Time for WotC to start officially supporting older editions?

Well, with the OGL and OSRIC, 3pp can already do this (though I'm not sure what is going to happen to 4ed), but I guess what I was arguing was that the point of releasing new material would be for WotC to generate constant income from older editions.

Unfortunately, the 3rd party content is not free.

And I'm afraid supporting older editions won't happen due to the amount of work this would require. Seeing as there are four eras to consider - [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica]there's the 1350's (OGB era), 1360's (AD&D era), 1370's (3e era) and 1485 (4e era), and as yet unknown Next D&D era...[/FONT][/FONT]
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Unfortunately, the 3rd party content is not free[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica]...[/FONT][/FONT]

I'm not exactly sure what you mean by 3rd party content is not free...?

If you mean that it's not free for WotC to use (whether on DDI or in printed products), that's not accurate.

First of all, mechanics can't be copyrighted. WotC can use the same or similar mechanics as any other RPG, it doesn't even need to be a 3pp making an OGL product. But it can be tricky. If they can do so without creating a derivative work as that term is used in Title 17 of the US Copyright law, without infringing a trademark they don't own (such as specific terms, campaign specific IP, or verbatim text), and any number of other legal landmines, then they're more than welcome to do so. WotC has lawyers that can walk them through it. Something a small 3pp may not have the money for (for the kind of legal advice that's necessary). They'd only do it if it was worth their while, but they can do it.

However, if it is Open Game Content (OGC) under the OGL, WotC (and anybody else) is already covered...

From the WotC OGL and SRD FAQ

Open Game Content is any material that is distributed using the Open Game License clearly identified by the publisher as Open Game Content. Furthermore, any material that is derived from Open Game Content automatically becomes Open Game Content as well.


Q: Does this mean that someone could take Open Game Content I wrote and distributed for free, and then put it in a product and sell that product to someone else?
A: Yes.​

Q: To be clear: Does this mean that Wizards of the Coast could take Open Game Content I wrote and distributed for free, put it into a Dungeons & Dragons product and make money off it?
A: Yes.​

Q: And they wouldn't have to ask my permission or pay me a royalty?
A: No, they would not.​


(Also)...if at some point in the future, Wizards of the Coast adds third-party Open Game Content to a published product, and the contents of that published product are extracted for the SRD, it is possible that the content could find its way into the SRD.

For some evidence of this, take a look at the Pathfinder SRD website Pathfinder_OGC , which includes (for free) Open Content from a multitude of other 3pp's.



...And I'm afraid supporting older editions won't happen due to the amount of work this would require. Seeing as there are four eras to consider - [FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica]there's the 1350's (OGB era), 1360's (AD&D era), 1370's (3e era) and 1485 (4e era), and as yet unknown Next D&D era...[/FONT][/FONT]

Here, I simply don't agree, though I may be wrong. But...

First, 4E is already done as far as DDI is concerned. All they have to do is just continue the support - which they have already said they are going to do. No extra prep, no financial outlay for programming, etc. - it's already in existence.

Second, 5E will need to be developed anyways.

Third, support for OD&D would be quite easy to develop. Mechanically it's quite simple. Character/Monster/Encounter builders and VTT support would be quite simple and likely wouldn't take very long to develop.

Fourth, 1E and 2E are enough alike that one could design an application for one and then just tweak for the other. However, 2E could get quite complicated if the "Complete" books materials were included. Though at intitial release I don't think it would be a necessity. They could roll them out as updates over time, based on WotC available time and finances. They have all the time they want for full release, and then it's just pure profit except for server maintenance (which is shared with the other editions - 4E and 5E already require that maintenance - I think what extra maintenance outlay would be necessary would be negligible). And that profit continues for as long as DDI exists, which if done right could be a very, very, very long time...

Fifth, on 3E/3.5E I agree that outlay and time for development would be considerable. But with the number of people still playing it, I think it would be more than worth the investment in the long run. And once 3E/3.5E was complete, Pathfinder would be a piece of cake.

Last, WotC can use Pathfinder material. As long as they don't use the Pathfinder name and Paizo's specific IP (specifically, anything related to Golarion for the most part, etc.), they can use damn near anything they want out of the Pathfinder rulebooks. It's almost all Open Game Content. WotC can make money off of Pathfinder, without paying Paizo a single penny.

B-)
 
Last edited:

I feel it is time that Paizo starts supporting 4E and later 5E strongly. They should strongly support all that is DnD. I would like to see a translation of their early APs into 4E, for example. They could generate more revenue from it, because more 4E GMs will buy their products.
Also, since their product quality is so high, they should start making adventures for retro clones to support the players that play those games.
Come on, people, it is all about togetherness! ;)
 

Would love support of older editions.

New Product? No not necessary.

OGL to allow 3PP to provide new product? Sure would love it.

Licensing to allow 3PP to apply to make new product? More likely and profitable as just necessary to write it up and than have their set charge.

DDI Support? Would be great. Personally I know I would love DOWNLOADABLE Character Builders for prior editions with a way to add our own customizable stuff.

PDF Sales? Yes, this is the quick way to profits again. Pirates have already released every PDF they could already. And proved even when they pulled them the next book took less than a week to hit the servers fully.

And as another poster said, I still associate D&D with TSR not WotC, and I've been playing 3E since it came out. Brandwise that isn't a good thing.

I'd love to see downloadable character builders for previous editions. That'd probably cause me to purchase at least a month of DDI. I'd also have a stopwatch handy to see how long it takes for someone to mod the 3.5 one to be Pathfinder...

And yes, I associate D&D with TSR, and I began playing with 3.0...
 

I don't think that WotC should 'support' previous editions (the focus should be on current editions only. However, I think it's ludicrous that they haven't made all the previous editions and supplements (as well as the new stuff) available as pdfs.
 

I'd like to point out that it's not completely unknown for WotC to support older products via back-conversion, at least a little.

Dungeon #191 had an article by Rodney Thompson on adapting the 3.5 adventure "The Lich Queen's Beloved" (from Dungeon #100) to Fourth Edition. At the end of the adventure, he spends about a page talking about converting the adventure to older editions, giving us a complete First Edition stat block for Vlaakith, and abbreviated stat blocks for three new monsters from the adventure. He then gives a paragraph or two on converting those to Second Edition.

It's not much, but it's something.
 

[MENTION=17674]possum[/MENTION] & [MENTION=20914]TheYeti1775[/MENTION]

Y'all do realise that 3rd edition was released by WotC and not TSR, right?:erm:
 


I'm hopeful that Hasbro will find a way to enable support of older editions, while making 5e relevant to pre-3.x gamers too---whether that's directly in the design of the edition (about which I'm skeptical, but open-minded also), or in some license that enables older edition support beyond leveraging the OGL. I'm not sure that combination is a threadable needle for Hasbro, though....
 

[MENTION=17674]possum[/MENTION] & [MENTION=20914]TheYeti1775[/MENTION]

Y'all do realise that 3rd edition was released by WotC and not TSR, right?:erm:

Sorry that I confused you. I meant that I only started playing D&D with the WOTC-produced 3.0 edition, yet I still identify the brand with TSR rather than WOTC.
 

Remove ads

Top