|
This is interesting.
Over at ENworld, poster Vocenoctum implied that, without the OGL, Green Ronin never would have existed. (Post can be found here.) Here's a response from Nicole "Nikchik" Lindroos from Green Ronin:
I know Pramas usually posts here as the voice of Green Ronin but I find myself with a few things to offer today, if just for a little clarification.
Green Ronin was formed in early 2000 and our first product Ork! the Roleplaying Game was released in June of that year. We shortly thereafter decided to dabble in this "d20 thing" by planning out a couple adventures, adventures that went on to become the Freeport Trilogy, but when we made that decision the OGL and the d20 STL were completely untested. Make no mistake, we certainly benefited from the license and will never deny the impact that d20 had on the direction of our company but I think it's quite overstating the case to claim that we "wouldn't exist if not for the OGL."
Green Ronin's founders had more than 35 years of combined experience in the game industry when we formed the company, experience not only in roleplaying games but also cards, miniatures, magazines, board games, and more. Due to the enthusiastically favorable response to our d20 dabbling, you could say we were "distracted" from some of our other possible projects for a while but we did continue to work on other things, even during the height of the demand for d20 material. The Spaceship Zero Roleplaying Game and Faery's Tale Deluxe, the Torches & Pitchforks card game and the Walk the Plank card game, map books like Dungeons of Doom and Cartographica, or our recent non-fiction hit Hobby Games: the 100 Best. We've always had our fingers in things other than d20 products.
I've often seen people talk about how third party publishers failed to support WotC or D&D, something I think Charles Ryan first floated here on EN World back when he was still the D&D Brand Manager. Green Ronin published almost 100 straight-up d20/D&D support products without counting support for d20 Modern or D20 Future. My feeling is that WotC's expectation that unrestricted numbers of third party support companies could continue to endlessly support straight-up D&D in the face of the product glut and unending direct competition was unrealistic. The market was demanding more and WotC themselves were not filling those holes; it's utterly predictable that companies would expand out to fill those niches and strive to create products to meet fan demand (as well as differentiate themselves from their competition). That was no more a "betrayal" than WotC designing a new edition of D&D... it's the natural course of business.
While we are mindful of the role the OGL played in the development of Green Ronin, I personally don't feel we "owe our success" to it. We helped manufacture support for WotC's business according to the plan they offered and by doing so we received exposure for our company; it was a mutually beneficial relationship. Our success, on the other hand, was not granted to us from on high by Wizards of the Coast or any other Powers That Be. We competed, we worked hard, we made mistakes on some things and chose wisely on others and earned our success through our efforts. In the far less mutually beneficial climate of 4th Edition and the GSL, I am confident that we will continue to produce excellent work and find an audience for it, starting with A Song of Ice and Fire Roleplaying and any number of things beyond.
Nice response. Those folks at Green Ronin kick ass.
Well put. I like their attitude. Confident in who they are and willing to state as much. Much respect for them.
Nice response. Those folks at Green Ronin kick ass.Well put. I like their attitude. Confident in who they are and willing to state as much. Much respect for them.
Well if their Song of Ice and Fire Roleplaying system takes off, maybe they could sever their tie to anything d20/ogl and strive on their own.
I read the playstart booklet and I think this system has promise.
Well if their Song of Ice and Fire Roleplaying system takes off, maybe they could sever their tie to anything d20/ogl and strive on their own.
I don't think they're going to be severing their ties to M&M and True20 anytime soon.
|
|
Well if their Song of Ice and Fire Roleplaying system takes off, maybe they could sever their tie to anything d20/ogl and strive on their own.
I read the playstart booklet and I think this system has promise./QUOTE]
Shameless Plug:
I did playtesting for ASOIF RPG and let me tell you this Game kicks bum!
It is tailor made for G.R.R. Martins world but if you are looking for a system that favors grim and gritty very realistic gameplay than this one is for you!
|
I think he is more right than wrong but I wonder where his company would be if he had to give back all of the profits made from the use of the OGL. I understand that both Green Ronin and WotC benefitted from the d20/OGL but frankly it seems a bit odd to say that Green Ronin owes them nothing. At the very least they owe them a debt of gratitude for making it possible to have the success that they have had.
