Hi,
Recent lurker, first time contributor:
Rogers Cadenhead wrote:
> At 12:34 PM 8/18/00 EDT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >Hum. Then that is where I am confused. I knew the OGL was "invented" by
> >Ryan Dancy, but I thought the project was directed towards RPGs, not just
> >D&D. I'm not saying that is a good or bad thing, but it changes my
> >perspective, obviously. So, who is the OGL for?
>
> The OGL was created by Ryan Dancey to sell more copies of the Player's
> Handbook. His interest is centered around D&D, but there may be a few
> publishers who are planning to adopt it for their own rules systems.
The OGL is designed to support D20 products, if I read the OGL and
Dancey's public statements correctly. Currently, this means D&D. As more D20
products are produced by WotC (owners of the trademark), the OGL will support
them as well, I'd imagine. The D20SRD is designed, I presume, to make sure
that the OGL doesn't put WotC out of business. That's a perfectly reasonable
desire for WotC.
The OGL will allow trends in the gamer audience to circulate, swell, and
drop more naturally. D&D is expected to spawn a score of products using the
OGL to see circulation. Those products would well spawn more products,
expanding the game, touching more gamers, and maintaining a large audience.
WotC support for D&D will benefit from watching the OGL products and market
interests. These WotC products will lead "storefront" gamers to free or
independent content which will enrich their games further. OGL products will
likewise lead gamers back to WotC products.
Timmy might buy D&D at Barnes & Noble, catch sight of some internet OGC,
and through it find out about the Star Wars RPG and decide he wants to play
that, too. Since none of these OGL products can tell Timmy what his Star Wars
character needs to reach a new level, though, he will still be motivated to
buy WotC's book. This way, WotC continues to thrive as a company (which makes
the OGL possible). Also, with a constant flow of game support into the market,
WotC can devote more time to individual products in-house. Product quantity
increases through OGL, which gives casual and regular gamers enough material
to keep playing, while product quality increases from WotC, which keeps the
game looking pretty and catches new gamers off-the-shelves.
Let's say I get to print my fantasy game world using the OGL and
(hypothetically) it sells like crazy (score one for me). Anyone who wants to
play in my setting will still have to buy the Player's Handbook (score one for
WotC). My book is so popular, that somebody else sets an adventure module in
my game setting (score for them). I still get credit, somewhere, in the
manuscript, and so maybe consumers recognize my name when I release my next
book (score for me again). Meanwhile, handsome official products are appearing
on the shelves in Borders, and everyone's happy.
Am I wrong? This is what appeals to me about the OGL at present. Quality
designs will continue to get attention based on their quality. If people don't
like an OGL product, they won't set their own products there. It's precarious,
sure, in the way capitalism is precarious. But if it works ...
word,
will
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
