...in any way, it seems. (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=975808)
That, I'm thinking, will cause a bit of a stink.
EDIT: ENWorld's got a thread going on it, too (http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=216025&page=1&pp=30).
Very interesting. I suspect that the basic effect of this will not be more sales, but far more piracy being generated.
RPGPundit
My sense of it right now is that the new direction is to specifically encourage people writing adventures and modules (with perhaps some modular content--i.e feats, spells, races, monsters..) and not new rules systems or entire derivative game systems.
Yeah, Abyssal, I often wondered if WOTC cringed when something like True20 dropped. Cause then a consumer could run 'D&D' with nothing but third party products.
If that's the case, you'll quickly see a legal version of 4e rules using the OGL 1.0. I suspect Bradford's right about that one.
Quote from: Abyssal MawMy sense of it right now is that the new direction is to specifically encourage people writing adventures and modules (with perhaps some modular content--i.e feats, spells, races, monsters..) and not new rules systems or entire derivative game systems.
That's how they wanted the 3.0 OGL to happen, but it didn't work out that way. It looks like they're trying to put the genie back in the bottle, but I think they'll fail at doing it, what with the 1.0 OGL still being intact.
Yeah, that's what I'm thinking. Exactly how do they intend to stop people refitting 4E rules to fit the 3.X OGL?
It would entail completely rewriting the rules in question - you might not be able to patent game rules, but you still own the copyright on a particular presentation of them - but given that we keep being reassured that 4E is "still a D20 game" would it really be that difficult?
I know several people who played in mostly online games that never bought any of the core books because they could use the SRD. You miss out on a few things, but can get those easily enough by asking politely on a message board.
In that respect at least, having the SRD be a near complete replacement cost WotC money. I have no idea how much money, but it seems like it was enough to trigger a change with 4e.
Quote from: Sacrificial LambIf that's the case, you'll quickly see a legal version of 4e rules using the OGL 1.0. I suspect Bradford's right about that one.
I think so, too.
The OGL is permission by WoTC to use text that is copyrighted by them. This permission has conditions and limitation most notably that you must give others the same permission as WoTC give you.
Reading through the various comments on Enworld and WoTC does not leave me with a good feeling about this.
First and most weird is the idea the SRD is going to be an index to the main books as to what text can be incorporated into a product.
Soo..... what to stop somebody from incorporating all the allowed text into a product and only the allowed text. Somebody over there in Wizard land is having a misunderstanding of how open source works.
Of course they could say "Only spell names and these particular stats may be used." which means you can say that this trap acts like four magic missile but not copy the description of what a magic missile is.
I was having a discussion about this with a couple of people about a open Original D&D. I said
"Look barring consulting a lawyer, you could just list everything in the D20 SRD that is found in OD&D and use that at first. If people want to know how a Magic Missile word or the detailed description of a goblin refer them to the OD&D PDF. This way you can get your modules and settings out. If the monster, spell, or treasure is not listed in the d20 SRD don't use it."
It could be that Wizards will do the same thing with the 4th edition SRD.
And too top it off there could be other conditions or limitations.
However what going to be interesting is how the current D20 SRD does as a RPG and will anybody attempt a 3.75.
QuoteThe OGL is permission by WoTC to use text that is copyrighted by them. This permission has conditions and limitation most notably that you must give others the same permission as WoTC give you.
Exactly, it lets you copy-and-paste. If you completely reword a description of a rule (and perhaps reformat important tables), there's nothing stopping you incorporating it into your game anyway. So long as you completely reword the description, it's OK.
There may be a problem if Wizards do something like trademarking the names of all the feats (for example), but a) that would be crazy and b) changing the names of feats is trivially easy.
Non-issue. I expect an ungimped 4.0 SRD, released under the OGL v1.0a, within a month of the release of the 4.0 PHB. I also expect that any necessary dodges will be covered with rewording of troublesome language--because copyright only covers expression of ideas, not the concepts themselves, and trademarks can be dodged with Brand X euphemisms--and that it will be out on the peer-to-peer networks.
Are you people saying we won't have something like a 4E version of d20srd.org, or only for $$$ on gleemax?
That would suck. I use that website all the time.
Quote from: Pierce InverarityAre you people saying we won't have something like a 4E version of d20srd.org, or only for $$$ on gleemax?
That would suck. I use that website all the time.
All but guaranteed, actually. There will not be a 3.X-style SRD for 4.0, not from WOTC. What will be released will be gimped, and the new OGL will have parts in it that resemble the d20STL. It is stated that wholesale copy-and-paste of the ruleset will not be possible under the new scheme, hence no new Conan or Iron Heroes or Arcana Evolved (etc.) style of products.
I´m mildly amused about how everyone is two months behind me in grokking all this.
Won't do them a damn bit of good. The cat's out of the bag now, there's already a free D&D, and evne if no one bothers with the extra effort to port the new rules into the old license, there's still probably going to be continued development on 3.x simply because of the whole free thing.
Open source was designed with that express intention in mind, I can't believe WotC is so myopic as to not realize that.
Furthermore, if the new SRD is only, as one poster on the Wizard boards points out, an index to what is open material as opposed to the open material itself, it's only a matter of time before someone compiles said open material, adds whats missing, and thus winds up with a PHB replacement of their own for all the world to see.
Quote from: RPGPunditVery interesting. I suspect that the basic effect of this will not be more sales, but far more piracy being generated.
RPGPundit
I think you're dead on about this. I had players who didn't feel comfortable putting down money for all three corebooks (or even the PHB) but would happily buy additional products...because they knew they could use them with just the SRD.
And with people who pirate habitually, products that were often referenced at the table usually ended up purchased eventually anyway. The ease of use and comfort of a book isn't easily replaced by a .pdf, and anything that saw heavy use would invariably end up on the table in a hard, legally bought format.
QuoteThe ease of use and comfort of a book isn't easily replaced by a .pdf
It is however, easily replaced by something as well designed and organized as d20srd.org.
Which is why unless there's an equivalent for 4e, then independent of all other issues I may have with the game, it will be the clinching point for me sticking with 3.5.
While d20srd.org is certainly amazingly useful and easy to navigate, and I've used it every time I've run D&D in the past year, it still doesn't replace the books themselves.
Given that someone will be able to do what you've said upthread and that we'll probably have a d20srdesque site for 4e before too long. I'm not too worried about the changes to the SRD in and of themselves because of of this, but rather the wrongheaded attitude it's a symptom of.
Quote from: J ArcaneOpen source was designed with that express intention in mind, I can't believe WotC is so myopic as to not realize that.
.
As I recall, the SRD came from WotC when that's all they were. Now they are a subsidiary of Hasbro, a much larger, and we can assume more moribund company. Attempting to regain control, and financial income, from the SRD/OGL is undoubtedly what some Hasbro Beancounter thinks is 'Very Important' and all subsequent posts on the topic are undoubtedly then written, or at least planned, by Hasbro's legal department for maximum value to Hasbro.
WotC, and more specifically, the designers of 4e, have about as much control over this as my stinky sock.
Quote from: RPGPunditVery interesting. I suspect that the basic effect of this will not be more sales, but far more piracy being generated.
RPGPundit
Yup, this looks likely, and has been happening with non-OGC 3e products already. My most frequent duty as the moderator of RPG.HU's A/D&D forums is to delete requests for pirated material, and I assume the rest of the world is not that much better.