I think he is more right than wrong but I wonder where his company would be if he had to give back all of the profits made from the use of the OGL. I understand that both Green Ronin and WotC benefitted from the d20/OGL but frankly it seems a bit odd to say that Green Ronin owes them nothing. At the very least they owe them a debt of gratitude for making it possible to have the success that they have had.
I think the title of this thread is overstating the case. Here's a direct quote of what is posted above:
So all they're claiming is that they'd still be around, doing something, whether they used the OGL or not.
|
I think he is more right than wrong but I wonder where his company would be if he had to give back all of the profits made from the use of the OGL. I understand that both Green Ronin and WotC benefitted from the d20/OGL but frankly it seems a bit odd to say that Green Ronin owes them nothing. At the very least they owe them a debt of gratitude for making it possible to have the success that they have had.
He certainly admits as much. He is just denying that his company relied solely on d20 for profits. He suggests that without d20, they would have had time to make other products, which although likely not as successful as d20, would still make them money given the success of their non-d20 material.
Not to pick specifically on your post, CWM. You did point out a flaw in his statement, in that it was a little obtuse in its wording.
EDIT: Ninja'd by Hogarth!
|
[sarcasm]
Oh, yes. A debt of gratitude...
*bows to the wotc ringlords in their ivory tower*
O Great Masters!
Oh thank you for trying to pull out the OGL from under us!
We owe you a debt of gratitude for the horrible treatment of your customer base!
We are grateful for the alleged lies proclaimed at last year's GenCon, and applaud your wanton and dispassionate (attempted) dismissal of 30+ years of history and tradition.
We are thankful for the way you've snubbed your nose at your own previous product, and the continued fans of 3.5.
We do not mind overlooking the fact that you've tried to monopolize the fantasy role play industry. Even though the OGL was the only proper way to share a genre you did not create and cannot claim to completely own, we humbly owe you a debt of gratitude for giving 3pp the so-called right to use what you cannot claim to own in the first place.
We ask this through, CWM, our "debt of gratitude Policeman."
[/sarcasm]
|
I think he is more right than wrong but I wonder where his company would be if he had to give back all of the profits made from the use of the OGL. I understand that both Green Ronin and WotC benefitted from the d20/OGL but frankly it seems a bit odd to say that Green Ronin owes them nothing. At the very least they owe them a debt of gratitude for making it possible to have the success that they have had.
First of all, She.
Second of all, don't judge her post by Joela's topic title.
Second of all, no they don't. Their success came from the quality of their work. There are several dozen second party publishing companies that attempted to hook onto the OGL/D20 liscence, produced crap, and folded. To say it would have been impossible for them to have been this sucessful without the OGL is speculative at best, and disingenous at worst. They're a great company who put out great products. Mutants and Masterminds, for example, divorced itself far enough away from the core OGL that it could have easily been released without it and still been successful. I would speculate that they would have been a great rival for White Wolf, for instance, if the OGL had never been.
|
|
To use a perhaps overachieving analogy, let's say a poet sits down to pen these lines:
No! I am not Prince Hamlet, nor was meant to be;
Am an attendant lord, one that will do
To swell a progress, start a scene or two,
Advise the prince; no doubt, an easy tool,
Deferential, glad to be of use,
Politic, cautious, and meticulous;
Full of high sentence, but a bit obtuse;
At times, indeed, almost ridiculous—
Almost, at times, the Fool.
It's absolutely true that this poem could not exist in its current form without Shakespeare. It is, however, equally true that the poet himself is a genius, whose works draw from those who inspired him while nevertheless remaining works of art in their own right.
Note: WotC is not Shakespeare (and neither was Oxford), and Green Ronin is not Eliot. As previously established, this is an analogy.
Green Ronin put out quality products that were solidly designed and solidly produced through their own efforts, not those of WotC or anybody else.
Second of all,
Second of all,<Slap!>
Ok, that's what I get for seconding twice.
