GSL posted


4th Edition

651 to 700 of 807 << first < prev | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
bugleyman wrote:
P1NBACK wrote:
bugleyman wrote:


Seriously. If WOTC doesn't blink, my 4E core books are going into a box with a nasty letter and going back to WOTC.

Can you please video tape this and the mailing and put it on Youtube so we know you aren't full of s~@&? Please?

I'll do you one better.

If WOTC doesn't state within one week that an updated GSL (and not just an FAQ posting "clarifying things") is inbound, I will send my 4E core set to Lisa or Erik. Once they confirm receipt, they are free to do with them as they please.

Consider it my penance for being wrong about the whole 4E/Pathfinder fiasco. I might be arrogant, but I'm all for putting my money where my mouth is.

Wow, I take back anything negative I might have said to you the other day. It takes guts to admit you were wrong and to take it to that level in recompense. For what it's worth, I can respect that.

Well done, sir.


dmchucky69 wrote:
bugleyman wrote:
P1NBACK wrote:
bugleyman wrote:


Seriously. If WOTC doesn't blink, my 4E core books are going into a box with a nasty letter and going back to WOTC.

Can you please video tape this and the mailing and put it on Youtube so we know you aren't full of s~@&? Please?

I'll do you one better.

If WOTC doesn't state within one week that an updated GSL (and not just an FAQ posting "clarifying things") is inbound, I will send my 4E core set to Lisa or Erik. Once they confirm receipt, they are free to do with them as they please.

Consider it my penance for being wrong about the whole 4E/Pathfinder fiasco. I might be arrogant, but I'm all for putting my money where my mouth is.

Wow, I take back anything negative I might have said to you the other day. It takes guts to admit you were wrong and to take it to that level in recompense. For what it's worth, I can respect that.

Well done, sir.

Don't congratulate me until I send them, but thanks ;-)

I'm just that disguisted by the GSL's uselessness.

So how about Lisa or Erik? If WOTC doesn't back down, you can have a free set of 4E core books for the asking...all you have to do is confirm receipt. You can feed 'em to your dog or something. Or heck, play with 'em, though I suspect you guys get that stuff for free.


Samuel Weiss wrote:
The problem with the GSL is not the extreme lengths to which it can be taken.

Good post Samuel.

In some quarters (i.e. EnWorld), I have seen the position of:

"Why would WOTC do these awful things? Why wouldn't they want 3rd party adventures to support their core product?"

Honestly, I don't see the malice or ill-intent on their part at all.

But the license is too damn dangerous. When you have your work or lifelihood at stake, you can't expect to leave anything to faith in the goodwill of another party.. especially when it's a corporate entity you're speaking of.

As it stands, it's practically irresponsible not to hire a lawyer before considering adopting it. Not just to ensure any work you produce will be protected, but to ensure that your other products aren't damaged by association with it. Gosh, what a statement that is, in of itself.

Sovereign Court

Wow there totally needs to be a prize for reading this thread from beginning to end :)

I'm kinda just curious at this point to know what Mr. Reynolds has to say about 3.5 and 4e and which he would rather play now that he is no longer a cog in the massive corporate machine that is Hasbro.

And to the GSL, eh. What's to be expected when everything about 4eds release (not 4e itself, just the release and all the things that were supposed to go along with it) has been dissapointing, why is anyone getting upset over yet another dissapointment?

Paizo Employee Director of Brand Strategy

Teiran wrote:

They couldn't even use the same name if it's one you created. I can't use the word Beholder in anything I want to sell because it's their IP, and not something drawn from mythology. They hold the copywrite for beholder, and thus only they can use it. If I created a entirely new race or class, say something like the Bright Blade class, they can't take my name and print their own version because it's copywrited by me. Thus it can't be put into in the SRD.

This is true of some of the things they left out of the SRD, but Drow are not their IP, as much as they might think they are. They are derived from numerous sources (as is the Displacer Beast now that I think about it). If their restriction is that you can't redefine or refer to anything in the SRD that isn't their IP, then in theory, writing about Drow (non SRD) and defining them how you want is still available.

