D&D 5E What I want: 17 books or book series (and two boxes) for a Third Golden Age

[Dungeonosophy]

OK first, that's only because they HAD to do that as a company using Hasbro's IP to publish their books under the OGL.

Well, I'm not here to suppose whether Paizo would've invented the OGL if WotC/Hasbro hadn't already done it. I can't fault Paizo for not traveling in time.

Now it comes down to this: the GSL was and is not open in the way I'd like to see it. Pathfinder's SRD and "Pathfinder Compatible" license are *closer* to what I'd like to see. Yet what I myself want to see is:

1) A Public Domain, Free Culture release of the 5E SRD.

2) Along with a WotC/Hasbro-initiated d20 Quality Mark association which really includes all of the high- to mid-high quality publishers, such as Green Ronin, Necromancer, Goodman Games, and even Hasbro's "competitor" Paizo(!) if they decide to publish 5E things (though I don't expect them to do that). That would be a shift from corporatist competition to quality-enhancing association.

3) Plus an experimental Public Domain, Free Culture release of the Birthright campaign setting materials. If this turns out interesting and profitable (in the widest sense) for Hasbro, then do a ceremonial release of other worldsetting IPs, to fuel interest in, and sales of, the 5E campaign setting worldbooks (FRCS, Greyhawk CS, Eberron CS, Dragonlance CS, Dark Sun CS, Mystara CS).

Second, when a competitor decided to use that OGL to do the same to Paizo and publish an online PF SRD, Paizo reacted to the competitor by co-opting the idea (which essentially drove that competitor away), so they could control it and push their advertising using it. There is nothing "free" about that corporatist behavior they exhibited.

Oh, I don't know the story. Would you tell me? Which competitor?

Third - Hasbro absolutely has the same open SRD - where they heck do you think Paizo got their initial content from? It's just that the Hasbro open content is from 3.0 and 3.5, not 4e or 5e. But so what - they did it first, they did it arguably more openly than Paizo, and it remains the most prolific SRD used in the business. So if you are going to credit Paizo for that thing they had to do, you might want to credit Hasbro for doing it first and with even more impact.

That's a good point. And there was no personality or business culture within Hasbro which would have initiated an Open Game if Dancey and Adkinson hadn't had the OGL coming out of the oven when they sold WotC to Hasbro.

I hereby credit Hasbro for serving as the steward of D&D when the OGL was released in 2000, a few months after their purchase of WotC.

Now again, I just see this as the reality of the market, and I like Paizo and the people who work there. But - I also appreciate corporatism, and Paizo right now is the leading juggernaut in this industry in terms of corporatist practices.

Not many cultural/entertainment companies invite any sort of small publisher or self-publisher to produce products with their logo on them and receive bread for their work in the way that Paizo and Savage Worlds and MnM do. I haven't seen a "Walt Disney Compatible" self-publishing industry or "Powered by DC Universe" self-publishing culture. Walt Disney with Star Wars and Paramount with Star Trek are the closest thing I know of examples where a lively culture has some space to flourish without legal-corporatist hindrances. The Star Trek aficionado-made films are quite something. But I suppose from a strictly pragmatic perspective, they are only tolerated, without the corporate steward's blessing.

Even though Paizo didn't invent the OGL, and even though their own profitability is served by making space for others to write compatible books (which is what I suggest Hasbro do too), I still appreciate that Paizo (and Green Ronin and Pinnacle and Pelgrane some other RPG enterprises) do this. This provides space for cultural richness and diversity.

So I ask again, why do you seem to give a pass to corporatist Paizo actions, but you don't give a pass to WOTC corporatist actions? It sure seems like you either have an agenda here you're not talking about, or you've let some bias influence your principals.

If you read my "From Open Gaming to Free Culture" essay, you'll see that I hold Paizo to the same standard. There are things I like about Paizo, yet I do not hold them up as my examplar for what I'd like to see happen in D&D culture. I'm no partisan. I own like one Paizo product--the Pathfinder Beginner Box. 3.75E is still too gearheady for me. And I was miffed that there was a semi-hidden "handling" fee on the online order.

 

[prosfilaes]

OK first, that's only because they HAD to do that as a company using Hasbro's IP to publish their books under the OGL.

