PDA

View Full Version : Resurrecting D&D 3.5



Boci
2010-07-07, 06:46 PM
So I asked here: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=8871092#post8871092 to make sure it’s okay, but please note the limitations. Anyway, do you think it could happen that another company bought / made a deal for the license to publish D&D 3.5 material?
I'm not an expert on economics, but I'm guessing there is only so much money you can make from something that is out of print, so WotC would not lose much. And there is certainly an already established customer base for 3.5 books. In addition to the standard customers for any RPG, you have:
1. Diehard 3.5 fans who never converted to 4E
2. The D&D fans who use both
3. People introduced to D&D 4ed and want to try out some of the more previous editions
Just look here: http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=155381 that’s quite a few people apparently still willing to pay for 3.5 source books.
Certainly there are some companies apart from WotC that have some experience making 3.5 sourcebooks, so we have all the ingredients. Do you think it could happen? As someone who uses 3.5, would you start buying 3.5 books again, or make do with those already published? What company would you like it to be?
Personally, I do not know enough about the possible companies to have a favourite, but I am sure I would continue to buy them. As for could it happen? No idea, but I can always hope.

Defiant
2010-07-07, 06:47 PM
Not going to happen. I really don't see it, to be honest.

Wings of Peace
2010-07-07, 06:53 PM
Certainly there are some companies apart from WotC that have some experience making 3.5 sourcebooks,


If you're in the business of frosting cakes for a bakery and suddenly they decide that instead of vanilla cakes they will make chocolate cakes how long would you expect to stay in business if you decide you're going to keep on frosting just vanilla cakes?

Umael
2010-07-07, 06:54 PM
D&D 3.5 is a dead game in the way that Latin is a dead language.

(Please, re-read and consider what I said before leaping to conclusions.)

arguskos
2010-07-07, 06:55 PM
D&D 3.5 is a dead game in the way that Latin is a dead language.

(Please, re-read and consider what I said before leaping to conclusions.)
Not the main thing anymore, but still heavily used in many places? Cause, that's really the only thing I can think of that you mean with that statement.

Also, I'd be interested, but the odds of it happening are pretty low honestly.

Zovc
2010-07-07, 06:56 PM
What about Pathfinder? Is that related in any way to what you're talking about?

Fax Celestis
2010-07-07, 06:58 PM
It's been tried, trust me. WotC is a business primarily, and actively creating competition is not exactly a good business practice.

There are plenty of projects (including Pathfinder and my own d20 Rebirth (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=132683)) that are trying to do what they can with the OGL base and their own alterations, but really, I find myself wishing more and more that I could have access to three particular books in d20r.

Umael
2010-07-07, 06:58 PM
Not the main thing anymore, but still heavily used in many places? Cause, that's really the only thing I can think of that you mean with that statement.

Dead languages don't change. Official, there is nothing more being produced for D&D 3.5. However, that doesn't mean it isn't very popular or useful.

El Dorado
2010-07-07, 07:01 PM
Don't see it happening. It's hard enough for a game company to maintain profitability. Any revenue gained by selling the rights to a third party would quickly be offset by loss of market share to that same company.

Boci
2010-07-07, 07:14 PM
To the nay sayers: firstly, I am not saying I disagree with you. If I had to guess yes or no, will it happen, I would say no. But, lets consider the specifics of such an agreement:

1. WotC is very unlikely to say "Give us X money and you can have D&D 3.5". A temporary liscence is far more likely. This would prevent such an agreement from haunting WotC profits for two long.

2. WotC could gain a percentage of the profits of each book. I'm still confident the new company could benefit from such a deal even with these reduced profits.

Finally, such a move could increase confidence in WotC. I do not know if they are of significant number, but I am sure there are some role players who do not want to invest too heavily in 4ed because they are worried it will be abandoned when 5ed comes out.

As I said, I'm no expert on economics, and I doubt this could happen, but I find it interesting to think about and I hope that somehow it does work out.

EvilJoe15
2010-07-07, 07:16 PM
It's a nice pipe dream, but 5th being backwards compatible is more likely.

Fax Celestis
2010-07-07, 07:20 PM
1. WotC is very unlikely to say "Give us X money and you can have D&D 3.5". A temporary liscence is far more likely. This would prevent such an agreement from haunting WotC profits for two long.