Also, on a different note, catching up and commenting on the discussion is tough at this point, cause so many people are writing so much. Let me catch up, people!


so beauty is in the eye-of-the-[WotC IP], as they say. ;-)

Sovereign Court Contributor

Watcher wrote:

In some quarters (i.e. EnWorld), I have seen the position of:

"Why would WOTC do these awful things? Why wouldn't they want 3rd party adventures to support their core product?"

Honestly, I don't see the malice or ill-intent on their part at all.

I agree with you here, and to back up the rest of your post, I just want to mention something related.

Ari Marmel mentioned that he isn't worried that WotC will steal his IP under the GSL, because the suits won't know what's worth stealing and the actual game designers are nice guys that would never do that.

Here's the problem. If a corporation has a weapon like the GSL, even if you trust the people who are there now, and that weapon was developed with no malice behind it, that doesn't help you two years down the road when all of those people could well be gone and be replaced by malicious folks who will use that weapon.

It doesn't matter how much You, I, Ari or anyone trusts the current folks at WotC. The question is how much do we trust every conceivable person who might eventually be put in a position to screw us with the GSL? And most of those folks, we've never even heard of.

My big two cents.

EDIT: Just reread Sam's post and I now see that he essentially covered everything I did and more. Nice Post!


lastknightleft wrote:

I'm kinda just curious at this point to know what Mr. Reynolds has to say about 3.5 and 4e and which he would rather play now that he is no longer a cog in the massive corporate machine that is Hasbro.

Sean's Blog He talks about his feelings about GSL and a bit down about his 4e experience.


yoda8myhead wrote:
Teiran wrote:

They couldn't even use the same name if it's one you created. I can't use the word Beholder in anything I want to sell because it's their IP, and not something drawn from mythology. They hold the copywrite for beholder, and thus only they can use it. If I created a entirely new race or class, say something like the Bright Blade class, they can't take my name and print their own version because it's copywrited by me. Thus it can't be put into in the SRD.

This is true of some of the things they left out of the SRD, but Drow are not their IP, as much as they might think they are. They are derived from numerous sources (as is the Displacer Beast now that I think about it). If their restriction is that you can't redefine or refer to anything in the SRD that isn't their IP, then in theory, writing about Drow (non SRD) and defining them how you want is still available.

I think the name Drow is specifically thiers, in all their underground spider worshiping, while the concept of Dark Elves in general are public domain because of how often they've been used over the years.

Whether or not Drow is or isn't their IP isn't much of a consideration I'm afraid. Since they are printed in their Monster Manual, and are not in SRD, you cannot use a version of the monster if you accept the GSL. Very annoying really.

But! You could for instance create a jungle dwelling Dark Elf race with a distinctive look and feel from the Drow and be on perfectly solid ground, as they would be your own creation and not a copy of the drow.

yoda8myhead wrote:


Also, on a different note, catching up and commenting on the discussion is tough at this point, cause so many people are writing so much. Let me catch up, people!

Good lord, I know. We're breaking 650 posts here. [Edited to update the number.]


Teiran wrote:
Good lord, I know. We're breaking 400 posts here.

660+

Scarab Sages

Tibitu wrote:

SO PAIZO, what is the next big thing you have in mind?

James Jacobs wrote:
I suspect we'll be announcing THAT in relatively short order.
Dark Psion wrote:

It's the Bella Sara Live Action Rolepaying Game.

Step 1: Get a horse!

Vigil wrote:
Be sure to enter the code correctly!

OK, that's freakin' hilarious. People walking past my office looked at me funny when I laughed at it. :)


Teiran wrote:
I think the name Drow is specifically thiers, in all their underground spider worshiping, while the concept of Dark Elves in general are public domain because of how often they've been used over the years.

Nope. Drow predates WotC and TSR by hundreds of years. Now, the specific spider-worshipping dominatrix-queen ... thing.. they've got going on? Yeah, those are WotC now.

The Exchange

hmarcbower wrote:
Tibitu wrote:

SO PAIZO, what is the next big thing you have in mind?

James Jacobs wrote:
I suspect we'll be announcing THAT in relatively short order.
Dark Psion wrote:

It's the Bella Sara Live Action Rolepaying Game.

Step 1: Get a horse!