No, they didn't. You can look in vain for the Castles and Crusades SRD, and they claim to lock down the main part of the system, the SIEGE mechanic. There are a lot of D20 derivatives that didn't bother to create an SRD and in some cases have actively tried to fight the open reuse of their system.

Beyond the SRD, they created a trademark license for Pathfinder that "nurtures a relatively free-handed third-party publishing culture". Sans trademark license, the OGL won't let third-parties claim compatibility, which makes it real hard for third parties to sell product; they have to resort to wink, wink, nudge, nudge, e.g. "for generic fantasy systems", "for the 3.5 edition of the world's most popular roleplaying game", etc.

Second, when a competitor decided to use that OGL to do the same to Paizo and publish an online PF SRD, Paizo reacted to the competitor by co-opting the idea (which essentially drove that competitor away), so they could control it and push their advertising using it. There is nothing "free" about that corporatist behavior they exhibited.

I don't know what you're talking about here. The Pathfinder RPG was released GenCon 2009 (August 13-16), and the Web Archive shows that the first appearance of the Pathfinder SRD was August 16, 2009: http://web.archive.org/web/20090816000422/http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/ .

they did it arguably more openly than Paizo

That would be a heck of an argument. Pathfinder has released all the bestiaries under the OGL in their SRD, whereas WotC released most of their first one. They also released the Ultimate books and the Advanced books whereas WotC released none of the Complete * or Races of * books.

And, again, they didn't have to; the Creature Collection (possibly Revised too, but I'm looking at the original) said the description and the names of the creatures were not open content, which made referencing it impossible and reuse except for mechanics impractical. If you're looking for monsters for an OGL product, it's probably best to just act like the Creature Collection doesn't exist. The Pathfinder Bestiaries don't have that problem.

 

[Lalato]

The World Builder's Guide comes to mind; it's a shame it wasn't released in PDF. It's an ambitious goal, that really needs to be a goal in and of itself; it's unlikely to be worth in-game the effort it took to make it out of game.

Funny you should mention it. Back when WotC was selling PDFs (not the current DnDClassics) I bought the PDF of The World Builder's Guide. It's not the best scan, so if they do decide to sell it again I hope they re-scan it.

That said, it's a great little resource that makes building a world a fun side project.

 

[Mark Morrison]

This kinda exists already. It's called Campaign Coins. They're freakin' expensive. WotC could certainly partner with them though. It's a little hard to justify, not when you can just get gold painted plastic coins from a dollar store.

Thanks for the shout out Jester - and it's true, our coins are a major investment. But, they are real metal, edition proof, prop quality, and will last longer than I will. They are not necessary for play, but they add a really pleasing tactile feel, and reinforce the cycle of goal-obstacle-reward. There's nothing quite like real money hitting the table when the last orc in the room dies. So, they are certainly hard to justify, and we encourage everyone to stay within their gaming budget - but they do add a lot, we reckon.

We have considered making them in plastic, but the best part is the metal heft and chink; it feels right if the coin in your hand is like the one in your character's hand.

As for the original post, while our coins are not Forgotten Realms coinage, we have designed them to be a universal fantasy currency system.

I'd love to see a return of some of the in-world games like DragonChess and Three-Dragon Ante.

Playing Three Dragon Ante with our coins was so much fun that it put our weekly Pathfinder game on the backburner for three months once! At Gen Con it was our pleasure to gift Dragon Ante designer Rob Heinsoo with a complete set of our coins, as thanks for the hours of enjoyment we got from that game.

Cheers,

Mark

 

[Jester David]

Thanks for the shout out Jester - and it's true, our coins are a major investment. But, they are real metal, edition proof, prop quality, and will last longer than I will. They are not necessary for play, but they add a really pleasing tactile feel, and reinforce the cycle of goal-obstacle-reward. There's nothing quite like real money hitting the table when the last orc in the room dies. So, they are certainly hard to justify, and we encourage everyone to stay within their gaming budget - but they do add a lot, we reckon.

We have considered making them in plastic, but the best part is the metal heft and chink; it feels right if the coin in your hand is like the one in your character's hand.

I mostly wanted to point out that metal coins are not cheap, even for a company that specializes in them and makes lots. They'd be even higher for WotC.

I do like the coins and regret not snatching a few at GenCon while getting my Sihedron medallion (budget and all). I still might get a few to serve as tokens for my upcoming pirate game (if the Freeport set becomes available on Paizo again).
I'm a sucker for props and delux gaming accessories. As seen by my GeekChic table and fancy Runelords book.

