WOTC undecided over OGL/GSL. Why you should care

[Belphanior]

pathfinder won't be out for more than a year after 4E is released. Why on EARTH would they assume it was Pathfinder. Some of the Pathfinder fans are giving it way too much credit.

Are you calling me a Pathfinder fan? I fought duels over less, sir.

And the point isn't about whether or not Pathfinder is out yet. The point was that if there's thousands of people cancelling right now it's unlikely that "the suits at Habsro" immediately make the connection to the OGL minutiae. It's more likely they blame this new competitor, the state of the economy, or even the lunar phases for all I care.

 

[malraux]

I am with the let the OGL die camp.
I went recently over my RPG library and while there was rubbish from all periods the concentration of rubbish was highest during the early d20-OGL times.
What OGL did was encourage hyper-production while at the same time stifling creativity.

It does more than that though. Back in the TSR days, even fan created stuff given away for free would get hit with legal threats. The OGL made it clear that some stuff was automatically free from legal action.

 

[Orcus]

That is a fairly big assumption.

And while I in no way support your proposed boycott, why on earth can't it wait until we hear something more. Pre-orders can be canceled up until the moment stuff is shipped, last I checked.

It may be an assumption, but I also believe it is true. I think there is a chance that there is no open gaming for 4E. And that really has me concerned.

I am one of Wizards' biggest supporters on these boards. I always have been. I've worked with them in the past. I've gotten special permission and license deals for things like Tome of Horrors. If there is a dedicated and trusted third party publisher from Wizards' standpoint, it really has to be me.

I am not calling for a boycott. But get one thing straight--the OP is not wrong in his belief. Not at all. This is a very real concern. I am reconsidering my whole strategy because of teh very same concerns. That is how real it is.

And thrid parties are relevant to gaming. We help transfer customers from one edition to the other. We provide alternate visions of game play. Gamers are fickle. They like things their way. Not everyone wants the Forgotten Realms or Eberron. We provide alternatives. So what does that do? It keeps people playing D&D as opposed to peeling off to other games. Some of that happens anyway, but the third parties have really kept people playing D&D. That is a HUGE benefit for Wizards.

 

[Oldtimer]

So you're free to write rules that are inspired by the things you see in 4e. But when you cross the line from inspiration to imitation, then you might be treading a little to close to 4e's specific expression to be entirely safe. And that's especially true if your product uses the same terminology as 4e does (reflex defense, encounter power, etc.)--something you'd obviously want to do if the product was intended to be used in a 4e game

And this would the whole story but for one thing - the 3.x SRD.

 

[Orcus]

Why should WOTC give their rules for free to other companies, so they can profit with these rules, unless it somehow benefits WOTC business?
If open gaming does no good for WOTC business, why should they support it?

Because it very clearly does do good for Wizards. No one involved in open gaming feels that open gaming is bad for Wizards. Only suits would think that way. Seriously. And that is a concern because there are some decision makers at Wizards who are new and have ZERO experience with the actual events and experience of open gaming.

 

[Reaper Steve]

I am just asking that WoTC HONOR the promise they made to us at the launch of 4E.

I don't think they ever promised an OGL. Stating 'there will be an OGL' is different. That may have been the case, stated in good faith, six months ago. They are well within their rights to change their minds since that original statement was made if they have determined it to no longer be in their best interests.

Not saying this scenario is what is happening, but if it is, I do not see it as a re-neg on a promise.

 

[bramadan]

Of course, creating a completely new system, balancing it appropriately, etc is a long, involved and in many cases, a failed task. If you already have a core system to look at, tweak and bend to go w/what you have in mind, it is much faster and chances are, better balanced. I think products like Arcana Evolved and Mutants & Masterminds were both very innovative, yet at their core they are just d20. Why is this such a bad thing?

I guess I just happen not to like either of them so I am not so sad to see them go.

I do not like GURPS exactly because it if flavorless system made to fit every kind of game. Insofar as I like DnD is that it supports DnD-sort of play. If 4ed moves more in the genre-specific direction I will be very happy. At that point forbidding the (official) grafting of the separate genres onto its base seems a very good marketing decision (a way of making clear statement of "DnD is not GURPS" if you would).

Alternative rules wise again I think that if someone has good rules ideas it is better if they write their own rules. That way if they really are good - they are not hampered by the "basic" rules and if they are bad they are not muddying the water, confusing the player base and generally contributing to the rules glut. Letting other people make rules modules for your game is as if BMW said "from now on we will let random 3rd party manufacturers design steering systems for our cars and will provide instructions for removing the original BMW steering and its replacement with the 3rd party one which we have neither tested nor in any other way approved". Sure, it *may* end up a better car - but somehow it seems unlikely.

 

[Orcus]

Actually that is NOT what it says.

Having worked for some time in marketing in a big corporation this would be my interpretation of the "spin".

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

I agree that is the interpretation.

I dont think this is about HOW they license 4E to us. I think the decision has gone back to WHETHER OR NOT they license it at all.

That said, I know that Scott and many people at Wizards are believers in open gaming and are fighting for 4E to be open. I hope they win.

So everyone use your daily powers to give Scott and Linae bonuses to their skill checks all next week. Then take an extended rest and do it again.

I'm not trying to be doom and gloom. I still think there are enough good voices for Open Gaming at Wizards that this will work out. But (1) I am concerned, (2) the OP is right, and (3) if you love D&D and its longevity and value, you should be concerned. A healthy D&D means a healthy RPG industry. I dont think we can afford the level of fragmentation that is likely to happen if 3Ps arent allowed to support 4E.

 

[Roland55]

It may be an assumption, but I also believe it is true. I think there is a chance that there is no open gaming for 4E. And that really has me concerned.

I am one of Wizards' biggest supporters on these boards. I always have been. I've worked with them in the past. I've gotten special permission and license deals for things like Tome of Horrors. If there is a dedicated and trusted third party publisher from Wizards' standpoint, it really has to be me.

I am not calling for a boycott. But get one thing straight--the OP is not wrong in his belief. Not at all. This is a very real concern. I am reconsidering my whole strategy because of teh very same concerns. That is how real it is.

And thrid parties are relevant to gaming. We help transfer customers from one edition to the other. We provide alternate visions of game play. Gamers are fickle. They like things their way. Not everyone wants the Forgotten Realms or Eberron. We provide alternatives. So what does that do? It keeps people playing D&D as opposed to peeling off to other games. Some of that happens anyway, but the third parties have really kept people playing D&D. That is a HUGE benefit for Wizards.

I'm very sad to hear this. I think a lot of other players will also be sad, but by no means all -- there are plenty of devotees who only care about WOTC.

If it means anything, I think (just think ... I have no source of concrete information or special insight) we older gamers will continue to support the 3rd party producers like yourself. Your work is solid. It is often superior to that of WOTC. Whether it involves 4E or not is irrelevant.

Alternatives, variations, fresh insight -- these are all very valuable.

 

[Orcus]

The books have already gone to the printers, any GSL/OGL information will already be pinned down and in the books. Nothing is public yet at this time however. So a boycott will solve nothing as they already have this information decided otherwise they couldn't include the info in the books.

No it wont. Wizards doesnt have to use the GSL/OGL.

Nothing in the books will solve this problem.