Maybe it is like when you double twice in 3.x, you actually get triple not quadruple. ;)
What's the point of the discussion? Are people trying to say GR should support 4E because they made money off of 3E?
I would hope that is not the whole point.
Yea, I'm a little confused by this "debt of gratitude" that GR supposedly owes WotC. What is that? Is it not enought that they made products that supported the (then) current edition of D&D and helped (to some degree) sell more books? Now GR owes even more to WotC... I don't get it.
I thought the point of the OGL was that everybody helped everyone else. Let's look at the 3.0 release at GenCon. Green Ronin made more sales from Death in Freeport because WotC published 3.0. WotC made more sales of 3.0 since Green Ronin had the first adventure module available for 3.0. (I think I got that right)
It was supposed to be synergy thing where everyone benefitted and helped each other grow by doing what you do best. A socialist system so to speak. But after the market was re-born, WotC decided the wanted to own it. Hence the secrecy of 4.0 and the restrictiveness of the GSL.
I think the 'current' D&D market exists because of the mutual efforts of WotC and 3PPs. If anything WotC owes the 3PPs. (Just an opinion but I think more of us would have wondered without Paizo and people like Green Ronin.) But in the future, if WotC vastly expandeds the market and brings in new players WotC has the right to own the rewards. If WotC changes the market landscape they deserve to own 4.0. But if WotC just makes everyone fight over the same size pie, WotC deserves to get dog piled by the aggressive marketing and the creative efforts of the 3PPs.
Nice response. Those folks at Green Ronin kick ass.
Agreed! I've put off my purchase of the Modern and Future Player's Companions for far too long. Off to buy it now... I'll show my support with my wallet.
Yea, I'm a little confused by this "debt of gratitude" that GR supposedly owes WotC. What is that? Is it not enought that they made products that supported the (then) current edition of D&D and helped (to some degree) sell more books? Now GR owes even more to WotC... I don't get it.
Me either...
Do I owe a debt of gratitude to McDonald's for providing me with today's Big Mac? No, I traded legal tender for it. We entered into an agreement as soon as I placed my order and traded currency for the Big Mac.
Just because that Big Mac fueled my wonderous brain with energy does not mean I owe McDonald's anything extra for it!
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
What's the point of the discussion? Are people trying to say GR should support 4E because they made money off of 3E?
I would hope that is not the whole point.
Disclaimer:This post is intended as civil, polite disagreement. It welcomes any civil, polite response.
Well, at one point, the suggestion was that Green Ronin should think itself indebted to Wizards for the Open Gaming License.
I think he is more right than wrong but I wonder where his company would be if he had to give back all of the profits made from the use of the OGL. I understand that both Green Ronin and WotC benefitted from the d20/OGL but frankly it seems a bit odd to say that Green Ronin owes them nothing. At the very least they owe them a debt of gratitude for making it possible to have the success that they have had.
Hi, CrossWiredMind. I appreciate you taking the time to post a cogent, supported position, and I appreciate your tolerence with the were-idjits who turn into jerks when they see your posts. If it were me, I wouldn't be handling it with as much class.
It doesn't surprise me that you take this position, and it shouldn't surprise you that I disagree, because I think we have very different ideas about what Wizards was doing with the OGL.
I've seen people over on the WotC boards say that Wizards was doing 3rd party publishers a huge favor by "giving away" the SRD core d20 mechanics. I apologize if I've mischaracterized your position, but you seem to fall into that camp, too.
Green Ronin's Freeport line is a series of terrific adventures in an interesting setting. There's a market for it. If there weren't an OGL, as there wasn't during the 2nd Edition AD&D days, then GR might have done what publishers did pre-OGL, which is write a game system as well. And, just as gamers bought Castle Falkenstein and Deadlands and 7th Sea and Ars Magica, they would have bought a pirates-and-cultists "Freeport" RPG.
Ryan Dancey didn't push for an Open Gaming License because he wanted be nice to small game publishers. He pushed for an OGL so that everybody would be using the same core mechanics for their games, and those core mechanics would just happen to be D&D. This was intended to be good for everyone, including Wizards.
