GSL to control the "glut" of products

In response to this post:

To be clear, I never held that 3PP betrayed or failed to support WotC. (Nor did I ever feel that 3PP owed any loyalty to WotC or obligation to support WotC or D&D beyond the terms of the OGL and d20 STL.) What I observed is that WotC left holes in the marketplace, and many 3PP, rather than exploit those holes, chose to make products that competed directly with WotC's products.

(Hi, Nik!)
__________________
Charles Ryan

Lisa, Erik, do/did you know Nicole and Charles?

If by 'control the glut' you mean 'create a vast wasteland devoid of intelligent life' yes, it succeded.

ToH 4e dead. Pathfinder 4e stillborn. Freeport 4e dead. Goodman games, printing outside the OGL. Spycraft 4e dead. Ptolus 4e dead.

The GSL as written has reduced official approved 3PP to companies like Red Brick who don't have and OGL to lose, and new fly by night companies. Now I'm not slamming Red Brick, they are likely looking to broaden their Earthdawn base. But do you really think WotC stopped production of 4e's badly done 3PP? If you do, I've some lovely oceanside property in Ohio to sellM

WOW!! This argument is so flawed, I don't even know where to begin.

What I observed is that WotC left holes in the marketplace, and many 3PP, rather than exploit those holes, chose to make products that competed directly with WotC's products.

Is this because WotC fears the competition? No. The most successful OGL products of all time made only the tiniest blips on the WotC sales radar.

Here he counters his own argument. If the must successful OGL product is "only the tiniest blips on the WotC sales radar" then why do they care if a 3PP makes a product "that compete[s] directly with WotC's Products"?

Consumers and retailers are confused about which products to buy, so they dabble in a range and end up with a lot of stuff that doesn't sell. Huge amounts of revenue is tied up in dead product--revenue needed to order new product or simply pay the bills. Shops close (nearly half the core hobby shops in the US shut down over the past five years--admittedly, there are other causes, but the RPG glut was a very real contributor);

The numbers out of GAMA a few years ago is that RPGs represent 5-10% of the Comic and Game Industry. FIVE TO TEN PERCENT. You cannot built a thriving business on five to ten percent of a niche industry. It is not Green Ronin's fault if a game store does not diversify sufficiently into other areas. It is not Mongoose's fault if a store does not offer services and products that Amazon cannot. That is a poor business model, and those stores that do not adapt to a changing business market will not survive.

So WotC changed the terms of 3PP compatibility with D&D, and made it more restrictive. Insofar as it controls the glut and keeps 3PP focused on products that players actually want and don't get (or don't get enough of) from WotC, more restrictive is good for the RPG business as a whole, it's good for WotC, and frankly it's good for the third-party publishers.

You mean except for the part where you have to stop selling old product of a product line and the part where they can never publish this product under the OGL even after the license terminates. Oh, and the part where WotC can change the terms at any moment and the part were WotC doesn't even have to send up a mass email notifiying their registered licencees that the license has been updated. And don't forget the part that all court cases, win, lose, or draw with WotC result in the 3PP paying the behemoth's lawyer fees. And then there ...

EDIT: reposted on ENWorld too. Follow along to see if Ryan has anything to say about this.

To be clear... CUT...

Looks to me as poorly developed flame-trolling attempt. Dismissed.

Charles wrote:

What I observed is that WotC left holes in the marketplace, and many 3PP, rather than exploit those holes, chose to make products that competed directly with WotC's products.

Charles wrote:

Is this because WotC fears the competition? No. The most successful OGL products of all time made only the tiniest blips on the WotC sales radar.

Here he counters his own argument. If the must successful OGL product is "only the tiniest blips on the WotC sales radar" then why do they care if a 3PP makes a product "that compete[s] directly with WotC's Products"?

I thought he was contradicting himself at first, but reading it carefully it seems like he's saying that WotC doesn't care if a 3PP makes a product that competes with D&D, but game shoppe owners care because it means they're pressured to carry a lot of material that is competing for the same (pencil-n-paper fantasy role-playing game) spending dollar.

I'm not totally convinced by his claim that there is/was a significant "hole" in the OGL d20 market that no company was serving, though.

I thought he was contradicting himself at first, but reading it carefully it seems like he's saying that WotC doesn't care if a 3PP makes a product that competes with D&D, but game shoppe owners care because it means they're pressured to carry a lot of material that is competing for the same (pencil-n-paper fantasy role-playing game) spending dollar.

