Wizards' "Poison Pill"

[caesarslaad]

This is a bit of a buzz on the D20 related forums, but I thought I'd share here to collect my thoughts and expose the issue to the LJ circuit.

I had sort of taken a back seat in the wailing and gnashing that is the D&D 4e buildup, and specifically, the discussion of the licensing of the 4th edition content. I had sort of come to a peace with 4e.

Comments

[the_tall_man]

For one, I'm waiting to see the thing, read it myself.

But I will say this.

My own fan support, my community-creative stuff, all that? It occurs most where it is appreciated and when I feel that the company in question would dig it a little if they read it.

I'll likely play a closed-content or tightly-controlled D&D. But I won't rant about the cool new thing I thought of for it, show off my fanstuff to my friends online, any of that noise. I do NOT expect WotC to give a shit about that. Drop in the bucket, all that.

But if the new stuff is restrictive? You can bet your ass I'll be looking around for the communities that are seriously into OGL stuff, and enough others will do something vaguely similar that at least a pennyworth of those will become new, strange, and viable in a way they never were before.

And I'll be there.

[caesarslaad]

Possibly, but I don't think that many will consider that a favorable course of action. It appears that the GSL will be rather generous in terms of branding; that branding will move product.

Still, as Levi says, many questions remain unanswered.

[maliszew]

And so it begins.

Call me paranoid, but I suspect this isn't the last bombshell we'll be getting regarding the D&D 4E GSL (née GSL, OGL 2.0).

[drivingblind]

Makes me sad. I had had some interests in at least playing around with 4E from a maybe-some-day-we'll-do-a-thing perspective, but I cannot jeopardize my flagship system just for a chance at a tiny slice of the 4E pie. WOTC has not demonstrated that it's looking out for us; even if I was willing to make that gamble, their actions don't show that they have any intention of watching my back in the years that would follow.

[caesarslaad]

To be fair, there is some doubt being raised that this "per company" interpretation is correct. So don't count it out just yet.

But if I were a betting man, that's the way I'd bet.

(Rhyming unintentional...)

[sanityimpaired]

This is actually a ridiculously easy thing to work around. Create a subsidiary company specifically to publish GSL material, and keep your primary OGL line going. There would be some awkward bookkeeping and separation of finances, but that would be about it.

[caesarslaad]

Maybe. And that's been discussed on the linked thread.

I suspect there may be a "revoke at any time or any reason" thing that would allow them to deal with what they perceive as shenanigans.

[josephbrowning]

As I understood from all the way back at the first phone call, the 4e OGL (at that time they were still using that term) always was going to include a revocable clause unlike the 3e OGL. If I'm remembering properly it was to be similar in tone to the d20 revocable. I see no reason to not assume it would be, effectively, an "at will" clause because that would provide the greatest possibility for a successful exercise of that clause were it to be needed.

So, yeah, IMO, no shenanigans will be possible.