4E and GSL Fracturing the Gaming Community - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

4E and GSL Fracturing the Gaming Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
thecasualoblivion
Apr 19, 2008 22:01:59 I'm just going to list some comments, questions, and musings and not argue any of them for this:

1. Will the novelty of 4E and the restrictions of the GSL fracture the d20 gaming community?
2. Was the viability of OGL based gaming systems due to the merits of the system in question, or its existence as an alternate ruleset to core D&D, and does a change in what core D&D is affect this?
3. What effect will the success of 4E have on OGL based gaming?
4. Is a restricted GSL better or worse than no GSL at all for open gaming?
5. Hypothetically, what effect would 4E being a runaway success have on established OGL based systems if the GSL were taken out of the equation?
6. How much more valuable to a 3rd party company is the ability to put a D&D compatible logo on a product compared to a d20/OGL logo?
7. What effect does the d20/D&D shakeup have on non d20/D&D systems?
#2
LFK
Apr 20, 2008 0:11:23
1. Will the novelty of 4E and the restrictions of the GSL fracture the d20 gaming community?
2. Was the viability of OGL based gaming systems due to the merits of the system in question, or its existence as an alternate ruleset to core D&D, and does a change in what core D&D is affect this?
3. What effect will the success of 4E have on OGL based gaming?
4. Is a restricted GSL better or worse than no GSL at all for open gaming?
5. Hypothetically, what effect would 4E being a runaway success have on established OGL based systems if the GSL were taken out of the equation?
6. How much more valuable to a 3rd party company is the ability to put a D&D compatible logo on a product compared to a d20/OGL logo?
7. What effect does the d20/D&D shakeup have on non d20/D&D systems?

I'm going to ramble for a bit and hope that I get some answers woven in and out here.

The OGL was a brilliant move, a worthy (if strange) experiment. It became immensely successful (in an overall scope) thanks in part to its accessibility to publishers and part due to the strength of the system itself. That said some of its overall successes are direct failures to the intent of the OGL. I think the hobby as a whole is better off with the presence of many of the d20 products that were created as a result of the holes in the OGL, but I don't blame WotC for wanting to close some of those holes back up.

I think a good way to evaluate this is to look at the pros and cons of a specific example.

Conan. If Conan is currently successful enough as a standalone product under the OGL then Conan's publishers have no compelling reason to switch to the GSL. They can continue to make supplements for Conan and, essentially, go their own way, so long and thanks for all the fish kinda thing. If, however, Conan's publishers largely supplement their revenue with D&D products and wish to continue to do so they would have to switch to the GSL and then they would no longer be able to produce Conan as a stand-alone product. Conan would need to be updated to the GSL (4e rules) and would become a Campaign Setting for 4e rather than remain its own game.

The GSL does not forbid the creation of new classes or the wholesale restructuring of the fluff, but is designed to prevent 3rd party publishers from creating their own PHBs. From the breakdown currently on EN World I think, from a business perspective, it's pretty fair. There's still a lot of flexibility in there for creative uses of the game system, just with the caveat that it requires the 4e PHB to use.

To many that sounds a little draconian, but conventional business wisdom wouldn't allow anything resembling the OGL or GSL to exist in the first place. The GSL is definitely more restrictive than the OGL was, but I still think its presence will be a good thing on the whole.

Lastly, personal opinion, I think being able to put the "D&D Compatible" logo on a product is more valuable than the d20 logo was (and the d20 logo was very valuable.) When the OGL was first announced I was under the impression that it would allow, finally, a sort of grand-unification of gaming, where we could finally settle disputes about who would win: a Sailor Scout, a Klingon with a Bat'leth, a Beholder, or a Jedi. All teenage crossover fantasies, no matter how horrible, could be played out in basements everywhere by bringing together the right books. Now my adult mind finds the concept of that fight equally sickening and awesome, but the GSL is definitely doing what I perceived the intent of the OGL was 8 years ago.
#3
strand0
Apr 21, 2008 12:47:58 Funny you should ask when I get this e-mail:
With all the recent changes due to the release of 4e, the GSL and the OGL, we here at Louis Porter Jr. Design have decided to create an all new OGL 3.5 logo which can be used by any and all 3rd party publisher, completely and absolutely free of charge, with any of their products that initial had the d20 logo or was OGL created material.