For example, a d20 "Freeport" campaign would not drain sales from D&D , but would rather reinforce the dominance of the d20 mechanics. Anybody who wanted to run a campaign in Freeport needed to buy D&D core books, and their next campaign was very likely to be a Wizards campaign setting.
You ask, "...where her company would be if she had to give back all of the profits made..." Give back? Give back to whom, the gamers who purchased them? Because they never got that money from Wizards.
What GR gave Wizards was a cadre of people who bought and ran, and who played, Freeport, and had a great time, and considered themselves "D&D players" instead of "Freeport RPG" players.
And GR doesn't think they can do that under the new GSL. So, you'll note, they're coming out with their own game system for Song of Ice and Fire.
|
|
[sarcasm]
Oh, yes. A debt of gratitude...*bows to the wotc ringlords in their ivory tower*
O Great Masters!
Oh thank you for trying to pull out the OGL from under us!
We owe you a debt of gratitude for the horrible treatment of your customer base!
We are grateful for the alleged lies proclaimed at last year's GenCon, and applaud your wanton and dispassionate (attempted) dismissal of 30+ years of history and tradition.
We are thankful for the way you've snubbed your nose at your own previous product, and the continued fans of 3.5.
We do not mind overlooking the fact that you've tried to monopolize the fantasy role play industry. Even though the OGL was the only proper way to share a genre you did not create and cannot claim to completely own, we humbly owe you a debt of gratitude for giving 3pp the so-called right to use what you cannot claim to own in the first place.We ask this through, CWM, our "debt of gratitude Policeman."
[/sarcasm]
Couldn't have said it better me'slf.
I seems that "THE WAR OF PUBLISHERS" has now began, and we'll probably see even more rivalry and childish comments throuwn evreywhere, and the prime targets will be the prime publishers.
|
|
I've seen people over on the WotC boards say that Wizards was doing 3rd party publishers a huge favor by "giving away" the SRD core d20 mechanics. I apologize if I've mischaracterized your position, but you seem to fall into that camp, too.
I certainly do not believe that Green Ronin or any successful d20/OGL publisher should be so beholden to WotC that they must publish under the GSL. In fact I do not think anyone should publish under the OGL unless they are willing to risk having the rug pulled out from under them. If anything they should only risk what they are willing to lose.
I believe that Green Ronin and other quality d20/OGL companies created their own success stories by producing quality games. But I also believe that the production of quality products is not in and to itself the sole driver of their success. Throughout the history of the gaming industry there have been some fantastic games that have died on the vine because they did not get the attention of the larger market.
The d20/OGL license gave a company like Green Ronin a huge stage and a bright spotlight for their work. Their stuff is amazing, so when they had the spotlight they really took off.
That is the crux of my point - Green Ronin provided the quality and WotC gave them center stage. If the d20/OGL license had never come about then Green Ronin would still be a great game company but they would have a far smaller niche and may have struggled just to get the side stage, or they may have ended up as an opening act to stretch the concert metaphor to its limit.
Ever hear of Midkemia press? They produced some amazing stuff Like Tulan of the Isles and the city of Carse. Chaosium picked their stuff up for a brief period but they were never in the limelight even though their products were top notch.
So I think Green Ronin should give credit where credit is due. Their success was a magical combination of quality products and open use of WotC's IP.
What's the point of the discussion? Are people trying to say GR should support 4E because they made money off of 3E?I would hope that is not the whole point.
On ENWorld, some people basically are saying just that. Or that GR owes it to those of their fans who are switching to 4e to support their system of choice.
On ENWorld, some people basically are saying just that. Or that GR owes it to those of their fans who are switching to 4e to support their system of choice.What's the point of the discussion? Are people trying to say GR should support 4E because they made money off of 3E?I would hope that is not the whole point.
Saying that "GR should support 4E because they made money off of 3E" and saying that "GR owes it to those of their fans who are switching to 4e to support their system of choice" are two totally different things.