Most 3PP's didn't and still do not have the distribution capability that WotC had and still has, respectively. Only a few did. Even then, those that were able to reach a national audiance, smaller game stores couldn't afford many non-WotC products. So we're not talking a apples and oranges, but a bushel of apples vs a single apple. Sheer volume, WotC always won out.

Most 3PP's didn't and still do not have the distribution capability that WotC had and still has, respectively. Only a few did. Even then, those that were able to reach a national audiance, smaller game stores couldn't afford many non-WotC products. So we're not talking a apples and oranges, but a bushel of apples vs a single apple. Sheer volume, WotC always won out.

I don't know about you, but the last time I went into a game store they had non-WotC material available. For all I know, third-party stuff might've sold like hotcakes. Or not at all.

At any rate, I think that a glut of material is responsible for about 5% of recent hobby shoppe woes and the rise of big internet sellers like Amazon.com is responsible for the other 95%. Certainly I remember a "glut" of different role-playing games in the early-to-mid 80s, so it's not a new phenomenon!

I don't know about you, but the last time I went into a game store they had non-WotC material available.

My local comic book shop (~10 minutes away) routinely orders WotC products and the latest DCC. That's it. Now a real game store some distance away from me (45-50 min drive) carries Paizo, Necro, GR and some of the other handful of major publisher but nothing from Bards and Sages, LPJ, Tabletop, Dark Quest, and the hundreds of other small publishers that is generally referred to as the "glut" by the WotC. Mind you, customers refer to a glut of quality, WotC referrs to a glut of quantity.

Reference link:

Love it or hate it, one consequence of the GSL is that it'll keep a lot of those guys out of the market, making it a better business environment for the smaller number of publishers that do pursue the GSL.

Those guys?!? Those guys that are staying out of the market are those with a history of quality.

What I observed is that WotC left holes in the marketplace, and many 3PP, rather than exploit those holes, chose to make products that competed directly with WotC's products.

...

Smart businesses look for opportunities and points of differentiation--they don't attack their competition's strengths (unless they're in a position to really win). When consumers already have good, solid choices in one product category, why pile on to that category when the need for a different type of product is unfulfilled?

You mean producing things like Dungeonscape or Cityscape a year or two AFTER 3PPs like Fantasy Flight produced their equivalent products, City Works and Dungeoncraft (both of which had a more flavorful, less crunchy feel)? It seems to me that a company releasing something AFTER a separate company is the one trying to compete against someone.

Is this because WotC fears the competition? No. The most successful OGL products of all time made only the tiniest blips on the WotC sales radar.

I'm thinkin "get ready for a bigger blip under GSL" ... but that may just be me and my consumer spending habits.

It's because WotC fears the glut. When an unrestricted number of companies creates an unrestricted number of products in an unrestricted range of categories (especially categories in which WotC is strong), the inevitable result is a huge glut that sucks revenues out of the sales channels and creates a swath of destruction....

How about when one company creates a glut for itself? How many spaltbooks did WotC produce? Was there really a need for Complete Arcane AND Complete Mage? How many products did WotC crank out into the glut in comparison to each individual 3PP?

Of course, you'd think WotC would have learned from TSR's glut mistakes. Producing and supporting numerous productlines under 2e (Ravenloft AND Planescape AND Birthright AND Dragonlance AND Forgotten Realms AND .....) nearly devastated the company which led to WotC's ability to buy them. When you produce multiple product lines, each of which requires a minimum printrun per product, and each product line has a limited number of diehard buyers, often below the printrun numbers rather than fewer or a single larger group to buy a single productline, you gut your company finances.

If anything OGL allowed WotC to survive because they could let other companies foot the bill for the multiple productlines rather than spending their own money (e.g. the high quality DL products from Sovereign/MWP).

2 cp...

Oh, and why isn't this stravag thread on the 4.x boards, where it belongs?

Oh, and why isn't this stravag thread on the 4.x boards, where it belongs?

Good point. Moved thread to 4e forum.

As far as I'm concerned Korgoth's post ended the thread.

WOW!! This argument is so flawed, I don't even know where to begin.

Right on the money DMcCoy

You know, during the 80s, most game stores had NO PROBLEM holding not just one major game system, but something like 20, and most of their books. Ah, the glory days of Hero (Champions), GURPS, Star Frontiers, Marvel Super Heroes, D&D, Traveller, Harn, etc etc...

