http://wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4news/20080417a
And the text:
Wizards of the Coast is pleased to announce that third-party publishers will be allowed to publish products compatible with the Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition game system under the new Dungeons & Dragons 4E Game System License (D&D 4E GSL). This royalty-free license will replace the former d20 System Trademark License (STL), and will have a System Reference Document (SRD) available for referencing permissible content.
The D&D 4E GSL will allow third-party publishers to create roleplaying game products in fantasy settings with the D&D 4th Edition rules, and publishers who register with WotC will be granted the right to use a version of the D&D logo that denotes the product as compatible with the D&D 4th Edition Roleplaying Game, in accordance with WotC’s terms and conditions. The effective start date for sales of D&D 4E GSL publications will be October 1, 2008.
The license associated SRD will be available on June 6, 2008, at no cost. A small group of publishers received advanced notice and will receive these documents prior to June 6, at no cost, in order to prepare for publication of compatible materials by the effective start date. If you haven’t already been contact by WotC, you will be able to access the documents on the Wizards website beginning on June 6, 2008.
Wizards is also working on the details of a second royalty-free license, the d20 Game System License (d20 GSL). This license will allow third-party publishers to create roleplaying game products in non-fantasy settings with the 4E rules. The exact details for the d20 GSL will be released as they become available.
Well, then the obvious question is: Hey Paizo, did you get it and the NDA?
Or did you take a pass?
Ha! Finally, some real 4E news in this board. And it's about the D&D 4E GSL. Thank you Bryon for copying the text of the announcement, that is a real help to those of us unable to see the WotC site most of the day.
Since getting the GSL early is free now, I really don't why Paizo would say no. June 6th is a good date for when everyone will see it, five months is a lot of time even with the better publishing date for third party producers. October 1st instead of January 1st is very nice.
And that last part there, the thing about the d20 GSL? I think that may expalin why things have been delayed for so long in legal. The d20 GSL for non-fantasy settings sounds a lot like the folks who made Mutants and Masterminds or Sypcraft, and similair settings, were lobbying really hard for the GSL to be more open.
I wonder how much, or how little, Paizo's decision changed things. Unfortunately we may never know for sure.
Paizo will definitly get their hands on the GSL as soon as possible for Necromancer games products.
There was a selfish part of me that was hoping there would be no GSL. I wanted more Dungeon Crawl Classics and Necromancer Games adventures for 3rd edition and later see those made using Pathfinder rules.
Still since there is one Im glad its finally being released. The limbo that 3rd Party companies were left in was really horrible.
I very much like how there will be a D&D logo that 3rd party companies can put on their product.
The way they word it sounds like it will be a different looking logo that the official WotC D&D but will be a "D&D Compatable" logo.
The "d20" on certain books just wasnt cool enough for me.
The way they word it sounds like it will be a different looking logo that the official WotC D&D but will be a "D&D Compatable" logo.
Green Ronin has a logo called the Mutants and Masterminds Superlink Logo (link). Its different then what GR has on their books but it indicates 3rd party compatability. Sounds like wizards is doing something similar.
Yeah like the Swords and Sorcery logo that White Wolf, Troll Lord Games, Necromancer Games all used.
The way they word it sounds like it will be a different looking logo that the official WotC D&D but will be a "D&D Compatable" logo.Green Ronin has a logo called the Mutants and Masterminds Superlink Logo (link). Its different then what GR has on their books but it indicates 3rd party compatability. Sounds like wizards is doing something similar.
I always saw the SuperLink more as the d20 of Mutants and Masterminds, because of how radically different M&M is from D&D. I mean, you couldn't pick up a Superlink item and use it in D&D game, even if it had the d20 logo on it.
And because of that, I this is a very good idea. They seem to be creating a three tier system with their logos.
The Core D&D 4E, 4E compatable products, and then 4E d20 produts which are not nessisarily compatable with D&D.
The new logo will also prevent people from getting confused about which 3rd party compatable material is for 4E and what is 3.5 d20 material.
The GSL isn't yet ready; it's just been officially announced. We don't have it yet, but it certainly sounds like it'll be ready relatively soon.
One would certainly hope! Would you come back and tell us here when you do get it James?
Creative Director
|
The GSL isn't yet ready; it's just been officially announced. We don't have it yet, but it certainly sounds like it'll be ready relatively soon.One would certainly hope! Would you come back and tell us here when you do get it James?
