With the built-in delay to the {OGL Open Gaming License} for D&D 4th ed. and the USD 5000 price tag on the license to publish close to Wizards of the Coast they are trying to make sure that only big names participate at the beginning, hoping that big budget = big names = better quality. Interesting times! š
You must have seen it online if youāre a regular reader of any D&D related forum: D&D 4th Edition System Reference Document and OGL Designerās Kit. Here, {WotC Wizards of the Coast}, have some pagerank!
D&D 4th Edition System Reference Document and OGL Designerās Kit
Iām sure if you look at the forums youāll see them going bonkers all over the place. I looked at the OpenDesign thread To 4E or not to 4E? and I expect EN World to have more info as well. Check it out: WotC announces plans for 4e SRD and OGL.
WotC announces plans for 4e SRD and OGL
Ok, since this post only points out the obvious, it must qualify as most useless post of 2008 for the time being. Maybe Iāll add some thoughts of my own tomorrow.
ā#RPG ā#Publishing
(Please contact me if you want to remove your comment.)
ā
Interesting times, indeed. The thing is, Iām still none the wiser whatās going to be *in* the 4th Edition SRD. It sounds to me like thereās going to be guidelines and page references back to the Playerās Handbook, and not much else. Unless Iām reading it wrong, or it changes, or whatever.
Thatās not to knock it though; there was a genuine concern that WoTC could close the entire system off with 4th Edition meaning other companies were screwed when it came to creating variant rules books. Itās good to see thatās not going to happen, and I like that theyāre taking control of who gets first pick; one thing lacking from the 3rd Edition version of the SRD/OGL was any kind of quality control. It looks like thatās in place here.
Iām very, very excited about Necromancer Gamesā plans for 4th Edition; thatās one thing which might enourage me to switch.
Oh, and the news about a revised d20 Modern in 2009 is terrific!
Happy New Year too, Alex š
ā greywulf 2008-01-09 10:08 UTC
---
Well, ENWorld doesnāt seem to be going that bonkers over it, especially compared to the row over the feat called Golden Wyvern Adept and the inclusion of dragonborn as a PC race :p
I would be personally disappointed if the new SRD isnāt like the current one, i.e., that there is an online-accessible version with the core rules to play the game. I rely heavily on d20srd.org right now and would hate to see a resource like that disappear. However, the openness of the SRD/OGL for 3.x was a pretty amazing thing, unlike any other previous incarnation of D&D, so I canāt blame them if they want to reassert some control and, at the same time, make it necessary to at least own the PHB.
ā Adrian 2008-01-09 10:43 UTC
---
I guess Iām mostly intrigued by the similarities between Software and D&D rules. The kind of early buy-in giving you a head-start is an interesting idea. Iām undecided: One the one hand, I have socialist tendencies, and this blatant encouragement of a division into big players and small players ā argh... I just canāt say āYes!ā to it. On the other hand I totally understand they want to build some kind of filter to encourage quality third party products. Their solution is simple and will probably deliver with a good enough degree of confidence. Having to submit products to censors would be far worse, obviously. Iām also enjoying the copyright and patent talk. Dual-licensing the old SRD. The āOpenā Gaming License transforming into something a bit less open by apparently incorporating d20 License issues (that nobody is allowed to talk about). Anyway, thatās the intriguing part.
Iām guessing the 4th ed SRD will contain the same amount of rules as the current version. The rules will not be written for the table, however. Thus, making something like d20srd.org useful for a gaming table will be much harder. Thatās what they want the DI to be, after all. Youāll have to rewrite it. For people who like paper in their hands, no big loss. For some online players, itās going to be a bummer or the DI membership. (And Iām not prepared to pay $10 to $15 a month for a D&D gaming service.)
As for the player handbook requirement, Iām hoping that it will basically just require the appropriate sentence somewhere prominent: This requires the ownership of the 4th ed. Playersās Handbook or something along these lines.
ā Alex Schroeder 2008-01-09 10:46 UTC
---
Well, you are supposed to receive a digital copy for a nominal fee ($2-3) when you purchase the hardcover book. This does not require DDI, and if the PDF is properly assembled, it would have some of the functionality of, say, d20srd.org, though PDFs are never as good in my experience.
My biggest concern is the fact that the 4E OGL appears to preclude books like *Arcana Evolved* and *Iron Heroes*. That is not to say that the 4E mechanics would even be compatible or desirable with AE or IH, but the little information available suggests that you canāt publish a 4E variant PHB, for example.
ā Adrian 2008-01-10 17:16 UTC