|
|
Post by kesher on Jan 13, 2016 13:09:51 GMT -6
|
|
oldkat
Level 6 Magician
Posts: 431
|
Post by oldkat on Jan 13, 2016 13:13:29 GMT -6
What took them so long!?
|
|
|
|
Post by kesher on Jan 13, 2016 13:19:02 GMT -6
What's particularly awesome is, unless I'm misunderstanding it, as long as you're publishing for 5E, in FR, through the Guild, you can ignore all OGL gobbledygook. EDITED TO ADD: That is correct, Kesher! |
|
oldkat
Level 6 Magician
Posts: 431
|
Post by oldkat on Jan 13, 2016 14:46:58 GMT -6
Just think, if TSR had done this in 1980, would it still be around today?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2016 13:54:18 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by ritt on Jan 14, 2016 15:14:00 GMT -6
This is very cool. Very forward-thinking. Will it re-energize Forgotten Realm? D&D as a whole? I don't know, but it's definitely the kind of thing that could.
|
|
oldkat
Level 6 Magician
Posts: 431
|
Post by oldkat on Jan 14, 2016 16:07:23 GMT -6
I bet it would have shot some life into JG, with TSR keeping 3rd party designers from producing things for the market place.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2016 4:44:21 GMT -6
Seriously, though - I am pretty skeptical about this one; an OGL is always a good thing.
A setting-related license, at least as WotC present it, is bound to create copyright issues of epic proportions on the long run.
Just for example, who owns the right to new content, and who can decide about its use out of the license?
What if I created a multiverse-traveling villain, who just happens to visit FR, and then returns to one of my worlds?
What about alternate continuities? What about TSR-related crossovers, like Planescape, and Spelljammer?
What about possible fan fiction, as in non-gaming literature, and narrative prose?
I don't want to sound alarmist, and I certainly welcome this turn of events, but I will also stay away from it, at least as long as the process itself is not tested extensively through its application in practice. I think the crucial point will not be now, with a first peak of publications presumably early next year, but around 2020, when a few years have past, and people start to get really creative, like it happened with the OGL, and how it spawned C&C, OSRIC, and PF.
|
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Jan 15, 2016 5:44:20 GMT -6
I think it has some merits, but it does seem to screw the local game store owner. For example, there are some Adventurer's League documents that can be run in the store, but can't be sold by the store. They were only open to AL DM's before but now can be bought by anyone. So, the store used to have a bit of an edge where folks pretty much had to come in to play, and might actually buy some product while they are there, but now for a few bucks you can bypass the game store and just buy a PDF of the thing. So, not only has WotC not been creating many core rulebooks or adventure modules but now what new content they are authorizing is direct sales.  I'm hoping that the SRD will allow some third-party products that can come out in print and fill up shelves in the store. |
|
|
|
Post by kesher on Jan 15, 2016 10:04:21 GMT -6
Seriously, though - I am pretty skeptical about this one; an OGL is always a good thing. A setting-related license, at least as WotC present it, is bound to create copyright issues of epic proportions on the long run. Just for example, who owns the right to new content, and who can decide about its use out of the license? What if I created a multiverse-traveling villain, who just happens to visit FR, and then returns to one of my worlds? What about alternate continuities? What about TSR-related crossovers, like Planescape, and Spelljammer? What about possible fan fiction, as in non-gaming literature, and narrative prose? I don't want to sound alarmist, and I certainly welcome this turn of events, but I will also stay away from it, at least as long as the process itself is not tested extensively through its application in practice. I think the crucial point will not be now, with a first peak of publications presumably early next year, but around 2020, when a few years have past, and people start to get really creative, like it happened with the OGL, and how it spawned C&C, OSRIC, and PF. I don't have time at the moment for a more exhaustive post, but I think the guidelines address a lot of those (excellent!) questions. It's definitely a different licensing paradigm than the OGL, and you're of course right that the proof, as they say, will be in the pudding.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2016 12:37:22 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by sepulchre on Jan 15, 2016 13:23:57 GMT -6
Certainly, a means to kindle sales of 5th edition manuals and net talent for their own products. As WOTC has possession of the copyrights I can't imagine that will bring this endeavor to a halt. As for conflicting narratives, I imagine many will coexist within the framework, whereas WOTC will choose pieces that specifically support an official narrative the company has adopted for their own products.
If past products are added to the roster of reference materials, it's true this could be quite an expansion of the OGL.
