Doh! Now Ryan responds to me, after I've already signed off in bitterness!
Well, I feel dumb. Anyway, what you have said is very reassuring and I
hereby admit I was wrong and eat crow.
Bleah, it tastes quite crappy.
I still can't see how you'll sell more PHBs like this. But if you can, and
can do that while giving away D20SRD for free, more power to you. Don't
have anything else to say, thanks for a great response.
Alex
At 08:51 PM 9/6/2000 -0700, you wrote:
>From: Alexander P. Macris
>
>> From what I gleaned from the article, WOTC is not pursuing a strategy
>> of "Open Gaming" at all. They are pursuing something more like
>> Microsoft's strategy with regards to Windows...
>
>You cannot copy, modify and distribute the Windows sourcecode or compiled
>binaries without Microsoft's permission. I hear that the going rate for the
>source code license is US$100m + 30% of your company - i.e., not very many
>people do it. (Citrix is the only one that springs immediately to mind.)
>You absolutely cannot take the Windows sourcecode and attempt to create a
>competitive PC desktop/server OS with it. And everyone who wants to deal
>with the Windows sourcecode needs to sign a separate license with Microsoft
>so even the (small) community of external Windows developers can't easily
>share their improvements and changes to the base code.
>
>You can copy, modify, and distribute the D20 system without restriction
>except as set forth in the Open Gaming License. Open Gaming (as defined at
>www.opengamingfoundation.org/foundation.html) means two things: Game rules
>and material that use those rules that can be freely copied, modified and
>distributed, and a requirement that those freedoms be passed forward to any
>recipients of the Open Gaming Content.
>
>If you think you can make a better core rulebook than we can, you are more
>than welcome to try. You'll have exactly the same game we have (plus any
>modifications you might choose to make). Go ahead and see how you do. I'm
>actually quite curious and can't wait to see the first couple of attempts!
>
>> The D20STL is essentially a "game developer kit" (like a Windows SDK)
>
>It is this as well, because in addition to the core rules of the game, you
>also get the classes, races, spells, magic items and monsters that comprise
>the medeival fantasy expression of the D20 System. Eventually, you'll get
>lots more (from us and from other contributors), but the D&D derived
>medeival fantasy bits in the D20STL are a substantial start.
>
>> I thought the point of open source gaming was to be like LINUX: Make
>> the system free and modifiable, until a truly superior system emerges,
>> and then compete on the basis of value-added applications or support.
>
>That is the point. Except that instead of starting from zero, like the
>LINUX crowd did, we all get to start with the marketshare leader.
>
>> The plot thickens. Ryan writes, "we want to use the trademarks of D&D
>> to hold the value of the business, rather than the rules themselves."
>> Now what does this mean?
>
>It means that I think people are more likely to buy a D20 core rulebook that
>is labeled "Dungeons & Dragons Player's Handbook" than they are to buy a D20
>core rulebook labeled "Dave's D20 Player's Handbook". "More likely" in this
>case, meaning "a ratio of one thousand or more to one".
>
>How much carbonated, caramel colored sugar water do you think you'll sell,
>even if you use the exact same recipie as Coke, without the Coke label?
>
>> If WOTC honestly believes that sales of their core rules are their
>> revenue driver
>
>No, I believe that the Dungeons & Dragons brand is the revenue driver.
>Associated with a core rulebook, that brand expresses itself as a very
>salable product.
>
>> As it is, all they have essentially done is say that if you want to write
>> stuff compatible with D&D, that's ok with us as long as you don't
>> alter anything we think is important, include any rules which would
>> prevent people from buying the rules, and use any of our proprietary D&D
>> source material. Uh, thanks!
>
>Or you could ignore the D20 System Trademark License (which gives you the
>right to put the D20 System logo on your product >and nothing more<), and
>compete head to head with your own system brand. The D20 System Reference
>Document contains no trademarks and will be released using the Open Gaming
>License exclusively.
>
>> Fortunately, I think I have figured out a clever loophole using a
>> combination of the OGL and the D20STL which we can use to avoid
>> the need for PHBs. Hehehehe.
>
>I'm guessing you'll produce a complete-in-one-book core rulebook with your
>new game/world brand on it with just the OGL, and then label the rest of
>your product line with the D20 System Trademark in the hopes of selling to
>both your core book owners and to PHB owners as well.
>
>The question you need to ask yourself is: How many people do you really
>think will buy your core rulebook and not >already< own the core D&D 3e PHB?
>And how much of your time, editing, playtesting, etc. do you want to waste
>on something your customers already own?
>
>Ryan
>
>-------------
>For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
>
Alexander P. Macris
WarCry Corp. -- Chief Executive Officer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tele: 617.354.7843
Cell: 617.515.6934
Fax: 253.423.6181
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
