WOTC undecided over OGL/GSL. Why you should care

[Plane Sailing]

Which is why my advice to you is to take the foot out of your mouth and shut up.

My advice to you is that you clean up your act or you will face a suspension. You've got no call to speak to someone else like that.

I'd appreciate it if you would edit your post somewhat.

If you can't understand why I've said this, do feel free to email me.

 

[The Little Raven]

Something profound is going on; some internal debate at Hasbro.

No. There's an internal discussion happening at Wizards of the Coast. Being owned by another company doesn't mean they constantly stick their nose in your business. WotC is the most successful RPG company in history, and Hasbro isn't going to mess with that. Hasbro bought Wizards because they were a successful, money-making company that knew how to handle themselves in a risky market.

 

[The Little Raven]

“We’re still vetting our final policy regarding open gaming. As soon as that process is complete, we’ll make an official announcement. Stay tuned for more information.”

What is amusing is that Mike said this...

"Higher-ups in the company are having second thoughts about whether we want to support Open-Gaming".

...and some people, for some reason, try to reframe it as this.

 

[Andre]

Whether or not you believe it to be true was not the point. The point was misrepresenting what the post actually said.

If we did that to people actually posint here (probably including yourself), we'd get complaints about allowing people to put words in other people's mouths. It is rude.

It is fine to quote them, and say, "I interpret this to mean X." It is not fine to quote them, and say, "They are saying X." The former is being clear about your thought process, and admitting it is yours. The latter is rude.

Yep.

I respect the concerns of those who fear that WOTC is going to gut or eliminate entirely the GSL, but that's all it is at this point - fear. We don't *know* what is happening. We're all just guessing.

It's threads like this one that lead me to understand why WOTC reps don't post more often. It's far too easy to be crucified for a comment that, taken literally, is completely innocuous.

And as Umbran says, if you're not going to take it literally, at least be clear that you are expressing an opinion, not fact.

 

[Reaper Steve]

While I'm not defending Sora Justice's post per se, I do think he has a valid point.

Tighter control over their IP and an assurance of quality.

One does not need an OGL to allow licenses that grow the industry, both in innovation and profit.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

Are you always this cheerful Charwoman?

I am actually very very tired and hungry. I ran out the door after 3 hours of sleep and forgot to make sure I had food or anything.

I am stopping posting cause I'm acting like a bit of an idiot.

My basic idea of disagreeing with you is valid.

My methods are questionable.

 

[HeinorNY]

I agree that there are some things about open gaming that dont help Wizards, and I have said as much. They dont get any benefit from bulk reprinting of their rules. They dont get any benefit from products that dont help sell D^D proiducts. They dont get any benefit from the creation of competing stand alone games like Mutants and Masterminds. I wouldnt be surprised to see any new license change all that. I would support such a license.

Your point says it all. WOTC should change the license to get rid of all situations that don't benefit them and may actually hurt their business.
If for some reason we all come to agree that any kind of open gaming is bad for WOTC business, I'm pretty sure you would keep the logic of your statement and you would, even if it was bad for your business, agree with their decision of banishing any kind of OGL.

That's my point. I'm only presuming WOTC is going to make a decision based on what is good for their business and just that. If the final decision is the correct one, or if it was made by the right person or group of people, that's another discussion.

And if after all that, we simply disagree with WOTC's decison because we believe open gaming is good for everyone and even for WOTC, what to do? IF open gaming is really the wave of the future, if the RPG market won't survive without it, why don't all the small 3rd party publishers unite themselves and make up their own, completely open and free, set of RPG rules? Does open gaming only work if it's headed by WOTC?

I'm sorry but this is a pet peeve of mine. All this sounds like all the 3rd publishers can't survive if they are not under the wing of momma duck WOTC. Momma duck decides to close her wing and the little quackers are completelly lost without knowing what to do, waiting to see what momma duck next step will be. That doesn't sound like a real Open Gaming Movement to me. IMO, a real OG movement would be a group of publisher with a common interest (RPG market) that would unite themselves to create something they can all benefit form it together and, when possible, bring others like them to join the party.

WOTC tried to do it, but failed. Maybe WOTC was too big for that, maybe the small publishers forgot about the mutual aspect and started using the OGL to do things for themselves only (it won't harm WOTC because their big, but will benefit us a lot 'cause we are small). WOTC can't just keep supporting it with the promise of some possible indirect benefit like the "doorway to RPG" argument. It was clear the OGL was much better to 3rd party publisher's business than it was for WOTC business. There were many things in the OGL that didn't help WOTC, but I think there was nothing in it that could be bad for 3rd parties. Well, such a "OG" movement is fated to an end.

 

[xechnao]

I'm sorry but this is a pet peeve of mine. All this sounds like all the 3rd publishers can't survive if they are not under the wing of momma duck WOTC. Momma duck decides to close her wing and the little quakers are completelly lost without knowing what to do, waiting to see what momma duck next step will be. That doesn't sound like a real Open Gaming Movement to me. IMO, a real OG movement would be a group of publisher with a common interest (RPG market) that would unite themselves to create something they can all benefit form it together and, when possible, bring others like them to join the party.

This is a good point.
I guess what they need is to adopt the right mentality and some good talent.
Is it so hard to it?

 

[SSquirrel]

Your point says it all. WOTC should change the license to get rid of all situations that don't benefit them and may actually hurt their business.
If for some reason we all come to agree that any kind of open gaming is bad for WOTC business, I'm pretty sure you would keep the logic of your statement and you would, even if it was bad for your business, agree with their decision of banishing any kind of OGL.

Well I would assume that people who ignore WotC's books and go for alternate games like M&M, Arcana Evolved, Iron Heroes, True 20 etc would be bad for their business b/c none of those books refer you back to the core rulebooks. So those would be right out. Campaign settings can easily point back to the core books for base classes and such, most of the actual rules of the game etc, thus focusing on the fluff and mentioning any tweaks to standard rules that need made (ex. no Dragonborn, no Paladins). So campaign settings should be good to go.

Adventures would pretty clearly point right back to the core books and thus help their business. Books of new rules and classes like WotC's own Unearthed Arcana would be good as you need the core of the game to use the tweaks and new classes. So basically, alternate PHBs and maybe things like sexually explicit material seem to be the only things I could see as bad for their business of selling the core books and/or coloring the view of the game by the general public.

Clark, would you say this is a fair summary of what you think they might be pondering as far as what is and isn't helpful to thier sales totals?

 

[vazanar]

"we" who?
The players?
So Wotc pays tribute to me with open gaming? How? I don't even care about most 3rd party produtcs.
I believe WOTC "pays a tribute" to me by selling me great products. And that's why I think
WOTC has been so successful, because they make quality products I've never seen in all these years of gaming, and not because of open gaming, not because there were some 3rd party publisher out there releasing M&Ms, True20s, AEs, Spycraft and so on.

If 4E is as good as 3E, I consider that tribute well payed.

Well one they do a nice press of GSL call to 3rd parties then drop it. Makes me wonder how much of the other things they've told us will be dropped. When will the full ddi go online?

Also where do you think 4e is coming from? Its coming from ideas in the mess of OGL. Heck they only reason Mearls was hired was his work with 3rd party products. DD can only be improved by more ideas. Not one groups vision.

However, WOTC doesn't owe OGL anything, however the GSL delay is silly. The offer early this year, intended or not, was just a sign of bad planning on wotc's part.