Even then according the interview, it appears older materials are meant to be refitted to 5E.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2016 14:38:13 GMT -6
From a business side, this is almost textbook "controlled outsourcing". They have let most of their staff writers go, and figure, whatever competent fan is still following the company, will continue to do so. For the last decade, the foreign infrastructure built on their IP by Paizo, GGG, TLG and on has been a sting in their side. By effectively monopolizing fan material distribution, it's all about them again, and to reasonably low costs. - I am bit concerned for the future of the hobby a bit, when I read this, because the current scene stems from decades of fan work, from the Oerth Journal to ENWorld. With that fan movement again centering around WotC, true innovation is less likely. - Like, a long-term division of the fan base was inevitable, but this move certainly sped up things.
|
|
mindcontrolsquid
Level 4 Theurgist
"There is a fifth dimension beyond that which is known to man..."
Posts: 118 
|
Post by mindcontrolsquid on Jan 15, 2016 14:57:31 GMT -6
I do hate to be the optimist here, but it is possible that aspiring writers and creators might be able to use this "outsourcing" as a means of getting practice and experience (and if they're lucky, perhaps some name recognition) before moving on and publishing their own works, either by themselves or through another company. I do agree that WotC is being pretty manipulative with this move, but I'd like to think that some good will eventually come out of this.
|
|
oldkat
Level 6 Magician
Posts: 431
|
Post by oldkat on Jan 15, 2016 15:54:43 GMT -6
I'm really kind of on both sides of the issue.
On the one side, it's clearly a tactic for WotC to stay the dominant player in controlling the IP of modern D&D.
That said, it's just 5E Forgotten Realms, for cryinoutloud; not like contributing to this is going to close down 3rd party publishers or kill the OSR community.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2016 4:54:08 GMT -6
I do hate to be the optimist here, but it is possible that aspiring writers and creators might be able to use this "outsourcing" as a means of getting practice and experience (and if they're lucky, perhaps some name recognition) before moving on and publishing their own works, either by themselves or through another company. Actually, I share your optimism; I think the decisive element, like with the OGL, will be the human factor. I personally just don't want to try to be *the one* who finds out how far one can really outwit WotC, and I honestly don't recommend anybody to become *the one*, either. Now, I think this DMsG, like many other things in our hobby, are a young man's game. If I was still 20, I would be all over this, and I certainly hope that many 20-year-olds really are. To give you an idea how I personally am handling this - and, like many here, I have some material FR that I could probably monetize right away - yesterday, immediately after learning about the news, I wrote into my perspectival project calendar for spring 2021: "Check back on DMsG, potentially reserve four weekends for polishing manuscript". (I didn't write that, verbatim, but you get the idea.) - Because I think that's the timeframe the situation with the license will need to clear up. - Not going to say everyone has to follow my example, but to recommend people to get, like, super-exited about this one, I think would be... "Unsound" is the English term, I think. It's just 5E Forgotten Realms, for cryinoutloud; not like contributing to this is going to close down 3rd party publishers or kill the OSR community. Absolutely. But again, wouldn't it be outright unacceptable to falsely encourage people to go into this without pondering the risks? - I am far from being a Chicken Little when it comes to such stuff, but there are simply better ways to publish one's own stuff, without all the draconic restriction that WotC imposes its freelancers. (Because that's what this new license agreement effectively is, a public offer for freelance writing contracts.) |
|
randyb
Level 3 Conjurer
Posts: 92
|
Post by randyb on Jan 16, 2016 9:16:43 GMT -6
I see it (along with the 5e SRD) as an attempt to get the benefits of the original OGL (lots of fan-made materials driving brand mindshare and Players Handbook sales) while reducing the risk of another Pathfinder coming to market. The former is likely to be successful. The latter? Pathfinder may have been a "lightning in a bottle" event anyway, so the risk may not be that great to start with.
|
|
|
|
Post by tkdco2 on Jan 18, 2016 1:53:32 GMT -6
I am a fan of the Forgotten Realms, 5e not so much. I wouldn't mind seeing an OD&D version of FR, but I won't hold my breath.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2016 2:21:53 GMT -6
|
|
oldkat
Level 6 Magician
Posts: 431
|
Post by oldkat on Jan 18, 2016 18:50:38 GMT -6
I am a fan of the Forgotten Realms, 5e not so much. I wouldn't mind seeing an OD&D version of FR, but I won't hold my breath. What edition of FR are you a fan of? You're probably closer than you think. |
|
|
|
Post by tkdco2 on Jan 18, 2016 21:28:51 GMT -6
I am a fan of the Forgotten Realms, 5e not so much. I wouldn't mind seeing an OD&D version of FR, but I won't hold my breath. What edition of FR are you a fan of? You're probably closer than you think. I prefer 2e, but I like 1e a lot too. |
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Jan 20, 2016 12:47:02 GMT -6
Hypothetical question. It’s supposed to be “Fifth edition content only.” What about stat blocks so minimalistic that they could be interpreted by the DM for whatever game he plays? You know, “a Beholder” or “a Fighter 7”? Not including full lists of spells for a magic-user (sorry, wizard) you face but rather just naming a few specific spells he is likely to cast—common spells that are included in multiple editions? Do you think that “goes against the spirit of the Dungeon Masters Guild program”?
