WOTC undecided over OGL/GSL. Why you should care

[JohnRTroy]

Based on the polls going on, I don't think the amount of customer loss will be significant, especially if they do license it but have more stringent standards. Right now only 5-7% need it to be of the level of the OGL.

I've got no problems with "freedom of speech" arguments, but I do blanch on others saying it's their right to have complete freedom with other's creations.

 

[xechnao]

Based on the polls going on, I don't think the amount of customer loss will be significant, especially if they do license it but have more stringent standards. Right now only 5-7% need it to be of the level of the OGL.

I've got no problems with "freedom of speech" arguments, but I do blanch on others saying it's their write to have complete freedom with other's creations.

5-7% is significant. The fact here IMO is that the value of the poll is insignificant.

 

[Wystan]

So, I assume that she didn't read it (being a non-roleplaying wife I'd imagine she wouldn't understand much of the rule stuff anyway)?
No?
Sorry, in that case I'm putting this one down to a knee-jerk puritanical reaction.

Is BOEF a good book? Not really, but that's because it details a lot of things that really don't need detailing anyway - much like a book full of various statistics on how various kinds of alcohol, food and sleeping patterns would affect your PCs woldn't really be all that useful.
It's a book concerning itself with sex and eroticism. Is sex and eroticism bad?
Have you shown your wife a copy of the Kama Sutra? If so, did she react the same way?
There's really nothing "demented and disgusting" about it, it's about sex, something all people (well, most anyway) engage in in their adult life.
To me (but hey, I'm European ) all the fuss about BOEF is really much ado about nothing.

Yes she actually opened it and saw what it contained...on that note, she also plays Runebound and Magic the Gathering so does understand what roleplaying is about, just not her cup of Tea... However, that book was marketed at pre-teens and teens. It was a slap in the face of roleplaying to put it out there to Tweak Wizards nose. It does not need to be read by parents to have them nay say roleplaying based on it.

 

[Oldtimer]

But it's not up to you to decide. It's up to the owner of the brand, the D&D and d20 owners, to decide. Brands are powerful statements and I think it's up to WoTC to define their standards.

I think you've said that a million times by now.

They can start using their trademark for wholemeal donuts instead if they want. What is your point? Can't customers have opinions? Isn't it a good idea for companies to listen to their customers?

 

[xechnao]

I think you've said that a million times by now.

They can start using their trademark for wholemeal donuts instead if they want. What is your point? Can't customers have opinions? Isn't it a good idea for companies to listen to their customers?

I believe that the fact is that not everyone around here is just customers.

 

[GentleGiant]

Yes she actually opened it and saw what it contained...on that note, she also plays Runebound and Magic the Gathering so does understand what roleplaying is about, just not her cup of Tea... However, that book was marketed at pre-teens and teens.

Who marketed it to pre-teens and teens? The bookstore? Nothing on the book itself proclaims this.
RPGs and D&D are wide ranging products, some appeal to "kill the monsters and loot the treasure, then onwards to the next dungeon" players and some appeal to "you have now successfully infiltrated the King's court" players and some appeal to all the people in between.
So, are you making the argument that just because it's D&D (well, OGL really) it's automatically marketed at pre-teens and teens?
Would you argue that for every single OGL product out there?

It was a slap in the face of roleplaying to put it out there to Tweak Wizards nose.

Hardly, I'll again argue that it's only people who have issues with sexuality, and average to bad RPG design, who really have a problem with BOEF (and the latter could be said of many, many other products, so it really comes back to issues with sexuality).

It does not need to be read by parents to have them nay say roleplaying based on it.

I'd argue that parents who dismiss a whole hobby, especially one as diverse as RPGs, because of one single book have other issues they need to deal with.

 

[Orcus]

Based on the polls going on, I don't think the amount of customer loss will be significant, especially if they do license it but have more stringent standards. Right now only 5-7% need it to be of the level of the OGL.

I've got no problems with "freedom of speech" arguments, but I do blanch on others saying it's their right to have complete freedom with other's creations.

I agree with this post in general. My guess is that the customer loss for not doing 4E under the OGL would not be huge (it would be some, but not that huge. 5-7% seems about right to me as a gut number). BUT I think the loss would be more significant if not open at all.

I have long said I understand the desire for a GSL with the old restrictions from the STL/Guide worked in. As a result, I predicted Wizards would choose this path.

However, the other issue is simply annoyance factor. It would be far EASIER to simply do it under the OGL. It is an existing license. It is well-understood. The mechanism for releasing content is clear and easy. The risk of competing products is pretty small, particularly since they already exist any courtesy of the current OGL and SRD.

The more I think about this, the more it makes sense. Why not just release it under the OGL? The protections of a GSL are of less value since the 3E SRD allows for all those types of products anyway taht they are worried about (to the extent they are even worried). I'm not sure it is worth the man hours and headache to make a new license.

Just a thought.

Clark

 

[SSquirrel]

Yes she actually opened it and saw what it contained...on that note, she also plays Runebound and Magic the Gathering so does understand what roleplaying is about, just not her cup of Tea... However, that book was marketed at pre-teens and teens. It was a slap in the face of roleplaying to put it out there to Tweak Wizards nose. It does not need to be read by parents to have them nay say roleplaying based on it.

Try again. Direct quote from the introduction section:

"Warning! Adult Content! The Book of Erotic Fantasy is a sourcebook that deals with the topics of sex in the world of fantasy roleplaying games, written with the adult player in mind. It
deals with mature adult subjects and is not meant for immature players."

The book was a book to cover a niche not covered. I can't find any pictures of the back cover of the book to review, but I seem to recall a similar "mature audience" message there as well. White Wolf has the Black Dog Games line of books that are usually full of more sex and violence than normal and they don't get run out of the industry for it. Yes it's their game not a license owned by another company, but the book was legal when it was produced.

I don't see an issue w/it, but I also believe in personal responsibility and (as a parent) I believe it is the parent's job to pay attention to what their kid is buying and not blindly buy them GTA when they are 13. Many parents don't see things that way, but then want to go off about how X or Y is so terrible for their kid. After they ignored warnings on the product and bought it anyway.

 

[Alzrius]

I can't find any pictures of the back cover of the book to review, but I seem to recall a similar "mature audience" message there as well.

In capital letters on the back, "THIS PRODUCT IS FOR MATURE AUDIENCES ONLY."

I don't see an issue w/it, but I also believe in personal responsibility and (as a parent) I believe it is the parent's job to pay attention to what their kid is buying and not blindly buy them GTA when they are 13. Many parents don't see things that way, but then want to go off about how X or Y is so terrible for their kid. After they ignored warnings on the product and bought it anyway.

I could not possibly agree with this more.

 

[carmachu]

I think the OGL actually hurt us because instead of having a heterogenous market with a wider variety we just have a lot of semi-, demi-, quasi-, and psuedo- versions of D&D 3e. Maybe if the license is more restrictive, people will focus on building good games from the ground up and actually create something really innovative.

I dont know about that....OGL gave us some pretty GOOD things: Ptolus and AE, Iron heros and Iron Kingdoms. And more thana few other things.