2. WotC could gain a percentage of the profits of each book. I'm still confident the new company could benefit from such a deal even with these reduced profits.

Explicitly, this has been attempted before and been denied.

Boci
2010-07-07, 07:33 PM
Explicitly, this has been attempted before and been denied.

Dam. Oh well, I can always hope WotC screws up again and posts some other companies material and grants that company a limited liscence to publish 3.5 books as part of the court settlement.

arguskos
2010-07-07, 07:33 PM
Explicitly, this has been attempted before and been denied.
Out of curiosity, do you have any external links to such events? I've not heard of it, and would find it very interesting to peruse.

Fax Celestis
2010-07-07, 07:35 PM
Out of curiosity, do you have any external links to such events? I've not heard of it, and would find it very interesting to peruse.

I am unfortunately not at privilege to talk about specifics. Sufficient to say, I have an email, and the answer is "No. Never. Not even then."

Reluctance
2010-07-07, 07:35 PM
Go out and find a legal PDF of a pre-4E D&D book. WotC would clearly make money off the licensing fees, so either there's a rational reason why they're not keen on it or there's an irrational reason they're not keen on it. Either way, the amount of money you'd need to change Hasbro's mind would be far more than you could ever hope to recoup from sales.

arguskos
2010-07-07, 07:36 PM
I am unfortunately not at privilege to talk about specifics. Sufficient to say, I have an email, and the answer is "No. Never. Not even then."
Seriously? Damn. That's rough.

BritishBill
2010-07-07, 07:41 PM
I am one of those people lucky to play 3.5 and as much as I love it I dont see wizards allowing anybody to publish anything for it. They are really going all out on pushing 4th edition. All the investments they have put in it I dont see them allowing it to fail.

Lord Vampyre
2010-07-07, 07:42 PM
The OGL covers people wanting to make anything related to 3.5 supplements. The main problem with WotC selling the actual rights to 3.5 is actually in the trademark. They will never sell the D&D trademark or lease it while they are making money on the name in the form of 4E or later versions.

For them to allow another company the chance to use the trademark, opens them up to some major potential problems. Such as the company reselling the trademark. I suppose they could try to create some sort of gaming franchise. But in the end, I don't see it working out very well.

Rothen
2010-07-07, 07:44 PM
There's a reason Rich made this (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0032.html) comic.

Chances to get a license or agreement with WotC to use any of their intellectual property are pretty much nil.

There is a ton of homebrewed/non-official material out there on the net, though. The only problem is that you need to decode what is appropriate/balanced for a game yourself.

ericgrau
2010-07-07, 08:13 PM
I think after 5e WotC will handle the job themselves. Right now they want people to play 4e.

Morph Bark
2010-07-07, 08:13 PM
I'm guessing there is only so much money you can make from something that is out of print, so WotC would not lose much.

Aren't PDFs of the books still sold online? Other companies that would be potential buyers of the rights you describe could exploit that, and make 3.5 more popular than WotC's own 4E, which WotC would not want at all.

Boci
2010-07-07, 08:16 PM
Aren't PDFs of the books still sold online? Other companies that would be potential buyers of the rights you describe could exploit that, and make 3.5 more popular than WotC's own 4E, which WotC would not want at all.

I'm pretty sure WotC stopped selling PDF long ago, since it made pirating their product too easy.


I think after 5e WotC will handle the job themselves.

What exactly do you mean by that?

Mystic Muse
2010-07-07, 08:30 PM
If I were to have control (Just a pipe dream) Here's what I'd do.

1. Nerf casters a bit. Take out the more broken spells yadda yadda.
2. Replace the lower tier classes with homebrews (With permission from the creators of the homebrew's permission of course.)
3. Change the monster manual so that you can use the monters better as a player. (Anybody wanting to use monsters that you normally can't, I direct you Here) (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=142724)
4. Change a few of the rules* and emphasize the fact that these are all guidelines.


*alignment restrictions, All grafts automatically being evil, always X alignments, and clear up RAW.

ericgrau
2010-07-07, 10:11 PM
What exactly do you mean by that?
I was thinking old material like 2e pdfs but I may have been mistaken as I can't find such things. There is some random free material on the WotC website, but it's adventures and errata and such; things that were always free. Chances of new 3.5e material is slim to none. People can buy all the old material they want from used book sources.