Vigil wrote:
Be sure to enter the code correctly!
OK, that's freakin' hilarious. People walking past my office looked at me funny when I laughed at it. :)

Usually Sebastian is very careful about the accuracy of his codes too, I was surprised that he erred.


Rambling Scribe wrote:


EDIT: Just reread Sam's post and I now see that he essentially covered everything I did and more. Nice Post!

Yeah. The license is like a loaded gun. I have a lot of good friends, but there are very few of them, if any, that I would feel comfortable sitting around with, while a loaded gun was sitting out on the coffee table between us.

Now I'm not trying to antagonize gun afficandos. I'm just saying, you don't put that much trust in people unless you have to.

There should be a way to conduct lucrative and equitable business without WOTC taking out this atomic powered insurance policy.


Rambling Scribe wrote:
Watcher wrote:

In some quarters (i.e. EnWorld), I have seen the position of:

"Why would WOTC do these awful things? Why wouldn't they want 3rd party adventures to support their core product?"

Honestly, I don't see the malice or ill-intent on their part at all.

I agree with you here, and to back up the rest of your post, I just want to mention something related.

Ari Marmel mentioned that he isn't worried that WotC will steal his IP under the GSL, because the suits won't know what's worth stealing and the actual game designers are nice guys that would never do that.

Here's the problem. If a corporation has a weapon like the GSL, even if you trust the people who are there now, and that weapon was developed with no malice behind it, that doesn't help you two years down the road when all of those people could well be gone and be replaced by malicious folks who will use that weapon.

It doesn't matter how much You, I, Ari or anyone trusts the current folks at WotC. The question is how much do we trust every conceivable person who might eventually be put in a position to screw us with the GSL? And most of those folks, we've never even heard of.

My big two cents.

They may just be your two cents, but I think you have very clearly articulated the fear behind all the anger over the GSL.

However much the current folks at Wizards might like 3rd party developers (and I think the current management does or they would not have even done a GSL), people are afraid that somebody will one day in charge of the GSL who hates the 3rd party developers, a corprate shark looking for blood and easy money who will envoke the liscence in a way it was never really going to be used.

This fear is a bit paranoid right now, but it is quite justified. We went through a period when TSR sued anyone who even looked at them funny. It is not that big a leap to imagine someone in charges of Wizards that would do the same.

The Exchange

drjones wrote:
Anyone check out http://www.enworld.org/ main page faq/reading of the gsl? Preferably without 5 axes to grind?

I haven't seen anyone on here ask any of those questions and I don't see any of the pertinent questions asked, such as what happens if WOTC publishes something with the same "name" as one published by a third party beforehand, or what happens when WOTC yanks the GSL, addressed.


Watcher wrote:


Now I'm not trying to antagonize gun afficandos. I'm just saying, you don't put that much trust in people unless you have to.

Especially when you 're doing business...


prashant panavalli wrote:


I haven't seen anyone on here ask any of those questions and I don't see any of the pertinent questions asked, such as what happens if WOTC publishes something with the same "name" as one published by a third party beforehand, or what happens when WOTC yanks the GSL, addressed.

I think that is because Morrus was only answering questions he felt capable of providing answers for. The questions you elude to will likely require comment from the Rouse and WotC legal for it to have any reasonable weight behind it.

Cheers! :)

The Exchange

BPorter wrote:
And market glut or lack thereof has no bearing on game time. If the GM isn't disciplined enough to say what will or won't be allowed in the game, that's the fault of the GM - not the publishers (WotC or 3rd-party).

You are correct - the problem is not at game time. The problem is at the distributor level as buyers try to figure out which OGL products to carry and which to ignore. Then the problem is passed down to the FLGS - what to stock and what not to stock. Then the consumer is faced with the same problem.

The OGL resulted in a flood of crap with some real gems floating in the muck but the market had a hard time sorting it all out. Yes, some good publishers have risen above the muck while others never got the attention they deserved.

Unfortunately, instead of a well crafted response to the OGL and its failures we have the GSL which will solve nothing unless it is substantially revised.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

vance wrote:
Teiran wrote:
I think the name Drow is specifically thiers, in all their underground spider worshiping, while the concept of Dark Elves in general are public domain because of how often they've been used over the years.

