GURPS Lite and a Open gaming license?

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by mburr0003

You're really going to say "potentially safer" in light of the OGL 1.1 shenanigans WotC was trying to pull (and are likely still considering)? Really?

I was talking about the OGL as it was perceived at the time (and through to about two months ago). Note my last sentence in the post you replied to.

[acrosome]

Originally Posted by mburr0003

But corporations are the very entities that can easily afford getting a license.

No, you are making too broad of a statement, there. When I say "corporation" I'm not talking about Hasbro or Mattel. I'm talking about three geeks in a garage who were at least smart enough to incorporate- kind of how Silicon Valley used to work. And they might bash away on their project for years before they finally have something publishable (contrary to how SJG's editorial oversight works now when someone "pitches" them an idea).

And I am relieved to see multiple others agreeing with me when they use phrases like "easier and safer" for third-party publishers when there is a clearly defined OGL.

Because I will say it again- I think that I am a more typical gamer than most of my fellow GURPS geeks in at least one key respect: I'd like to flip through a setting book that I like, grab an adventure module set it in with everything properly statted out, and run a game without either having to do the metric crapton of conversion work or "winging it". Can you imagine if Forgotten Realms had been a GURPS setting? Yes, I also enjoy digging deeply into making my own settings but that is never going to be taken from me... because it can't be- and that is in fact how so many of these third-party settings started.

I have come across so many great and creative settings that were absolutely wonderful... but they were tacked to incredibly poor rulesets. A lot of latter things made by GDW come to mind, like 2300AD and Twilight 2000. (Original Traveller was a different beast from a different age, and cannot be judged similarly.) And if SJG had a limited OGL about settings and adventure modules then there would be an awesome ruleset out there for those creative people to wrap their wonderful settings around.

And that's why I'm so supportive of the idea of such a limited OGL for GURPS. I understand SJG's concerns about quality, but I don't see a problem with just requiring a "Designed for GURPS" blurb and a list of required SJG books on the cover. A BSF (Bog Standard Fantasy) might use Basic Set, Low-Tech, Magic... and maybe Martial Arts.

But especially since we have gotten wink-wink nudge-nudge type hints that a GURPS 5E isn't completely off the table I really don't see much risk on SJG's part if they do such an OGL for 4E. Though gamers sure do like to buy physical books so it'd be nice to get things publishing again.

[mburr0003]

Originally Posted by acrosome

I think that I am a more typical gamer than most of my fellow GURPS geeks in at least one key respect: I'd like to flip through a setting book that I like, grab an adventure module set it in with everything properly statted out, and run a game without either having to do the metric crapton of conversion work or "winging it".

There is a good chance of that being true. But then... if most of your fellow GURPS fans don't care about that...

It's an RoI thing. How much investment will be returned catering to the 'few' fans who want full worldbooks and "properly statted out" adventures?

Douglas Cole can answer as to the niche of "GURPS Fans who want a Nordic setting", and I'd argue that Nordlond is probably the second most popular fantasy right after "Generic Middle European Faux-Medieval Fantasy". Though, tastes have always been a varied thing.

Can you imagine if Forgotten Realms had been a GURPS setting?

As far as I'm concerned, it already is. But I'm one of those that never does a direct conversion, I prefer to do mash-ups and "evoke the feeling" conversions.

But especially since we have gotten wink-wink nudge-nudge type hints that a GURPS 5E isn't completely off the table...

I'm pretty sure you're reading way more into that singular Tik-Tok than there is. That was a way to get feedback, which was answered with "This is already done here, here, and here" and anything not directly addressed is probably in the works for 4e, excepting any actual core rules redesigns.

Which...

...I really don't see much risk on SJG's part if they do such an OGL for 4E.

There was very little actually changed between editions. So any OGL that fit 4e would probably equally apply to all editions before (baring TFT) and any going forward. Unless SJG radically alters the core rules setups.

Hence, they really couldn't do a "4e only OGL".

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by mburr0003

Douglas Cole can answer as to the niche of "GURPS Fans who want a Nordic setting", and I'd argue that Nordlond is probably the second most popular fantasy right after "Generic Middle European Faux-Medieval Fantasy". Though, tastes have always been a varied thing.

