The Economics of Open Gaming - An Open Letter To WotC

[Dragon Snack]

Here, here. Ditto. What he/she said...

I've seen it tangentally in a couple of industries I've been involved with, some who have embraced helping the industry and, sadly, many who have fought it. By far the more successful were those that embraced it (or who had employees who embraced it even if it wasn't company policy).

 

[Jdvn1]

Let me note something about real world economics. A healthy market sector means more for everyone.

I just wanted to say that I agree with your post, and that those concepts are solidly established in economic theory.

I can't speak for you, but for me the answer would be "none of them are any better." I don't buy products to adapt to another system. When I'm playing another system, I'll buy products designed for it.

Precisely, and because of the OGL, there are tons of books that are designed for use with D&D. And, I know plenty of people who play a system like that but not D&D.

 

[hossrex]

This entire thread is predicated on the idea that some person on the internet with qualifications impossible to verify knows more about the Role Playing Game sector then people who've made it their business to know about the Role Playing Game sector.

You might be right. You might be smarter then the influential people at Hasbro/WoTC.

But if we were in Vegas, I don't think anyone would put "smart" money on that proposition.

ETA: I love the posts about how its reasonable to assume everyone that plays a D20 game automatically, and inherently has a PHB. Not even everyone in my DECADE old DnD group (formed at the release of 3.0) owns a PHB. If a group likes a ruleset (i.e. D20), they're going to buy into that ruleset. They're however not necessarily going to buy unnecessary "official" books, simply because they've decided to play Spycraft.

In the end... like everything in life... the OGL helped WoTC in some ways, and hurt them in others. The *VAST* majority of people in this thread are focusing so fervently on the "helped" them part that this thread has nearly turned into parody.

Unless, that it, you think WoTC is run by monkeys who don't have a clue whats in their best interest. Especially with oversight by Hasbro, I find that supposition to be quite unlikely. WoTC will do what is statistically to their best advantage. That might be to support the OGL, that might be to discontinue the OGL. Either way, its (thankfully) in the hands of people who've decided to make it their life to study this *SPECIFIC* sector, and not people who think they know the "ins and outs" of capitalism because they own stock in a technologies company.

It might help your little computer company to share your innovations, so everyone can build upon your new paradigm. Thats fantastic! I wish you the best.

It doesn't however benefit Colonel Sanders to go around blabbing whats in his eleven secret herbs and spices.

The point?

Not every sector is identical, there are no "golden rules" for capitalism (or else no one would ever lose money), and you're entire post... as I said in my initial "pre-edit" post... is predicated on the assumption that you're more intelligent then a multi-billion dollar corporation.

I'm not saying I'm smarter then you. I'm not saying I'm right, and you're wrong. I'm just saying WoTC will make the decision it feels is best for itself, and any griping, whining, or pouting from the peanut gallery will simply be because that decision isn't *ALSO* best for them. Not because that decision wasn't best for WoTC.

(The argument that standalone books caused 'lost sales' of PHBs is pretty fallacious; while I'm sure a small minority started with M&M or Spycraft, for the vast bulk of customers, they already OWNED a PHB, so nothing was lost.)

The "vast majority" of a small group is still not really all that important. Thats like saying "most internet troll agree... the sky is red!" Consensus does not equal truth... especially when dealing with the largest contingent of a small demographic.

Precisely, and because of the OGL, there are tons of books that are designed for use with D&D. And, I know plenty of people who play a system like that but not D&D.

You realize the situation you've just outlined specifically harms WoTC... right? People who might have played DnD because its a fine system... but don't because they've chosen instead to play a game licensed through the OGL.

The vast majority of games utilizing the OGL, in my experience, have been in fantasy setting. "Me too" books. Spycraft, M&M, or Conan might not inherently detract from WoTC sales... but these "DnD clone" books certainly do. A player/DM has "X" dollars to spend per month on books/games. We aren't just talking about core books here. If that "X" goes to a DnD clone (as good as that clone might be), instead of another WoTC book, its lost WoTC money.

