GURPS Lite and a Open gaming license?

[dataweaver]

Originally Posted by Varyon

Honestly, after having recently read a bit (a very small bit, mind you) about the OGL changes, I kinda assumed the question in the thread was meant to roughly be "Now that d20's OGL is being shanked in a back alley, are there any plans for GURPS to try to fill the vacuum left behind?"

Honestly, I don't think it would work. Unfortunately, GURPS does not appear to be what D&D fans are looking for; so if you're expecting Steve Jackson Games to find a new audience in D&D fans who are walking away because of OGL 1.1, I suspect you'd be sorely disappointed. And besides: even if they did, I doubt that an SJG OGL would translate to SJG sales.

If Hasbro goes through with their alienation of their fan base, I think the more likely outcome will be something like Paizo releasing a Pathfinder 3e that's “20% different” or whatever's needed to be free of the OGL entirely, while still being similar enough to D&D that the disgruntled game will flock there.

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Varyon

Honestly, after having recently read a bit (a very small bit, mind you) about the OGL changes, I kinda assumed the question in the thread was meant to roughly be "Now that d20's OGL is being shanked in a back alley, are there any plans for GURPS to try to fill the vacuum left behind?"

That's the right question. I suspect "oh, let's stick our hand in that slow-motion meatgrinder!" was not looked on favorably. Just a hunch tho.



(seriously: tongue in cheek speculation. But really...doesn't that seem like "where angels fear to tread?")

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by dataweaver

... Paizo releasing a Pathfinder 3e that's “20% different” or whatever's needed to be free of the OGL entirely, while still being similar enough to D&D that the disgruntled game will flock there.

One of the Paizo folks today - and I regret I've been so deep in so many sources I can't link to where I saw it - basically said the only reason we didn't yoink the OGL from PF2 was it was easier to just do that than do the work of generating our own version of a third-party license, vetting it, etc.

So I'd 100% expect something...let's call it PF2.1.0a...to be forthcoming as soon as the math is done on current inventory, time needed to change over, and evaluating the good will there.

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Witchking

While I would not 'technically' disagree with you; considering the leaked OGL 1.1 is based around Gross Revenues...

Well the people Wotc/Hasbro would be looking at most likely would intend to profit...since the lowest (we want a taste) tier apparently starts at $50,000 Gross Revenue (and is also subject to abrupt change) they will likely take money from a lot of people not within yelling distance of actual profit.

A lot of folks are pointing out "revenue, not profit?!" but honestly, if you've seen the shenanigans about revenue and profit that the movie industry is always accused of (and has been proven a few times?) I don't see how any distant party would do anything OTHER than revenue. It's the cleanest, most obvious, and least intrusive thing. "No, I'm not going to be paid for my IP based on whether or not you know how to run a company's internals. Your lack of ability to control spending isn't my problem."

And it's not like "X percent off the top" isn't a normal practice for a LOT of things.

"This could make a mediocre project unprofitable!"
"Plan better." [1]


[1] This 100% applies to me, by the way.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

A lot of folks are pointing out "revenue, not profit?!" but honestly, if you've seen the shenanigans about revenue and profit that the movie industry is always accused of (and has been proven a few times?) I don't see how any distant party would do anything OTHER than revenue.

I think the main point is "$750k isn't as much as it sounds like", though I think people also don't realize how shoestring most RPG operations actually are.

[WingedKagouti]

Originally Posted by Refplace

Also it needs to not violate copyright, trademarks, Image Use guidelines, and apply to the ToS.

I consider that to be an always implied rule, no company can condone violations of those rights without facing some sort of legal consequences.

Originally Posted by Witchking

While I would not 'technically' disagree with you; considering the leaked OGL 1.1 is based around Gross Revenues...

I was mostly referring to profits as what Hasbro/WotC would think of as "lost" profits (ie. money they'd have gotten with a normal licensing agreement), sorry for not being clear about that.