Nope. Drow predates WotC and TSR by hundreds of years. Now, the specific spider-worshipping dominatrix-queen ... thing.. they've got going on? Yeah, those are WotC now.

Not really. That aspect is in the SRD. It's also in Green Ronin's drow book, which is also mostly open content. Proper nouns like Lolth, Eilistraee, Menzoberranzan, Erelhi-Cinlu, and the like are WotC's IP and not open content though. But under the 3rd edition SRD, the concept of drow as evil underground elves is open.

The Exchange

carmachu wrote:
What makes you and him think the 800 pound gorilla is going to WANT to negociate a seperate Liscense with the good 3rd party companies?

Money. Royalties on the sale of each licensed product.

The Exchange

elnopintan wrote:

There is one good thing about this GSL release.

It has ended with the edition war here in this boards. I see less angry posting and less people arguing since then.

GSL = common enemy


crosswiredmind wrote:
elnopintan wrote:

There is one good thing about this GSL release.

It has ended with the edition war here in this boards. I see less angry posting and less people arguing since then.
GSL = common enemy

Well put.


David Marks wrote:
The questions you elude to will likely require comment from the Rouse and WotC legal for it to have any reasonable weight behind it.

Run! Dodge those questions, even as you approach them!

SNEAK ATTACK!

Dark Archive

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber
bugleyman wrote:
crosswiredmind wrote:
elnopintan wrote:

There is one good thing about this GSL release.

It has ended with the edition war here in this boards. I see less angry posting and less people arguing since then.
GSL = common enemy
Well put.

Who'd have thought two or three weeks ago that WotC actually would manage to bring everyone together with the GSL? A masterpiece... from a certain point of view.


vance wrote:
David Marks wrote:
The questions you elude to will likely require comment from the Rouse and WotC legal for it to have any reasonable weight behind it.

Run! Dodge those questions, even as you approach them!

SNEAK ATTACK!

=P funny funny. Anyone know the word I was looking for again?

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
David Marks wrote:
vance wrote:
David Marks wrote:
The questions you elude to will likely require comment from the Rouse and WotC legal for it to have any reasonable weight behind it.

Run! Dodge those questions, even as you approach them!

SNEAK ATTACK!

=P funny funny. Anyone know the word I was looking for again?

Allude


Paul Watson wrote:
David Marks wrote:
vance wrote:
David Marks wrote:
The questions you elude to will likely require comment from the Rouse and WotC legal for it to have any reasonable weight behind it.

Run! Dodge those questions, even as you approach them!

SNEAK ATTACK!

=P funny funny. Anyone know the word I was looking for again?
Allude

Hehe, thanks! *wanders off mumbling about stupid English language ...*


golem101 wrote:


Here. Seoni in black leathers and whips. ;)

I was promised porn! Where is the porn? All I see are people posting!

Scarab Sages

Jeremy Mac Donald wrote:
golem101 wrote:


Here. Seoni in black leathers and whips. ;)
I was promised porn! Where is the porn? All I see are people posting!

But some of us are posting with one hand...


Wow. I have to say I think the GSL is the best thing to happen to the RPG industry in years.

Seriously.

Think about it. The OGL led to some top quality game publishers, but most of them supported only a single system. How many game stores (and publishers) have been struggling for nearly 10 months since that system was announced as defunct. With the GSL, 3PP will flock in droves away from 4E and move to other systems. With other game systems out there, not all the eggs are in one basket anymore.

More competitive game systems equals a stronger RPG industry overall.

Not to mention, Wizards isn't looking at "competition" that is still in some way supporting sales of their products. If players are willing to leave the entire system to play a better quality adventure (for instance), then Wizards sees some pressure in producing better quality adventures themselves.

So the GSL may end up being the best thing for the industry (and even Wizards), though doubtfully in the way it was intended to be.

At this point, it's just a question of how long it takes WotC to realize that in an effort to reduce competition, they have actually increased it.


MarkusTay wrote:
Russ Taylor wrote:
I also don't see too much in common between Spelljammer and Space:1889 rather than the obvious link of flying ships. Spelljammer wasn't particularly Victorian, and was very much magic-obsessed.

