WOTC undecided over OGL/GSL. Why you should care

[Orcus]

I believe Hasbro appointed a new WOTC director recently. It would be entirely rational for a new director to revisit many prior decisions ... it isn't necessarily anything to feel 'doom and gloom' about. A new director cannot retain power without immediately seizing the reins and getting 'into' the new business (well, often 'new' to the 'new director'). A little soul searching does not always lead to change.

Or it may. Time will tell. I've seen it go both ways -- and I've worked at various levels in major corporations and enormous organizations for over 40 years. So, stay tuned.

I think you are exactly right. That is what is going on.

BUT THERE IS A POSSIBLE -POSITIVE- OUTCOME HERE TOO!

Rethinking the GSL could lead to a decision to simply release 4E under the OGL.

So I dont want people to go all gloom and doom. Yes, I am concerned. I am concerned at the twists this has taken. The initial meeting with the publishers was awesome. It was well done, professional, and clearly a part of a well-integrated plan. Then upper management got involved and it got yanked. Then, silence. We knew the GSL was intended to be more restrictive. Frankly, I was ok with that. There were thinigs that didnt make sense for Wizards in the OGL if the d20 STL was not used, which it didnt have to be because the d20 logo lost all value and meaning. Now they are back to the drawing boards. There are three options:

1. Use the GSL, or a version of it, as planned. With some of the restrictions from the STL and Guide built into the GSL itself. I'd be fine with that.

2. Swing to one extreme and say there is no license for 4E at all.

3. Swing to the other side and say 4E can be used under the existing OGL (with a stripped down SRD).

Until last week, it seemed clear that option (1) was in play and we were told that things were proceeding along with option 1. Now, it is clear that option (1) is not the only option in play and that higher ups are considering option (2). Which means they may also be considering option (3).

Clark

 

[Umbran]

Fans are painfully ineffective at doing anything except whining and being consumed by pitiful nerd rage.

If you wish to continue to engage in insulting people, please do it somewhere else.

That goes for everyone - be respectful, or don't post. It's pretty simple, really.

 

[Orcus]

Mods,

I know the rules about where threads go, but this isnt so much an OGL question as it is a question about what will you, the gaming public, do if 4E is not open.

That belongs in the general 4E forum, in my view.

Yes, there is some overlap. But most people dont care about the nuts and bolts of the OGL (which is what the OGL forum is for) but they may well care about open gaming and third party publishers. I know they do. Please return this to the main 4E forum. I think that was the intent of the original poster--to take the temperature of gamers what impact no third parties would have on everyone, not just those interested in the details of the license.

Clark

 

[BASHMAN]

You know, about 2-3 months ago, I remember making a prediction:

"I think that WotC is going to let the 3rd party publishers twist in the wind, and at the last minute decide not to have an OGL for them to use w/ 4E to weaken/destroy some 3rd party publishers, so that they will be the only source of D&D material."

At the time, a lot of 4E marketing tactics apologists branded me a tin-foil hat wearing conspiracy theorist for saying so. Now we know that it IF they have 3rd party support is is with a "GSL" and not an "OGL" for $5k, and alsot now they are saying that "Just kidding, we may not even have a GSL at all. Have a nice day filing chapter 11 former competitor." Anyone who justifies this as acceptable is a WotC employee or should be.

I certainly hope this is not the way it goes-- that at least Necromancer and Goodman will get some special liscence granted in case that is true-- if they didn't allow them to publish for 4E that would be the ultimate stab in the back to these companies that even pledged to go "all in" way back when the $5k tribute was announced, and have likely been banking on 4e, and spending a lot of their R&D on projects for it (at least I know necro has). To tell them "oh well" now is not good enough.

If WotC does decide not to make a GSL this late in the game, I encourage ALL 3rd party publishers to use the 3.X OGL to make and support a "4E OSRIC". I might even found a new combany called "Four Elves Press" and Publish lines of products like "4E Fantasy Classes" and "4E Adventures" and "4E monstes & booty" All those things, while written under 3.x OGL will "just by coincidence" happen to be perfectly compatable w/ 4E D&D, but likely say that they are for "4E OSRIC and "other" 4th Edition Games" Without stating implicitly what it is the 4th Edition of (is it GURPS 4E? M&M? We just don't know...)