KillianHawkeye
2010-07-08, 07:04 AM
The problem with this idea is that WotC has very little to gain by allowing companies to continue producing D&D 3.5 material. They don't care about 3.5 anymore now that they have 4e. If there's still new material for D&D 3.5, they think that less people will switch over to 4th Edition.

Gorbash
2010-07-08, 07:57 AM
I'm pretty sure WotC stopped selling PDF long ago, since it made pirating their product too easy.

No, they're just greedy for money. When you give people an option to buy a cheaper PDF version, or the more expensive paperback, a lot of them will buy the cheaper one. But if you offer them only the expensive option, those who don't want/know to get themselves involved in piracy will pay the full price.

Precisely that attitude has earned them the scorn of the gaming community, and they're not actually subduing the piracy of their products, since there's a pirated version of every book they ever published on internet.

AtwasAwamps
2010-07-08, 08:31 AM
Not to put too fine a point on it, but remember that WotC is now a part of Hasbro. For a major toy manufacturer and brand holder like Hasbro, ceding control of a brand is at the top of the “No Way In Hell” list of things to do. There are simply too many risks inherent in that. On top of that, you never, ever support an older version of a product you’re selling now…customer loyalty is one thing, good business is another. 4e is quite successful these days and while there is a die-hard crew that will never switch, WotC and Hasbro doesn’t NEED to care about that group and, I’m sorry to say…can’t afford to. Major companies like Hasbro were hit HARD during the recent economic difficulties in the U.S. and have neither the time nor the inclination to create a scenario in which the license another company to create a competing product that will not return 100% of the after-expenses profits to the core company.

From Hasbro’s point of view, 3.5 is an obsolete product that’s been updated to a newer, cooler, sleeker, more-friendly game. They don’t know why you would want the old one, and frankly, they don’t care.

Optimystik
2010-07-08, 08:47 AM
Precisely that attitude has earned them the scorn of the gaming community, and they're not actually subduing the piracy of their products, since there's a pirated version of every book they ever published on internet.

To be fair, it's a lot easier to unprotect a PDF than manually scan in 70-100 pages.


From Hasbro’s point of view, 3.5 is an obsolete product that’s been updated to a newer, cooler, sleeker, more-friendly game. They don’t know why you would want the old one, and frankly, they don’t care.

Sadly, I have to agree with this.

PairO'Dice Lost
2010-07-08, 08:50 AM
To be fair, it's a lot easier to unprotect a PDF than manually scan in 70-100 pages.

I believe his point was that every D&D book already exists in unlocked un-DRMed pirated form on the intertubes, so WotC stopping PDF sales now makes no difference whatsoever to piracy rates or convenience.

Frog Dragon
2010-07-08, 09:00 AM
I believe his point was that every D&D book already exists in unlocked un-DRMed pirated form on the intertubes, so WotC stopping PDF sales now makes no difference whatsoever to piracy rates or convenience.
Actually, it might even swing the numbers the other way.
Most of the 3.5 material disappeared around here from the local stores a while ago. This means that people wanting to get 3.5 books have three options. Buying Pdf, amazon/ebay/something similar or piracy. They took the only option that could give them more money off the table.

AtwasAwamps
2010-07-08, 09:08 AM
Actually, it might even swing the numbers the other way.
Most of the 3.5 material disappeared around here from the local stores a while ago. This means that people wanting to get 3.5 books have three options. Buying Pdf, amazon/ebay/something similar or piracy. They took the only option that could give them more money off the table.

Yes, because

A) The profit that option granted wasn't worth the cost of maintaining that service.

B) That service existing increased the chance of people looking to start with the old product instead of the more expensive new product.

C) Supporting obsolete product is not an effective business decision when your money comes from people making continued purchases.

3.5 players are not important to them. You're not buying new products and if they continue to support your decision to not buy new products, you never will. Congratulations on being a loyal fan for a long time. Here's a cookie. Buy our new stuff.

Nobody ever said business was NICE.

Thurbane
2010-07-08, 09:10 AM
I'd be happy if 3rd party companies kept producing new adventures and campaign settings for 3.5, using as much OGL as possible.

