What does official mean? (Dragon Mag)

[DaveMage]

I am *very* happy with the products WotC puts out. There were a few changes in 3.5 I felt were unnecessary, but overall the products they produce (IMO) are top notch.

Regarding the "Official" moniker, as has been said before, "Official" seems to equal "licensed". Nothing wrong with that.

If you take "Official" to mean "it can be included in my game" there's nothing wrong with that either. The only danger is, of course, that it may be unbalanced (and some people don't mind that) since the playtesting may not have been very extensive.

Regarding the whole "profit" issue, I hope the Dragon staff does what it has to for the magazine to be viable. Since the magazine is no longer a product of Wizards, it *has* to be profitable for Paizo (rather than just a marketing tool) or it may disappear. I would be very sorry to see it go.

 

[Buttercup]

just my opinion, but why the negative vibes against dragon and wotc?

No negative vibes here. I own nearly everything WotC has published since 3E came out. But the truth is, when I'm prepping for a game session, the books I seem to reach for aren't WotC books. It's not that I don't like their stuff, but the information I need I've already got on my hard drive from past session notes (like monster stats), or I have memorized, like the cost of a potion of Cure Light Wounds.

I spent most of today prepping for next week's session, and the books that I used were En Route from Atlas, Toolbox from AEG and the PDF Everyone Else from Ambient.

As for Dragon, I've had a subscription for some time, and I just renewed it for two years, so I hardly think one could say I have negative vibes about it. I'm just not so big on throwing lots of extra stuff into my game. I like to limit the number of sources I draw from for rules, since several of my players struggle with even the basics.

And I wanted to note that IMHO it's Ryan Dancey who deserves our respect and admiration for making D&D open source, not WotC and Hasbro. It wouldn't have happened without him.

 

[Buttercup]

this makes me wonder what it means when "kingdoms of kalamar" is an "official" dnd product. i think it was the first non-wotc product to be "official".

Sorry I didn't respond to this point in the post above.

Kenzer has the right to use the logo and call their products "official" because of a license deal. I've heard that Kenzer got this deal because WotC violated Kenzer's copyright in some way, and didn't want to be sued. I don't know if that's true or not, but the only other way they could have gotten the right is to have paid for it. (I'm sure there are some regulars around here who do know the truth. Perhaps one of them will read this thread and clarify.)

The downside, of course, is that WotC has to approve every Kalamar book that Kenzer puts out, and can forbid publication if they want to, as they did with the equipment book that was supposed to come out with the Kalamar brand last year.

 

[Umbran]

Well, there's "what does this mean?" on different levels. Overall, it's more than just being able to say "Dungeon and Dragons" on it - that's a matter of licensing, not "offciality"...

In one sense, it means that it contains material vetted by WotC. I don't really think that implies anything about balance, nor should it. It's more a stamp that WotC doesn't find the stuff therein so far out in left field as to be objectionable.

In anohter sense, it says that this is a place you can look for the word, "right from the horse's mouth". If you're looking for direct word from WotC on a development, product, rules clarifications, and the like, this is a place to do it. It's a place where WotC will present the actual articles they choose to produce.

In another sense, it's an advertising gimmick. A lot of people seem to frown on that. But folks, the colors you see on soda bottles are calculated advertising gimmicks too. I don't see anyone compaining about that. "That evil Coca-Cola company made the bottles red, so we'd buy more. The sleazebags!"

But there's a good question there - why is it an effective advertising gimmick? Why do people care if the content is "official"? WotC hasn't done much of anything that I can see to foster the idea that "only official D&D will do". That idea comes from the market. WotC and Paizo only take advantage of the reaction among us.

So, why do some players care? Well, for one thing the only place to get even halfway decent D&D stuff was from the originators - licensing wasn't given out. So you had homebrew and "official", and homebrew was notoriously poorly thought out. So part of the tendency is a very old habit.

Another is... I'll call it an overactive sense of propriety. Some folks just don't think it through - that they're playing a game, among friends, and that it doesn't matter much where the material you use comes from, so long as it is solid. Folks forget that games are not cars, and it isn't like if you buy a part from another manufacturer that you're going to run into trouble.

 

[Nifelhein]

Great post here, I will use it to my reply, mind you, I don't see any bad vibes, we are actually wondering and so far I have tried to kep the most up to date with WotC products that i can (or my money allows me).

seems as if people don't think much of wotc or dragon magazine, as if they are just in it for the money, which is true to some extent, since they are money-making businesses after all. it's as if people look down at them for actually trying to make a buck from their product. i get the feeling that there is an "elite" attitude, as if not using any wotc products makes someone a better gamer, as if it something to be proud of not to use wotc products.

I don't think they are in it just for the money, but they are in it because of it, the staff is more for the product, and they fight the problem of conflic between money and care. I wish WotC keeps making good money, sicne I love d&d and would hate see it down. More after next quotes portions.

this isn't meant to be inflammatory, just how i feel and what i believe is true to some extent

Well, I don't thinkit was, you were very polite and I understood it that way, so you can relax, i also don't like flames and would walk away in case it starts, we are discussing here, for an agreement or not, but just giving opinions, yours is more than welcome!

my definition of "official" is that the rules can be taken as canon and supersede any other rules produced by any other party or can be integrated with existing "official" rules. this is taking into account that wotc makes mistakes as well, but that is addressed by the erratta that they put out.

Very good point here, I actually would think the same, but never truly thought about it, it was in me all this time! I am with you here. Of coruse, as you pointed, house rules and simply options can change it.

this makes me wonder what it means when "kingdoms of kalamar" is an "official" dnd product. i think it was the first non-wotc product to be "official".

And also Dragonlance lately... Ravenloft and Rokugan were made either by the publishers alone or based on a book madee by WotC.


Well, I think Rian is the guy responsible for the SRD too, and I am just a little unhappy that he didn't made such a good job with OGL as he did with SRD, since I think the d20 OGL coul be more "democratic" and less disposable in its terms, but since WotC has shown a very good use of its terms so far, and is showing with the new changes, I cannot blame and am very pleased also.

 

[Desdichado]

Official means absolutely nothing to me. I couldn't for the life of me decide what material actually is or isn't official anyhow, so rather than wrestle with the question, I just use the stuff I like. My games are often quite unofficial, for that matter, as I prefer some rather radical mechanics changes.

 

[Nifelhein]

I prefer to adapt the rules to what the group wants, so official is what we agree upon using and what comes in that line from whoever it is!

 

[Particle_Man]

Sorry I didn't respond to this point in the post above.

Kenzer has the right to use the logo and call their products "official" because of a license deal. I've heard that Kenzer got this deal because WotC violated Kenzer's copyright in some way, and didn't want to be sued. I don't know if that's true or not, but the only other way they could have gotten the right is to have paid for it. (I'm sure there are some regulars around here who do know the truth. Perhaps one of them will read this thread and clarify.)

The downside, of course, is that WotC has to approve every Kalamar book that Kenzer puts out, and can forbid publication if they want to, as they did with the equipment book that was supposed to come out with the Kalamar brand last year.

I think that they paid for it. And that they did this before the whole d20/OGL liscencing thing happened. I thought that the Wotc review was just to make sure that no legal problems would arise. I didn't realize that wotc could veto a book, but I understand that they might take a loooooong time to review it.