The problem with the 'glut' was the number of very obviously cheap 'dungeon hack' material that was just thrown together for desperate GMs by talentless hacks. This all cleared out, though, before 3.5 even hit, as retailers finally wised up.

What hit AFTER was that 3.5 insisted on reproducing everything 3.0 had, only with more cost and crunch! Oh, and skipping a lot of setting material that would have sold to put out 'yet another Eberron update' for BOTH of Eberrons fans, and a waddling series of 'here's the Dales in detail for the sixth time, in case you missed it in the past 20 years of D&D stuff'.

The problem isn't a lack of games, or that 3PPs are out there, etc.. the problem is a lack of diversity of games. If everyone, including WotC, puts out thousands of reams of samey material, people are going to stop buying. Who NEEDS 'yet another Drow variant'.

Try some real diversification. Get some good hard-core sci-fi going. Get some 'pirates adventures' going, etc. The guys who are still around are so because they're DIFFERENT.

'Cause, let's face it, D&D's brand of 'high-fantasy' has been DONE, repeatedly. And now it's all getting redone. Let WotC have it.

I thought he was contradicting himself at first, but reading it carefully it seems like he's saying that WotC doesn't care if a 3PP makes a product that competes with D&D, but game shoppe owners care because it means they're pressured to carry a lot of material that is competing for the same (pencil-n-paper fantasy role-playing game) spending dollar.

So who controls the glut of WOTC product on the same said game owners shelf?

'Cause their just as guilty of it as 3PP.....

As far as I'm concerned Korgoth's post ended the thread.

I hesitated to enter this conversation, but ... here goes. Korgoth's post (I believe he is dipping into spurious argumentation by using a slightly different use of the word 'competition' and a message that was part of a very old marketing strategy that has little to do with 4th edition) did not end this thread for me, and, really, I agree with the sentiment of the original post's body.

I think the 'glut' that is being referred to in the original post is a reference to the piles and piles of relatively useless d20 books available out there (OGL Chimney Sweeps is a good example. I think it was a joke, but sadly I'm not sure.). In fact, places like DriveThruRPG were giving these things away before the announcement of 4th edition. Most of the products available under the original OGL, in my opinion, watered down the overall quality D&D books available for purchase. It became a scavenger hunt of sorts to track down quality resources and was largely overwhelming to someone who didn't have the experience or time to research quality products. Furthermore, the lack of supervision from WotC on these items led, largely, to the power creep that was so impressive towards the end of 3.5's publishing run. Even the official WotC splat-books crept up with the 3PP books, such that I groaned every time one of my players pulled out ANY spell, class, feat, race, or piece of equipment from a non-core book.

Let me be clear in saying that there were, and are, some 3PP that produce fantastic quality materials that display a deep knowledge of the rule systems, flavor, and balance of D&D. Paizo is a great example, and I will continue to purchase Pathfinder products for as long as Paizo keeps making them. The vast majority of other publishers, I feel, saw an opportunity to hop onto the back of a gaming institution and make some $$ from D&D players with too many dollars and not enough sense.

WotC has a right and a responsibility to protect its product and brand, and I am looking forward to a more tightly controlled market, in which the products offered are as 'official' as possible.

That said, I understand why Paizo and other companies have not signed on with the new GSL and hope that they can come to some sort of compromise, but ultimately I see it as a positive.

O

As far as I'm concerned Korgoth's post ended the thread.

good stuff, no doubt about it

Why was he posting, anyhow? This is a pretty big gun to be doing damage control on a viral marketing platform.

When I see someone like this deployed at this level of discourse it smells of damage control.

When I develop a marketing campaign, a central component is a communication plan, complete with strucutred talking points. If one of my managers were to get drawn into this sort of conversation on a public list it would either be

1) Strategy in an attempt to defuse os spin an issue
2). Damage control and an attempt to regain definition of the topic on our terms

Unless WOTC completely lacks a Marketing*Communication C&C, this is another attempt to contain and shape the conversation. It's also a rather poor one.

"We did it for the good of the industry". Pitiful if scripted. Irresponsible if not. I'd be in his director's office in the morning discussing his disciplinary document if this occured on my watch.

Lisa, Erik, do/did you know Nicole and Charles?

Yep, I worked with both of them. Nicole and I were co-workers at Lion Rampant and then White Wolf when the two companies merged. Charles worked at WotC when I was there, but I also knew him when I was on the Origins Award committee for a number of years.

-Lisa

"We did it for the good of the industry". Pitiful if scripted. Irresponsible if not. I'd be in his director's office in the morning discussing his disciplinary document if this occured on my watch.