And I mean physical books - online PDFs are great, but I really prefer my material to be in hard copy, and nicely bpund into a book. :smallwink:

Dacia Brabant
2010-07-08, 11:20 AM
From Hasbro’s point of view, 3.5 is an obsolete product that’s been updated to a newer, cooler, sleeker, more-friendly game. They don’t know why you would want the old one, and frankly, they don’t care.

I'm sure that is their point of view, but I think they're wrong. Let's look at video games as a counter-example. The Elder Scrolls: Oblivion didn't kill The Elder Scrolls: Morrowind. When Warcraft 3 came along, Warcraft 1 and 2 didn't disappear from retail shelves, and World of Warcraft didn't push out Warcraft 3. Same with the Baldur's Gate series, the Icewind Dale series, the Neverwinter Nights series and now the Dragon Age series, which are all basically updates to the same gaming structure and all of which are still purchasable (NWN, an 8 year old game, only recently received its final update from the developer).

I don't know, maybe there's a fundamental difference between video gaming and tabletop gaming that I'm missing here, but it seems to me that a company can produce several different games in the same format without worrying about competing against itself. I mean this isn't like General Motors crippling itself by selling a bunch of basically identical mid-range sedans under different brands, mostly because games don't cost $25,000.

Frog Dragon
2010-07-08, 12:06 PM
I'm sure that is their point of view, but I think they're wrong. Let's look at video games as a counter-example. The Elder Scrolls: Oblivion didn't kill The Elder Scrolls: Morrowind. When Warcraft 3 came along, Warcraft 1 and 2 didn't disappear from retail shelves, and World of Warcraft didn't push out Warcraft 3. Same with the Baldur's Gate series, the Icewind Dale series, the Neverwinter Nights series and now the Dragon Age series, which are all basically updates to the same gaming structure and all of which are still purchasable (NWN, an 8 year old game, only recently received its final update from the developer).

I don't know, maybe there's a fundamental difference between video gaming and tabletop gaming that I'm missing here, but it seems to me that a company can produce several different games in the same format without worrying about competing against itself. I mean this isn't like General Motors crippling itself by selling a bunch of basically identical mid-range sedans under different brands, mostly because games don't cost $25,000.
The sedan analogy is flawed though. Say, you buy a cutting edge car. Then a few years after, they bring a new, bigger, better, smoother, etd (in their words) to the market. Do you buy the new thing, or are you going to still going to around driving your old car?
For most people, I'd guess they would keep the old car instead of shelling more money for the next big thing.
Not so for tabletop gamers. A lot of them buy the new books and leave the last edition stuff in the shelf, or ebay them. Or something, Wizards doesn't care.
Anyway, the point is. When a car company releases a new "edition" most drivers using a car from the company aren't switching. It'll be a minor percentage+ those who are looking into buying a car now.
When a gaming company releases a new edition, they're going to get profits from most of the players of their old game + and those who just came into the hobby. So supporting old stuff could, infact lose money.
(Yeah, AtwasAwamps conviced me.)

Gorbash
2010-07-08, 12:19 PM
I believe his point was that every D&D book already exists in unlocked un-DRMed pirated form on the intertubes, so WotC stopping PDF sales now makes no difference whatsoever to piracy rates or convenience.

My point exactly, you just put it better than I did. :smallsmile:

Kurald Galain
2010-07-08, 12:27 PM
I'm sure that is their point of view, but I think they're wrong. Let's look at video games as a counter-example. The Elder Scrolls: Oblivion didn't kill The Elder Scrolls: Morrowind. When Warcraft 3 came along, Warcraft 1 and 2 didn't disappear from retail shelves, and World of Warcraft didn't push out Warcraft 3.

The difference is this: if you buy, say, Warcraft 2, you buy it once and are done with it. There may be an expansion pack at some point, but it is primarily one sale, and after that the publisher wants you to go and buy something else.

Whereas if you buy the D&D PHB, WOTC hopes that you will also buy the AV, MP, FRPG, PA/SAS and other books, as well as take a long-term subscription to their website model.

Aside from that, pen-and-paper RPGs are very much a niche market as compared to computer games.

