The 4e GSL Topic

[Ishmayl-Retired]

You're a true gentleman, Poseidon

[Xathan]

Summary: This publisher is under the impression that using the OGL is a violation of the GSL.

Actually, that's not what I got from what he said. I think using the OGL is fine, but you cannot mix and match 3.5 and 4.0, and once you start making 4.0, you cannot make any more 3.5 products. I'm pretty sure that this is to prevent people from using rules that are similar between the two system or possible legal loopholes to get around restrictions in the GSL.

[Epic Meepo]

Summary: This publisher is under the impression that using the OGL is a violation of the GSL.

Actually, that's not what I got from what he said. I think using the OGL is fine, but you cannot mix and match 3.5 and 4.0, and once you start making 4.0, you cannot make any more 3.5 products. I'm pretty sure that this is to prevent people from using rules that are similar between the two system or possible legal loopholes to get around restrictions in the GSL.

I think we're both saying the same thing: once you use the GSL to make 4.0 products, you can't use the OGL to make new 3.x products. If you ignore this restriction and make more OGL 3.x products anyway, you're violating the rules of the GSL.

[SDragon]

So I take it the two systems are going to be mechanically similar? Or am I missing something?

Thanks, Psoeidon. I don't really have many questions, but I do have a few. Primarily, I'd like to know (in as close to lay-term as possible) just what the change-over means for 3.x.

[Poseptune]

From the GSL Q&A
Q. Can publishers release new products under both the OGL and 4E GSL?
A. No. Each new product will be either OGL or 4E GSL. If a new product is published under the 4e GSL, it cannot also be published as 3.x product under the OGL; and vice versa.

Q. I have multiple product lines. If I update one product line to 4th Edition, do they all have to be updated?
A. No. Publishers are able to choose on a product line by product line basis which license will work best.

[Elemental_Elf]

From the GSL Q&A

Q. I have multiple product lines. If I update one product line to 4th Edition, do they all have to be updated?
A. No. Publishers are able to choose on a product line by product line basis which license will work best.

That's a nice compromise by WotC.

[brainface]

(These are from Monte Cook's Boards. Which are from enworld. Which are probably from somewhere else.)

Q) Are there any "types" of product prohibited by the GSL? For example, the old d20 STL prohibited the inclusion of character generation or advancement, meaning that a standalone game could not be created, while the OGL alone did not. Does the GSL contain these restrictions? Are any other types of product restricted?

A. Most of what was in the d20 STL has been pulled into the GSL. For example, no product can describe a process for creating a character or applying the effects of experience to a character. The new license is meant to work with the core D&D rules. The final details will be announced when the license is released in June.

Q) Are there any "types" of product prohibited by the GSL? For example, the old d20 STL prohibited the inclusion of character generation or advancement, meaning that a standalone game could not be created, while the OGL alone did not. Does the GSL contain these restrictions? Are any other types of product restricted?

A. Most of what was in the d20 STL has been pulled into the GSL. For example, no product can describe a process for creating a character or applying the effects of experience to a character. The new license is meant to work with the core D&D rules. The final details will be announced when the license is released in June.


Q) Is WotC planning on providing an easily available, downloadable copy of the rules available both online and off without a fee?

A. No. Anyone wishing access to the rules will need to purchase the core rulebooks. The GSL SRD will have a list of the terms, tables, and templates available for use under the GSL and will be available for download at no charge with the GSL itself.
[/quote]

I think wizards has an inflated opinion of how much Arcana Unearthed and the d20srd.com competed with their players' handbooks. :P

[Ishmayl-Retired]

There's a complete interview, including these questions, on enWorld's front page

[snakefing]

Yeah, sites like d20srd.com were great to have a handy reference for lots of basic stuff, even if it couldn't cover everything. Much easier than flipping through a rule book to find stuff.

But I suppose it might have allowed some number of gaming groups to get by using shared copies of core books. How much of an impact that was, I don't know. I guess that the cost of entry and participation for D&D is still pretty low compared to a lot of hobbies, so it isn't really that much of an imposition to ask people to buy at least a PH. But the loss of online rules resources is a fairly significant inconvenience.