The reason for this new OGL 3.5 logo; beyond the obvious loss of the use of the d20 logo; is to unify those companies who still wish to support the 3.5 OGL rule set. This logo easily brands and makes d20 and OGL material easy to identify with this logo so people can tell on sight what gaming system they are supporting. The initial concept of the OGL was to make the gaming industry stronger by making it possible for more people to create and make products to support the concepts of the OGL. With the changes in 4e and the GSL, and the recent comments by Linae Foster and Scott Rouse of that you can only make products for either the OGL or the new GSL, this is no longer the case. And with those actions have caused the creation of this new OGL 3.5 logo.

This logo has bee created in several graphic formats including Adobe Acrobat, Adobe Illustrator, Adobe Illustrator EPS, Adobe Photoshop, Adobe Photoshop JPEG and TIFF. Each of these formats comes with three different versions: color, Grayscale and Black and White. A complete zip file containing all these logos can be downloaded directly from this link: http://lpjdesign.rpgnow.com/product_info.php?cPath=1308&products_id=55437

We hope that any and all 3rd party publishers who stick with OGL 3.5 will use and support this initiative. A lot of customers gave us their hard earned money and supported us; I think it is only fair that we return the favor to them. This isn’t the first time David has gone after Goliath and attempted something amazing. Thank you for this support!

So some will see fracture'n as a good thing.
OR at least useful in the short term. ;)
#4
elibus
Apr 21, 2008 13:00:11
I'm just going to list some comments, questions, and musings and not argue any of them for this:

1. Will the novelty of 4E and the restrictions of the GSL fracture the d20 gaming community?
2. Was the viability of OGL based gaming systems due to the merits of the system in question, or its existence as an alternate ruleset to core D&D, and does a change in what core D&D is affect this?
3. What effect will the success of 4E have on OGL based gaming?
4. Is a restricted GSL better or worse than no GSL at all for open gaming?
5. Hypothetically, what effect would 4E being a runaway success have on established OGL based systems if the GSL were taken out of the equation?
6. How much more valuable to a 3rd party company is the ability to put a D&D compatible logo on a product compared to a d20/OGL logo?
7. What effect does the d20/D&D shakeup have on non d20/D&D systems?

to add a third party to the fracturing, i personally don't care whether DnD has an OGL or not. there wasn't one until 3.x, and aside from a couple of splat books, i never bought any when the OGL was in effect. from my point of view the OGL is a privledge. it seems to me that alot of people seem to think that WotC are required to have an OGL. this false sense of entitlement is rather irritating to me. the OGL is a gift the WotC gave with 3.x. who the hell do some people think they are to feel entitled to a free license for a gaming system that took millions to put together. i know that many companies sprouted up b/c of the OGL and they would probably end up going out of business, but such is life. it is unfortunate, but acceptable. many people should be rather happy that the decision to have an OGL is not mine to make. b/c whether i thought it was a good idea or not, the flavor of a lot of peoples ideas on the matter repulse me and i would say "no" simply to give them the finger.
#5
arderkrag
Apr 21, 2008 13:02:17
I'm just going to list some comments, questions, and musings and not argue any of them for this:

1. Will the novelty of 4E and the restrictions of the GSL fracture the d20 gaming community?

No.
2. Was the viability of OGL based gaming systems due to the merits of the system in question, or its existence as an alternate ruleset to core D&D, and does a change in what core D&D is affect this?

Merits of the system. If the games are worthy, they will last under the OGL after the change.
3. What effect will the success of 4E have on OGL based gaming?