AtwasAwamps
2010-07-08, 12:42 PM
I'm sure that is their point of view, but I think they're wrong. Let's look at video games as a counter-example. The Elder Scrolls: Oblivion didn't kill The Elder Scrolls: Morrowind. When Warcraft 3 came along, Warcraft 1 and 2 didn't disappear from retail shelves, and World of Warcraft didn't push out Warcraft 3. Same with the Baldur's Gate series, the Icewind Dale series, the Neverwinter Nights series and now the Dragon Age series, which are all basically updates to the same gaming structure and all of which are still purchasable (NWN, an 8 year old game, only recently received its final update from the developer).

I don't know, maybe there's a fundamental difference between video gaming and tabletop gaming that I'm missing here, but it seems to me that a company can produce several different games in the same format without worrying about competing against itself. I mean this isn't like General Motors crippling itself by selling a bunch of basically identical mid-range sedans under different brands, mostly because games don't cost $25,000.

I am afraid that your counter-examples simply don’t work because of the differences in the business. The most important of these is the fact that when you are dealing with a video game, you are dealing with finite content.

Allow me to explain. If you played Baldur’s Gate 1 from start to finish, you have a complete experience in that game. You are, technically, done with it. You’ve completed a story and seen what you have to see. Sure, you may replay it, but the fact remains that you have finished with the Baldur’s Gate 1 experience. Hence, when Baldur’s Gate 2 is released, or an expansion is released, you have an incentive to purchase it…you are seeking a new experience based on previous finite experiences. This is the same situation with The Elder Scrolls series and Warcraft 1-3…each of these games was essentially a self-contained experience that ENCOURAGED you to purchase the experience’s continuation. This is true of every series you mentioned. It should also be noted that while WC1 and WC2 weren’t bumped off the shelves, their rate of sales dropped DRAMATICALLY upon the release of WC3…because WC3 was the series star at that point. Support for the previous games was also completely dropped at that point. Also keep in mind cost…video game production, especially for the PC, is front-loaded, with the majority of the money going into programming costs. Pressing out and sending CDs/DVDs around is extremely cheap, especially compared to hardcover book publications (doubly so now, with production costs skyrocketing in mainstay production countries overseas and US manufacturers being a bit slow trying to grab other opportunities just yet).

In the cases where games have lasted a considerable amount of time, take a look at those games…they contain extremely heavy PLAYER-GENERATED content, which allows them to remain popular past the traditional breaking point of games. This, of course, may the reason you would choose to say that 3.5 and 4.0 can co-exist and co-publish, but you are unfortunately missing something VERY VITAL – Books can be shared. In my current group, every book is owned by two people. We converge at their home and share their books. In the video game example, each fan must make those purchases themselves. You cannot play NWN with your friends if you don’t have NWN, whereas I can make a paladin if someone will let me borrow the PHB. There is a given amount video game fans have to spend no matter what which is not a factor in tabletop gaming.

You also bring up WoW in your post, which is a bit like shooting yourself in the foot. Vivendi-Blizzard has not released another MMO because they know it would have to compete with their own beast, and they can’t risk shattering their own cash-cow OR launching a failed product. Hence the acceleration of patches and content for WoW, looking forward to a time when they can shut it down and bring out their new products. Yeah, D3 and SC2 are coming out, but those are NOT competing with WoW directly…they are competing for time, certainly, but Vivendi-Blizzard is more than making up for that with its changes to Battle.net and the current pricing system of most video games (>$50 for most brand new PC games is fairly common).

In short, yes…video games and cars are sold on very different principles than table top games. Sales strategies and potential marketing techniques vary greatly from category to category, which make comparisons like this cumbersome and often unintentionally vague. It’s best to stick to comparisons within the same category to do so.

I’ll give you what you should have gone with…White Wolf ;) But since I’ve talked for so long already and I’m sure you’re all bored with my ramblings, we can touch on that another time.

Yora
2010-07-08, 12:51 PM
As I see it, Wizards first stoped printing of books and then stopped selling of pdfs. While they would make some monney with a pdf, it has the nasty side effect of making more people keep playing 3rd Edition.
And with 4th Edition, they really want to see 3rd Edition removed from public consciousness. But they made the huge mistake of introducing the OGL, and now they can't stop people from releasing 3rd party material.

The must be only one D&D, and that one is 4th Edition!

Oh, wait (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/drfe/20100706)...