Yup. Probably not to this exact thread. But you can probably expect to hear more from us about it when we get there (except the parts we'll be under NDA, if any, about, of course).
Yay!
I was bummed about the thought of no third-party publishing for 4th edition, to the point that I was considering not purchasing the books in June if WotC made the GSL that restrictive.
|
The GSL isn't yet ready; it's just been officially announced. We don't have it yet, but it certainly sounds like it'll be ready relatively soon.
I'm sure they mean it this time!
;PHonestly, I really have no care either way. With PathfinderRPG being made, I could care less what WotC does anymore, I just find it funny how optimistic everyone still is about WotC.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
Since getting the GSL early is free now, I really don't why Paizo would say no.
I've notices that quite a few people seem to think Paizo had a problem with the $5000 fee that Wizards had previously announced would be required for early access to the new SRD.
To be clear, we *never* had a problem with that, and we let Wizards know immediately that we were prepared to pay it at the appropriate time.
Honestly, I really have no care either way. With PathfinderRPG being made, I could care less what WotC does anymore, I just find it funny how optimistic everyone still is about WotC.
I care significantly less than I did before.
My Pathfinder RPG playtesters have generated a lot of excitement.
On the other hand, I haven't cancelled my 4th Edition pre-order though. I'm still curious, and I've never been one to make a fuss about sacred cows. My biggest concern about 4th edition is that there won't be a quality campaign world with cool AP's.
Though ChristianJ does point out to me that WOTC can make a good campaign world... but without APs of the quality Paizo makes, I'm skeptical. Even now that they have announced an AP, I'm still a little dubious.
The GSL isn't yet ready; it's just been officially announced. We don't have it yet, but it certainly sounds like it'll be ready relatively soon.
Now this is funny.
Sounds like something that was posted in October...
Honestly, I really have no care either way. With PathfinderRPG being made, I could care less what WotC does anymore, I just find it funny how optimistic everyone still is about WotC.
I care significantly less than I did before.
My Pathfinder RPG playtesters have generated a lot of excitement.
On the other hand, I haven't cancelled my 4th Edition pre-order though. I'm still curious, and I've never been one to make a fuss about sacred cows. My biggest concern about 4th edition is that there won't be a quality campaign world with cool AP's.
Though ChristianJ does point out to me that WOTC can make a good campaign world... but without APs of the quality Paizo makes, I'm skeptical. Even now that they have announced an AP, I'm still a little dubious.
The funny thing is, if you look at WotC 3.5 products, many, many of the great ones were penned by Paizo staff.
Pathfinder is in very good hands.
Since getting the GSL early is free now, I really don't why Paizo would say no.I've notices that quite a few people seem to think Paizo had a problem with the $5000 fee that Wizards had previously announced would be required for early access to the new SRD.
To be clear, we *never* had a problem with that, and we let Wizards know immediately that we were prepared to pay it at the appropriate time.
Sorry Vic, I didn't mean to imply that at all. I know you guys were always ready to get hold of the GSL, were desprate to there for a while, but that was before PathFinder's announcement.
I was just trying to tell a previous poster that you guys would still love to take a look at it GSL, whether it was free or not.
I'm sure they mean it this time!
;P
Honestly, I really have no care either way. With PathfinderRPG being made, I could care less what WotC does anymore, I just find it funny how optimistic everyone still is about WotC.
Holy Threadcrap, Batman!
I'd post a longer response, but I'm too busy going into all the Pathfinder threads and posting about how I "could" (don't you mean couldn't?) care less about what Paizo does, and how I find it funny how optimistic everyone is about Paizo and Pathfinder RPG.
Seriously, can we *not* go back to last month?
I'm pleased to see that there will still be a GSL. I was wondering if they hadn't scrapped it altogether. I'm surpried by the announcement of a separate d20 license; that seem to imply that WOTC will be more open to other genres, etc. than it seemed.
Honestly, I really have no care either way. With PathfinderRPG being made, I could care less what WotC does anymore, I just find it funny how optimistic everyone still is about WotC.
That's where I'm at. I'm happy for Wizards and those still excited about 4E, but I don't know anyone anymore that is. Forum posters, yea. But everyone I know in person has long since made up their minds to stick with 3.5 (and I"m working on them to go pathfinder).