In 1988, GDW came out with a game about "flying through space with limited technology". In 1989, precisely one year later and after GDW won an award for its game, TSR launched a game about "flying through space with limited technology". Space:1889 was Victorian-era, and Spelljammer had guns - although not exactly the same tech-level, there were also many other steam-age type devices around, like Gnomish Sidewheelers and automatons. The methods presented may have differed, but the underlying concept was the same.

But, having played both games (and knowing some of the GDW folks) they had entirely different feels. In addition, Space 1889 was strongly based on Victorian Science Fiction (Poe, Verne, Wells, etc.) -- in a way it was a predecessor to games like Spirit of the Century which took the 1930s pulp science fiction trope into a game. I'm pretty sure that TSR was influenced by Space 1889, but more in the nature of "hey, this is a cool idea, what can we do to put space travel in to D&D, and make it still feel like D&D."


Jeremy Mac Donald wrote:


I was promised porn! Where is the porn?

Here! (NSFW)


Watcher wrote:


You control the rights to it or you don't. This is a clever way of saying, "If you write under our license, we have say in what you do with it, forever. We may not be able to do anything with it without your consent, but you can't do anything with it without our consent either."

From what I am reading its more like:

A) You'd have to stop producing your product under the GSL if we redefined the terms in our favour.
B) Your not allowed to then take your IP and use it with the OGL.

What you could do is take your IP and make your own game with it and Wizards can't really do anything about that.

That said this is a pretty nasty license. I can't see anyone risking something like a significant print run for 4E when there is a chance that WotC will suddenly take it all away and there is nothing you can do about it.

Dark Archive

Lilith wrote:
Jeremy Mac Donald wrote:


I was promised porn! Where is the porn?
Here! (NSFW)

Best. Fanservice. Ever. ;-)

Scarab Sages

Rambling Scribe wrote:


Here's the problem. If a corporation has a weapon like the GSL, even if you trust the people who are there now, and that weapon was developed with no malice behind it, that doesn't help you two years down the road when all of those people could well be gone and be replaced by malicious folks who will use that weapon.

Not to mention that even though the suits might not have a clue, that doesn't stop them from a scorched earth policy. If they don't like the looks of something in general, stop the licence (maybe evenf or everyone).

"They're comin' right for us!"

Liberty's Edge

I hate to admit it, but this is exactly what I was hoping for from WotC. My thoughts on the subject can best be described as the following:

"Drive those publishers away from 4e! Keep the OGL movement viable! Huzzah!"

I'm perfectly happy to allow WotC to [CENSORED] themselves in the [CENSORED] with a [CENSORED] while [CENSORED][CENSORED][CENSORED] jellyfish [CENSORED][CENSORED][CENSORED][CENSORED] tuba [CENSORED][CENSORED][CENSORED][CENSORED][CENSORED][CENSORED] orange [CENSORED][CENSORED] pogostick [CENSORED]fnord[CENSORED] aardvark [CENSORED][CENSORED][CENSORED][CENSORED] tomato sauce.

Err, never mind that last bit.

Anyway, all joking aside, this IS actually better for non-WotC publishers than WotC wants it to be. They can band together, service the existing 3e market, and continue without the interference of Hasbro's geek division.


bugleyman wrote:
P1NBACK wrote:
bugleyman wrote:


Seriously. If WOTC doesn't blink, my 4E core books are going into a box with a nasty letter and going back to WOTC.

Can you please video tape this and the mailing and put it on Youtube so we know you aren't full of s~@&? Please?

I'll do you one better.

If WOTC doesn't state within one week that an updated GSL (and not just an FAQ posting "clarifying things") is inbound, I will send my 4E core set to Lisa or Erik. Once they confirm receipt, they are free to do with them as they please.

Consider it my penance for being wrong about the whole 4E/Pathfinder fiasco. I might be arrogant, but I'm all for putting my money where my mouth is.

Heh - a mountain of returned 4e books at Paizo... nice mental picture... I wonder if they might offer a trade-up discount off Pathfinder if you send in your 4e books :)

Liberty's Edge

bugleyman wrote:
dmchucky69 wrote:
bugleyman wrote:
P1NBACK wrote:
bugleyman wrote:


Seriously. If WOTC doesn't blink, my 4E core books are going into a box with a nasty letter and going back to WOTC.