Or on the other hand, we could make & support PATHFINDER. I think that WotC might discover what happens when they sow the wind a few times to many. They can fool some of the people all the time, All of the people some of the time, but they won't fool all the people all of the time. Deciding this late in the game to take away the GSL would be the last straw for many people I expect.

 

[JohnRTroy]

I'm gonna have to agree with Orcus about the threads and their location.

I find that a lot of people ignore the OGL forum, for whatever reason. I noticed a few threads started in the 4e forums end up dead when they are moved here.

 

[Azgulor]

Ok, here's where I really run into trouble with your point. I largely don't buy third party products. I certainly don't consider them 'support' for the main system, so their non-existence wouldn't diminish it in any meaningful way. Even if it did, if the 'old guard' doesn't like 4e, it will be on the basis of the core game. 3rd party products aren't going to go in and fix the essential problems in the basic system- they're going to be based on that system.

While that is your experience, it's the polar opposite of mine. 3rd-party products brought me back to D&D b/c they showed me how easy it was to modify the d20 engine to suit the interests of GMs, players, and the needs of any given campaign setting. I have significantly more 3rd-party product than WotC product. And in many cases with 3.x, 3rd-party products did "fix" the D&Disms that drive me nuts. Products like Grim Tales (grittier games, toolkit approach), Conan (classic swords-n-sorcery rather than D&D-Fantasy superheo), Game of Thrones (political games, grittier combat), and Thieves' World & True Sorcery (non-Vancian magic). Whether you call them fixes or options, they added to the game in ways WotC would never have done. That's as valid a support model as 3rd-party adventures which coincidentally compete with WotC's adventures. The only difference there is that WotC doesn't care about that level of competition as they view them as table scraps anyway.

Bottom line, open gaming and continued ability for 3rd-party is a BIG deal for a lot of people.

 

[Umbran]

Nope, its my interpretation, too. And I believe it is the 100% truth. This is not conjecture. Dont dismiss it as conjecture.

Note how the word "conjecture" did not appear in my post.

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.

 

[Azgulor]

Mods,

I know the rules about where threads go, but this isnt so much an OGL question as it is a question about what will you, the gaming public, do if 4E is not open.

That belongs in the general 4E forum, in my view.

Yes, there is some overlap. But most people dont care about the nuts and bolts of the OGL (which is what the OGL forum is for) but they may well care about open gaming and third party publishers. I know they do. Please return this to the main 4E forum. I think that was the intent of the original poster--to take the temperature of gamers what impact no third parties would have on everyone, not just those interested in the details of the license.

Clark

I absolutely agree with Orcus. Please put this in the 4e forum. It's really where it belongs.

 

[Ydars]

Mods; Please move this back to the main forum.

My intention with this post was to reach all gamers interested in 4E, not just industry insiders.

There are serious issues here that need a wide audience.

 

[BASHMAN]

I think you are exactly right. That is what is going on.

BUT THERE IS A POSSIBLE -POSITIVE- OUTCOME HERE TOO!

Rethinking the GSL could lead to a decision to simply release 4E under the OGL.

So I dont want people to go all gloom and doom. Yes, I am concerned. I am concerned at the twists this has taken. The initial meeting with the publishers was awesome. It was well done, professional, and clearly a part of a well-integrated plan. Then upper management got involved and it got yanked. Then, silence. We knew the GSL was intended to be more restrictive. Frankly, I was ok with that. There were thinigs that didnt make sense for Wizards in the OGL if the d20 STL was not used, which it didnt have to be because the d20 logo lost all value and meaning. Now they are back to the drawing boards. There are three options:

1. Use the GSL, or a version of it, as planned. With some of the restrictions from the STL and Guide built into the GSL itself. I'd be fine with that.

2. Swing to one extreme and say there is no license for 4E at all.

3. Swing to the other side and say 4E can be used under the existing OGL (with a stripped down SRD).

Until last week, it seemed clear that option (1) was in play and we were told that things were proceeding along with option 1. Now, it is clear that option (1) is not the only option in play and that higher ups are considering option (2). Which means they may also be considering option (3).

Clark

Clark, I admire your optimism in times like this. I honestly hope that it all works out for you!