I'd post a longer response, but I'm too busy going into all the Pathfinder threads and posting about how I "could" (don't you mean couldn't?) care less about what Paizo does, and how I find it funny how optimistic everyone is about Paizo and Pathfinder RPG.
[sarcasm]Yah, FH went into every 4E thread and posted his feelings about the GSL release.[/sarcasm]
There are threads where people are saying they are unhappy or not interested in PRPG and nobody is getting sensitive about it.
There are threads where people are saying they are unhappy or not interested in PRPG and nobody is getting sensitive about it.
I'm sure there are. But those threads aren't about the GSL. That is why messageboards have threads...so people can have conversations (about the GSL, for example) that don't involve hearing (again) about how much WOTC sucks. FH's post was a threadcrap, plain and simple, and I called him on it.
Can we get this thread back on topic please? Anyone have any thoughts about an actual D&D logo usable by third parties?
Can we get this thread back on topic please? Anyone have any thoughts about an actual D&D logo usable by third parties?
Yeah, if WotC actually releases one, we'll have all sorts of thoughts. They said 6 months ago the GSL would be out soon, this is just another "it will be about soon". This thead is getting all of the deep, considered posts that it deserves.
|
|
Yeah, if WotC actually releases one, we'll have all sorts of thoughts. They said 6 months ago the GSL would be out soon, this is just another "it will be about soon". This thead is getting all of the deep, considered posts that it deserves.Can we get this thread back on topic please? Anyone have any thoughts about an actual D&D logo usable by third parties?
Watch it! A semi-sarcastic or negative comment will land you a spanking by Bugleyboy! Don't you know that you aren't allowed to have a negative comment about WotC's honor?
Watch it! A semi-sarcastic or negative comment will land you a spanking by Bugleyboy! Don't you know that you aren't allowed to have a negative comment about WotC's honor?
Grow up.
For the last time: I am just tired of threadcraps and name calling, and said as much. A month or so ago I stated my displeasure with Paizo's decision, and left it at that. I don't go into Pathfinder RPG threads and take pot shots at what I believe is a bad decision on Paizo's part. All I'm asking for is the same courtesy. Instead, as is becoming common on Paizo's boards, the actual conversation is derailed because most people just don't feel like wading through the crap. The signal to noise ratio is just getting too low. I had thought the worst of this was behind us, but it appears you've managed to prove me wrong about something after all.
Congratulations.
Why is it a threadcrap?
Title: "Ding! Your GSL is ready!"
A guy says he just doesn't care anymore for reason X.
A guy mocks the announcement because, well, it's not the first.
A guy is relieved because he worried WotC was going to strand 3rd party publishers.
Who cares?
Chill out bugleyman, there's no noise. This thread is not, and never was a deep conversation that can be derailed.
Why is it a threadcrap?
Title: "Ding! Your GSL is ready!"
A guy says he just doesn't care anymore for reason X.
A guy mocks the announcement because, well, it's not the first.
A guy is relieved because he worried WotC was going to strand 3rd party publishers.
Who cares?
Chill out bugleyman, there's no noise. This thread is not, and never was a deep conversation that can be derailed.
OK, so everyone going into 4th should go to the PRPG threads and say "well, I couldn't care less" and supposedly be on topic and help with the playtesting over there?
|
|
Why is it a threadcrap?
Title: "Ding! Your GSL is ready!"
A guy says he just doesn't care anymore for reason X.
A guy mocks the announcement because, well, it's not the first.
A guy is relieved because he worried WotC was going to strand 3rd party publishers.
Who cares?
Chill out bugleyman, there's no noise. This thread is not, and never was a deep conversation that can be derailed.
Actually my first comment was in reply to Mr. Jacob's statement that clarified that the GSL was not out yet but that it should be soon. My comment was a bit tongue-in-cheek in regards to WotC's past track record on this subject.
On topic? Yes. Somewhat negative? Yes. So? Since when is there a rule against ever expressing a slightly negative thought on a subject?This is more of an issue of a comment that happened to touch a raw nerve on some people. WotC can't seem to get their crap together(IMO) and I pointed it out in jest. Boo Hoo. Guess I am now a Threadcrapper for expressing a non-Gleemax or ENWorld compatible thought.
