Now we have the GSL. Right now, in my view, the GSL needs some major reworking or clarification to be usable. The bottom line, in my view, is that the GSL is a total unmitigated failure. And that is a shame. I have been one of the biggest vocal proponents of Wizards and I love Scott and Linae. I still do, big time. I am hopefull that we can find a way to change or clarify some of the issues with the license so that we can use it and create 4E products. You know that philsophically I believe in supporting the current version of D&D.
Please dont take this post as bashing Wizards. I am not doing that. I support Wizards. And if there is one thing that is clear from this process it is that, while I would have done it differently, they have always been great about listening to our comments and revising things based on our comments. That is a credit to them, for sure. And Scott and Linae continue to be amazing and, in my view, working hard to make the license usable.
So are you doing 4E? Well, right now I dont see 4E products in the immediate future from Necro without some changes or clarifications to the license. My hope is that I will be able to get what I need so that we can do 4E products. But as of today we have not adopted the GSL, we have not sent in our card accepting the license. And, unless there are changes or significant clarification, we won’t be adopting it.
What about that free adventure, Winter’s Tomb? Can’t you just do a free adventure? Its not happening. There is no way to “just do a free adventure” without adopting the GSL, which we have not yet done and wont do in its current incarnation.
So now will you release all that stuff for 3E? Doubtful. The market for 3E is not there. I expect Pathfinder to revive it, but that isnt going to be a full, public supportable system for some time. 3E remains viable for many publishers. But our plan is to up the production value on our products, which means they cost alot more to make, which means our margins are so small, that the current 3E market makes those products not feasible for lots of reasons I wont get into. I know there are many fans who say they will buy that stuff and would love to have it. Well, in a perfect world, we’d love to deliver it. But this isnt a perfect world and fan demand isnt the only factor--there are distributors and retailers and others who are not so excited about generic 3E now that 4E is out.
So bottom line it for me--what are you going to do? We are working with Wizards to clarify and/or change the license. If that works, we will release 4E material. If there are no changes, I dont see us adopting the GSL (absent some significant official clarification of terms of the GSL). We will support Pathfinder. But we will not just release OGL content from this point forward until Pathfinder is viable and we can support it.
Necro isnt going anywhere. We are trying to work to be able to get a usable GSL or other arrangment with Wizards to bring you the awesome 4E content we have planned. If that wont work, you will see us fully supporting Pathfinder.
Wow… just wow. They have been one of the most vocal proponents of 4e to date (excepting Wizards of course ) this kinda of sucks as I was really looking forward to their alternate PHB. I noticed that there is no mention of a “4e compatible” release I am guessing that that is not an option for some reason? Or that they opted out of it.
Wow… just wow. They have been one of the most vocal proponents of 4e to date (excepting Wizards of course ) this kinda of sucks as I was really looking forward to their alternate PHB. I noticed that there is no mention of a “4e compatible” release I am guessing that that is not an option for some reason? Or that they opted out of it.
Clark mentioned that in his post. I won’t quote him here, but essentially he said that he supports Wizards of the Coast and D&D and likes the 4th Edition. He doesn’t want to undermine it in any way, and rather than do a 4E compatible, he’d rather just get behind Pathfinder.
Clark wants to do 4E and wants to do it in a way that supports WotC (A). But he also wants to be able to create work for Pathfinder (B). If he can’t do (A) and (B) because the GSL prevents it, then he’ll just do (B).
So are you doing 4E? Well, right now I dont see 4E products in the immediate future…
Honestly, while I am happy about this I do find it a bit suprising as on their front page they say, “With the new announcement by Wizards of the Coast that publishers like Necromancer Games will be able to support the new Dungeons and Dragons 4th Edition rules, Necro is going 4E!” I reported this in an earlier post in the News and Resource Submission thread but no one thought it was important enough to post. I believe it though and I predicted that this would happen. I don’t think Paizo could find better news if they tried especially with Necromancer Games making comments like:
I expect Pathfinder to revive [3E], but that isnt going to be a full, public supportable system for some time. 3E remains viable for many publishers.
The only real option for companies who want to produce products for D&D but do not want to subject themselves to the GSL are to either print products under the existing OGL for 3.x or to make them more compatible with Pathfinder. Being that Pathfinder is moving forward in a constructive way (as opposed to the uber-limiting way WotC is with the GSL) I would think that companies would rather advance with them. Obviously if they choose to not produce anything under the GSL but don’t want to stick to the OGL/Pathfinder then...well...they aren’t producing anything and they will go out of business.