AtwasAwamps
2010-07-08, 12:58 PM
As I see it, Wizards first stoped printing of books and then stopped selling of pdfs. While they would make some monney with a pdf, it has the nasty side effect of making more people keep playing 3rd Edition.
And with 4th Edition, they really want to see 3rd Edition removed from public consciousness. But they made the huge mistake of introducing the OGL, and now they can't stop people from releasing 3rd party material.

The must be only one D&D, and that one is 4th Edition!

Oh, wait (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/drfe/20100706)...

Meh. Standard Ranger vs. Mystic Ranger vs. Wildhshape ranger. They did the same thing in 3.5, they just made it more of a pain in the butt to know what all the options were. At least they're up front about it this time. They still just want your money.

The Big Dice
2010-07-08, 01:23 PM
The must be only one D&D, and that one is 4th Edition!

Oh, wait (http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/drfe/20100706)...

What scares me is that box is an almost exact replica of the second D&D set I ever owned.

Darth Stabber
2010-07-08, 02:03 PM
WoTC is not going to make more 3.5 D&D since it is 4e's biggest competitor. D&D is by far the biggest P&P RPG, for better or for worse. Nothing really competes with D&D on an even playing field since it is synonymous with the genre (I have met several people who play D&D and have no idea that non-d20 games even exist). Even with no new books 3.5 is keeping a lot of people from buying into 4e.

WoTC is not going to exacerbate this by giving it's competitior more ammo. They are loyal first and formost to the stock holders, not the gamers. They may be semi-responsive to what we want, but that is because they cater to a small and vocal niche market, and they have to in order to maintain their top dog status. They can't stop others from publishing under OGL, but they can drop all support for anything not 4e (and they pretty much have).

Bottom line, Deal with OGL/homebrew materials, switch to 4e. Those are your options, I recomend the first but I am biased as a homebrewer.

Ruinix
2010-07-08, 02:47 PM
no this kind of thread again ¬¬ *sigh*

is 2ed dead? i say no, there is some ppl there still playing 2ed. same for 3-3,5.

AtwasAwamps
2010-07-08, 02:58 PM
no this kind of thread again ¬¬ *sigh*

is 2ed dead? i say no, there is some ppl there still playing 2ed. same for 3-3,5.

Commercially, it's a corpse.

Latin's a dead language, but they still teach it in schools. Nobody's saying people aren't playing the game. But WotC is done supporting it.

Yora
2010-07-08, 03:01 PM
Commercially, it's a corpse.
More like a zombie, that just can't get removed from the market.

What's your point?

Darth Stabber
2010-07-08, 03:35 PM
That would mean bad things if I tried to cure what I don't like about 3.5.

gdiddy
2010-07-08, 03:37 PM
WotC's treatment of the franchise has left me happily ignoring their recent products.

I will never buy a 4e product, because the lack of 4e SRD. Everything else after that merely adds to the injury.

Much rather play Fudge or the Pool. Or hell, DnD's cool goth younger sister, WoD. Or reflavored WHFRPG. Or Dark heresy. Or Exalted. Or checkers. Or LARP a game that involves actual dentistry.

There can be no resurrection of 3.5. But the SRD is the phylactery of 3.5 and it's kind of eternal for that.

dragonfan6490
2010-07-08, 03:45 PM
There can be no resurrection of 3.5. But the SRD is the phylactery of 3.5 and it's kind of eternal for that.

Can I steal this quote for my sig? That is epic.

gdiddy
2010-07-08, 03:47 PM
Absolutely. I was kind of proud of it.

Sir_Elderberry
2010-07-08, 04:32 PM
It seems the answer to "Where would you hide your phylactery?" doesn't involve making it a grain of sand or on a personal demiplane or on the moon. No, hide your phylactery on the Internet.

PairO'Dice Lost
2010-07-08, 05:52 PM
It seems the answer to "Where would you hide your phylactery?" doesn't involve making it a grain of sand or on a personal demiplane or on the moon. No, hide your phylactery on the Internet.

Yep, just digitize your phylactery, put it up on a torrent site with a popular name and you'll be ensured to have at least a few thousand copies floating around. You'll never die, though you will have to deal with materializing in a nerd's basement somewhere every time you're destroyed.

...actually, that's the best-case scenario, isn't it? Who would respect and fear you more when you reform than someone who knows what a lich is and knows he's at least 5 levels too low to take you on?