 

[Lizard]

The vast majority of games utilizing the OGL, in my experience, have been in fantasy setting. "Me too" books. Spycraft, M&M, or Conan might not inherently detract from WoTC sales... but these "DnD clone" books certainly do. A player/DM has "X" dollars to spend per month on books/games. We aren't just talking about core books here. If that "X" goes to a DnD clone (as good as that clone might be), instead of another WoTC book, its lost WoTC money.

But the 'clone books', for the most part, are D20STL -- not OGL. They're what WOTC wanted -- setting books, etc.

I can't think of any pure OGL D&D-type Fantasy games, though I'm sure there's some. The fantasy games I can think of -- Sovereign Stone, Midnight, Dragonlance, Dragonmech, and tons more -- are D20, not OGL.

 

[Lizard]

I'm just wondering who on this list has read Dacey's extensive essays on the why of the OGL, beyond the simplistic "Uhm, it's supposed to sell PHBs" bit. The real point was that studies howed the main reason people left the hobby was because of no one to play with, and one thing driving that was system diversity -- too many systems, too few players to support them, people just quit gaming and never came back. So by spreading one system -- D20 -- as far as possible, the "no one to play with" problem was reduced. Whether you wanted sorcerors, spies, superheroes, or spacemen, you could do it with the same core rules, suitably varied and tweaked for the genre (as opposed to a true 'generic' game like Hero or GURPS, where the genre is pounded into the rules).

If D20 keeps people playing, it serves WOTC, even if they're not playing WOTC games, because the success of WOTC is served by a strong hobby base overall. (And if WOTC had not been stricken with a case of 'not invented here', it could have helped them a lot more, since they could have used the best OGL material in their work and even made money supporting games like M&M or Spycraft. What if, instead of D20M, WOTC had decided to latch onto the Spycraft base and released core rules based on that? The OGL would have let them. Instead of trying, and then failing, to release a supers game, what if they'd adapted and built on M&M? It would have been interesting...)

 

[mxyzplk]

But the 'clone books', for the most part, are D20STL -- not OGL. They're what WOTC wanted -- setting books, etc.

I can't think of any pure OGL D&D-type Fantasy games, though I'm sure there's some. The fantasy games I can think of -- Sovereign Stone, Midnight, Dragonlance, Dragonmech, and tons more -- are D20, not OGL.

Well, sure. But the GSL is supposed to merge and replace both the OGL and d20STL. It was initially cast as mostly identical tot he old d20STL. And they're "rethinking the GSL". So the concern is tha they're planning for "no license at all, not even to the degree of the old d20STL." Clark, via his contacts at Wizards, validates that as a real concern.

So whats at risk is also saying goodbye to all the d20 stuff.

 

[catsclaw]

Well, sure. But the GSL is supposed to merge and replace both the OGL and d20STL ... So whats at risk is also saying goodbye to all the d20 stuff.

Yeah, I don't see any serious distinction between the OGL and the d20. The d20 license comes with more restrictions (and it's better for the industry if WotC was to stick with the OGL) but 95% of what people want to do is permitted under the d20 license.

 

[Delta]

Unless, that it, you think WoTC is run by monkeys who don't have a clue whats in their best interest. Especially with oversight by Hasbro, I find that supposition to be quite unlikely. WoTC will do what is statistically to their best advantage. That might be to support the OGL, that might be to discontinue the OGL. Either way, its (thankfully) in the hands of people who've decided to make it their life to study this *SPECIFIC* sector, and not people who think they know the "ins and outs" of capitalism because they own stock in a technologies company.

Companies make bad decisions all the time. Executives are not always the best positioned -- or properly incented -- to identify what's best for their company long-term. For example, most mutual funds go bankrupt. Or consider the current mortgage crisis (initiated by leaders of multi-billion dollar banks and investment companies).