For supposedly being one of the smartest subsets of society, some of the ridiculous leaps in logic I see among us (i.e., gamers) really makes me wonder sometimes.
|
|
Do I owe a debt of gratitude to McDonald's for providing me with today's Big Mac? No, I traded legal tender for it. We entered into an agreement as soon as I placed my order and traded currency for the Big Mac.Just because that Big Mac fueled my wonderous brain with energy does not mean I owe McDonald's anything extra for it!
WAYYY off topic: I have the same opinion when people tell me that it is rude to put seasonings on your food before tasting it at a fancy restaurant. Rude to who? The cook? As far as I remember, I am paying for the meal, so I can do what I want!
Getting back to the issue at hand, in a way I agree with CWM: the 3pps did benefit from the OGL (but as Chris pointed out, so did Wizards).
I find the whole argument somewhat confusing, since it is ridiculous to demand that all the 3pps collectively thank Wizards for the OGL. As far as I know, that clause was not part of the OGL, so they don't have to do anything. That said, if someone (like Green Ronin) were to issue a public statement about the OGL (read: OP), it might be a bit more favorable if they did directly say "The OGL was good for everyone, especially us."
|
|
That said, if someone (like Green Ronin) were to issue a public statement about the OGL (read: OP), it might be a bit more favorable if they did directly say "The OGL was good for everyone, especially us."Yep. That is the heart of it.
You mean like:
Make no mistake, we certainly benefited from the license and will never deny the impact that d20 had on the direction of our companyWe helped manufacture support for WotC's business according to the plan they offered and by doing so we received exposure for our company; it was a mutually beneficial relationship.
Which she wrote in refutation of the following concepts:
we "wouldn't exist if not for the OGL."
we "owe our success" to it.
a "betrayal"
If you read Nichole's statement without the "benefit" of Joela's misleading Thread Title, you'll see she's already stated these things.
|
|
You mean like:
Make no mistake, we certainly benefited from the license and will never deny the impact that d20 had on the direction of our companyWe helped manufacture support for WotC's business according to the plan they offered and by doing so we received exposure for our company; it was a mutually beneficial relationship.
To be fair, saying "we benefitted" and "will never deny the impact" and "mutually beneficial" is not the same as saying "The OGL was great for the industry, and thanks to Wizards and their forthought of releasing a brilliant new strategy in RPG gaming, we have all the great games we have based on d20."
To be clear, I am not suggesting GR needed to say exactly this, just that it might make them look better to some people if they did.
|
|
To be fair, saying "we benefitted" and "will never deny the impact" and "mutually beneficial" is not the same as saying "The OGL was great for the industry, and thanks to Wizards and their forthought of releasing a brilliant new strategy in RPG gaming, we have all the great games we have based on d20."
To be clear, I am not suggesting GR needed to say exactly this, just that it might make them look better to some people if they did.
Sounds fairly arogant if you ask me.
|
|
To be fair, saying "we benefitted" and "will never deny the impact" and "mutually beneficial" is not the same as saying "The OGL was great for the industry, and thanks to Wizards and their forthought of releasing a brilliant new strategy in RPG gaming, we have all the great games we have based on d20."
To be clear, I am not suggesting GR needed to say exactly this, just that it might make them look better to some people if they did.
Sounds fairly arogant if you ask me.
I understand that the statements made in the OP were done in defense of criticism of GR - and I completely agree with their entire statement, it is their company and they forged their own destiny.
What I am suggesting is that when it comes to addressing the OGL itself, GR could be more clear about what they mean by "benefitted" (sales, recognition, fanbase?) and "impact" (good, bad, notorious?)
I don't think it is arrogant to suggest a company explain itself to people who are asking.
EDIT: Sorry, Callous, but did you mean my whole post or just the wording of my suggested statement?
|
|
What I am suggesting is that when it comes to addressing the OGL itself, GR could be more clear about what they mean by "benefitted" (sales, recognition, fanbase?) and "impact" (good, bad, notorious?)
I just think GR has been fairly clear that the OGL was a good thing for them and they've publicly expressed that. For bitter fanboys to "require" anything further is arrogant and completely unnecessry. I throw those guys in the same category of the irrational 4E haters who hold a grudge against WotC.
