Why the thought of D&D 5e makes me sad...

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Walking Dad brings up an important concern. The OGL let ODnD clones, 1st Edition, 2nd Edition, 3.0, 3.5, CnC, Pathfinder and others to exist in a free form throughout the internet without legal reprisal. Will WoTC allow people to continue to create and distribute 4E material throughout the internet once they convert to 5e? If so, for how long? I think it's a great question.

As was said earlier, it's not up to them. If 1E can return as OSRIC, it's possible to reverse engineer 4E back into life.

I would say the success of Pathfinder guarantees we'll see a 4E fork product when the time comes.

 

[jaerdaph]

They don't count if they already play D&D or express any interest in such...

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Actually that's not true.... and that's all the details I will say about that.

if you had a little more experience under your belt, and I'm not just talking about +3 codpieces, you'd understand that many things will get one "laid". Yes, including D&D.

Factually incorrect. I met the lady who is now my wife when she showed up to make a character for my D&D game. Though we didn't start dating for years after that, I probably wouldn't have gotten to know her if not for that game.

So, an entire marriage worth of... liaisons... can be chalked up to 2e.

Pics or it didn't happen!

 

[Dark Mistress]

Pics or it didn't happen!

Well no pics where taken. It was just one of those things, I only knew the guy by way of gaming and one night on a cancelled night at his place no one else showed up but me. We played board and computer games, then drank way to much beer and well....

and that is just all the details you boys are going to get.

 

[Hussar]

The OGL is an offer to others to let them use your copyrighted material. It's not at all restrictive on you; as long as you own all the copyrights on your material, you can use it however you want.

That's not the issue. If 4e goes OGL and 5e contains any mechanics from 4e, then it will be required to use the OGL license first off, and secondly, it will become defacto OGL simply by using OGL mechanics.

The legal nightmare that would create would never, ever get past the WOTC lawyers.

 

[Hussar]

There's a strange contradition about PDFs and how many people will use them (on screen or print them out). On the one hand, some folks will say that WotC can't make money on them, yet when they were available WotC was constantly atop the best sellers list on the top ePub sites (and acceptance of electronic products just keeps exponentially growing, if things like tablets and readers, and the demise of so many B&M stores, are anything to judge by) and on the other hand apparently piracy of current edition books at the time was enough to cause WotC to completely reverse their policy on all PDF products, even older edition (but if nobody wants them or will use them, how can they damage the profits?).

So, lines like "The pdf's never sold in numbers to actually matter all that much" really doesn't track for me.


As for 4E support once 5E is out, and compatibility of 4E with 5E? I think those situation will be in line with 3.XE support once 4E was out and 3.XE compatibility with 4E. It's a matter of bolstering the value of the most recent edition.

How many copies does a really, really good selling RPG pdf sell? 2000, 3000? Maybe? Selling like gangbusters on an epub site is a lot like being Valedictorian in summer school.

I don't think so. They're gonna pull the "storage and support cost" argument and hatch it soon...

Really? I can go to the WOTC site right now and every single 3e and 3.5 article (well, maybe not every single, but a HELL of a lot) is still up. A couple of dozen free modules, tons of rules and supplementary material, all the errata, the artwork, everything.

This from the company that Mark CMG is claiming that is trying to isolate the game from what came before. I find that rather hard to understand when you have regular D&D Alumni articles in Dragon, frequent references to older editions, as was mentioned, specifically calling out that the VTT is compatible with all editions of the game. And, let's not forget, enough supplementary 3e and 3.5 material available for free to keep you gaming for the next several years.

 

[Plane Sailing]

It's true. There's a point where fighter saves are the best... mostly in pretty high levels like 14-18. But at low levels, they kind of suck. At mid-levels, they're part of the pack. The supposed advantage of the fighter saving throws is actually not that great.

EDIT: It's huge compared to the thief whose saves were far and away the worst of 1e. But the fighter is only marginally better than the wizard - having the best save 50 times over 21 levels compared to the wizard's 46. He also comes out with 31 worst saves (heavily concentrated in the first 8 character levels across multiple saves) compared to the wizard's 30 (heavily concentrated in paralyze, poison, and death magic across the whole career).

