WOTC undecided over OGL/GSL. Why you should care

[Michael Morris]

I'm not challenging your decision. Its your decision, not mine. I'm just noting how time changes things, even ENWorld. I think "no open gaming? how would you respond"" is front page stuff for ENWorld. Arguing about details of the license and the specifics, that seems like OGL thread stuff to me. But its your call, not mine.

ENWorld 2 supports the ability to promote threads to news items. A news hound can write up a summary or introduction to the ongoing conversation of the thread, then the comment link can lead into the thread itself. The hope is to highlight the best threads of the board on the front page regardless of the forum in which they are classified.

 

[Ranger REG]

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.

And yet Gwendolyn M Kestrel -- wife of Andy Collins and is one of the book's contributors along with former WotC Prez Anthony Valterra -- is still on Wizards payroll.

I don't know about being marketed to teens and pre-teens. The FLGS retailer should have exercised reasonable judgment when it comes to displaying their inventory. Then again, it's not like family-friendly Borders have put their adult magazines in the back of the cashier's counter which can be viewed upon request.

But as everyone noted here, it does have a mature warning label.

 

[Mouseferatu]

And yet Gwendolyn M Kestrel -- wife of Andy Collins and is one of the book's contributors along with former WotC Prez Anthony Valterra -- is still on Wizards payroll.

Actually, just for the record, Gwen left WotC mid- to late last year. (It was, also for the record, a personal decision on her part to do so.)

 

[bramadan]

I don't give a fig for puritanism and even less for scandalizing the kids.
Hell, I wrote the campaign setting and rules to support it where one of the most popular classes is courtesan-assassin and where stuff like seduction and sex are about as common as combat in the actual gameplay.

That said, BoEF is a piece of garbage

I bought it exactly because I was looking for good, well thought out rules for using sexuality in RPGs. For things like virginity bonuses for paladins, sexual sacrifices for necromancers, seduction rules to match DnD combat rules in complexity, charm and enchant effects (magical and mundane) available to skilled courtesans - generally things to bring sexuality into the context of an adventure game.

Instead it was 95% full of such inanities as the "spell to make your dick bigger" and "magical nipple rings". It was a book aimed squarely at the most juvenile segment of DnD market and the fact that it had those "Mature" warnings only made it more so.

There was OGL crap before - hell there was some fairly bad WotC stuff as well - but no published book was ever so egregiously horrible on every level - from good taste to gaming applicability. Subject matter notwithstanding if I were a company I would make damn sure I do whatever I could to prevent such items from ever being associated with my IP again.

 

[Alzrius]

Bramadan, I found your points quite interesting regarding the things you were looking for and didn't find in the BoEF. That said, I don't understand your comments about not liking what was there.

For things like virginity bonuses for paladins, sexual sacrifices for necromancers, seduction rules to match DnD combat rules in complexity, charm and enchant effects (magical and mundane) available to skilled courtesans - generally things to bring sexuality into the context of an adventure game.

All of these things sound cool, though I'd think that seduction rules that are as complex as combat rules would be a little too much. That sounds like it'd almost be making combat-style interaction rules. Likewise, there seemed to be plenty of charm and enchant effects, which a courtesan-style character could use.

Instead it was 95% full of such inanities as the "spell to make your dick bigger" and "magical nipple rings". It was a book aimed squarely at the most juvenile segment of DnD market and the fact that it had those "Mature" warnings only made it more so.

This part I don't understand. I don't recall any such spell or magic item. That said, such an item doesn't sound like a necessarily bad idea, since magic items are a standard d20 staple, so magic nipple rings seem like an obvious idea (though, as I mentioned, the book didn't seem to have any, except for that piercer PrC).

Also, in a book about sex and sexuality, with photoshopped images of naked people, why does a "mature" warning make it juvenile?

There was OGL crap before - hell there was some fairly bad WotC stuff as well - but no published book was ever so egregiously horrible on every level - from good taste to gaming applicability.

I personally think the BoEF needed more material that went beyond just new crunch - it should have given an entire sex-based adventure, and some sort of location or setting to show how the material is used, among other things - but the stuff it had seemed applicable, and not in bad taste. It just wasn't anything particularly special.

 

[hossrex]

Nope. You're still wrong. If you had bothered to read the rest of my post, you might understand why.

You claiming you haven't personally benefited from the OGL is like a native New Yorker saying they haven't personally benefited from the Interstate Highway System. To the extent that the OGL expanded the size of the industry, employed a number of people who were able to freelance for WotC, and made it more profitable for WotC to publish books--you have personally benefited. Without touching a single d20 product yourself.