I have to say, this does nothing for the goodwill for WotC at this point... and they need it, desperately.

Why was he posting, anyhow? This is a pretty big gun to be doing damage control on a viral marketing platform.

When I see someone like this deployed at this level of discourse it smells of damage control.

When I develop a marketing campaign, a central component is a communication plan, complete with strucutred talking points. If one of my managers were to get drawn into this sort of conversation on a public list it would either be

1) Strategy in an attempt to defuse os spin an issue
2). Damage control and an attempt to regain definition of the topic on our terms

Unless WOTC completely lacks a Marketing*Communication C&C, this is another attempt to contain and shape the conversation. It's also a rather poor one.

"We did it for the good of the industry". Pitiful if scripted. Irresponsible if not. I'd be in his director's office in the morning discussing his disciplinary document if this occured on my watch.

Charles Ryan doesn't work for WoTC anymore, I don't think he has for almost two years.

Charles Ryan doesn't work for WoTC anymore, I don't think he has for almost two years.

I've got him listed as 'D&D Brand Manager' without a date, and the times I can CONFIRM he worked at WotC, as 'Graphics Design'. Did he get rehired? Is he in a new position?

Still, for someone to just feel like posting this - I'm sorry, there's no other way to say it - revisionist assinine corporate boot-licking piece, it's really hard to believe he's NOT working for WotC.

Charles Ryan doesn't work for WoTC anymore, I don't think he has for almost two years.

Well that makes me feel better about the nature of the post. It's not a C&C issue. He's another gamer with an opinion then, although his has some flaws others have discussed rather well.

Anyone know what he does now?

Shroomy wrote:

Charles Ryan doesn't work for WoTC anymore, I don't think he has for almost two years.

I've got him listed as 'D&D Brand Manager' without a date, and the times I can CONFIRM he worked at WotC, as 'Graphics Design'. Did he get rehired? Is he in a new position?

Still, for someone to just feel like posting this - I'm sorry, there's no other way to say it - revisionist assinine corporate boot-licking piece, it's really hard to believe he's NOT working for WotC.

<sigh> Welcome back vance. Been a few days.

<sigh> Welcome back vance. Been a few days.

sorry to dissapoint. :P

But, nah, this isn't a 4E issue really, just a rather insane comment from a seemingly ex-WotC employee. Really, this is just a type of public 'corporate-sounding' comment that does more harm than good - the prototypical example of bad PR.

Like I said, there really just ISN'T another way to classify the post from him. It's just that bad.

(further edited)
If Wizards of the Coast had proven themselves to me to have the wisdom of Solomon, then I just might regard the 'GSL is for the good of the market; really Wizards are only behaving in a responsible manner with its terms, to avoid unnecessary gluts of material' argument, (which the OP's quote seems to me to indicate that Charles Ryan is putting forward) as being valid.
However Wizards of the Coast have not convinced me that that they possess such superhuman wisdom, but are fallible mortals like many of the rest of us, so I personally see that argument falling flat.

Edit:
If Mr. Ryan is trying to make a different argument in favour of the GSL, I'm not currently seeing what it is.

Alright, here I go again venturing into areas I have an opinion on with very little experience. This might be a side topic but the GSL might help the market by helping the FLGS. I think they were hurt by the influx of 3PP's product that did not sell. I think FLGS are good for everybody. Maybe not as much as in the 70s and 80s, but still a good influence to keep the hobby going. So by keeping 3PPs to a higher standard (e.g. the make of sales) the industry may be helped.

So by keeping 3PPs to a higher standard (e.g. the make of sales) the industry may be helped.

But there's nothing about standards in the GSL. In fact, if you want to keep your more 'precious' IPs out of WotC's hands, you wouldn't JOIN the GSL. (Even Necromancer and Mongoose is making 4E-only stuff and keeping their own coveted IP out of the GSL).

If anything, the GSL ENCOURAGES the exact same type of glut that littered (and litters) the stores from the the 3.0 days, all those endless samey dungeon-crawls, feat-lists, and so on... all that 'quick cash' material with little IP to worry about.

Like I said, there really just ISN'T another way to classify the post from him. It's just that bad.

Weird. I just don't see this. There have been half a dozen or so posts that claim this post is "asinine" or "pitiful," but it makes sense to me. I think DMMcoy's point about being self-contradicting has been successfully rebutted, and that's been really the only discussion that has happened here.