Can you please video tape this and the mailing and put it on Youtube so we know you aren't full of s~@&? Please?

I'll do you one better.

If WOTC doesn't state within one week that an updated GSL (and not just an FAQ posting "clarifying things") is inbound, I will send my 4E core set to Lisa or Erik. Once they confirm receipt, they are free to do with them as they please.

Consider it my penance for being wrong about the whole 4E/Pathfinder fiasco. I might be arrogant, but I'm all for putting my money where my mouth is.

Wow, I take back anything negative I might have said to you the other day. It takes guts to admit you were wrong and to take it to that level in recompense. For what it's worth, I can respect that.

Well done, sir.

Don't congratulate me until I send them, but thanks ;-)

I'm just that disguisted by the GSL's uselessness.

So how about Lisa or Erik? If WOTC doesn't back down, you can have a free set of 4E core books for the asking...all you have to do is confirm receipt. You can feed 'em to your dog or something. Or heck, play with 'em, though I suspect you guys get that stuff for free.

Incidentally, welcome back, as it were. Now if I can just convince you that some of your socio-political views are as misguided as your faith in WotC was... ;)


I can see it now...

Pathinder - From Paizo Games
Now printed on 100 percent recycled 4E books.

Dark Archive Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

Samuel Weiss wrote:
There is also the constant assertion that this is just like any other contract for using IP. That is nice in theory, but it is functionally irrelevant as this is nothing like any other situation for using IP.

It's not an assertion, it's a fact. The deviations from a standard IP license are a result of having something that is entirely non-negotiated. As is to be expected, such a license is ridiculously one-sided, and is to be accepted only by those with no other option for access to the licensed IP.

Samuel Weiss wrote:

The GSL (and the OGL) were not there to license a specific character for use in another line of merchandise. Nobody was, or even could, use it to make Driz'zt bobbleheads. It was never that kind of contract.

The anti-OGL provisions in the GSL are not the equivalent of using a console game engine to make your own game then not being able to use the engine any longer when the license expires or is cancelled. It is like getting a license from Microsoft to make a spreadsheet program for Windows Vista, then when it expires you can never write a book about bookkeeping, or preparing taxes, or anything else you would ever use a spreadsheet for ever again because Microsoft has decided it hates print products.
Yes, that is quite absurd. That is why people are upset.

I would advise not signing such a license with Microsoft. I'd also advise not writing any spreadsheet for them absent a license to do so, or they will sue you. But, if you really want to make a spreadsheet program, and you've got no other way to get a license from Microsoft to do so...well...life's full of tough decisions.

Also, the analogy is flawed. You can still go out and publish rpgs for other systems, or for no system at all. It's not a lifelong ban from the gaming industry, much less the publishing industry, if you lose your rights under the GSL, you just can't publish D&D compatible products. Seems to me that people were publishing such products just fine for the 20 or so years of gaming history prior to the introduction of the OGL.

Is it a bad license? Yes. In the absence of a license, do you have any rights to use WotC's IP? No. Should you publish under the GSL? Probably not, it's too risky.

End of the day, I find it hard to be so offended by WotC doing what every other non-OGL game company does. I guess if you're mad about how one-sided the GSL is, you must be really irate at those bastards at White Wolf, Hero, Atlas Games, etc., who don't even offer any universal rights to publish under their system.

Dark Archive Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

Fake Healer wrote:


Usually Sebastian is very careful about the accuracy of his codes too, I was surprised that he erred.

Ah, but maybe it wasn't an error after all. Everyone laughed at my love of Bella Sara, but now you know the truth!

If you'll excuse me, I'm going to go back to making more pseudonatural ponies...

Mha ha ha!


Timespike wrote:


Incidentally, welcome back, as it were. Now if I can just convince you that some of your socio-political views are as misguided as your faith in WotC was... ;)

Hmmm...I've found that messageboards can be polarizing. I'm not saying we'd see eye-to-eye if we met in person; rather, we probably have much more in common than is apparent from messageboard postings.

