|
Neat.
Gen Con Releases (In Stores Early September)
DCC #53: Sellswords of Punjar
DCC #54: Forges of the Mountain King
DCC #55: Isle of the Sea Drake
Master Dungeons M1: Dragora's Dungeon
Awesome. Clyde Caldwell art - old school indeed.
Umm guys... These are just guesses but it sounds reasonable that:
1) Master's Dungeons are the 4E equivilent line since all previous adventures would have to be taken down if they made DCC a 4E line.
2) M1 will be free.
3)DCC 53-55 are probably statless or for 3.5/OSRIC/C&C.
CEO
|
Umm guys... These are just guesses but it sounds reasonable that:
1) Master's Dungeons are the 4E equivilent line since all previous adventures would have to be taken down if they made DCC a 4E line.
2) M1 will be free.
3)DCC 53-55 are probably statless or for 3.5/OSRIC/C&C.
From looking at the website, it says that the DCC 53-55 are for 4E. Hmmm. Interesting.
-Lisa
|
From the Goodman Games Forums: Linkee
--------------------------------
For those of you who are wondering about today's news post: yes, those products really will be available before October 1. I generally don't discuss business in public forums but because there will be questions, I am posting here to confirm yes, it is true, as is the blurb in the back of yesterday's Free RPG Day release. 'Nuff said... now enjoy reading about Punjar with the freebies from yesterday.
_________________
Joseph Goodman
Goodman Games
www.goodman-games.com
Ok, maybe I got behind on my information, I was getting the impression Goodman Games wasn't going 4th edition. So I take it they ARE supporting the game system. Is that correct?
Special licensing agreement, I wager.
Apparantly Paizo is not the only one that knows how to surprise.
Interesting news. I've never bought any Goodman stuff before but I'll have to check these out. Maybe they've found a new customer in me ...
(Thanks for the heads up joe!)
Interesting news. I've never bought any Goodman stuff before but I'll have to check these out. Maybe they've found a new customer in me ...
(Thanks for the heads up joe!)
We have several Goodman Game modules here at home. I have run 1 or 2 but own several more. My daughter has run plenty of them and she thinks they are great. The do seem to have editing problems off and one (map versus text errors for example) but nothing serious.
It's rather interesting that they label the ruleset "4E". In case they would be using the GSL, they could easily market it as Dungeons & Dragons 4.
It's become a staple where I live for the gamers here to refer to anything 3.5E D&D and earlier to be D&D whereas no one calls 4th Edition D&D at all. Everyone just calls it 4E. When asked, most of them say it's because it has nothing in common with D&D that calling it D&D would just mislead people so they call the game "4E".
Makes perfect sense. All I have ever called it was 4E myself.
Well, if you say it... it must be gospel.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
It's rather interesting that they label the ruleset "4E". In case they would be using the GSL, they could easily market it as Dungeons & Dragons 4.
Yeah—I wonder if he's going the route of offering 4E rules-compatible products without signing to the GSL. Pretty much the only thing he loses is the ability to place Wizards' compatibility logo on the back cover, and the ability to refer to any game terms that wizards has trademarked (do they even have any such terms?)
I think this is a much smarter choice for him than signing the GSL, though he'll need to be diligent about avoiding misuse of Wizards' trademarks.
By the way, note that's he's saying early September for retail release, but the heading of the section indicates that he'll actually be debuting them at Gen Con.
Assuming it is an agreement they worked out with WotC, I only hope this means they can still sell their 3e DCCs. Cause I don't have most of them yet. :)
I was wondering whether the GSL would drive completionists crazy and drive recent 3.5 product prices up. A frenzy before things are no longer avialable. Collectors have low Will Saves. Time will tell.
I know this is not legally necessary, but I wonder if WotC will pull their 3.5 product books to 'support the GSL'. I think it is obvious they will not print them, but will they allow PDF sales?
I know this is not legally necessary, but I wonder if WotC will pull their 3.5 product books to 'support the GSL'. I think it is obvious they will not print them, but will they allow PDF sales?
Last time I checked drivethrustuff, they were still selling *1E* PDFs.
Last time I checked drivethrustuff, they were still selling *1E* PDFs.
Yes, but by pulling their 3.5 products now, particularily their Complete Series, people will loses options. So if they stop the sales, it will incentives people to move to 4.0. I don't know if it is smart or not. But I think it might move people to 4.0. Think of it this way. If it is hard to get the Complete Series, PfRPG and other 3.5 systems are less valuable. I know there are plenty of books available as of today but they could get scarse fast. I am just thinking out loud.