|
|
|
|
Post by tkdco2 on Jan 20, 2016 13:03:27 GMT -6
Probably. WOTC seems to love its stat blocks.
|
|
oldkat
Level 6 Magician
Posts: 431
|
Post by oldkat on Jan 20, 2016 13:08:38 GMT -6
Hypothetical question. It’s supposed to be “Fifth edition content only.” What about stat blocks so minimalistic that they could be interpreted by the DM for whatever game he plays? You know, “a Beholder” or “a Fighter 7”? Not including full lists of spells for a magic-user (sorry, wizard) you face but rather just naming a few specific spells he is likely to cast—common spells that are included in multiple editions? Do you think that “goes against the spirit of the Dungeon Masters Guild program”? I don't think WotC would let that slip by. Like it has been said, this is a move to promote 5E and all things about it. So, I expect that WotC would want all their little 5E goodyness spread throughout the/a/any product, created through this procedure. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2016 13:45:01 GMT -6
Hypothetical question. It’s supposed to be “Fifth edition content only.” What about stat blocks so minimalistic that they could be interpreted by the DM for whatever game he plays? You know, “a Beholder” or “a Fighter 7”? Not including full lists of spells for a magic-user (sorry, wizard) you face but rather just naming a few specific spells he is likely to cast—common spells that are included in multiple editions? Do you think that “goes against the spirit of the Dungeon Masters Guild program”? This is what I think the license, if not revoked, will eventually evolve into: Essentially, with the borrowing of the yearly multi-platform Storylines (apparently that's the term that's officially used) WotC is already courting fans of Dragonlance, Greyhawk, and now Ravenloft to migrate over - and to make use of the DMsG license in bringing interest content over from the original sources. And I would not be at all surprised if next year's great story arc featured a flying ship traveling the world. - FR, the politically correct minimal consensus of D&D worlds, with all major themes somehow shoehorned in. Not even a bad idea, but it certainly shows how long the glory days of the brand are really over. That's one of the reasons why I personally would want to wait a few years - first, let's see if the piglet is really a boar before we call for the great hunt. |
|
|
|
Post by kesher on Jan 20, 2016 14:32:37 GMT -6
Honestly, I don't see the connection of this statement to the topic at hand, but I swear I WILL find a real-life context in which to use it! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2016 0:29:52 GMT -6
d**n YOU SIR, for questioning my most prosaic prose!  What I meant, again, was that this is one of those classic "sit-and-wait"-situations: What the first pro-level projects are, how the market reacts to them, how the original FR authors position themselves, how Wizbro deals with possible conflicts of interest, and so on. This license will only work well for its users if the infrastructural base upon which it is set works. And there, even a year might be too little time to tell. |
|
|
|
Post by sepulchre on Jan 21, 2016 2:31:53 GMT -6
Maybe someone can explain to me why anyone here should care? I don't say that to be insulting or even at the least flippant. If all the former material is retrofitted to 5E is this not just another reordering of the deck chairs on a vessel that effectively sank in the minds of many decades ago. What is the hope one might hold out for here, or have I missed it and this thread should just be indulged as the starry-eyed potential of bringing new people to the hobby as framed by WOTC?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 21, 2016 3:53:43 GMT -6
Well, most of us here on the boards are hobby writers, or at least fancy the idea. And WotC just released an open license - likely one of many to come - that affects that part of our community. That's the reason I personally fancy an opinion on the matter. Otherwise, you are right, whatever WotC might be doing these days does not knock on my dungeon's door. Like, I am actually surprised how heated the discussion of gaming *industry* events usually becomes - not here, but all over the internet. Outside of the most general thing, none of this will every directly concern me. |
|
|
|
Post by Falconer on Jan 21, 2016 9:27:34 GMT -6
Unless they open up Blackmoor in addition to the FR…
|
|
What I meant, again, was that this is one of those classic "sit-and-wait"-situations: What the first pro-level projects are, how the market reacts to them, how the original FR authors position themselves, how Wizbro deals with possible conflicts of interest, and so on. This license will only work well for its users if the infrastructural base upon which it is set works. And there, even a year might be too little time to tell.