Should I post on 4E boards? WotC has screwed up (IMO)to the point that I am ready to never buy another thing from them even though I have played D&D for close to 30 years. If I feel like commenting from my perspective, I will. I earned the right to critique their business practices by my past patronage and through the loss of D&D (IMO once again) as a hobby I want to partake in.
I never tossed around any personal insults such as a "grow up" comment or anything.
D&D is STILL my game although I disagree with the company that now holds the reins. That gives me every right to post a comment, whether positive or negative, on a 4E thread. I guess that "grow up" means something different to me than to never display a negative opinion to someone who has an opposing stance to my own.
Oh, and thanks for the English lesson back there, I will try to be more cognizant of my vernacular in the future.
I have run a few 4e playtest games with the info collected over on ENworld and me and my players loved it. As a result I am very happy to hear about the GSL news as several of us are Paizo fans so Paizo/Necro 4e content is about the only thing I am looking forward to more than the core wotc books.
|
This could have been an interesting thread.
Threadjack in a threadcrap...
I still think you should have an alias that is 'DuderinoMonkey',
I don't think, however that Fakey's original post is off the mark at all. The GSL has been beeing talked about and dangled as a boon to 3rd parties that is 'soon to be released' for about 6 months. I understand it has to be bounced off of the Hoary Host of Hasbro's Corparate Lawyers, but this is geological time we're moving into.
Actually my first comment was in reply to Mr. Jacob's statement that clarified that the GSL was not out yet but that it should be soon. My comment was a bit tongue-in-cheek in regards to WotC's past track record on this subject.
On topic? Yes. Somewhat negative? Yes. So? Since when is there a rule against ever expressing a slightly negative thought on a subject?
This is more of an issue of a comment that happened to touch a raw nerve on some people. WotC can't seem to get their crap together(IMO) and I pointed it out in jest. Boo Hoo. Guess I am now a Threadcrapper for expressing a non-Gleemax or ENWorld compatible thought.
Should I post on 4E boards? WotC has screwed up (IMO)to the point that I am ready to never buy another thing from them even though I have played D&D for close to 30 years. If I feel like commenting from my perspective, I will. I earned the right to critique their business practices by my past patronage and through the loss of D&D (IMO once again) as a hobby I want to partake in.
I never tossed around any personal insults such as a "grow up" comment or anything.
D&D is STILL my game although I disagree with the company that now holds the reins. That gives me every right to post a comment, whether positive or negative, on a 4E thread. I guess that "grow up" means something different to me than to never display a negative opinion to someone who has an opposing stance to my own.
Oh, and thanks for the English lesson back there, I will try to be more cognizant of my vernacular in the future.
I'm going to assume you actually have an interest in communicating and try this once more:
(1) I apologize for correcting your English. It was petty. That particular (all too-common) mistake is a pet peeve of mine, but that doesn't excuse me pointing it out glibly.
(2) You did, in fact, insult me (bugleyboy?). Your attempt to claim the moral high ground lacks any credibility.
(3) I have no issue with disagreement, as I thought I had made clear. My problem is it seems impossible to have a conversation about anything 4E related without people chiming in with comments like "who cares?," which add nothing to the discussion. There are many threads in which I abstain from participating because I recognize my opinion wouldn't add to the discussion at hand. I'm not being opressed. I don't think the people in the thread are overly sensitive. I am not a victim of political correctness run amok. I am simply exercising some restraint.
In any case, I'm done with this thread (and more and more lately, Paizo's boards), because it is very clear that, despite what I think are several interesting developments related to the most recent GSL announcement, discussion of those developments isn't going to take place here. However hostile Enworld has become to those who do not look forward to 4E, Paizo has become to those that do, and irony which I think would be of interest given the "Enworld 4E bias" clamor of late...
At this point, there's no evidence to think that the license will strangle 3rd parties.
Killing Dungeon magazine
Killing Dragon magazineKilling Code Monkey Publishing
Needing to come up with a new OGL
Leaving the 3rd parties hanging for several months
Keeping 3rd parties from having 4E products at GenCon
Riiiiight, we've got no evidence AT ALL that things may be getting worse for 3rd parties.