Assuming it is an agreement they worked out with WotC, I only hope this means they can still sell their 3e DCCs. Cause I don't have most of them yet. :)
Actually, even under the GSL, they can sell their back-inventory after conversion. It's just a question of whether they can print new copies. But they must have come to some separate agreement with WotC in order to release the projects before October.
|
|
Yeah—I wonder if he's going the route of offering 4E rules-compatible products without signing to the GSL. Pretty much the only thing he loses is the ability to place Wizards' compatibility logo on the back cover, and the ability to refer to any game terms that wizards has trademarked (do they even have any such terms?)
That was going to be my guess as well. Wait... I guess it still is my guess.
|
Sounds like they didn't get a special agreement and aren't signing the GSL to me. They're just using the system and avoiding trademark infringement (hence calling it 4e instead of "Dungeons & Dragons 4e.")
Not a bad move, allows them to ignore other parts of the GSL they don't like... like backwards compatible modules.
|
Interesting news. I've never bought any Goodman stuff before but I'll have to check these out. Maybe they've found a new customer in me ...
(Thanks for the heads up joe!)
The Punjar Gazetteer looks pretty interesting (free at Free RPG day). If they do put out adventures in august, I may have to check them out. They look like they'll be city-type adventures.
Looks like a trilogy...Sellswords of Punjar, (DCC 53), the in sept and oct, Six Against Punjar and Thrones of Punjar. There are previews/summaries of them in the Gaz'.
Yes, the first 3 4E DCC's will be released on August 6th according to Amazon, but even September is ok by me. And they are using 4th Edtion D&D rules and they are going to be awesome. I'm actually going to be running the Goodman Games DCC's when they come out as an adventure path, starting with Sellswords of Punjar.
Goodman Games products get the early release I'm sure partly because they were on board with supporting 4E from the get-go. Whereas Paizo was too busy with listening to idiots like Razz and came out with the Pathfinder RPG, which I'm never going to touch.
The 4E DCC's are already available for pre-order on Amazon (I've pre-ordered all of them), I made a list:
http://www.amazon.com/Dungeon-Crawl-Classics-4th-Edition/lm/R2VRAIZ5MJO33D/ ref=cm_lm_byauthor_title_full
|
|
Well, if you say it... it must be gospel.
Ok, I've noticed that you follow Razz around and seem to answer every, single, regenerating (TROLL!), post Razz makes on 4e.
I have to ask, how are you behaving any different than he does? I mean, I know that his posts are inflammatory, especially to someone who likes 4e, but I fail to see how your post-stalking is much better. To a large degree, I think its behavior like this (both you & Razz) that contribute to the ill will between the fans of 3.5 and 4e.
The 'Ling
|
|
Well, if you say it... it must be gospel.Ok, I've noticed that you follow Razz around and seem to answer every, single, regenerating (TROLL!), post Razz makes on 4e.
I have to ask, how are you behaving any different than he does? I mean, I know that his posts are inflammatory, especially to someone who likes 4e, but I fail to see how your post-stalking is much better. To a large degree, I think its behavior like this (both you & Razz) that contribute to the ill will between the fans of 3.5 and 4e.
The 'Ling
What underling said. I LIKE both games. Yes, it is possible.
I got some 3.5 games going. A Pathfinder playtest and I have plans for more. I am playing in a 4e game, and have a great idea for Punjar or maybe an Eberron one come the fall. I also play HERO and WH40K RPG, CoC...I have no conflict.
Frankly, I just don't understand the snide remarks and sniping. It would be nice if our boards community just stopped this.
Guys sorry but I cannot find out.. Can you provide me with a link to download the Gazeteer for Punjar?
Special licensing agreement, I wager.
Either that or sometimes you have to punch someone in the groin to see if they are a career bully or just bluffing.
Again, with the c&~$&!!&+ing! Oy gevalsh! I get it already!
Again, with the c$!*+#++$ing! Oy gevalsh! I get it already!
You assume too much; everyone has the former, not so with the latter!
+1000 sheqalim for including Yiddish in your reply.
|
|
HEya, Urza.. long time no see.. remember LON? :P
Ladies of Neverwinter? Sure do.