I'll agree that it seems like an exaggeration to suggest that the overabundance of OGL books has brought about the majority of gaming store closings, but one of my (very poor) local gaming stores has an entire wall of 3PP crap that he's had for years and that will (rightly) probably never sell, even in the discount bin. That has to have cost the owner some serious money, which is bad for him and gaming in my area, given that he is one of the very few in-town options for gaming materials.

Why is it so obvious to everyone here but me that this post is ridiculous?

O

Alright, here I go again venturing into areas I have an opinion on with very little experience. This might be a side topic but the GSL might help the market by helping the FLGS. I think they were hurt by the influx of 3PP's product that did not sell. I think FLGS are good for everybody. Maybe not as much as in the 70s and 80s, but still a good influence to keep the hobby going. So by keeping 3PPs to a higher standard (e.g. the make of sales) the industry may be helped.

Goodman Games are ostensibly producing 4E compatible products, whilst having signed no GSL. If that is true then the GSL seems to me to be signally failing already to control products produced by other companies.

However Wizards of the Coast have not convinced me that that they possess such superhuman wisdom, but are fallible mortals like many of the rest of us, so I personally see that argument falling flat.

The obvious point that WotC is run by humans in no way prohibits the possibility that they have written a GSL that is in fact good for D&D.

O

Goodman Games are ostensibly producing 4E compatible products, whilst having signed no GSL. If that is true then the GSL seems to me to be signally failing already to control products produced by other companies.

But if I only buy and, more importantly, gaming stores only buy products that are 'officially' licenses by WotC (I believe there is a logo), then I am not falling into the problem that developed around the 3.x glut.

O

I'll agree that it seems like an exaggeration to suggest that the overabundance of OGL books has brought about the majority of gaming store closings...

Because it wasn't really the OGL. It certainly wasn't the wonders of the d20 system. What caused the 'glut' was 20 years of the 'tyrant' of TSR's law-ninjas FINALLY coming to an end. The OGL was a tacit acknowledgement that the behaviour of TSR's "IP regieme" was damaging the community and market.

So, everyone in all that time that had access to a photocopier, printer, and stapler, started putting out all that crap that they wanted to for years, only now could do it under the auspices of 'OGL'. And, for about two years, this WORKED... until everyone wised up, and you could buy d20 material for cheaper than toilet paper.

But that period ENDED years ago, before 3.5 even came out. What hit 3.5 wasn't the OGL, or a 'glut of bad quality' (which the GSL does nothing about), but WotC putting out splat-book-after-splat-book, all of which with a narrow focus of what d20 could do.

Like I said before, the reason that WotC's competitors succeeded where they didn't want them to was that they were answering different parts of the market while WotC was focusing on expanding the 'rules of D&D'.

Why is it so obvious to everyone here but me that this post is ridiculous?

Because even if all the causes he asserted were true, he could not also take credit for the success of other companies (such as Green Ronin), and ALSO could not claim that the GSL would have any different effect or be GOOD for the industry as a whole. There's no level of quality control in the GSL - in fact, it encourages just the opposite.

alleynbard wrote:

<sigh> Welcome back vance. Been a few days.

sorry to dissapoint. :P

But, nah, this isn't a 4E issue really, just a rather insane comment from a seemingly ex-WotC employee. Really, this is just a type of public 'corporate-sounding' comment that does more harm than good - the prototypical example of bad PR.

Like I said, there really just ISN'T another way to classify the post from him. It's just that bad.

<grin> Sorry, mostly poking fun. I respect that you say what you feel and don't see the need to censor. I may not always agree but at least you are consistent in your thoughts and ideals.

I do agree that the statement is.....somewhat one-sided and short sighted. I will admit I don't have too much more to add to the conversation. A lot of people have already taken all the salient points. :)

I can, up to a point, believe that Wizards really does have the market's interest in mind. It would only make sense. What I guess I don't understand is why create a license that guarantees your biggest supporters, who produce quality product, won't follow you into the big debut. Either that or it forces them to find ways around the restrictions. Just doesn't make any sense. That is not the behavior of a company that wants to preserve the market.

I was never one of those that felt Wizards was entitled to open the latest edition. But I feel they probably shouldn't have bothered if this was going to be the result.

Charles Evans 25 wrote:

Goodman Games are ostensibly producing 4E compatible products, whilst having signed no GSL. If that is true then the GSL seems to me to be signally failing already to control products produced by other companies.

