D&D 4E Who has rights to BoEF, and are they in on the 4e OGL

[Lord Zardoz]

The funny thing about making absurd exaggerations when you actually have no idea what the number is is that someone will come along and call you on it.

I've seen tons more new gamers who were adults (spouses, girlfriends, friends, etc. of current gamers) than new kid gamers in the last ten years or so.

Are kids picking up gaming today? I have no doubt about it. Are they 100% of new gamers? Not bloody likely.

I did not say new gamers. I said new consumers, which in a literal sense, is true.

A better statement, I think, is that erecting new barriers to young gamers does not really create any significant advantage that I can think of. Having a standards clause is a good way to keep the D&D game from becoming associated with content that could negatively impact the game in regards to its availability to new young gamers.

I will state, for the record, that I do not think it is a good idea for Wizards of the Coast to outright prohibit game material dealing with sexual content. I also think it is a bad idea for Wizards of the Coast to let a 3rd party publisher attempt to sell thinly veiled pornography by throwing a D&D / d20 logo on their product. As was noted by someone else in this thread, I do not think there is any real benefit to the game for adding things to the game like a 'Perform(Oral)' check. But adding rules for 4th edition covering seduction via social encounter mechanics? That could be useful.

END COMMUNICATION

 

[Green Knight]

As was noted by someone else in this thread, I do not think there is any real benefit to the game for adding things to the game like a 'Perform(Oral)' check.

I still shudder at the thought of the "Magical nipple clamps".

 

[Desdichado]

I did not say new gamers. I said new consumers, which in a literal sense, is true.

No. It is not at all literally true. If I talk my wife and my brother into playing and they go out and buy books, they are new consumers without being young people. In case you've forgotten already, what you said is

Young gamers may only make up 1% of the market place, but they also make up 100% of new consumers.

I don't know what the percentage is, but I know for sure it's not 100% because I personally know new consumers (of RPG material) who are not young gamers.

A better statement, I think, is that erecting new barriers to young gamers does not really create any significant advantage that I can think of. Having a standards clause is a good way to keep the D&D game from becoming associated with content that could negatively impact the game in regards to its availability to new young gamers.

That's because you're not very imaginative then; I can think of all kinds of possible negative impacts. They all depend on knowledge which I don't have about the D&D customer, but what I'm saying is that you don't have it either, so who's to say my situation is more or less likely than yours?

Here's an example. Let's assume that your totally unsubstantiated claim that young gamers are 1% of the market is true for a moment. Let's also assume that designing the product line to appeal to young gamers isolates and drives off a huge chunk of the rest of the 99% of the player base. Let's say 50%, just because it's an easy number.

In your effort to court 1% of the player base, you've alienated and lost 50% of the player base.

Negative impact, right there.

I will state, for the record, that I do not think it is a good idea for Wizards of the Coast to outright prohibit game material dealing with sexual content. I also think it is a bad idea for Wizards of the Coast to let a 3rd party publisher attempt to sell thinly veiled pornography by throwing a D&D / d20 logo on their product. As was noted by someone else in this thread, I do not think there is any real benefit to the game for adding things to the game like a 'Perform(Oral)' check. But adding rules for 4th edition covering seduction via social encounter mechanics? That could be useful.

Oh, no doubt. I'm not arguing with your interpretation of this specific case in the least; I'm saying I'm certainly hesitant to make broad, sweeping claims about what WotC should produce without actually having any idea about what the customer base is demanding. Personally, I'm kinda sceptical of the idea that catering to youngins is a good idea. D&D---honestly---has never done so, and it didn't hurt it in the past. I also am skeptical that doing so will help it now. To me, your recommendations sound sorta like the mentality that brought us a number of the changes in 2e that were so reviled, and which seem to have seriously hurt TSR's ability to maintain sales. Rather, I fear it will hasten the eventual downfall of the game by being spectacularly unsuccessful in attracting new gamers and spectacularly unsuccessful in pleasing the current crop.

