Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="innerdude" data-source="post: 7549186" data-attributes="member: 85870">I ask this question because I'm curiously interested as a non-vested observer of what's happening with Pathfinder 2. More and more it feels like that the "lock in" to the 3.x OGL is going to be problematic for Paizo. But on another level I'm interested in this topic because the 20th anniversary of D&D 3 and the OGL is next year, and I'm interested in looking back and at the effects of the OGL on the industry since its public announcement. (For the record, I have zero vested interest in the success or failure of either Paizo or WotC. I am not employed by nor do I own stock in either company. I haven't actively played Pathfinder since 2009, and I've purchased exactly ONE d20-based source book in a decade---a D&D 5e Player's Handbook that I loaned to a teenager six months after I bought it and never saw again. My reaction? A resounding shrug.)Long term, games built on / derived from the D&D 3 OGL are moving into the same niche-within-a-niche-within-a-niche market as the OSR. Like 1e and 2e, there will probably always be a minute subset of roleplaying groups that doggedly stick with the 3.x line, but will increasingly represent a non-viable business market. So in this context, does the OGL still matter relative to the roleplaying game market generally?In my mind one of the primary purposes of the OGL was enable robust third-party support for the 3.x game---which it accomplished in spades---which in turn would permanently cement D&D's primacy in the market.But I'm beginning to wonder if the relevance of the OGL has waned, since access to third-party content is easier than it's ever been. In the year 2000, I imagine one of the assumptions of the OGL was that access to quality third-party material would primarily have to be through hard-copy print media. The goal of the OGL at that time was to enable established publishers to commit resources to creating print material for D&D 3. The "lone man" publisher simply didn't have enough long-term capital to consistently put out hardcover print media and be successful doing it.But the business realities of published content distribution are so radically different from twenty years ago as to be fundamentally a different world.So to me it seems that the OGL no longer serves some of its original purpose---but what purpose does it serve now?Take the case of Paizo --- the issue I see happening with Pathfinder is that no matter how great Pathfinder 2 is, they're essentially splitting their own market, while also contending with arguably the most robust version of the actual Dungeons and Dragons IP in the game's history. The success of Pathfinder 1 was 100% the result of market demand for keeping the 3.x OGL framework actively available and supported. But I've looked through a couple of the Pathfinder 2 playtests (even though there's zero chance I'll ever GM or play it), and there's some significant deviations from the original Pathfinder 1. So what is the goal now? The success of D&D 5 seems to indicate that the old strictures of 3.x are no longer really the fashion. Pathfinder 2 has to simultaneously 1) differentiate itself as a valuable, fun, playable game in a way that is both NOT Pathfinder 1 and NOT D&D 5, while 2) convincing players to move to the new system, while 3) maintaining the ability to provide the high-quality supplements it has become known for. Facing that reality, is there still enough demand for 3.x gaming out there to justify long-term maintenance of the Pathfinder 1 line in perpetuity?And maybe more to the point, what are WotC/Paizo/Fantasy Flight Games/Cubicle 7/Pelgrane Press/Green Ronin/Evil Hat really looking for now when it comes to allowing/disallowing third-party content licensing? I'm beginning to think a broad-scale "OGL" type of framework is really unnecessary.Hasbro's DM's Guild seems to be the "new normal," where "lone wolf" creators and super-indie publishers can utilize a simpler-yet-restrictive "open" licensing model, while requiring large-scale publishers to engage in more traditional licensing models. Of course I've not read through the current OGL for 5e, so I may be off on that assessment. In the end, I'm curious about all this because the 3.x OGL was clearly an inflection point in our chosen hobby's future---and feels to me like the fate of Pathfinder 2 is going to be another. Paizo is either the #2 or #3 RPG company in the industry (depending on how you view Fantasy Flight Games' offerings). And I'm wondering if Pathfinder 1's ties to the 3.x OGL is ultimately going to be a handicap, rather than a boon.</blockquote>

Verification