Can someone educate me on the reasoning behind the "fantasy"/"non-fantasy" split? I can understand the distinction of separating the D&D 4E GSL and d20 GSL in order to impose some quality control on items that will be allowed a version of the D&D logo, but specifying that one has to be fantasy and the other non-fantasy doesn't make sense to me. Unless its to reeaaallly make sure that anything they might disapprove of is "different" from a fantasy game?
Thoughts?
|
|
Nasty suspicions aside, this seems to me that it might develop into a way for small companies to get recognition for their products by association with a big name in the market without any kind of threat to the legal status of various WotC Intellectual Properties, trademarks, etc, being inadvertantly created.I hadn't even thought of that, but I was starting to see a competition between Paizo and WotC for the services of people like Nicolas Logue and Wolfgang Baur. These are people who can cover WotC's weak area (adventure design) and can give DMs reason to buy 4th edition. This would be good for freelancers and allow Paizo and WotC to increasingly subsidize talented writers.
I believe that since being hired by Paizo, Nic Logue was told by WotC that his services would no longer be needed by WotC.
Hope that wasn't too negative of a thing to post...;P
Ding! Fries are done!
I believe that since being hired by Paizo, Nic Logue was told by WotC that his services would no longer be needed by WotC.Not quite. He was told that a certain project of his with them could not go forward until the GSL was fixed up.
Well...no projects can go forward until the GSL is fixed up. I hope now I can get on some more projects...
Edit: in the mean time I'll just have to write TONS of kickass stuff for Paizo and Sinister Adventures...curse to my joys! ;-)
|
|
I believe that since being hired by Paizo, Nic Logue was told by WotC that his services would no longer be needed by WotC.Not quite. He was told that a certain project of his with them could not go forward until the GSL was fixed up.Well...no projects can go forward until the GSL is fixed up. I hope now I can get on some more projects...
Edit: in the mean time I'll just have to write TONS of kickass stuff for Paizo and Sinister Adventures...curse to my joys! ;-)
Ahhh, that clears that up, I had heard a few differing stories, some of which involved pre-pubescent otters, and was hoping you would clarify the terms.
Don't worry, I am sure the GSL will be out soon. *tries to keep a straight face*
Honestly, I really have no care either way. With PathfinderRPG being made, I could care less what WotC does anymore, I just find it funny how optimistic everyone still is about WotC.
That pretty much sums up my feelings as well. I'm 100% ok with not buying official 4e product anytime soon. I'm also come to the conclusion that SOME 4e fans would like anything released by WotC so long as it has the WotC logo and Dungeons & Dragons on it. To each their own, I'm just glad with Pathfinder I get to have my cake and eat it too.
Long live Pathfinder!
Watch it! A semi-sarcastic or negative comment will land you a spanking by Bugleyboy! Don't you know that you aren't allowed to have a negative comment about WotC's honor?Grow up.
For the last time: I am just tired of threadcraps and name calling, and said as much. A month or so ago I stated my displeasure with Paizo's decision, and left it at that. I don't go into Pathfinder RPG threads and take pot shots at what I believe is a bad decision on Paizo's part. All I'm asking for is the same courtesy. Instead, as is becoming common on Paizo's boards, the actual conversation is derailed because most people just don't feel like wading through the crap. The signal to noise ratio is just getting too low. I had thought the worst of this was behind us, but it appears you've managed to prove me wrong about something after all.
Congratulations.
RIIIGGGHHHTT, because the pro-4e crowd never disparages those who don't share their world-view of D&D. Even been to Gleemax, ENWorld, RPG.net?
There's a big difference between "I no longer care what WotC does given the Pathfinder RPG announcement" and "You grognards are full of crap, 4e will rock, and you'll all end up playing it within a year anyway". And no, you didn't say that, but I've been in plenty of threads on the boards I referenced where those statements are the "civil", "reasoned" and "grown up" responses.
I'm pleased to see that there will still be a GSL. I was wondering if they hadn't scrapped it altogether. I'm surpried by the announcement of a separate d20 license; that seem to imply that WOTC will be more open to other genres, etc. than it seemed.
I was surprised to see a d20 license announced as well, although on first read it appears that by combining the references of other genres with the repeated statements of "no 4e d20 Modern plans at this time" I suspect there won't be a new WotC d20 Modern product for years, if ever. That's not a good or bad thing, IMO, just a surprise.
Ding! Fries are done!
Dee dee dee!