(Btw, Jal I am not calling you a bitter fanboy as you seem to be more of the devil's advocate.)|
|
What I am suggesting is that when it comes to addressing the OGL itself, GR could be more clear about what they mean by "benefitted" (sales, recognition, fanbase?) and "impact" (good, bad, notorious?)
I just think GR has been fairly clear that the OGL was a good thing for them and they've publicly expressed that. For bitter fanboys to "require" anything further is arrogant and completely unnecessry. I throw those guys in the same category of the irrational 4E haters who hold a grudge against WotC.
(Btw, Jal I am not calling you a bitter fanboy as you seem to be more of the devil's advocate.)
I totally understand your position. I am definitely playing devil's advocate here (but I did say that nothing should be "required" of them). Your arguments about people's expectations are equally valid.
Overall, their response was professional and business-oriented, which accounts for the rather dry feel to it. If they came out with a slavering endorsement of the OGL, that would be a bit innocuous.
|
|
Well if their Song of Ice and Fire Roleplaying system takes off, maybe they could sever their tie to anything d20/ogl and strive on their own.
I read the playstart booklet and I think this system has promise.
Shameless Plug:
I did playtesting for ASOIF RPG and let me tell you this Game kicks bum!
It is tailor made for G.R.R. Martins world but if you are looking for a system that favors grim and gritty very realistic gameplay than this one is for you!
Yup. I got a copy at Free RPG day, and really liked the Intrigue rules. I hope they do forward the timeline though so you can play in the Civil War.
On ENWorld, some people basically are saying just that. Or that GR owes it to those of their fans who are switching to 4e to support their system of choice.What's the point of the discussion? Are people trying to say GR should support 4E because they made money off of 3E?I would hope that is not the whole point.Saying that "GR should support 4E because they made money off of 3E" and saying that "GR owes it to those of their fans who are switching to 4e to support their system of choice" are two totally different things.
For supposedly being one of the smartest subsets of society, some of the ridiculous leaps in logic I see among us (i.e., gamers) really makes me wonder sometimes.
You are correct that they're two different statements. They're both equally stupid, and I pointed out that versions of both are being thrown around in the ENWorld thread the OP quoted from.
I think what is happening here is that the so called edtion wars dust is starting to settle. And like any war there aren't winners, just surviors.
Pro 4th ers assumed because they didn't like 3rd for whatever reason, that everyone else would not like 3rd and/or that publishers would see 4th as a better money making option. Sadly whatever side of the wars you fall on, the GSL simply makes supporting 4th ed. risky at best. Pro-4thers are howling because the companies that produced some of the best material, better then Wizards core stuff, are not all going to 4th.
This is very bad news for 4th ed. I would say that most, 70% of the best 3.x material came from 3PP because it kept itself in balance with core books, while Wizards began Powercreep and shiny new toys to play with that tried to outclass 3PP material, while there own style (which others call fluff) simply fell short. Not to mention edt. problems not seeming to even know there own system. I don't see this changeing with 4th, though I could be wrong. Like I said bad news but not Doomsday. The name will hold 4th up, and they do have Goodman, Necro (some support) and even Kingdoms of Kalamar supporting 4th. I even heard that Mongoose will do some 4th stuff. Good companies to have supporting your system.
Meanwhile 3rd ed., or 3.P has taken a life of its own, and found multiple homes, True 20, Conan, Pathfinder. 3.X has lost its core (DnD proper) but it lives. Hopefully Pathfinder will replace that core but in either case 3.X mechanics live. And a lot of the best RPG companies are supporting it in various ways. Those wanting 4th ed. materials feel they have been backstabbed by this. It makes little sense as Wizards 3rd ed. wouldn't have been so widely played without 3pp, and those compines wouldn't have had the opptunity to become known for there quality of work had they not had OGL. Both sides got benifits and both sides have walked away from each other with mutual reward.