Q. What products would WotC like to see come out of the third party publishers that they are not currently interested in producing themselves?

A. The easy answer is we want to see quality products that support 4th Edition D&D. I'm guessing you want specific examples, right? The GSL is designed for publishers to make Adventures, 'Fluff,' Campaign settings, Alternate Classes, Races, Monsters, Paragon Paths, Epic Destinies, and other creative supplemental products.

Looking at this answer, I think their goal is mostly to encourage third party stuff that is D&D-plus, not variants and alternatives. Thus, you can't create a variant class, unless you call it something else. (Can't change the definitions of things that are in the GSL SRD.) Variant rules for existing skills - probably out. New or alternative skills - probably okay. Etc.

You could do all that by writing your own game, of course, but you'd have to do it without the GSL, which means you'd have to look out for violating copyright by "derivative works". This means that if you wanted to update something like True20 for 4e, you'd have to be very careful about how close it looks to D&D 4e. You'd probably end up having to change enough terminology to make sure that it won't look much like D&D - but of course the appeal is that it should be familiar, not different.

I'm sure this is intentional, but I doubt if that is the primary purpose, since things like that have never managed to capture more than a tiny fraction of the market, and most of them have already purchased their D&D books anyway. The number of people who play D&D using someone else's PH and d20srd.com for reference is surely a hundred times larger than the number of people who play True20 or similar system and don't own a PH. They're more interested in making sure that people actually buy their books than in preventing competition.

[SDragon]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems the only reason this is taking off at all is because it's attached to the new system (which I still haven't looked at), and because it's really being pushed by WotC's PR. From the sounds of it, the GSL is actually inferior to the OGL. Yes, the 3.x system had it's flaws (all systems, ultimately, do), but what the OGL really has over the GSL is that people don't have to rely on WotC to fix those problems. You can almost pick and choose between the solutions all sorts of alternate systems (e.g., True20) offer.

[Epic Meepo]

@Sdragon: That's the exact same impression I have of the situation.

Also, from the ENWorld page in Ishy's above post (emphasis mine):

The Game System License Is revocable as it is tied to the D&D trademark and other intellectual property. Because of this Wizards needs to maintain control of the license.

[SDragon]

I had to recheck a few times to be perfectly sure, but Stargate hasn't posted in this thread yet. I think maybe you meant either Snakefing or I, as all three names start with S, and both Snakefing and I have posted since your last post.

[snakefing]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems the only reason this is taking off at all is because it's attached to the new system (which I still haven't looked at), and because it's really being pushed by WotC's PR. From the sounds of it, the GSL is actually inferior to the OGL. Yes, the 3.x system had it's flaws (all systems, ultimately, do), but what the OGL really has over the GSL is that people don't have to rely on WotC to fix those problems. You can almost pick and choose between the solutions all sorts of alternate systems (e.g., True20) offer.

Well, even if Meepo didn't intend to second your post, I will.

The thing is, D&D is the 800 pound gorilla of the hobby. 4e will inevitably supplant 3.x for popularity and everyone who wants to create and post worlds, house rules, etc. based on D&D will need to understand what they can and can't do within the GSL.

Of course, they'd be crazy to crack down on fan sites, but sites like CBG that reach small but significant groups of gamers will want to be careful so there could be a significant chilling effect anyway.

It seems like people will be able to do quite a bit in the way of variants and house rules, as long as you don't redefine the core SRD terms (and we don't yet know what they are), or reprint the core rules. I think they are restricting rules for character creation and experience too - not sure if this is to prevent competitive systems or to reserve one thing people need to have PH for, but in effect it does both.

[Epic Meepo]

I had to recheck a few times to be perfectly sure, but Stargate hasn't posted in this thread yet.

*looks back and forth furtively*
I don't know what you're talking about; my post clearly says Sdragon. ;)

Just pay no attention to that part where it says something like the following:

[sparkletwist]

as long as you don't redefine the core SRD terms (and we don't yet know what they are),

big[/i] changes is against the rules. Of course, it depends on what the terms are... but it's something else to wonder about.