Why I only buy open content

That said, I agree with Monte. I am a gamer first and a business person second. My number 1, total focus is to make a product that is great for gamers--the real players and DMs that play the game. As a result, I dont really spend much time considering opening and closing content, other than to say that if I can open it I generally do.

Some products, like the Tome of Horrors, were made specificially to be totally open and to support other publishers. BUT they were only done that way because they also met the overriding goal of making a great product for the players.

It is a business, though, and there are lots of good reasons why some content should be closed. Frankly, there are even better reasons for an industry genius like Monte to protect his content than there even is for me. Who is kidding who, no companies are coming to me to make videogames of my conent. Monte, on the other hand, might actually have to consider things like that. But I'm getting off the point.

I consider it utterly silly to claim that an email to Monte to use the AU license somehow destroys your "muse" or "mojo" or whatever. If you cant handle that, then there is a very serious question as to whether you can handle professional publishing. You are going to get way more scrutiny and have way more hours of other people climbing up your muse's a$$ than an email asking permission. Try getting that first manuscript back with all the editorial changes. 'Cause unless you are directing, editing, producing and publishing it all yourself, someone's red pen will hit your work and ruin your day. Its just the way it goes. You have to learn to surrender total control. [editorial note: Clark said this with a smile on his face and is not trying to make a personal attack against you --editor]

Now that I've gone off on that :) , I dont mean to say that you shouldnt use "openness" as a litmus test for what you buy. That is as sound a reason as any other--it is personal to you and you are free to have your selection criteria. I personally dont see the value to it, but you are free to value it. BUT please undestand that we as publishers arent sitting out here purposely trying to vex you, the guy who wants openness. I havent yet met a publisher who wouldnt like to sell a few more books.

There are lots of reasons people do their legal designations the way they do, and most have nothing to do with evil intent to close content and drive you crazy. Lots of people copy other designations, seeing that they work and wanting to avoid the costs of lawyers for every product. Seriously. I cant tell you how many early products simply copied the way I did the designation in the Creature Collection. And then the way we did it in Relics and Rituals. Slowly, there came to be a sort of "standard" way to do it that just got adopted. I can guarantee you that many people adopted that standard just ebcause it was the standard and not because of some complex analysis. Look, I like the OGL. I like the d20STL. I am a lawyer. I like the IP issues raised by the whole license thing. Most publishers dont have my sick love of intricate legal issues. They use what works. They dont have the legal resources to tread new ground. Or an in house lawyer to defend them if they try something new and get in trouble. I do. So I have tried all sorts of ways to designate content. But I dont think you should hold it against publishers who "follow the pack" and use the standard means of designating content.

Just my thoughts :)

Oh, and go buy our new Wilderlands Boxed Set. It isnt that open, but that is because it was created pursuant to a license from Judges Guild--an example of yet another good reason why we as publishers cant always make things as open as we would like in all instances.

Clark
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Orcus said:
OK then, if you buy open content you better have bought the original Tome of Horrors. Not only is it totally open, but we even put instructions on how to reuse the content right there in the book!

Make sure to poke around for Tome of Horrors II while you're there!

Two books any DM or D20 author should own.
 


Orcus said:
OK then, if you buy open content you better have bought the original Tome of Horrors. Not only is it totally open, but we even put instructions on how to reuse the content right there in the book!
I'm coming to your house to see if you have it, a copy of this thread in hand. :)

Come tomorrow - the dogs will be away & the cats love company. Seriously. They're really weird cats.

TOH is on the bottom-right shelf, near the center. TOH2 is right next to it (I sort by publisher &/or topic)

Orcus said:
Try getting that first manuscript back with all the editorial changes. 'Cause unless you are directing, editing, producing and publishing it all yourself, someone's red pen will hit your work and ruin your day.

Heh. The highlight (so far) of my editorial encounters was getting a submission back from Dragon with Roger Moore's, Harold (Brown's?), and Dave Gross's red pens all over it, and not in any sort of good way.

:D
Nell.
 

Orcus said:
'Cause unless you are directing, editing, producing and publishing it all yourself, someone's red pen will hit your work and ruin your day.

Why, yes, yes I am. And I thankfully work for a (non-gaming, dead tree) publisher so I know *exactly* how big that elephant is. I'm also doing all the layout work by hand - print ready copy can take a while, as you well know.

It's a phenomenal amount of work and the printing of the hardcover copies is going to be a big personal cost (there will be no income to offset it), but I don't mind doing it because I don't have to make any compromises on *anything* - and it will be publicly available, so my artistic needs will be satisfied even if no one likes it or spends a penny on it.
 

Orcus said:
OK then, if you buy open content you better have bought the original Tome of Horrors. Not only is it totally open, but we even put instructions on how to reuse the content right there in the book!
I'm coming to your house to see if you have it, a copy of this thread in hand. :)
Would you like coffee, tea or some other tasty beverage? ;)

Tome of Horrors, to me, is the ultimate expression of the OGL at its finest.
 

So I'm the rookie around here, especially when it comes to d20stl/OGL True20 issues. That said, I'm all for sharing, but only to a certain point.

Do I want other publishers to use the game mechanics I will be developing in the future? Sure! Of course! As I understand it, that IS what OGC is for!

Would I like it if I created an entire campaign setting, printed it, got it marketed and distributed to retailers across the country only to have another game publisher use the characters and nations etc. that I have worked hard on developing and have plans to continue to develop in the future?

I'm not sure I'd like that. I'm not sure any sane writer would like that.

BUT, I don't really see how a license is going to keep me from being creative. The d20STL and the OGL don't limit my creativity. Indeed, they have a "Red Bull" effect on my ability to create material, material which has a good chance of being used because it is compatable with Dungeons and Dragons, Sword and Sorcery, AU, and a hundred other games out there.

A license doesn't kill your creativity. YOU kill your creativity.
 


Actually, Mr. Cook is fairly reasonable about letting people use his open content.

When I was even more of a nobody than I am now (and still am a nobody) he was kind enough to allow me to use some rulesets for my first book.

BadAxe Games let me use thier Horror and Insanity rules.

It's not that tough, and the d20 community (for the most part) is VERY reasonable when it comes to letting you use content.

But you should ask first, it's only polite.
 

Teflon Billy said:
I thought that was how the OGL was expected to be used :\

I thought it was expected to be used by publishers to create new products. I really don't think the plan was to see a site created that served no purpose other than to give away entire products for free.

Reaching to my shelf and grabbing from the Green Ronin section I find Hammer & Helm. The OGC declaration reads:

Hammer&Helm said:
All text in this product is designated as Open Gaming Content.

Now this means, to me, that if I'm reading the book and it sparks an idea I can create a product based on that idea. It doesn't mean to me that I should just scan in the text and post it online for free.


Should publishers be punished for using OGC declarations like the above?
 

Remove ads

Top