Simply put 4thers are feeling the same thing 3rd ed. lovers felt when all this started, we're are going to lose all the companies that produced all the best work to 4th. Well now 4thers have lost some of the companies that produced the best work. And my gut tells me the work 3pp put into 4th will be so restricted, or that the publishers will tread so carefully that they will not be as dareing and experimental as before. Thus Wizards will find themselves the biggest fish in a very lonely pool. They will have to do all the S*** work to support 4th themsleves. Please don't missunderstand, they'll be just fine for the computer D'n'D game when it comes out in 2010 and ends D'n'D as pen and paper forever, I don't think anyone will beat them.
Thankfully to roll a natural 20, Paizo, GR, Mongoose and the rest don't have to beat them, they simply have to gain a part of the market, which I think they have very nicely.
I agree that Green Ronin or any 3PP producer owes anything to WotC, but I would also say that WotC doesn't owe anything to them as well. Both groups made decisions in order to make products they wished and to make money.
As someone who's 3.x library is 2/3 WotC products and the 1/3 that is not has been purchased within the last year or two (when the 3PP have been getting to a price I deem reasonable for 3PP products), I don't think the loss of several big name 3PP is going to hurt alot of sales for 4e.
Frankly, you either like the system or not, the lack of some 3PP writing a module for it or not is not going to be the decisive factor (as all the comments from Paizo fans going to 4e and ending their subscriptions can attest to). Having a greater selection of extra products for a system is just the cherry on the top.
I myself was a bit miffed at the GSL at first. But as I have purchased and seen more 3PP stuff, I have a better understanding why it has come about. And I realized the biggest thing about what they are doing that would annoy me as a player (if I ever bothered to become a 4e player) is the lack of a real SRD. I use online versions of the 3.5 one at least once a day on average, and the lack of access to detailed rules like that would annoy me. I realized I've gotten spoiled, but hey I deserve it. :P
|
|
And I realized the biggest thing about what they are doing that would annoy me as a player (if I ever bothered to become a 4e player) is the lack of a real SRD. I use online versions of the 3.5 one at least once a day on average, and the lack of access to detailed rules like that would annoy me. I realized I've gotten spoiled, but hey I deserve it. :P
[tinfoil hat]Perhaps the biggest reason for the GSL was to avoid the whole "online SRD resource" that in many ways circumvents having to purchase the core books.
Now, you have to buy the core books AND pay for DDI to get the equivalent of the SRD in the "DDI Compendium".[/tinfoil hat]
Hmm. On second thought, maybe I don't need the tinfoil - it sounds pretty reasonable that Wizards would actually form this opinion from a business perspective.
[tinfoil hat]Perhaps the biggest reason for the GSL was to avoid the whole "online SRD resource" that in many ways circumvents having to purchase the core books.
Now, you have to buy the core books AND pay for DDI to get the equivalent of the SRD in the "DDI Compendium".[/tinfoil hat]
Hmm. On second thought, maybe I don't need the tinfoil - it sounds pretty reasonable that Wizards would actually form this opinion from a business perspective.
Agreed. The day after 4E released there were people asking, "Where's the 4E SRD? I want to play 4E, but I don't want to buy the books."
Agreed. The day after 4E released there were people asking, "Where's the 4E SRD? I want to play 4E, but I don't want to buy the books."[tinfoil hat]Perhaps the biggest reason for the GSL was to avoid the whole "online SRD resource" that in many ways circumvents having to purchase the core books.
Now, you have to buy the core books AND pay for DDI to get the equivalent of the SRD in the "DDI Compendium".[/tinfoil hat]
Hmm. On second thought, maybe I don't need the tinfoil - it sounds pretty reasonable that Wizards would actually form this opinion from a business perspective.
Mongoose put out a similar type of SRD for Traveller, except alot more publisher friendly. It didn't list all the various careers; it listed how a publisher could make their own. It didn't list aliens; it listed various types of adventages/disadvantages an alien race could have, allowing a publisher to make their own. They did all that with the OGL.
The "online SRD resource" and having publishers copy large sections wholesale is just an excuse and nothing more then an excuse to exert tighter control 3PPs and eventually force them out when 5E gets rolled out.
|
|
I don't think the loss of several big name 3PP is going to hurt alot of sales for 4e.