[/derail]

Aroka
2010-07-08, 06:16 PM
What exactly is the difference between a third party creating 3.5 OGL stuff (like Pathfinder) and a "3.5 resurrection" ? Seems functionally identical to me. Was the 3.5 OGL revoked or something?


I will never buy a 4e product, because the lack of 4e SRD. Everything else after that merely adds to the injury.

This is just baffling. So there's two RPGs you'd ever buy - D&D 3.5 and Mongoose's Runequest? What?

Boci
2010-07-08, 06:21 PM
What exactly is the difference between a third party creating 3.5 OGL stuff (like Pathfinder) and a "3.5 resurrection" ? Seems functionally identical to me. Was the 3.5 OGL revoked or something?

The latter would be far more easy to get passed a DM and people would trust it more.


This is just baffling. So there's two RPGs you'd ever buy - D&D 3.5 and Mongoose's Runequest? What?

How did you interprit that from "I do not use D&D 4ed".

Aroka
2010-07-08, 06:25 PM
The latter would be far more easy to get passed a DM and people would trust it more.

These people would have to be pretty unintelligent to think there's a difference between "non WotC official 3.5 D&D" and "non WoTC OGL 3.5 D&D"...


How did you interprit that from "I do not use D&D 4ed".

Because he said the lack of SRD was the sole reason he wouldn't buy 4E (everything else just added insult to injury), and only those two games have a SRD.

Oslecamo
2010-07-08, 06:30 PM
Honestly, D&D 3.5 didn't die. It evolved into 3.X. Just in this forums you can see plenty of people playing, discussing and homebrewing it. Even the author of the comic that originated this forums keeps using 3.5.

Wotc really did something great 3.5. It won't die so easily as the release of a new massively diferent edition.

Tecnically nobody will ever be able to profit from it for free, but there's more than enough people out there willing to make public homebrew.

Boci
2010-07-08, 06:43 PM
These people would have to be pretty unintelligent to think there's a difference between "non WotC official 3.5 D&D" and "non WoTC OGL 3.5 D&D"...

No one ever said humans were that rational, especially when it comes to determining whether or not to trust something.

PairO'Dice Lost
2010-07-08, 07:12 PM
What exactly is the difference between a third party creating 3.5 OGL stuff (like Pathfinder) and a "3.5 resurrection" ? Seems functionally identical to me. Was the 3.5 OGL revoked or something?

Third party publishers can only use OGL stuff, whereas if 3.5 were officially supported again they could use anything. First off, one of the major complaints with 3e was that they'd introduce all this cool stuff and we'd never see any support for it again, so bringing back an OGL-only 3e would be a step backward on that front; second, how many times have you seen people in the Homebrew forums say "Yeah, it'd be a great idea to use X or Y for this, but it's not OGL, so...."

AtwasAwamps
2010-07-08, 08:10 PM
[QUOTE=Oslecamo;8880199]
Tecnically nobody will ever be able to profit from it for freeQUOTE]

Which is my point. I still play, enjoy, and love 3.5 myself. Commercially, it's dead. As a game system, it's immortal. People are still playing 1st edition.

Aroka
2010-07-08, 08:15 PM
Third party publishers can only use OGL stuff, whereas if 3.5 were officially supported again they could use anything. First off, one of the major complaints with 3e was that they'd introduce all this cool stuff and we'd never see any support for it again, so bringing back an OGL-only 3e would be a step backward on that front; second, how many times have you seen people in the Homebrew forums say "Yeah, it'd be a great idea to use X or Y for this, but it's not OGL, so...."

The forum bit is strictly about GitP forum rules - that's the only thing preventing references to non-OGL material here. As for the rest, I'm not sure why it'd be a problem - surely you can reference non-OGL material, you just can't reprint it? (Granted, it's years since I even looked at the OGL.)

PairO'Dice Lost
2010-07-08, 08:27 PM
The forum bit is strictly about GitP forum rules - that's the only thing preventing references to non-OGL material here. As for the rest, I'm not sure why it'd be a problem - surely you can reference non-OGL material, you just can't reprint it? (Granted, it's years since I even looked at the OGL.)

Well, I was more referring to things like Fax's d20r, where the authors intend to publish later and thus can't use non-OGL stuff regardless of GitP rules. And of course you can reference non-OGL material, but it means no new material for non-core stuff (which already has tons of expansion material), which raises the question of why you'd want to resurrect 3e to begin with.