But if I only buy and, more importantly, gaming stores only buy products that are 'officially' licenses by WotC (I believe there is a logo), then I am not falling into the problem that developed around the 3.x glut.

O

(edited)

Yep - there is a glut of product on the market. One successful local chain owner calls it the smell of death. For the purposes of competitive research he travels to local shops in and around the Philadelphia area. He sees a whole lot of 3.0 and 3.5 OGL products clogging up shelves and bloating inventories. He said that one shop in NJ was selling 3e books for $1 per pound.

The trouble is that the OGL was far too open and the GSL is far too closed. The overreaction of WotC has understandable motivating factors but their solution has gone too far.

Alright, here I go again venturing into areas I have an opinion on with very little experience. This might be a side topic but the GSL might help the market by helping the FLGS. I think they were hurt by the influx of 3PP's product that did not sell. I think FLGS are good for everybody. Maybe not as much as in the 70s and 80s, but still a good influence to keep the hobby going. So by keeping 3PPs to a higher standard (e.g. the make of sales) the industry may be helped.

Yes but, some the best producers of content (Mongoose, Paizo, Green Ronin) are opting out because they cannot in good conscience abide the terms of the GSL.

In effect the GSL forces down the bar while new publishers build out capacity. Additionally, it is a very tenuous business position as a company's IP can be "siezed" as the SRD is rewritten. In effect your day to day business existence is at WoTC's discretion. Chew up too much share and you get punted from the market.

The argument has a pretty surface, but seems to hides another agenda.

FLGS are getting hammered for the same reason local book stores and video stores got wiped out, and the same reason newspapers and network TV are hurting. The internet has changed both shopping habits and patterns of media consumption.

Local book and movies stores get crushed by Amazon on price, selection and efficiency of purchase.

Glut of product usually means competition, and competition is always better for the consumer as it drives down price or develops greater quality and hence value for your dollar.

So, Mr. Ryan's argument has some merit, in that a glut of options do require the consumer and the dealer to be selective in what they purchase. But to say that the GSL exists primarily as a quality control mechanism is like Chevy saying we are doing hybrids for the good of America.

There's an element of truth there, but it is more likely a symptom of the business strategy and not its driving force.

The trouble is that the OGL was far too open and the GSL is far too closed. The overreaction of WotC has understandable motivating factors but their solution has gone too far.

No, the problem was that retailers bought into the d20 hype really bad and OVERBOUGHT even the most obscure and rediculous crap while expecting it to sell like M:TG cards laced with crack. There's just a whole lot of that glut where retailers should have known better than to stock entire shelves with unknown rushed product with d20 slapped on it from an unknown publisher - along with no way to return in case of no-sale.

That's just retailer stupidity there.

Because it wasn't really the OGL. It certainly wasn't the wonders of the d20 system. What caused the 'glut' was 20 years of the 'tyrant' of TSR's law-ninjas FINALLY coming to an end. The OGL was a tacit acknowledgement that the behaviour of TSR's "IP regieme" was damaging the community and market.

So, everyone in all that time that had access to a photocopier, printer, and stapler, started putting out all that crap that they wanted to for years, only now could do it under the auspices of 'OGL'. And, for about two years, this WORKED... until everyone wised up, and you could buy d20 material for cheaper than toilet paper.

If you say so. It seems to me that the newfound ability to write material for D&D (even if it didn't explicitly say so on your book) got a whole bunch of people excited, and they wrote some good stuff and a lot of garbage. I'm not sure why you expect that to be different for 4th edition. Maybe it's because you think that ...

But that period ENDED years ago, before 3.5 even came out. What hit 3.5 wasn't the OGL, or a 'glut of bad quality' (which the GSL does nothing about), but WotC putting out splat-book-after-splat-book, all of which with a narrow focus of what d20 could do.

Actually, one of the other gaming stores in my area has no lack of crappy 3.5 books published by 3PP that outnumber the WotC books. I'm not suggesting that every WotC splatbook was gold, or even good, but I feel that a large number of them were responding to the junk that other publishers were throwing out there, in terms of power creep.

Like I said before, the reason that WotC's competitors succeeded where they didn't want them to was that they were answering different parts of the market while WotC was focusing on expanding the 'rules of D&D'.

I'm not sure what you mean by "succeeded where [WotC] didn't want them to." As the OP made clear, there is no real reason for WotC to want 3PPs to fail. I guess some 3PPs filled in areas that WotC didn't (although I'm not sure I can think of any), but your distinction needs some clarification to make sense to me.

