Quote from: walkerpSeriously, what is the upside of this announcement?  That there will be a general open license now that is free to everybody so they can develop product for the 4e line?  Not challenging, I'm just not totally up on all this GSL stuff.

The problem is primarily that a number of core third-party companies (IIRC, they included Paizo, Green Ronin, Adamant, etc.) had originally been offered to get early copies of the system so they could produce supplements in time for the official 4e release (as was done for 3e).  

However, this time they were first told that it would cost them $5,000; they would only get limited print copies (I think it was 3 per company) and no electronic versions; and the system and license were not yet ready.  These companies were hesitant and waiting to see the goods before committing (Paizo going so far as to say, "No thanks, can't afford it.")  Everyone was getting nervous as the goods were still not ready -- they needed the lead time to produce quality products for GenCon.  

Now, the fee has been removed but the goods are still not ready, which means that even if WotC was to hand them tomorrow morning, there would still be little time to produce decent supplements for August.  In other words, it will be, for these core supporters of D&D, a choice between publishing very rushed products or missing GenCon.  They get no more favour from WotC than if they were Joe Schmoe in his basement.  It means losing a good chunk of reliability on what is for most of these company the main source of income.

Edit: IIRC, the early-adopters were also initially going to get a protected period during which no other third-party company could publish D&D supplements; I believe that was going to be through December.

Thanks, Anenome.  Yeah, that doesn't sound very positive at all.  And I second JRients' position as well.  It could be that they have most of their shit together, but not the department of Dealing with Outside Vendors and Caring About the Rest of the Industry which can probably be found "in the bottom of a filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying beware of the leopard."

I suspect this has a lot to do with WOTC's strange status as a no-longer completely independent company. It is disconcerting.

Quote from: AnemoneNow, the fee has been removed but the goods are still not ready, which means that even if WotC was to hand them tomorrow morning, there would still be little time to produce decent supplements for August. In other words, it will be, for these core supporters of D&D, a choice between publishing very rushed products or missing GenCon.

No it won't be. No 3rd party products for GenCon this year, no 3rd party products till Oct. 1st.

Quote from: jgantsGee, I guess they discovered that people weren't quite as quick to hand over $5K as they originally thought.  I never saw that coming...

The $5k meant dick-all to WotC. They weren't charging the fee to make money, they were charging the fee to allow "serious" publishers early access, without having to determine on a case-by-case basis what constituted such a publisher.

Quote from: jrientsI'm having trouble seeing anything but a company that seems to profoundly Not Have Their Shit Together.  This is how the biggest name in the hobby does business?  Fartknockering around then changing the plan at the last minute?  I'm mean, sure.  Pat them on the back for being smart enough to realize they were fucking things up, but why did things get fucked in the first place?

The GSL is, ultimately, a minor aspect of 4E. It seems the lawyers got involved and caused lawyerly delays, but methinks they were more concerned with, you know, finishing 4E. The GSL was understandably not a priority.

Quote from: AnemoneNow, the fee has been removed but the goods are still not ready, which means that even if WotC was to hand them tomorrow morning, there would still be little time to produce decent supplements for August.  In other words, it will be, for these core supporters of D&D, a choice between publishing very rushed products or missing GenCon.  They get no more favour from WotC than if they were Joe Schmoe in his basement.  It means losing a good chunk of reliability on what is for most of these company the main source of income.

Definitely a good example of the 800lb gorilla peeing on all the other folks that worked hard and hand-in-hand to help them over the past few years by creating products compatible with the Gorillas goods.

I think IBM tried that already though in the 80's with the PC. Look where it got IBM in the PC Industry in the long run.

Quote from: GameDaddyDefinitely a good example of the 800lb gorilla peeing on all the other folks that worked hard and hand-in-hand to help them over the past few years by creating products compatible with the Gorillas goods.

Bullshit. They just revealed that the new GSL will be royalty-free. They dropped the $5k fee for early adopters. Despite much wailing and gnashing of teeth over the past few months, it appears WotC really supports open gaming. Fears that only a select group could publish 3rd-party stuff were unfounded. Etc, etc.

Those who rode WotC coattails over the past several years can continue to do so now. Without paying anything for the privilege. But you're right: how dare WotC treat them like that?

What is really interesting, to me, is the "future clone" scenario.

Here is the scenario: the GSL and SRD come out, and are somewhat more restrictive than the licence and SRD we are currently used to. (It has already been confirmed that the SRD won't be a document you can download and use to run a game, like the current one - just a list of references to rules in the core 4E rulebooks which third party authors can draw on.)