Out of interest, is that comparing saving throws at equal *levels*, or at equivalent *xp values* ?

After all, in those days thieves could be a level or so up on their comrades up until 10th level, and then more rapidly after that.

 

[Mark CMG]

How many copies does a really, really good selling RPG pdf sell? 2000, 3000?

We're talking about WotC numbers? Plenty. Of PDFs they either already have or would have when generating new print products anyway. This is a non-question.

Really? I can go to the WOTC site right now and every single 3e and 3.5 article (well, maybe not every single, but a HELL of a lot) is still up. A couple of dozen free modules, tons of rules and supplementary material, all the errata, the artwork, everything.

Any new 3.XE content or books for sale from WotC from previous editions?

This from the company that Mark CMG is claiming that is trying to isolate the game from what came before.

Do you really not get what I am saying about isolationism or are you purposefully conflating separate issues?

I find that rather hard to understand when you have regular D&D Alumni articles in Dragon, (. . .)

Explain.

(. . .) frequent references to older editions, as was mentioned, (. . .)

These are pertinent how?

(. . .) specifically calling out that the VTT is compatible with all editions of the game.

The VTT? I was unaware that this was finally completed and functioning. May I try out this VTT? Tell me about what it does for me as a 4E user versus me as an any-other-edition user, please.

And, let's not forget, enough supplementary 3e and 3.5 material available for free to keep you gaming for the next several years.

There is a nice collection of stuff that new GMs would find helpful, I'll give you that. I am often surprised that those PDFs are still available for a game they won't sell to me in in the same format or otherwise.

 

[Dausuul]

Usual disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, this is not legal advice, etc.

That's not the issue. If 4e goes OGL and 5e contains any mechanics from 4e, then it will be required to use the OGL license first off, and secondly, it will become defacto OGL simply by using OGL mechanics.

Not at all. 4E contains a ton of mechanics from 3E. The d20 mechanic, the way ability score modifiers are calculated, attack rolls and armor class, hit points, opportunity attacks, move action/standard action, cyclical initiative, abilities defined by a class/race combination, XP for kills, experience levels... et cetera, et cetera.

The thing about the OGL is that it is giving you permission to use the specific language and presentation of the game mechanics. The mechanics themselves are not copyrightable. According to this article, which matches other writing I've seen on the subject from legal types, it would be legal to clone an existing game down to the last detail, change the names and the wording on everything, and publish.

The value of the OGL is primarily to people who can't pay a lawyer to vet every word of their products and make sure it doesn't cross the line into infringement. That "change the names and the wording on everything" part is critically important. If you screw it up, you can leave yourself open. Furthermore, even if you don't screw up, you could have a big court battle to prove you didn't screw up, and because the US does not follow the "loser pays" model for civil cases, having an ironclad case doesn't mean you won't go broke fighting it.

If you followed the OGL, you have a much better shot at getting the whole thing dismissed quickly, because you have what is essentially a contract spelling out that you are allowed to do certain things. You don't have to prove those rights under copyright law, which is notoriously vague and squirrelly; you can just point to the contract.

Back to 4E and 5E. The question is, if 4E were put under the OGL, what would it mean for 5E? The answer, as I understand it (again, IANAL), is "very little." Wizards isn't going to sue itself for infringement. Anybody who tries to republish 5E and claim their work is protected by 4E's OGL status is still going to be subject to a big court battle to prove it, and they'll still have to get a lawyer to go over their rules with a fine-toothed comb and make sure they didn't stray into using 5E language anywhere. It's basically the same as if they just knocked off 5E and changed the words. You could do it. If you did it right and could afford the litigation, the courts would probably back you up. But how confident are you in your ability to do it right, and can you afford the litigation?

That's not to say they would ever OGL-ify 4E. It seems like a quintessentially un-Hasbro thing to do. But I don't think there are substantial legal obstacles.

 

[Mark CMG]

If 4e goes OGL and 5e contains any mechanics from 4e, then it will be required to use the OGL license first off, and secondly, it will become defacto OGL simply by using OGL mechanics.

Both wrong. As previously stated, you don't need to use the OGL with material of your own copyright.