Which works better? A small 'd20 System' logo in black on yellow at 1/2' high on the back of the book, or saying '4E' in any frickin' way you want to?
I have a feeling we'll see some kind of official 4e logo pop up eventually too. Many companies paid lip service to the OGL and used their own D20 logo or not one at all.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
Assuming it is an agreement they worked out with WotC, I only hope this means they can still sell their 3e DCCs. Cause I don't have most of them yet. :)Actually, even under the GSL, they can sell their back-inventory after conversion. It's just a question of whether they can print new copies. But they must have come to some separate agreement with WotC in order to release the projects before October.
While they could indeed continue to sell existing stock of their printed copies, if Goodman published even one Dungeon Crawl Classics Module under the GSL, they'd have to immediately stop selling the PDFs of the *entire* DCC OGL product line. That's a pretty big revenue stream to give up.
But I'm pretty sure that these new Goodman products aren't being published under the GSL or any other agreement with WotC. Seriously, I'm confident that Wizards wouldn't have considered negotiating a non-GSL 4E contract with *anyone* until the GSL was ready. And the notion that the company that took the better part of a year to come up with a *non*-negotiated license could turn around a negotiated license in less than a week is... well, I'm just gonna use the term "optimistic" and leave it at that.
Besides, I doubt there will ever be any separate 4E licenses like that—I think their cards are pretty much already on the table.
I don't think anyone posted this. One of Goodman Games products is 'Points of Light'. It is a collection of generic campign settings. I found it funny.
|
|
Besides, I doubt there will ever be any separate 4E licenses like that—I think their cards are pretty much already on the table.
My impression is that if at some point it were viewed as in the best interests of their brand they'd sign just about any deal. :-) And I don't say that entirely negatively, either. TSR especially didn't always handle the brand very well at times. Good or bad they're obviously looking out for #1 again.
I'm very interested to see how far 3rd parties will push the GSL boundaries without the GSL. I think the reaction (or non-reaction) by WotC will say more than the GSL itself, actually.
But I'm pretty sure that these new Goodman products aren't being published under the GSL or any other agreement with WotC. Seriously, I'm confident that Wizards wouldn't have considered negotiating a non-GSL 4E contract with *anyone* until the GSL was ready. And the notion that the company that took the better part of a year to come up with a *non*-negotiated license could turn around a negotiated license in less than a week is... well, I'm just gonna use the term "optimistic" and leave it at that.
*long whistle* DANG. I can't wait to see WotC's reaction if this is indeed without the GSL. Will WotC do anything? Will they try to stop them? What will the courts say? This will be most interesting to watch. *goes and gets popcorn*
|
|
Another publisher seems to have made up his mind. Adamant Entertainment has announced adventures "usable with 4E" for release in July.
http://adamantenter.livejournal.com/
Quite astounding consequence of the GSL. Would it be that WotC, by releasing a much stricter license, opened up the gates for third party publishers producing 4th Ed.-compatible products without any overview or framework (such the one provided earlier under the OGL) and without the possibility for WotC to reuse the game mechanics created by these publishers?
Quite astounding consequence of the GSL. Would it be that WotC, by releasing a much stricter license, opened up the gates for third party publishers producing 4th Ed.-compatible products without any overview or framework (such the one provided earlier under the OGL) and without the possibility for WotC to reuse the game mechanics created by these publishers?
This is exactly what Orcus warned Wizards about before Wizards released the GSL. Orcus said that Wizards felt that Orcus was threatening Wizards. Well, it turns out that Orcus was right. It'll be interesting to see what Necromancer does.
|
|
Looks like the djinni is far too fat to fit back in the bottle. Just below the Venture 4th advertisement, I saw it say, "Just because the new rules require miniatures....doesn't mean you have to go broke!" That's the first time I've seen a company of any size acknowledge that 4e is a grid-munchkin's wet dream. [no offense meant, I use miniatures, maps, tiles, tokens, templates, lines, and mats myself]
Goodman has been trying to get ahead of the curve for a long time... and I find their blind allegiance to wotc quite shallow and have asked to be removed from all mailing lists. IMHO, they've chosen poorly.
I don't think anyone posted this. One of Goodman Games products is 'Points of Light'. It is a collection of generic campign settings. I found it funny.