Frankly, you either like the system or not, the lack of some 3PP writing a module for it or not is not going to be the decisive factor (as all the comments from Paizo fans going to 4e and ending their subscriptions can attest to). Having a greater selection of extra products for a system is just the cherry on the top.
*shrug* It wont now, since 4e is the shiney new toy on the block. But what about 2 years from now? Three, four? Once the trickle of core items they held back from 3.X is finally introduced, then what?
Maybe we're unique, but maybe not, but alot of third party items have lit fires were WOTC's stuff? Its been pretty uninspiring for the most part. Dont get me wrong, there are gems-Bo9S, red hand of doom, and others. But lets face it: Wotc is terrible at writing adventures, as the AP and the last two arent that good.
3PP have a different perspective, and more ideas are good. You'd think they'd want the top teirs on their side, rather than "against" them, so to speak.
I myself was a bit miffed at the GSL at first. But as I have purchased and seen more 3PP stuff, I have a better understanding why it has come about. And I realized the biggest thing about what they are doing that would annoy me as a player (if I ever bothered to become a 4e player) is the lack of a real SRD. I use online versions of the 3.5 one at least once a day on average, and the lack of access to detailed rules like that would annoy me. I realized I've gotten spoiled, but hey I deserve it. :P
Why do you think it came about, I'm curious as to your reason.
*shrug* It wont now, since 4e is the shiney new toy on the block. But what about 2 years from now? Three, four? Once the trickle of core items they held back from 3.X is finally introduced, then what?
In a few years it will be more clear whether people like the core system or not, even more than now. It doesn't matter how good the support material is if the core material sucks big huevos. You either like the core and then are open to finding support material for it or you think the core sucks and it doesn't matter how good the support material is.
Why do you think it came about, I'm curious as to your reason.
Why did the GSL come about? I think it was an overreaction response to what 3PP were doing. 3PP would make their own game systems and game products for them and claimed they was compatible with "The most popular roleplaying system", i.e. D&D, but they weren't really (convertible perhaps but not compatible). This causes frustration from consumers, it also sets these 3PP in direct competition with WotC for the purchase of core rules. So I think it came about for two main reasons, 1) to ensure that when something said it was compatible with D&D 4e it actually was and 2) to try to discourage other companies from coming up with their own version of 4e-ish system and competing against WotC for the core books.
Agreed. The day after 4E released there were people asking, "Where's the 4E SRD? I want to play 4E, but I don't want to buy the books."
However, who's to say that these people aren't going to just pirate copies of the 4E books off some source anyway? I find the online SRD a phenomenal resource. I use it and my hardcopy PH and other books frequently. Sometimes at the same time. I still bring the hardcopies to the game table. So does everyone else that I know except for a tiny handful of laptop users - and they have everything on pdf.
|
|
Why did the GSL come about? I think it was an overreaction response to what 3PP were doing. 3PP would make their own game systems and game products for them and claimed they was compatible with "The most popular roleplaying system", i.e. D&D, but they weren't really (convertible perhaps but not compatible). This causes frustration from consumers, it also sets these 3PP in direct competition with WotC for the purchase of core rules. So I think it came about for two main reasons, 1) to ensure that when something said it was compatible with D&D 4e it actually was and 2) to try to discourage other companies from coming up with their own version of 4e-ish system and competing against WotC for the core books.
The ironic thing is, I think the crafters of the OGL understood this would happen. They wanted the 3pp to create games that were similar enough to D&D that it would encourage growth in the entire industry.
"Hey, wanna play M&M?"
"I don't know, what kind of game is it?"
"It's like D&D only with superheroes, and it uses the same mechanics."
"Sounds good, let's try it."
The thinking being, more people playing games is more money for the industry as a whole. If GR is successful with M&M, they can make more quality D&D products. Everyone knows that D&D is the gateway RPG; by allowing people to base their games off of D&D, you are just accomodating gamers behaviour and making it a lot easier to find a game to play in.