...hrm. !!! I think I just figured out WotC’s scheme! (kidding...maybe)
Can we get this up on the front page now? Honestly I thought it would have made great news if my previous post made the front page and then we see this backpedal. It really would exemplify the current climate in the RPG community.
You must have missed it. I put it on the front page before you posted.
And if you read what Clark posted, you’d note that he is actually optimistic that the GSL will be altered in a positive manner. If that happens, I think you’ll see more 3PP support almost immediately.
Also, Clark mentioned that Pathfinder would revive 3E, but not for another year, at least, and that until Pathfinder is finished, he won’t support that either. I’m also not convinced that Pathfinder will remain as supported by 3PP as it is right now any more than True20 is. YMMV, though. I just don’t see a whole lot of support from other publishers for other OGL games. They seem to mostly support themselves now that 3E is on life support. That includes publishers like the ones I’ve mentioned before. They all seem to be moving in separate directions now, and I’m not sure how much of a good thing that is either.
As Lune said, if a company does not produce anything, then they must go out of business. So either they’ll fold, or they’ll produce something for some game system, even if they have to make up their own., or produce modules for Runequest.
I think what kills a game system or a setting is the lack of supported modules. A basic fantasy setting can survive on all the D&D modules that have been published, but otherwise, people get excited about the fancy books and then ask “So what do we do now?” Some GMs are creative about making their own adventures, but many GMs are like me and just don’t have the time. Without published adventures, the game system and setting books just sit on the shelf.
I think what kills a game system or a setting is the lack of supported modules. A basic fantasy setting can survive on all the D&D modules that have been published, but otherwise, people get excited about the fancy books and then ask “So what do we do now?” Some GMs are creative about making their own adventures, but many GMs are like me and just don’t have the time. Without published adventures, the game system and setting books just sit on the shelf.
I don’t think WotC has anything to worry about on that front.
I know that the GSL and its effect on 3rd party publishers is getting a lot of internet attention, but personally I just don’t see it making any real difference long term. We make a big deal of it because of our own personal interest in the companies, which is fine. But Dungeon and Dragons will rise and fall on its own merits; no third party company support (or lack of) will change that. I am relatively knowledgeable about what third party products were out there for 3rd edition, but I bought very little. Outside of Dragonlance (which was officially licensed from WotC), the only third party product I bought was Iron Heroes. And while very nice, it got very little use. I would imagine the general D&D player is even less likely to even know about 3rd party stuff, let alone buy it.
Oh, 3pp are a drop in the bucket next to the big boy Wizards of the Coast, since they have D&D. Most D&D players probably do have very little interest in 3pp’s releases.
... however, when they decide to “take a break” from D&D, the question is: are they going to stay in Wizards of the Coast’s pond?
Under 3e and the OGL, when my group wrapped up its second long-term D&D game, we looked around for other games to try. We wanted to play something more modern and wound up going with Mutants & Masterminds. I could’ve probably picked up Hero for our game if we’d been feeling a little more simulationist, but we didn’t. We played a d20 supers game instead. After that, we went back to 3e a few times. I personally played a little Iron Heroes, Arcana Evolved, Grim Tales, Star Wars d20, and quite a bit of d20 Modern.
I was aware of these games, and I kept buying D&D material along side them, because it was all in the d20 pond. The OGL built quite a nice, wide pool of potential games which all followed the same fundamental rules, all of which were, to a degree, relevant to one another. It was relatively easy to port rules from one of these games to another (like adding Action Points to D&D from d20 Modern, or playing with Arcana Evolved classes in D&D, or swapping out saves for Star Wars Saga Edition defenses in Grim Tales), so even if you had little chance of ever actually playing a game, you might pick it up just because you’ve heard really good things about how they handle a particular rule.
Had I left the d20 pond, much of this material likely would’ve been irrelevant to me, and I wouldn’t have been a customer while I was playing a modern game or a sci-fi game. But that wasn’t the case.
Under the GSL, we’re unlikely to see the same sort of support from existing 3pp (I’m not willing to write off brand new publishers whose business model is built around the GSL springing up, but I still believe that we won’t see the abundance of 3pp that the safe-harbor of the OGL allowed for). That probably won’t hurt people playing D&D too much. What it will do is make it more difficult for WotC to retain a pool of potential customers in the d20 pond.
I agree with what you’re saying. For those that left D&D for other RPGs, the OGL did a good job of making keeping players in that d20 pond. The idea of buying WotC books in order to pull rules chunks for other games is a great one, and it ties the whole RPG industry together better.