Because even if all the causes he asserted were true, he could not also take credit for the success of other companies (such as Green Ronin), and ALSO could not claim that the GSL would have any different effect or be GOOD for the industry as a whole. There's no level of quality control in the GSL - in fact, it encourages just the opposite.

Why not? I don't think he needs to take credit for successful 3PPs. They made quality products that were entirely within what WotC seemed to hope for the OGL (Green Ronin products are a great example). And I feel there is a level of quality control within the GSL, as WotC has final say on those materials. I can only assume that we should allow the designers of the game to have some say in what fits within their vision of said game.

O

How likely are Games Store owners who don't actually play D&D to know to discriminate between 'D&D' on the cover and '4E compatible' on the cover? Are Wizards of the Coast going to send out a black-list of products which they shouldn't stock, to enlighten them?

I'm pretty sure they can simply point out to retailers that only the books that say D&D are, in fact, D&D.

O

The trouble is that the OGL was far too open and the GSL is far too closed. The overreaction of WotC has understandable motivating factors but their solution has gone too far.

I agree with this completely. The GSL could have been written as a mechanism to control IP but outsource low-margin product that sold sales of the core books. I can understand WoTC wanting to squelch competing game systems. However, the end result now is that there will be a very limited group of companies that go all in and fully invest themselves in this system.

I think it hurts the consumer.

crosswiredmind wrote:

The trouble is that the OGL was far too open and the GSL is far too closed. The overreaction of WotC has understandable motivating factors but their solution has gone too far.

No, the problem was that retailers bought into the d20 hype really bad and OVERBOUGHT even the most obscure and rediculous crap while expecting it to sell like M:TG cards laced with crack. There's just a whole lot of that glut where retailers should have known better than to stock entire shelves with unknown rushed product with d20 slapped on it from an unknown publisher - along with no way to return in case of no-sale.

That's just retailer stupidity there.

B+#&#$$$. When d20 broke sales went crazy. All the companies were new and game stores could not predict what would sell and what would not. Now some of those stores are stuck with the crap that was left after the tide washed back out. This is not the fault of the store owners and to blame them is pure b#@@@%$$.

Actually, one of the other gaming stores in my area has no lack of crappy 3.5 books published by 3PP that outnumber the WotC books.

If you look, though, I'm betting most of the crap 3PP stuff was pre 3.5, with WotC taking over that role AFTER 3.5 was released. Most of the local stores that still have the 'glut' have books nearing their seventh birthday now, collecting dust. It's the same glut, it just hasn't moved, and retailers haven't ditched it.

I'm not sure what you mean by "succeeded where [WotC] didn't want them to." As the OP made clear, there is no real reason for WotC to want 3PPs to fail. I guess some 3PPs filled in areas that WotC...

WotC now plainly looks at 'competitors' as the enemy, and they don't like that other companies have taken pieces of the pie away (which explains some of the revisionist statements above). WotC only wants 3PPs to succeed in that they directly bring more revenue to WotC itself. If 3PPs can do well independantly of WotC, or, worse, look like they're presenting superior product, then heck yes, WotC wants them to fail.

I think it hurts the consumer.

Absolutely. I think we will see a big change in the GSL during the next year as the publishers react and WotC catches flack for not supporting the community it created with the OGL.

Charles Evans 25 wrote:

How likely are Games Store owners who don't actually play D&D to know to discriminate between 'D&D' on the cover and '4E compatible' on the cover? Are Wizards of the Coast going to send out a black-list of products which they shouldn't stock, to enlighten them?

I'm pretty sure they can simply point out to retailers that only the books that say D&D are, in fact, D&D.

O

I don't doubt that they could point that out; I do have doubts though as to whether a company whose lawyers drew up a GSL which put all the responsibility on the signatories to take the initiative in contacting Wizards/Hasbro to check for updates, has a corporate culture which would bother itself much to be proactive in sending messages to retailers.

I think it hurts the consumer.

Absolutely. I think we will see a big change in the GSL during the next year as the publishers react and WotC catches flack for not supporting the community it created with the OGL.

This is hope, but my skepticism is still burning.

Your FGLS has been under tremendous pressure to operate as if it were Amazon. That is, they buy more product than they can move in an attempt to fill consumer need. If I can't get it at my local shop, I order it online. Most folks do the same thing and can do better on price also.

The most successful game shops I know burn their excess inventory through EBay or as an Amazon partner. This allows them to access to a much broader market. Game shops that stay in the traditional model and in their traditional market struggle and many have folded.