The typical reach of my books seems to be 400-600 people. Bestiary was a slight exception at 685, but it was also a very large and expensive book, what with the full-color hardback thing.

I would feel decidedly more comfortable serving the GURPS market with 50-100% more customers for a given title. As it happens, the "break even" point where you only cover development costs tends to run in the 400-500 range the way I run things, though I have only LOST money on the Nordlond Sagas kickstarters, and that because the project had already launched and prices were set before the core manuscripts of the bigger adventures grew by quite a bit.

If a new edition, or a revamp, or marketing, or mana from heaven were to increase the size of the population who actually purchase GURPS supplements by 2-3x, it would at least be a solid contender to start getting books that are more meaty from the get-go.

A 128-page full-color book probably needs a $50K crowdfunding effort ... which on a stand-alone basis requires about 1,400-2,000 backers if there are no discounts for crowdfunding and no back-catalog sales. That is to say: full-color GURPS releases of crowd-pleasing weight require a minimum of three times the usual audience (for me) to stand on their own.

(Edited to add: some of my larger releases have come with things like VTT packs and cards, which seem to be things folks want; this helps offset the substantial development costs of big books. The Bestiary in particular only became something approaching "a good deal" after a bunch of stretch goals were passed, plus the VTT and cards, and a non-trivial dent in my back-catalog pushing total funding up.)

[Ashtagon]

With the d20 open licence ecosystem, "open" normally includes freedom to create any number of new classes, races, skills, feats, spells, and monsters.

But in the context of a GURPS system, that doesn't necessarily (mutatis mutandis of course) have to be the case. Since most of the central content of GURPS books are crunchy rules,

What if...

* SJG's original campaign settings, including Yrth and Infinite Worlds, cannot be mentioned in any way, nor can 'suggestions' on how to integrate an original 3pp campaign setting into them. (This mirrors WotC withholding Forgotten Realms etc from the licence).
* Skills, skill tricks, advantages, disadvantages, perks, and flaws are kept off the table. Licensees can refer to them, but cannot reprint the rules for them, and cannot make new ones within a licenced product. (This differs from the 1.0a licence; I believe it is also a restriction on rights that a 3pp could conceivably have without a licence).
* Original campaign settings, adventures, and monster books, which SJG hasn't really focused on, could be considered available to 3pps. I'm open as to whether this should be clearly spelled out in the licence or left implied.
* The licence identifies the type of products that can be made (I expect this to be limited to print books and pdfs whose functionality is identical to a print book only). Anything further would be subject to separate negotiation, and outside the scope of the licence. (This differs from the 1.0a licence, which basically gave free reign to the type of product that could be made.)

The 1.0a OGL made a point of restricting rights that a non-licensee would have had. a GURPS open licence could do the same thing in order to product the rules from being changed, while still allowing content that complements SJG's work.

[Refplace]

Originally Posted by Ashtagon

What if...

* SJG's original campaign settings, including Yrth and Infinite Worlds, cannot be mentioned in any way, nor can 'suggestions' on how to integrate an original 3pp campaign setting into them. (This mirrors WotC withholding Forgotten Realms etc from the licence).
* Skills, skill tricks, advantages, disadvantages, perks, and flaws are kept off the table. Licensees can refer to them, but cannot reprint the rules for them, and cannot make new ones within a licenced product. (This differs from the 1.0a licence; I believe it is also a restriction on rights that a 3pp could conceivably have without a licence).
* Original campaign settings, adventures, and monster books, which SJG hasn't really focused on, could be considered available to 3pps. I'm open as to whether this should be clearly spelled out in the licence or left implied.
* The licence identifies the type of products that can be made (I expect this to be limited to print books and pdfs whose functionality is identical to a print book only). Anything further would be subject to separate negotiation, and outside the scope of the licence. (This differs from the 1.0a licence, which basically gave free reign to the type of product that could be made.)

The 1.0a OGL made a point of restricting rights that a non-licensee would have had. a GURPS open licence could do the same thing in order to product the rules from being changed, while still allowing content that complements SJG's work.