But I don’t think WotC sees those kinds of customers as vital to their business. Because of that, they are much more worried about preventing the next alternative player’s handbook like Arcana Evolved rather than promoting compatible systems like Mutants & Masterminds. If you are playing d20 fantasy, WotC wants you to play core D&D. If there are alternatives, they want them to be WotC branded.
The majority will still with D&D no matter what, if only because they don’t know of anything else. The hardcore gamers will, if given no alternatives, probably also stick with D&D. If there are alternatives, the hardcore will give them a good shake. Look at Pathfinder. It is drawing a great deal of attention. Without the OGL, WotC wouldn’t have that problem. Third edition would have “died” from a product standpoint just like prior editions.
Basically due to D&D’s brand strength, WotC feels it can get away with ignoring the minority interested in 3rd party products. It would rather keep a tight grip on its core line, rather than worry about the ones whole slip through its fingers. I think that we the hardcore customers will suffer for it, but we don’t make up enough of market share to make a difference to WotC.
One risk for WoTC is that some totally new game system will come up, that might also be open licenced, that third party publishers flock around (or not) or otherwise attracts a large amount of support to the extent that it becomes the biggest role playing game. Maybe everybody loves my new D12 System that much.
This kind of thing happened before, when the fan base of 2nd Edition dwindled because the game was not supporting the kinds of topics those players were interested in, and then White Wolf came around with their system and for a while, it was White Wolf, not D&D, that I saw covering the game book shelves.
In the real future, I think Pathfinder may be the most likely candidate to supplant D&D. White Wolf appeals to a significant target audience, but the tinker-gnome geeks like me don’t like it. And it seems to be tinker-gnome geeks like me who make up the majority of 4th Edition “naysayers”, and yet we also probably account for well more than our share of book sales, especially since we’ll buy a book just for a single chapter that we can cannibalize to use in a “Warlords of Atlantis” game we want to run. Us tinker-gnomes loved D20/3E, and as the most prominent heirs to 3E, Pathfinder will probably get the lion’s share of attention.
Books that are most compatible with D20 frontrunners like Pathfinders and True D20 will get the most sales. Perhaps one will pick up the fantasy niche and one will pick up the modern niche. Publishers interested in producing modules will likely find a significant market for D20 settings and systems like Deadlands, Iron Kingdoms, and Mutants and Masterminds. Companies may even keep printing 3E modules if they are close enough to IK or Pathfinder to provide side adventures for Privateer Press and Paizo’s main story arcs.
As for whether the lack of modules will hurt WoTC, that depends on whether WoTC decides to publish a significant number of modules in the future. In 3E, WoTC made the decision to only publish a few modules, and rely on third party publishers to fill in the gap. If there are not the third party publishers in 4E, then WoTC will have to fill in the gap. OTOH, their decision to cut Paizo loose might have been motivated by a desire to do their own modules.
If I were to form a company producing an open-licensed D12 System, I probably would want to concentrate more on modules than on splat-books which, really, are not as useful.
Lebkin, I do agree that your assessment of WotC’s current goals are correct but understand that this wasn’t always the case. Just like JK and Utgardloki are saying, 3.x and it’s OGL are what really attracted players like me. The cross compatibility of their products was great. Even the ease of instituting other rules systems was so easy to do that you could pick and choose between different products and it all worked together.
The problem with 4e in this regard is two-fold. First, the system itself is more simplified yet also rigid. It is going to be harder to “snap on” other rules systems. I have no doubt that WotC did this on purpose and likely for the very reasons you gave. In the end I don’t think it was a wise decision and I think they are going to start to realize that with the reaction of the 3pp folks and their customers. By alienating those 3pp they are also going to alienate those customers...and where do you think they will turn? I’m betting they will follow wherever the 3pp go. My personal bet is Pathfinder and I’m hopeful that is the case cause I really like the system. Oh, and secondly the GSL doesn’t allow for “snap on” type rules in the same way the OGL did.
Utgardloki: I guess we will have to see if WotC is going to be as good as the 3pp at creating modules. Also since they lost (fired/layed off) a lot of talent behind the setting specific books we will also have to wait and see what kind of quality campaign books they can come up with. Particularly with the loss of Sean. ...being that Sean is now working for Pathfinder I think the future is going to be interesting.
) this kinda of sucks as I was really looking forward to their alternate PHB. I noticed that there is no mention of a “4e compatible” release I am guessing that that is not an option for some reason? Or that they opted out of it.
(kidding...maybe)