As for the original post, while our coins are not Forgotten Realms coinage, we have designed them to be a universal fantasy currency system.

Future licencing venture, maybe?
Getting FR coins might appeal to a lot of D&Ders, and WotC seems open to 2nd Party products.

 

[Zardnaar]

The New Zealand $2 coin is very close to a D&D gold piece in terms of weight and it is a nice goldish colour as well.

 

[Mark Morrison]

I mostly wanted to point out that metal coins are not cheap, even for a company that specializes in them and makes lots. They'd be even higher for WotC.

I do like the coins and regret not snatching a few at GenCon while getting my Sihedron medallion (budget and all). I still might get a few to serve as tokens for my upcoming pirate game (if the Freeport set becomes available on Paizo again).
I'm a sucker for props and delux gaming accessories. As seen by my GeekChic table and fancy Runelords book.

Cheers Jester, I knew I'd seen that avatar before! Duh.

Thanks so much for picking up the Sihedron, will go nicely with your Rise of the Runelords set. And I am madly jealous of your Geekchic table. Those things would strain our luggage allowance flying back to Australia, but want want want.

The Freeport coins should be back in stock at Paizo any day now, as the warehouse crew undertake the Herculean task of getting everything counted back in after Gen Con. Stocks are pretty limited (down to 6 packs in some cases), but we will reprint soon.

Future licencing venture, maybe?
Getting FR coins might appeal to a lot of D&Ders, and WotC seems open to 2nd Party products.

Cheers for the suggestion. We had a great Gen Con, and talked to lots of people about new licensing and custom coin opportunities. Watch this space!

Cheers,

Mark

 

[Dungeonosophy]

I updated the OP.

1) I re-worded my resolve to say:

"I'm not going to buy any of this...until I see with my own eyes whether and how Open this rules system is come springtime.

Even if the 5E SRD were to be totally Open, there is much of this I still wouldn't buy. If 5E were really Open, it is likely I'd pick up the core rules."

2) I added 2e Complete Book of Humanoids as another source be covered in the Races of the D&D Multiverse series.

3) I named Echohawk as "that guy" who's doing the awesome Monster ENCyclopedia research, which I'd like to see serve as the basis for a 5e Monstrous Compendium.

4) I suggested that for the Atlas of the D&D Multiverse (or for the D&D Modern book), that we find out exactly whether and how the Milky Way Galaxy (the setting of D&D Earth) is related to the Phlogiston of the 2e Spelljammer cosmology and the Astral Sea of the 4e cosmology. Is it possible, for 5E, to somehow meld those various conceptions of the Prime Material Plane into a single plane, while still retaining all of the fun gaming aspects?

In BECMI, Earth's universe and the D&D universe are different dimensions altogether: the Multiverse Dimension is the home dimension of Mystara, while the Dimension of Myth is the home dimension of Laterre/Earth.

In 3e, "d20 Modern Earth" is a separate cosmology, which like all the other cosmologies (the Great Wheel of Greyhawk, the Great Tree of Forgotten Realms, the Orrery of Eberron) is only connected to other cosmologies via the Plane of Shadow.

In Frank Mentzer's home campaign, the World of Greyhawk is located in the Ceti Tau solar system in the Milky Way Galaxy.

5) I added the Freeport Campaign Coins as a fine example of what I'd like to see.

6) I ask if anyone knows of any other mention of "in-world games" besides Dragonchess, Magestones, and 3 Dragon Ante? There's also PlanarChess, but WotC probably doesn't own the rights to that since, AFAIK, it was in GG's non-TSR Gord novels. It seems likely that in the hundreds of D&D sourcebooks, adventures, and novels, some other games are mentioned.

 

[Mark Morrison]

5) I added Campaign Coins' coins from Freeport as a fine example of what I'd like to see.

Thanks Philmont!

Mark

 

[Jester David]

Thanks so much for picking up the Sihedron, will go nicely with your Rise of the Runelords set.

They look so nice together.

And I am madly jealous of your Geekchic table. Those things would strain our luggage allowance flying back to Australia, but want want want.

They do give a discount if you buy at the Con. But, yeah, getting one to Australia might be pricey. And getting the wood past customs might be tricky...