Several folks have used the current SRD and OGL - which, most people concur, cannot be revoked by Wizards - to produce "retro clones" of previous editions of D&D. OSRIC and Labyrinth Lord, in particular, are mechanically identical to 1E AD&D and Moldvay/Cook Basic/Expert D&D.

So, what happens when someone - and I think it's a case of "when", not "if" - makes a "future clone" - a document which is essentially 4E with the serial numbers filed off?

It would be almost painfully easy. One would simply publish it under the 3.5 OGL, and use the 3.5 SRD as a basis. You would need to put all of the new 4E rules into your own words - making sure that you are restating them as opposed to copy-pasting, since the copyright only applies to the specific words used to describe the rules - and be careful to leave out all trademarked content. Depending on the terms of the GSL, you may even be able to directly quote material from the core 4E books (in which case producing a usable 4E SRD would consist simply of copy-pasting all the material the 4E SRD allows you to use, and pasting over the cracks with material from the 3.5 SRD and/or your own rewrite of the relevant rules).

Now, what can Wizards do? Sure, they can bring a suit against you, but it would be pretty damn weak unless they also brought a suit against the OSRIC and Labyrinth Lord dudes. And you could point to various 1970s games which clearly cherry-pick rules from D&D (for example, almost all RPGs written in the 1970s had stats which map almost exactly to D&D's, and many of them even had them in the 3-18 range) and say "Well, since you didn't stop those guys doing it, the cat is well and truly out of the bag."

Such thoughts have probably occurred to Wizards. It's probably what's holding up the GSL. The fact that they are changing it about in the first place, rather than keeping the OGL (note, for example, that they are changing the way the SRD works, and removing the word "open" from the licence name), suggests to me that they want a more restrictive licence. But the legal realities mean that they can't enforce it, if it comes to court; they might, in the end, have to rely on their lawyers scaring people into rolling over and playing dead.

But what happens when they come across someone who won't do that, because they know damn well that Wizards is bluffing?

Brilliant, Warthur. Well played, sir.

I don't think they'd be too worried, however. Because the one thing the filed down version, and any material based on it, won't be able to do is say "compatible with 4e D&D" or whatever the trademark restrictions apply. WotC will rely on Branding to roll over any kind of competition that might arise. Why play a cheap knock off when you can play the real thing? At worst they will lose a sale, at best, they will gain a player that will one day become a customer of other products.

Just a thought.

IMHO, I think they should be more worried about the competition that arises from games that are built on the OGL that are not 4e clones. Paizo may or may not be successful, but I think that model would be the most likely to spawn something competitive on which they have little influence (because to react would be to back track).

In related news, it's surfaced (around page 2 of this thread) that publishing under the GSL will prohibit publishing under the OGL. So companies are forced to choose one or the other.

This is all getting a bit silly.

Quote from: Caesar SlaadIn related news, it's surfaced (around page 2 of this thread) that publishing under the GSL will prohibit publishing under the OGL. So companies are forced to choose one or the other.

Pierce is right, this is getting silly. What's to prevent a business from creating a company for publishing OGL material and then a second company to create GSL material?

Quote from: jeff37923Pierce is right, this is getting silly. What's to prevent a business from creating a company for publishing OGL material and then a second company to create GSL material?

They idea appears to be by product, (EDIT:and maybe company?)  Although that still gets a little messy around "grandfather" products. EDIT:  which they won't allow . Got a bunch of inventory? Either slit your throat and bleed or hold off on bringing that particular product to 4e till 3.5e inventory is out of your hands and in the channel and officially OOP. And I guess you have to stop PDF sales too?  "Systemless" (or really multi-system) stuff like Freeport? Hrmmm.

A whole lot of FUD right now. It's tough enough trying to sort this sort of thing with a document in hand. Oooo boy, wouldn't want to be a house heavy leaning heavy on d20. Scary times just got freaky.

Quote from: Fifth ElementBullshit. They just revealed that the new GSL will be royalty-free. They dropped the $5k fee for early adopters. Despite much wailing and gnashing of teeth over the past few months, it appears WotC really supports open gaming. Fears that only a select group could publish 3rd-party stuff were unfounded. Etc, etc.

Those who rode WotC coattails over the past several years can continue to do so now. Without paying anything for the privilege. But you're right: how dare WotC treat them like that?

Hmmm... Just looked over the EnWorld Thread. Scott Rouse, D&D's brand manager confirmed they would support open gaming, for 4e only! and are happily in the process of Fooxering the 3x publishers who already have invested loads of cash in supporting the 3x OGL.

I'm so glad I bought another set of C&C books instead of Wotc books. It's going to be a long... long... long... time before I buy another book or game aid from Wotc, if ever.