WTF are you talking about? I'm telling you that aside from the core books, we bought the Forgotten Realms book, and a VERY small handful of other class books.

You're *STILL* telling me that I've benefited from an expanded industry... even though I've not bought/used/read/cared about/had any interest in/etc any product created by this industry?

LOL!

People who've never touched "a single d20 product" have benefited from the OGL?

LOL!

You crack me up!

Lets try someone different, see if they make more sense.

Well, simply put, those third parties did have an impact on the books you name. The people that worked on them got their start in the 3rd party 'stuff' that you tend not to use. They added and changed D&D for all players with their innovations and they were absorbed by Wizards to do it on a more broad scale...

Any other questions?

Um? Yes?

First question: How does this effect someone who still uses almost exclusively core books? How does this 'back slide effect' help people who don't use content that was released after said 'back slide'?

You're all still assuming that everyone is using new books. You're all still assuming that everyone is going out every month and buying DnD content. That simply isn't true. I've tried to say that ten times now. Some groups are happy with the content they had with the edition came out, and don't generally expand upon that.

Your "reasoning" (and I am being generous) requires that a person be constantly buying books... and that they be buying WotC books. I entirely agree, as was indicated in my previous post (the part where I said something to the effect of 'if you buy enough books that the books you buy have been influenced by the newer books'), that the new WotC books have something to be thankful of from the third party books. It is, as is any, a synergistic market. Product A builds to product B, which was necessary for Product C.

If you enjoy product C, you can't say it would have happened without product A (well, you can... but even I'm not arguing that at the moment).

I'm however saying that while "Product A" (first party content) led to "product B" (third party content), which in turn led to "product C" (another piece of first party product)... none of that matters if all a person plays with is "Product A".

The person who plays with "Product B", and "Product C" might be beholden to the person who created "Product A", but yet the person who only plays with "Product A" is in no way beholden to the person who created "Product B", or "Product C".

This is simple economics, and wishful thinking is interfering. That so many fail to recognize the bias interfering with their opinions is just sad. That so many think there personal preference would be for the best of WotC is pathetic.

Not everyone has the same gaming trends as you. Not everyone has the same gaming trends as me.

The problem is that I'm allowing for other people to trend differently from myself, and you are not.

Epic. Fail.

 

[lrsach01]

WTF are you talking about? I'm telling you that aside from the core books, we bought the Forgotten Realms book, and a VERY small handful of other class books.

You're *STILL* telling me that I've benefited from an expanded industry... even though I've not bought/used/read/cared about/had any interest in/etc any product created by this industry?

Yup...I'll say it...YOU benefited....most probably. By letting other companies work on the less profitable aspects, WotC was free to devote all their time and effort to the core stuff. If someone complained that Faerun was getting too much attention, WotC could say, "This is where our focus is but Company X is doing the things you want. Go see them. See we are one big happy family!" This was the reason I was able to buy so many good Dragonlance source books (Thank you Margaret Weis Productions). I also got lots of modules to run in my games (Thanks Goodman and all the others...even those guys who aren't incorporated and selling their stuff at $5 a pop at RPGNow).

I'll be the first to admit the benefit might not be direct or even quantifiable, but its there EVEN if you didn't buy a single product outside WotC.

 

[Piratecat]

Less rudeness, folks. It distracts from the point you're trying to make.

 

[catsclaw]

WTF are you talking about? I'm telling you that aside from the core books, we bought the Forgotten Realms book, and a VERY small handful of other class books ... People who've never touched "a single d20 product" have benefited from the OGL? ... LOL! .. You crack me up! ... Lets try someone different, see if they make more sense.

Just because you can't imagine the world is round, it doesn't mean it must be flat.

Somewhere in the depths of WotC, before they write a splatbook or a campaign setting or an adventure, they hold a meeting. And at that meeting they discuss the likely health of the industry when the book is released, and how their previous sales did, and their expected profit, and how much money they're going to spend on art and freelancers and paper and ink, and whether it makes sense to risk publishing the product at all.

The larger the RPG market is, the easier those decisions are. If you double the number of potential buyers, you double your potential profit. To the extent that the OGL increased the size of the audience--yes, you have benefited from the OGL. Because that audience means Wizards of the Coast makes more money, and publishes more books, and those are books you do buy.

Epic. Fail.

Classy.

 

[BryonD]

You're *STILL* telling me that I've benefited from an expanded industry... even though I've not bought/used/read/cared about/had any interest in/etc any product created by this industry?

Yes, you most certainly have. You may be oblivious to how that works. But that doesn't change anything.