The marketplace has shifted. Go look at the strucuture of walmart.com or bestbuy.com to get a tangible feel for how major competitors position themselves for maximum inventory control and market position.

Said another way, the little guy is truly and royally screwed.

tadkil wrote:

I think it hurts the consumer.

Absolutely. I think we will see a big change in the GSL during the next year as the publishers react and WotC catches flack for not supporting the community it created with the OGL.

I can only hope that you're right here. Unfortunately 4E FR seems to indicate to me that Wizards of the Coast are occasionally impervious to flack.

b~@@#&!~. When d20 broke sales went crazy. All the companies were new and game stores could not predict what would sell and what would not. Now some of those stores are stuck with the crap that was left after the tide washed back out. This is not the fault of the store owners and to blame them is pure b~@@#&!~.

First, d20 Sales were LESS than 2nd edition. Second, just because game X does well doesn't mean all things related to Game X will do just as well. Any retailer that deserves to stay in business would know better. Saying "Well, they didn't know that 20 copies of Complete Guide to Drow Underwear wouldn't sell" doesn't wash. They shouldn't have BOUGHT all the stuff, and been far more conservative with expectations.

It's part of doing business. Who, prey tell, would be responsible OTHERWISE for retailers piling up rushed d20 crap sight unseen?

Said another way, the little guy is truly and royally screwed.

I don't think so. I just think that the FLGS can't operate like the 'geek's basement' anymore. They need to foster community, with gaming tables, diversity of options, etc... offer things that you can only get in person.

But, if like, sadly, most gaming stores, you get some unwashed social reject behind the counter who's too busy reading a comic to even WATCH his store, or he shuns the girls, etc... well, that's just a bad LGS. Remember, 'comic book stores' have a bad reputation in the general populace for a REASON. That has to turn around.

Two big things stick out like sore thumbs in this:

1. "Think of the children!"
That is the main argument Charles Ryan seems to be putting forward. Actually the FLGS, and to some extent individual gamers, since he says the glut hurts them by causing stock turnover issues for the FLGS and wallet destruction for the gamers. To some extent I expect those are both true. I know I certainly made a deliberate decision to give up on all third party material sometime in early 2001 when I realized there was no way I could buy the WotC book of the month, said release schedule decided by Charles Ryan, and third party products and still eat and pay my rent. And I expect that had an effect on FLGS trying to keep product turning over regularly. What is missing is any reason to believe WotC gives half a fig about that. Oh sure, they sponsor the Worldwide D&D Game Day which requires said FLGS to run events. And they encourage the RPGA to run game days at stores. But especially with 4E pushing playing online, and with the deal with Hasbro getting D&D books into bookstores again, where is the support for WotC being all that concerned about whether the FLGS is having problems carrying the horde of third party products. And let us not forget just how many third party products have gone to pdf over the past half a decade, cutting the stuff cluttering up shelves even more.

2. No More Competition With The GSL!
This is even more baffling than the first. Has Charles Ryan even read what WotC wants people to make using the GSL? Let me see . . .
Monster Books
New Class Options
New Powers
New Feats
Settings
Adventures
What do all of those have in common? Oh yeah, right - those are all things that WotC makes. The only thing they cannot make with the GSL is alternate game systems using the same basic rules. The problem is, as others have noted, that if as is stated none of the competition for products was ever actually relevant, something that is supported by WotC promotional material saying the GSL is supposed to be used to make material that will directly compete with what WotC makes, then the entire reference seems to be missing a point. As a lead into the appeal to save the FLGS, it comes across as twice as suspect.
Just what were these "holes" in the marketplace that Charles Ryan expects us to believe he was leaving in WotC's product line that the third party publishers failed to properly fill as they should have? There is only one I can think of, the problem is, no third party publisher could fill that hole. What was it? *SNICKER* Why Greyhawk of course. Actually, one third party quasi-publisher, at the time anyway, could fill that hole. And every time they did, their sales surged. (Note: I use the term "quasi-publisher" to reflect the extremely limited range of products Paizo published along with the magazines, not as a slur on the size or quality of the products. Paizo was making game tools then, not game books.) I would muse about there being some sort of inevitable connection between that and Paizo now going into full and direct competition with WotC over core rules, but there really is none unless it is karmic. Of course, Charles Ryan is no longer brand manager, so even that is not really applicable.

If those reasons are legitimate it is because there is some major background information that is nowhere in evidence. As such, the whole thing comes across as rather spurious.