[Willy]

Originally Posted by dataweaver

Honestly, I don't think it would work. Unfortunately, GURPS does not appear to be what D&D fans are looking for; so if you're expecting Steve Jackson Games to find a new audience in D&D fans who are walking away because of OGL 1.1, I suspect you'd be sorely disappointed. And besides: even if they did, I doubt that an SJG OGL would translate to SJG sales.

I disagree, 4th Edition ist already weak in adventures and had no new worlds and few campaign backgrounds for years. If fans or other companys are allowed to make money with such projekts SJG will make profit and sales from it.

The players and GMs will still need the Basic Set, and stuff like High Tech, Bio Tech etc for running their games. This would help both sides.

Originally Posted by dataweaver

If Hasbro goes through with their alienation of their fan base, I think the more likely outcome will be something like Paizo releasing a Pathfinder 3e that's “20% different” or whatever's needed to be free of the OGL entirely, while still being similar enough to D&D that the disgruntled game will flock there.

That´s a sure bet! Pathfinder was always profiting from mistakes of D&D, and it´s a great system. If Hasbro does what they are planning, they will make pathfinder even more liked and bought by the fans than before.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by dataweaver

Honestly, I don't think it would work. Unfortunately, GURPS does not appear to be what D&D fans are looking for; so if you're expecting Steve Jackson Games to find a new audience in D&D fans who are walking away because of OGL 1.1, I suspect you'd be sorely disappointed. And besides: even if they did, I doubt that an SJG OGL would translate to SJG sales.

To be clear, I'm not saying SJG should try to fill that void - rather, going into the thread, I assumed that was more-or-less what OP was hinting at.

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

But really...doesn't that seem like "where angels fear to tread?"

Indeed. If the OGL is problematic for basically the TTRPG juggernaut, it's not unlikely that any smaller company that tried to fill that void would find itself undergoing explosive decompression.

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

A lot of folks are pointing out "revenue, not profit?!" but honestly, if you've seen the shenanigans about revenue and profit that the movie industry is always accused of (and has been proven a few times?) I don't see how any distant party would do anything OTHER than revenue. It's the cleanest, most obvious, and least intrusive thing. "No, I'm not going to be paid for my IP based on whether or not you know how to run a company's internals. Your lack of ability to control spending isn't my problem."

As you hint, the issue isn't just competence, but corruption. If you're $20,000 over some breakpoint, you give your CEO a $20,000 bonus, buy $10,000 worth of office furniture from your cousin at a 100% markup, etc, rather than paying at the higher rate.

[robertsconley]

I already stated my strong opinions on why companies and SJ Games should have a open 3PP licensing program in the past here and elsewhere.

I will point out that no company in the industry has the manpower or capital to exploit its IP to the fullest not even Hasbro/Wizards. Given the situation with digital technology and the Internet, the market advantage is with those who effectively harness their fanbase into producing content for their system.

Likewise, the social situation that surrounds RPGs systems (FATE, Savage Worlds, etc.) means that the original publisher's work is considered the premium product and the first place that the fans of the system will look.

For an extreme example of this in action look at Evil Hat and Fate.

[David L Pulver]

Originally Posted by robertsconley

Likewise, the social situation that surrounds RPGs systems (FATE, Savage Worlds, etc.) means that the original publisher's work is considered the premium product and the first place that the fans of the system will look.

Sometimes that is the case. I did some freelance work for a modest-sized company, and we produced a core book with a detailed metasystem. We did not have a huge budget, but we did a perfectly decent core book for that with good B&W art, etc. In a fit of enthusiasm, the boss opted to release almost all of the book with an open content SRD, hoping other people would use it to design adventures or support material. About 2 months later, a competing but slightly larger company released there own version of our SRD as essentially a clone of our original book-- with *better* art and *extra* content. Naturally they became "the first place fans went" and the months of design work we'd done were wasted