Use of Existing OGC by Publishers

[Samothdm]

As I glance through various d20 books, I've noticed that many publishers tend not to use OGC from other companies, even when covering the same topics.

Now, some of this I guess I can attribute to the thinking of, "I can do it better!".

But, I wonder how much of this is due to potential sales forecasting? Meaning, do you think that a book about, say, Dark Elves, would be doing itself a disservice if it were to incorporate OGC from, say, Plot & Poison and The Quintessential Drow? Do you think it would sell less than if it did not specifically use OGC from other sources but came up with entirely "new" feats, skill uses, and PrCs that were really just tweaks on already existing material?

 

[Crothian]

I'm not sure it matter a lot as most people I think don't look at section 15 in the OGL to see if the book does.

 

[Samothdm]

I'm not sure it matter a lot as most people I think don't look at section 15 in the OGL to see if the book does.

I kind of agree with you in that the average consumer doesn't look at that kind of stuff. So, with the breadth of material out there, why not focus efforts on creating new stuff, and if you need to include content that's been done by another publisher (for the sake of completeness for the work that you're doing), why not just use the other publisher's stuff (unless you think it's not balanced or something)?

 

[EditorBFG]

It's getting more common

I think the number of publishers using other guys' OGC is increasing. Which I think is a good thing. Arthaus's D20 Adventure! and Bad Axe Games Grim Tales both wanted great vehicle rules, and both used Spycraft's chase system, because it's the best thing going. In fact, check out the copyright notices on the Grim Tales OGL page: it's like a half-page of other products they borrowed from.

This should ultimately make D20 better. As more publishers wake up and start using each other's content, there will be less reinventing of the wheel, more inter-product compatibility and more time spent creating the new.

 

[Ghostwind]

I've always been a proponent of other publisher's OGC. Why reinvent the wheel when someone else has created a really round one? Just look at the section 15's for Pale Designs, Torn Asunder, and Arms & Armor v3.5 for examples of using other publisher's OGC.

 

[Arcane Runes Press]

I've never had a problem incorporating existing stuff into my sourcebooks, but most of the editors I've worked for have preferred not to.

I may incorporate some stuff into my Ronin Arts books, dependent on the needs of the book, and whether or not I have the relevant book in my collection - I'm none too interested in paying 25$ to get access to a rule or two.

Patrick Y.

 

[Storminator]

I've always been a proponent of other publisher's OGC. Why reinvent the wheel when someone else has created a really round one? Just look at the section 15's for Pale Designs, Torn Asunder, and Arms & Armor v3.5 for examples of using other publisher's OGC.

Hey ghostwind, can you email me?

pncstorm AT yahoo DOT com

thanks,
Pete

 

[Crothian]

I've never had a problem incorporating existing stuff into my sourcebooks, but most of the editors I've worked for have preferred not to.

Do they ever say why?

I've always liked when people do do it, but I don't think they go far enough. I'd like to know what from what book is being used so that it makes it easier for me to use those books together.

 

[Arcane Runes Press]

Do they ever say why?

I've always liked when people do do it, but I don't think they go far enough. I'd like to know what from what book is being used so that it makes it easier for me to use those books together.

Usually not.

If I had to venture a guess, I'd say it's because of three reasons:

1) They don't want to worry over updating section 15.

2) There seems to be a perception of "ownership" when creating a new book - the idea that writing a sourcebook of entirely new material (other than stuff taken from the SRD) is preferable to borrowing existing material.

3) Competition. Some publishers, I think, dislike the idea of promoting another company's work in any form - and they consider incorporating existing material promoting.

 

[Samothdm]

2) There seems to be a perception of "ownership" when creating a new book - the idea that writing a sourcebook of entirely new material (other than stuff taken from the SRD) is preferable to borrowing existing material.

I think this is the main reason, from what I've observed. I was working on one book once and it would have made sense to use OGC from the very same publisher, but they chose not to.

3) Competition. Some publishers, I think, dislike the idea of promoting another company's work in any form - and they consider incorporating existing material promoting.

That's interesting... I hadn't thought of that. However, I agree with Crothian that the average gamer who is not interested in publishing probably doesn't read the Section 15 anyway. I often turn to it pretty quickly because I'm always interested to see how much, if any, OGC people are using from other sources. I suspect that's the exception to the rule, though.