 

[Zaruthustran]

I had no use for the rules in BoEF, but thought that the essays on the sexuality of different races and classes to be interesting. Paladins, it turns out, make terrific lovers. High Charisma, immune to fear (inhibitions) and disease, can heal, can inspire courage... I'd never thought of the implications of all that. Or really given any thought to how the long-lived elves might perceive love, sex, and relationships.

My point is that the book provoked thought on verisimilitude. I enjoy thinking about my campaign and trying to make it more "real"/functional, and this book inspired some new thoughts in that direction. Not "OMG elves 'do it', heh heh", but rather more of an academic vibe.

That said, the book did have a lot of what I felt were unneeded bits. The nudity, some of the rules... none of that stuff is needed. This product should have been released as a PDF and positioned as a collection of essays. Kind of like expanded "The Ecology of..." articles that dealt with sex and relationships. It probably shouldn't have been a hardcover book, with rules and DCs for orgasms.

I think a similar product would be a collection of essays on how magic would realistically impact the typical medieval European fantasy setting. I'd enjoy seeing more speculative/academic products available. Again, PDFs would be a better route than trying to reach niche customers through physical distribution.

 

[Desdichado]

I think a similar product would be a collection of essays on how magic would realistically impact the typical medieval European fantasy setting.

Wow. I wonder how Joe and Suzi feel at having their most famous publication compared to the BoEF as a 'similar product.'

 

[Zaruthustran]

Oh, and as for the "market to kids/market to adults" subdebate, I think WotC should do both. Not with the same product, of course. Do it with two different products, ideally positioned for each specific audience. Like how Toyota sells both Toyotas (positioned for the mass market) and Lexuses (positioned for the upscale market).

 

[Desdichado]

Oh, and as for the "market to kids/market to adults" subdebate, I think WotC should do both. Not with the same product, of course. Do it with two different products, ideally positioned for each specific audience. Like how Toyota sells both Toyotas (positioned for the mass market) and Lexuses (positioned for the upscale market).

Exactly my proposal too.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Quite true - spells or magical items dealing with birth control, pre-natal care, birthing, and so on - real world versions of which have been used (to varying degrees of success) throughout written history and probably beyond - make a lot of sense. Every society has a vested interest in the creation and health of the next generation because the next generation is the future of that society. In a world of magic it is only natural that people would find ways to use that tool in the quest for these things.

I agree, but I also don't think this stuff needs to be segregated into its own book. I'd like to see spells relating to determining paternity, increasing/decreasing fertility and the like in some sort of splatbook, whether it's about "everyday magic" or a 4E successor to A Magical Medieval Society: Western Europe. (4E's demographics are explicitly different, so MMS:WE would need to change to match, if ERP wanted to do one, and they were part of the conference call, so here's hoping.)

 

[Orcus]

I have to say that one of the best 3e third party product I have ever read, but only just recently read, was the Book of Erotic Fantasy. I heard that the book got its d20 lisence taken away because of violating quality standards, and as such, I am concerned about the books fate in 4e. Does anybody who currently owns rights to the book, and if they are planning on getting into 4e?


This is not intended to be a thread about anything not permitted on the boards, but as a discussion regarding the fate of this product in 4e.

I was in the publishers meeting with the WotC crew when some of the content restrictions were discussed. While nothing was said specifically, my strong suspicion is that you will see stuff in the OGL's content restriction that would essentially prohibit anything like the BOEF from happening again. Why? Because the 4E OGL as I understand it will allow us to tie to the D&D brand pretty directly and harm to the brand is a valid concern. In fact, it is exactly this kind of product I think they had in mind, but I cant speak for them of course.

I'm not intending to start a "BOEF was good or bad" thread or fuel such a debate. Just saying my belief is that the OGL will not permit a 4E version.

 

[Merlin the Tuna]

I still shudder at the thought of the "Magical nipple clamps".

If I remember correctly, they actually provided a boost to Concentration checks. How on earth THAT is supposed to work is beyond me, but there you go.