Some. Are you asking about alternate games, or supplements? Two different ball games.
4. Is a restricted GSL better or worse than no GSL at all for open gaming?

Better.
5. Hypothetically, what effect would 4E being a runaway success have on established OGL based systems if the GSL were taken out of the equation?

About the same that it will have anyway.
6. How much more valuable to a 3rd party company is the ability to put a D&D compatible logo on a product compared to a d20/OGL logo?

Much more.
7. What effect does the d20/D&D shakeup have on non d20/D&D systems?

Which shake-up, specifically?

A lot of your questions are kind of nebulous. Try nailing down your angles better.
#6
gamileo
Apr 21, 2008 13:19:04 1. 4E won't be novel very long, GSL will be used, and people will get used to it.
2. OGL was viable because 3E was a good product, GSL will be viable because 4E will be a good product.
3. Don't know yet, haven't seen the official GSL to determine what will happen with OGL. Original Gangster License.
4. Restricted is better than none.
5. 4E being a runaway success will draw more from the 3E crowd after their friends or retailers start crowing about it. If it is just ok, then there will be a 3E crowd and support much longer.
6. Depends on if 4E is a smash, if it is then it is more valuable. Also people buy sometimes for image and current vogue trends.
7. If 4E fails the non d20 games will flourish, if it succeeds they will maintain status quo.

My opinions of course.
#7
grimachu
Apr 21, 2008 14:37:31 1. Yes, unless there's a climbdown from what the GSL is being taken to say. If it's more relaxed than has been bandied about there'll likely be a smoother transition to 4th Edition.

2. There are multiple OGL systems, they're not all D&D derived by any stretch. The OGL movement worked because gaming is a hobby and people like to tinker and self publish. An open source movement readily taps into that.

3. See 1.

4. No GSL at all would be better IF it's as restricted as is said. Everyone would know where they stood and we'd either see continued 3.5 support or a renaissance in tailored systems.