As to WoTC...they may still change course, but I doubt it. I fully expect to be sending Erik or Lisa a package in the next week or so...

Scarab Sages

Sebastian wrote:
I guess if you're mad about how one-sided the GSL is, you must be really irate at those bastards at White Wolf, Hero, Atlas Games, etc., who don't even offer any universal rights to publish under their system.

WHAT?!? Those bastards!!!


prashant panavalli wrote:
drjones wrote:
I haven't seen anyone on here ask any of those questions and I don't see any of the pertinent questions asked, such as what happens if WOTC publishes something with the same "name" as one published by a third party beforehand, or what happens when WOTC yanks the GSL, addressed.

Unless the GSL is rewritten, which I doubt at this point, what it means is that if they come out with something similar, you have to stop selling yours, even if you were ahead of them by years.

The points some of you made about "the future" WotC is pretty scarey - what happens a year or two from now, and they aren't doing so good, and Hasbro comes in and 'cleans house' (which large corporations are wont to do when a sunsidiary is floundering). Now you got a bunch of bean-counters in charge who were given the prime directive from on high to make the IP profitable at all costs.

And then they look at the GSL, who signed it, and the shark grins widen...

Ami Silberman 96 wrote:
But, having played both games (and knowing some of the GDW folks) they had entirely different feels. In addition, Space 1889 was strongly based on Victorian Science Fiction (Poe, Verne, Wells, etc.) -- in a way it was a predecessor to games like Spirit of the Century which took the 1930s pulp science fiction trope into a game. I'm pretty sure that TSR was influenced by Space 1889, but more in the nature of "hey, this is a cool idea, what can we do to put space travel in to D&D, and make it still feel like D&D."

I own both, but only got the chance to play Spelljammer (which wasn't so great).

When I compared them, it was pretty much as you have stated. They took a terrific concept that was well-done by GDW, and then they D&Derized it to the point of silliness.

Space: 1899 was good, Spelljammer was a poor knock-off. Most of the material produced for it is a good example of TSR at its worst.

And there really is nothing at all stopping them from stealing your Uber-rat if its popular, and simply renaming it, screwing you in the process. I have seen hundreds of monsters in D&D books lifted directly from other games or novels with new names, so this is nothing new for them. What is NEW is their ability to now stop you from selling yours.


Sebastian wrote:
Also, the analogy is flawed. You can still go out and publish rpgs for other systems, or for no system at all. It's not a lifelong ban from the gaming industry, much less the publishing industry, if you lose your rights under the GSL, you just can't publish D&D compatible products. Seems to me that people were publishing such products just fine for the 20 or so...

It's not that. It's more that the 'entire industry' (note my use of quotes) was put on hold for the better part of a year pending how WotC was going to wow us with 4E's new open content, with the expectation of the 'entire industry' following suit with it.

Only to be told that, after taking it on the chin for nearly a year, the GSL is decidedly not only not open, but demands both testicles, your first born, and all your IP rights to anything you even THINK about doing that's possibly related to something WotC might consider in a meth-induced dream coma.

It's not that they're closed, it's that they promised that the GSL would be accessable, would be worth the effort, etc, and really, honest-to-God, was NOT about closing the license for good and screwing people who signed up anyway.

The response doesn't seem to have been 'those evil bastards, how dare they protect their IP!', but instead 'I waited a year only to be told to spread my cheeks HOW wide? Screw it, I'm doing something else.'

Sovereign Court

Daeglin wrote:


And the worst part is that the chance of a 4e GSL Bella Sara is practically nil. Poor Sebastian. He'll be crushed.

What about 4E My Little Pony?

::sobs::: Say it isn't so!!!


Vic Wertz wrote:
I have an axiom of business that states, you will be successful in business no matter what industry you are in IF you surround yourself with great people.

Alas, while this is true most of the time, I can personally attest that you can surround yourself with the greatest people in their respective fields of expertise, but without the funds and backing required to actually pay them, it becomes nothing more than a hobby.


Since I haven't seen it done yet...

The GSL

651 to 700 of 807 << first < prev | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Gaming / D&D / 4th Edition / GSL posted All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.