In this case, the current leaders of WOTC actually aren't studied in this specific sector. They come from toy or other entertainment sectors. And the "open evolving system" concept is a *very hard* one to grasp. A lot of sweat & tears have been shed in the software industry between people who do & do not grasp that concept.

I have a friend who works at one of the largest insurance companies in the world. This past week he was at a company conference, and observed a team problem-solving exercise. One of the 8-person teams had all upper-level executives, and they were completely unable to solve the puzzle given to them (my friend watched them argue for 30 minutes about who was team leader). One of the 8-person teams had all low-level help staff, and solved it in under 1 minute.

Will this company be going out of business any time soon? Absolutely not. They're in an immensely profitable sector, and even the worst decisions by management can't stop the money from rolling in profitably. But they're still not making decisions which are best, because the company is terribly wasteful (just not so wasteful as to be unprofitable). That's been my experience in every company I've seen that's no longer run by the founder of said company. So for it be different at WOTC would actually be a notable exception, not par-for-the-course.

 

[Jdvn1]

You might be right. You might be smarter then the influential people at Hasbro/WoTC.

...
In the end... like everything in life... the OGL helped WoTC in some ways, and hurt them in others. The *VAST* majority of people in this thread are focusing so fervently on the "helped" them part that this thread has nearly turned into parody.

Unless, that it, you think WoTC is run by monkeys who don't have a clue whats in their best interest. Especially with oversight by Hasbro, I find that supposition to be quite unlikely. WoTC will do what is statistically to their best advantage. That might be to support the OGL, that might be to discontinue the OGL. Either way, its (thankfully) in the hands of people who've decided to make it their life to study this *SPECIFIC* sector, and not people who think they know the "ins and outs" of capitalism because they own stock in a technologies company.

I think WotC is run by people who know how to run a business--they probably have MBAs and other business degrees--but they don't have degrees in Economics, and don't understand how a growing industry helps them. That's a situation more common than you'd expect.

It's true that there are both positive and negative effects of the OGL, but I'm fairly certain that the positive outweigh the negative (and, I think economic theory and economists would agree with me).

Not every sector is identical, there are no "golden rules" for capitalism (or else no one would ever lose money)

Economic theory demands that some people will lose money, but larger and stronger companies (such as WotC) will tend to come out ahead.

You realize the situation you've just outlined specifically harms WoTC... right? People who might have played DnD because its a fine system... but don't because they've chosen instead to play a game licensed through the OGL.

You misunderstand me--I was talking about people who would never play D&D and state that they hate D&D, but still play games that require D&D books.

 

[xechnao]

So by spreading one system -- D20 -- as far as possible, the "no one to play with" problem was reduced. Whether you wanted sorcerors, spies, superheroes, or spacemen, you could do it with the same core rules, suitably varied and tweaked for the genre (as opposed to a true 'generic' game like Hero or GURPS, where the genre is pounded into the rules).

If D20 keeps people playing, it serves WOTC, even if they're not playing WOTC games, because the success of WOTC is served by a strong hobby base overall. (And if WOTC had not been stricken with a case of 'not invented here', it could have helped them a lot more, since they could have used the best OGL material in their work and even made money supporting games like M&M or Spycraft. What if, instead of D20M, WOTC had decided to latch onto the Spycraft base and released core rules based on that? The OGL would have let them. Instead of trying, and then failing, to release a supers game, what if they'd adapted and built on M&M? It would have been interesting...)

There is not such a thing as a perfect general universal roleplaying system.
If it were the rpg industry would be doomed.
How would you keep the production going on? Wouldn't it arrive at a point of saturation?
Even in the case you go on by updating one system with new editions your production plan would be based on reupdating stuff from the previous editions. Not a good customer plan in the roleplaying business in the long run. IMO now it is time OGL rests in peace for the benefit of the rpg industry overall. It is time for the industry to expand by embracing a plan of bigger variety. Another massive OGL movement may be again beneficial in the future for a certain period of time -but for now it has to step back.