5. No real way to tell.

6. Can't speak for most, for me it's not really worth anything at all.

7. Given the current strife it would probably aid them. Non-d20 OGL systems may have issues, we'll have to see.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 thecasualoblivion Apr 19, 2008 22:01:59	I'm just going to list some comments, questions, and musings and not argue any of them for this: 1. Will the novelty of 4E and the restrictions of the GSL fracture the d20 gaming community? 2. Was the viability of OGL based gaming systems due to the merits of the system in question, or its existence as an alternate ruleset to core D&D, and does a change in what core D&D is affect this? 3. What effect will the success of 4E have on OGL based gaming? 4. Is a restricted GSL better or worse than no GSL at all for open gaming? 5. Hypothetically, what effect would 4E being a runaway success have on established OGL based systems if the GSL were taken out of the equation? 6. How much more valuable to a 3rd party company is the ability to put a D&D compatible logo on a product compared to a d20/OGL logo? 7. What effect does the d20/D&D shakeup have on non d20/D&D systems?
#2 LFK Apr 20, 2008 0:11:23	1. Will the novelty of 4E and the restrictions of the GSL fracture the d20 gaming community? 2. Was the viability of OGL based gaming systems due to the merits of the system in question, or its existence as an alternate ruleset to core D&D, and does a change in what core D&D is affect this? 3. What effect will the success of 4E have on OGL based gaming? 4. Is a restricted GSL better or worse than no GSL at all for open gaming? 5. Hypothetically, what effect would 4E being a runaway success have on established OGL based systems if the GSL were taken out of the equation? 6. How much more valuable to a 3rd party company is the ability to put a D&D compatible logo on a product compared to a d20/OGL logo? 7. What effect does the d20/D&D shakeup have on non d20/D&D systems? I'm going to ramble for a bit and hope that I get some answers woven in and out here. The OGL was a brilliant move, a worthy (if strange) experiment. It became immensely successful (in an overall scope) thanks in part to its accessibility to publishers and part due to the strength of the system itself. That said some of its overall successes are direct failures to the intent of the OGL. I think the hobby as a whole is better off with the presence of many of the d20 products that were created as a result of the holes in the OGL, but I don't blame WotC for wanting to close some of those holes back up. I think a good way to evaluate this is to look at the pros and cons of a specific example. Conan. If Conan is currently successful enough as a standalone product under the OGL then Conan's publishers have no compelling reason to switch to the GSL. They can continue to make supplements for Conan and, essentially, go their own way, so long and thanks for all the fish kinda thing. If, however, Conan's publishers largely supplement their revenue with D&D products and wish to continue to do so they would have to switch to the GSL and then they would no longer be able to produce Conan as a stand-alone product. Conan would need to be updated to the GSL (4e rules) and would become a Campaign Setting for 4e rather than remain its own game. The GSL does not forbid the creation of new classes or the wholesale restructuring of the fluff, but is designed to prevent 3rd party publishers from creating their own PHBs. From the breakdown currently on EN World I think, from a business perspective, it's pretty fair. There's still a lot of flexibility in there for creative uses of the game system, just with the caveat that it requires the 4e PHB to use. To many that sounds a little draconian, but conventional business wisdom wouldn't allow anything resembling the OGL or GSL to exist in the first place. The GSL is definitely more restrictive than the OGL was, but I still think its presence will be a good thing on the whole. Lastly, personal opinion, I think being able to put the "D&D Compatible" logo on a product is more valuable than the d20 logo was (and the d20 logo was very valuable.) When the OGL was first announced I was under the impression that it would allow, finally, a sort of grand-unification of gaming, where we could finally settle disputes about who would win: a Sailor Scout, a Klingon with a Bat'leth, a Beholder, or a Jedi. All teenage crossover fantasies, no matter how horrible, could be played out in basements everywhere by bringing together the right books. Now my adult mind finds the concept of that fight equally sickening and awesome, but the GSL is definitely doing what I perceived the intent of the OGL was 8 years ago.
#3 strand0 Apr 21, 2008 12:47:58	Funny you should ask when I get this e-mail: With all the recent changes due to the release of 4e, the GSL and the OGL, we here at Louis Porter Jr. Design have decided to create an all new OGL 3.5 logo which can be used by any and all 3rd party publisher, completely and absolutely free of charge, with any of their products that initial had the d20 logo or was OGL created material. The reason for this new OGL 3.5 logo; beyond the obvious loss of the use of the d20 logo; is to unify those companies who still wish to support the 3.5 OGL rule set. This logo easily brands and makes d20 and OGL material easy to identify with this logo so people can tell on sight what gaming system they are supporting. The initial concept of the OGL was to make the gaming industry stronger by making it possible for more people to create and make products to support the concepts of the OGL. With the changes in 4e and the GSL, and the recent comments by Linae Foster and Scott Rouse of that you can only make products for either the