That is pretty much what I suggested to them. Offer two liscence types. Third Party as it is now and an open one restricted to new settings, adventures, locations, and foes.

[robertsconley]

Originally Posted by mburr0003

It's an RoI thing. How much investment will be returned catering to the 'few' fans who want full worldbooks and "properly statted out" adventures?

I had folks who were starting out in OSR publishing talk to me about why they had trouble getting sales. My reply was that the OSR label is not a magic want and is of only a limited help. It is all about recruiting patrons (not customers) who like your take on things. But first, they have to know what your take is and that means sharing stuff for free and interacting with folks on social media.

Then once you think you can get around 100 sales per year doing what you can in the time you have for a hobby, then going the extra mile to secure art, and a decent layout will be worth it.

From there you can bootstrap to whatever level of involvement you want.

And if you are somebody like Douglas Cole who already had a rep, the organizational skills and the creative skill, you can start further ahead along the curve.

But you have to keep in mind that you like creatively may be a niche that only has so much potential. But the good news is that in a world of Print on Demand, PDFs, and digital software, a publisher can support that niche professionally in the time one has for a hobby.

And you if get a lot of small publishers doing this like what happened with the OSR then very quickly things start coming back to life. And the ones who have the talent and organization will start to move ahead of the pack.

If I had the chance to make some Bat in the Attic products for GURPS, the first thing I would be doing is blogging and talking about all the things I do with GURPS, at what level of detail I do it at. Start sharing some things that show the potential of what I am offering. Then if the interest is there, I will write up my first product, get whatever approval process going, and once the draft is set, do a Kickstarter using print on demand and PDF.

The more open things are the easier this can work. As I can tweak the format to do what I need it to do and make it more useful out of the box.

Also note for the record, I am not interested in mucking around with the GURPS mechanics. I know the system very well, used it for two decades, and know what options I need to do what I want to do with GURPS.

Finally, SJ Games has a limited staff. They may simply don't have the time to handle dozens of folks publishing for GURPS with sales in the tens and low hundreds. Unfortunately, the way things are now for GURPS that is what is going to take unless somebody stumbles on a magic bullet that revives GURPS.

Two dozen or so folks trying different things in different formats to see what reignites interest. That is how the OSR brought dead editions of D&D back to life.

[acrosome]

Originally Posted by Ashtagon

With the d20 open licence ecosystem, "open" normally includes freedom to create any number of new classes, races, skills, feats, spells, and monsters.

But in the context of a GURPS system, that doesn't necessarily (mutatis mutandis of course) have to be the case. Since most of the central content of GURPS books are crunchy rules,

What if...

* SJG's original campaign settings, including Yrth and Infinite Worlds, cannot be mentioned in any way, nor can 'suggestions' on how to integrate an original 3pp campaign setting into them. (This mirrors WotC withholding Forgotten Realms etc from the licence).
* Skills, skill tricks, advantages, disadvantages, perks, and flaws are kept off the table. Licensees can refer to them, but cannot reprint the rules for them, and cannot make new ones within a licenced product. (This differs from the 1.0a licence; I believe it is also a restriction on rights that a 3pp could conceivably have without a licence).
* Original campaign settings, adventures, and monster books, which SJG hasn't really focused on, could be considered available to 3pps. I'm open as to whether this should be clearly spelled out in the licence or left implied.
* The licence identifies the type of products that can be made (I expect this to be limited to print books and pdfs whose functionality is identical to a print book only). Anything further would be subject to separate negotiation, and outside the scope of the licence. (This differs from the 1.0a licence, which basically gave free reign to the type of product that could be made.)

The 1.0a OGL made a point of restricting rights that a non-licensee would have had. a GURPS open licence could do the same thing in order to product the rules from being changed, while still allowing content that complements SJG's work.

Yes, that is all sort of what I mean when I say that the notional limited OGL should allow for-profit settings and adventures by 3rd party publishers, but not reprints of the SJG rulesets. (Or only very limited ones, such as "remember that Will caps at 14 for this use!".) Necessarily, it should also allow publishing one's own templates and creature stats.