Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
Publishing Business & Licensing
Legal Discussion of OGL 1.2
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Steel_Wind" data-source="post: 8912244" data-attributes="member: 20741"><p>A calm and reasoned discussion. No surprise, no back-room deals under NDA. Critically, it would have had <strong><span style="color: rgb(251, 160, 38)">none of the stink of skullduggery</span></strong>. It would instead have been presented not in the shadows, but under the noon-day Sun.</p><p></p><p>"We are doing this for two principal reasons:</p><p></p><p>1. We see the D&D brand going forward as principally a digital game in the decades to come. The pandemic has certainly taught us that the importance of VTT gaming to the D&D brand is critical in a way we never foresaw in 2000. We previously were not directly in that business and we have confined ourselves to licensing others to make computer games and video games for us. Now that we are focusing efforts on Triple A VTT development, we need to protect that critical aspect of our market for ourselves. As you know, we have made a significant investment into DDB and those financial efforts continue with the development of OneD&D and our forthcoming online play experience - which we believe gamers will LOVE. We would be negligent and poor custodians of the brand if we did not take these modest steps at this time.</p><p></p><p>We wish to assure all our 3pp publishing partners that their core business model remains intact. We have co-existed for 23 years publishing alongside one another and this decision was made only with difficulty, after consulting with our publishing partners -- and only after making a significant investment in DDB itself.</p><p></p><p>This continuing reassurance is provided both to those who have used our IP to compliment our products -- and for those who have used it in the past (and present) to compete against us in the marketplace. Competition is good for us all and helps keep the hobby vibrant. It also provides important career opportunities for those who choose RPG game development as a career. We have no interest in closing or disrupting a business model under which we have operated successfully for 23 years. We fully expect it to continue for another 23 years without any significant change, too.</p><p></p><p>2. As for computer games themselves, we believed that our interests as licensors could accommodate an OGL based game, for those who dared to try making one. As we suspected at the time in 2000, few would (or did). Recently, however, one company did so with development of a significant PC games title based on the OGL 1.0a. Our licensees in the computer games business expressed to us great unhappiness with their facing another CRPG game, developed and released without our input -- and more importantly, without the benefit of our licensee knowing about that product's release schedule so that their development and marketing campaigns could take that into account. Because of that very real marketing concern, and the very real impact on development schedules and income for licensees and licensors both, we felt we have to make this minor change. The publisher of the OGL game in question is now under license and this decision will not affect their products going forward or materially reduce product selection or choice for all gamers in the future. We do think it wise, however, to close that door now while we can before any further mischief and disruption should happen again. Computer gaming is simply too important to leave such matters to the vagaries of chance. We trust you will understand that our focus is both reasonable and narrow and, to our knowledge, will not bring harm to anyone currently at work on a major OGL based title.</p><p></p><p>Yours in Gaming,</p><p>XXX OOO</p><p>Chris Cao"</p><p> </p><p>Had they said this? <strong><em>They would TOTALLY have gotten away with it, imo.</em></strong></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Steel_Wind, post: 8912244, member: 20741"] A calm and reasoned discussion. No surprise, no back-room deals under NDA. Critically, it would have had [B][COLOR=rgb(251, 160, 38)]none of the stink of skullduggery[/COLOR][/B]. It would instead have been presented not in the shadows, but under the noon-day Sun. "We are doing this for two principal reasons: 1. We see the D&D brand going forward as principally a digital game in the decades to come. The pandemic has certainly taught us that the importance of VTT gaming to the D&D brand is critical in a way we never foresaw in 2000. We previously were not directly in that business and we have confined ourselves to licensing others to make computer games and video games for us. Now that we are focusing efforts on Triple A VTT development, we need to protect that critical aspect of our market for ourselves. As you know, we have made a significant investment into DDB and those financial efforts continue with the development of OneD&D and our forthcoming online play experience - which we believe gamers will LOVE. We would be negligent and poor custodians of the brand if we did not take these modest steps at this time. We wish to assure all our 3pp publishing partners that their core business model remains intact. We have co-existed for 23 years publishing alongside one another and this decision was made only with difficulty, after consulting with our publishing partners -- and only after making a significant investment in DDB itself. This continuing reassurance is provided both to those who have used our IP to compliment our products -- and for those who have used it in the past (and present) to compete against us in the marketplace. Competition is good for us all and helps keep the hobby vibrant. It also provides important career opportunities for those who choose RPG game development as a career. We have no interest in closing or disrupting a business model under which we have operated successfully for 23 years. We fully expect it to continue for another 23 years without any significant change, too. 2. As for computer games themselves, we believed that our interests as licensors could accommodate an OGL based game, for those who dared to try making one. As we suspected at the time in 2000, few would (or did). Recently, however, one company did so with development of a significant PC games title based on the OGL 1.0a. Our licensees in the computer games business expressed to us great unhappiness with their facing another CRPG game, developed and released without our input -- and more importantly, without the benefit of our licensee knowing about that product's release schedule so that their development and marketing campaigns could take that into account. Because of that very real marketing concern, and the very real impact on development schedules and income for licensees and licensors both, we felt we have to make this minor change. The publisher of the OGL game in question is now under license and this decision will not affect their products going forward or materially reduce product selection or choice for all gamers in the future. We do think it wise, however, to close that door now while we can before any further mischief and disruption should happen again. Computer gaming is simply too important to leave such matters to the vagaries of chance. We trust you will understand that our focus is both reasonable and narrow and, to our knowledge, will not bring harm to anyone currently at work on a major OGL based title. Yours in Gaming, XXX OOO Chris Cao" Had they said this? [B][I]They would TOTALLY have gotten away with it, imo.[/I][/B] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
Publishing Business & Licensing
Legal Discussion of OGL 1.2
Top