OGL or the new GSL, this is no longer the case. And with those actions have caused the creation of this new OGL 3.5 logo. This logo has bee created in several graphic formats including Adobe Acrobat, Adobe Illustrator, Adobe Illustrator EPS, Adobe Photoshop, Adobe Photoshop JPEG and TIFF. Each of these formats comes with three different versions: color, Grayscale and Black and White. A complete zip file containing all these logos can be downloaded directly from this link: http://lpjdesign.rpgnow.com/product_info.php?cPath=1308&products_id=55437 We hope that any and all 3rd party publishers who stick with OGL 3.5 will use and support this initiative. A lot of customers gave us their hard earned money and supported us; I think it is only fair that we return the favor to them. This isn’t the first time David has gone after Goliath and attempted something amazing. Thank you for this support! So some will see fracture'n as a good thing. OR at least useful in the short term. ;)
#4 elibus Apr 21, 2008 13:00:11	I'm just going to list some comments, questions, and musings and not argue any of them for this: 1. Will the novelty of 4E and the restrictions of the GSL fracture the d20 gaming community? 2. Was the viability of OGL based gaming systems due to the merits of the system in question, or its existence as an alternate ruleset to core D&D, and does a change in what core D&D is affect this? 3. What effect will the success of 4E have on OGL based gaming? 4. Is a restricted GSL better or worse than no GSL at all for open gaming? 5. Hypothetically, what effect would 4E being a runaway success have on established OGL based systems if the GSL were taken out of the equation? 6. How much more valuable to a 3rd party company is the ability to put a D&D compatible logo on a product compared to a d20/OGL logo? 7. What effect does the d20/D&D shakeup have on non d20/D&D systems? to add a third party to the fracturing, i personally don't care whether DnD has an OGL or not. there wasn't one until 3.x, and aside from a couple of splat books, i never bought any when the OGL was in effect. from my point of view the OGL is a privledge. it seems to me that alot of people seem to think that WotC are required to have an OGL. this false sense of entitlement is rather irritating to me. the OGL is a gift the WotC gave with 3.x. who the hell do some people think they are to feel entitled to a free license for a gaming system that took millions to put together. i know that many companies sprouted up b/c of the OGL and they would probably end up going out of business, but such is life. it is unfortunate, but acceptable. many people should be rather happy that the decision to have an OGL is not mine to make. b/c whether i thought it was a good idea or not, the flavor of a lot of peoples ideas on the matter repulse me and i would say "no" simply to give them the finger.
#5 arderkrag Apr 21, 2008 13:02:17	I'm just going to list some comments, questions, and musings and not argue any of them for this: 1. Will the novelty of 4E and the restrictions of the GSL fracture the d20 gaming community? No. 2. Was the viability of OGL based gaming systems due to the merits of the system in question, or its existence as an alternate ruleset to core D&D, and does a change in what core D&D is affect this? Merits of the system. If the games are worthy, they will last under the OGL after the change. 3. What effect will the success of 4E have on OGL based gaming? Some. Are you asking about alternate games, or supplements? Two different ball games. 4. Is a restricted GSL better or worse than no GSL at all for open gaming? Better. 5. Hypothetically, what effect would 4E being a runaway success have on established OGL based systems if the GSL were taken out of the equation? About the same that it will have anyway. 6. How much more valuable to a 3rd party company is the ability to put a D&D compatible logo on a product compared to a d20/OGL logo? Much more. 7. What effect does the d20/D&D shakeup have on non d20/D&D systems? Which shake-up, specifically? A lot of your questions are kind of nebulous. Try nailing down your angles better.
#6 gamileo Apr 21, 2008 13:19:04	1. 4E won't be novel very long, GSL will be used, and people will get used to it. 2. OGL was viable because 3E was a good product, GSL will be viable because 4E will be a good product. 3. Don't know yet, haven't seen the official GSL to determine what will happen with OGL. Original Gangster License. 4. Restricted is better than none. 5. 4E being a runaway success will draw more from the 3E crowd after their friends or retailers start crowing about it. If it is just ok, then there will be a 3E crowd and support much longer. 6. Depends on if 4E is a smash, if it is then it is more valuable. Also people buy sometimes for image and current vogue trends. 7. If 4E fails the non d20 games will flourish, if it succeeds they will maintain status quo. My opinions of course.
#7 grimachu Apr 21, 2008 14:37:31	1. Yes, unless there's a climbdown from what the GSL is being taken to say. If it's more relaxed than has been bandied about there'll likely be a smoother transition to 4th Edition. 2. There are multiple OGL systems, they're not all D&D derived by any stretch. The OGL movement worked because gaming is a hobby and people like to tinker and self publish. An open source movement readily taps into that. 3. See 1. 4. No GSL at all would be better IF it's as restricted as is said. Everyone would know where they stood and we'd either see continued 3.5 support or a renaissance in tailored systems. 5. No real way to tell. 6. Can't speak for most, for me it's not really worth anything at all. 7. Given the current strife it would probably aid them. Non-d20 OGL systems may have issues, we'll have to see.