It is four unrelated lands, each with a different theme. Each land is has a map with numbered hexes along with locales keyed to a hex. The background for each are kept light and with an eye towards making it easy for a referee to drop it in her campaign. The lands are roughly 125 by 100 miles. Entries have minimal stats that are useful for most RPGs especially the various editions of AD&D/D&D.
If you have a need for a frontier where players can carve out baronies then Southlands will help. If you have a frontier overrun by humaniods or barbarians than look at Wildlands. A war torn land split between two empires or factions then look at Borderlands. Finally the Swamp of Acheron is an realm set in the Outer Planes.
Rob Conley
co-Author of Points Light.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
But I'm pretty sure that these new Goodman products aren't being published under the GSL or any other agreement with WotC. Seriously, I'm confident that Wizards wouldn't have considered negotiating a non-GSL 4E contract with *anyone* until the GSL was ready. And the notion that the company that took the better part of a year to come up with a *non*-negotiated license could turn around a negotiated license in less than a week is... well, I'm just gonna use the term "optimistic" and leave it at that.
Then again, perhaps he just got them to waive the "no products before October 1" provision for him. I suppose that could happen in a week...
Well, if you say it... it must be gospel.Ok, I've noticed that you follow Razz around and seem to answer every, single, regenerating (TROLL!), post Razz makes on 4e.
I have to ask, how are you behaving any different than he does? I mean, I know that his posts are inflammatory, especially to someone who likes 4e, but I fail to see how your post-stalking is much better. To a large degree, I think its behavior like this (both you & Razz) that contribute to the ill will between the fans of 3.5 and 4e.
The 'Ling
Post-stalking... well, never been accused of that before.
For the record, I play and enjoy 3.5 and 4E. I just find Razz funny.
History repeatig itself...
This is the coming of the new age of ROLE-AIDS!!
Actually this could have happened earlier but since the OGL was so open, it didn't have to. Which is what Clark was telling WOTC.
Will WOTC re-write GSL to make it more open?
I don't think so.
We will be seeing a lot of 3pp from unlicensed publishers very soon.
So I ask you , how is publishing under OGL any different than Unlicensed publishing to WOTC? Does WOTC get any benefit from any of them?
History repeatig itself...
This is the coming of the new age of ROLE-AIDS!!
Actually this could have happened earlier but since the OGL was so open, it didn't have to. Which is what Clark was telling WOTC.
Will WOTC re-write GSL to make it more open?
I don't think so.
We will be seeing a lot of 3pp from unlicensed publishers very soon.
So I ask you , how is publishing under OGL any different than Unlicensed publishing to WOTC? Does WOTC get any benefit from any of them?
At the least they get about the same amount of support from OGL/unlicensed support, I'd guess. Interesting question to consider though. I'll have to think more about that ...
So I ask you , how is publishing under OGL any different than Unlicensed publishing to WOTC? Does WOTC get any benefit from any of them?
Huge. Wizards could lose control of their IP. IIRC, Kobolds are not in the SRD. Well Kobolds are a german myth. Guess what, Goodman and AE can have Kobolds in their adventures. Mind Flayers are just a Cthulhu knock-off. Cthulhu is now public domain. Guess what. AE and Goodman can have their own Cthulhu knock off in their adventures. How about adventures "in the Realms Forgotten by time"? Publishers played nice in 3E because they had a favorable, safe harbor environment to publish in. Now, publishers are making a business decision because Wizards took away the safe harbor.
Unless Wizards does something soon (like change the GSL, bigtime and quickly), companies could pretty much pick apart WotC's IP. This could extend beyond RPGs too. Imagine a Mind Flayer-esque creature in WoW? (Mind you, I'm not a WoW player so I don't know if there isn't one or not.)
All this was prevented by the OGL. Everyone took a stance of, "These terms are acceptable, let's not pee in Wizards' pool." The GSL appears to be designed to be rejected. Doing something like this could be a "counteroffer" on Goodman/AE's part in the hope of getting Wizards to release something much more reasonable. If Wizards just lets it go, Goodman/AE will blaze the trail for the smaller companies to do whatever they want. And since rules are not copyrightable (only the presentation of them are) you might just see some M&M type games with a variation of 4E as a base engine.
And if Wizards does fight this in court, well, just remember they have to be profitable. Fighting half a dozen small companies in court (while bad for the small companies) can be quite costly for Wizards, in both money and PR.
Well, if you say it... it must be gospel.
Are you stalking Razz? Cause every time I see him post, you pop up and say something snarky. Fascinating.