Thrice Dead Cat
2010-07-08, 08:53 PM
This is rather a silly idea, but couldn't we all just wait for the license for 3.5 to run out?:smalltongue:

Aroka
2010-07-08, 08:54 PM
This is rather a silly idea, but couldn't we all just wait for the license for 3.5 to run out?:smalltongue:

What exactly does this accomplish that working under the OGL won't? The non-OGL material will still be copyrighted.

Thurbane
2010-07-08, 09:26 PM
Can I steal this quote for my sig? That is epic.
Agreed - if my own sig wasn't already full to bursting with 3.5 goodness, I'd sig that in a heartbeat! :smallwink:

Kudos gdiddy! :smallsmile:

Fax Celestis
2010-07-08, 10:26 PM
This is rather a silly idea, but couldn't we all just wait for the license for 3.5 to run out?:smalltongue:

The copyright expires in 95 years from publication or 120 years from creation, whichever is shorter. I'm kind of hoping to be published before then.

Mystic Muse
2010-07-08, 10:34 PM
The copyright expires in 95 years from publication or 120 years from creation, whichever is shorter. I'm kind of hoping to be published before then.

Yeah, and that's if they don't decide to renew the license.

Aroka
2010-07-08, 10:36 PM
Yeah, and that's if they don't decide to renew the license.

Copyright, license, trademark, etc. are all different, and all probably play into publishing related material.

gdiddy
2010-07-09, 09:52 AM
What exactly is the difference between a third party creating 3.5 OGL stuff (like Pathfinder) and a "3.5 resurrection" ? Seems functionally identical to me. Was the 3.5 OGL revoked or something?



This is just baffling. So there's two RPGs you'd ever buy - D&D 3.5 and Mongoose's Runequest? What?

No. WotC gained my trust with the SRD after they announced 3.0. "Okay. They're messing with my childhood. They're not really an evil corporation. At least they're expanding the hobby with an open source ruleset and haven't changed the rules around so I have to buy their minis. At least they're not Games Workshop."

My faith was shaken by the whole "We forgot to playtest, so here is 3.5," but I reserved my judgement. It was an obvious money grab, but hey, I still had the SRD.

Eight years after they gained my trust, they completely lost my trust and money when they announced that there would be no 4e SRD. My children will ask me why I won't buy them Hasbro toys. My only recourse will be "You wouldn't understand. I'll tell you when you're older."

I'm only sorry I partially financed 4e by buying so many 3.5 products.

Also, my primary two roleplaying systems, Fudge and The Pool, both are available for free online.

Like I said, though, if someone developed some kind of LARP that involved performing dentistry on me, it would see my participation before another dollar found its way to WotC.

Optimystik
2010-07-09, 09:56 AM
The copyright expires in 95 years from publication or 120 years from creation, whichever is shorter. I'm kind of hoping to be published before then.

Oh, fine... If being alive is that important to you.

Ormagoden
2010-07-09, 10:04 AM
Like I said, though, if someone developed some kind of LARP that involved performing dentistry on me, it would see my participation before another dollar found its way to WotC.

THAT CAN BE ARRANGED!
http://www.movieforum.com/people/actors/alanrickman/images/sheriff.jpg

AtwasAwamps
2010-07-09, 10:04 AM
No. WotC gained my trust with the SRD after they announced 3.0. "Okay. They're messing with my childhood. They're not really an evil corporation. At least they're expanding the hobby with an open source ruleset and haven't changed the rules around so I have to buy their minis. At least they're not Games Workshop."

My faith was shaken by the whole "We forgot to playtest, so here is 3.5," but I reserved my judgement. It was an obvious money grab, but hey, I still had the SRD.

Eight years after they gained my trust, they completely lost my trust and money when they announced that there would be no 4e SRD. My children will ask me why I won't buy them Hasbro toys. My only recourse will be "You wouldn't understand. I'll tell you when you're older."

I'm only sorry I partially financed 4e by buying so many 3.5 products.

Also, my primary two roleplaying systems, Fudge and The Pool, both are available for free online.

Like I said, though, if someone developed some kind of LARP that involved performing dentistry on me, it would see my participation before another dollar found its way to WotC.

Soooo...you don't like companies that pursue aggressive business practices? You're...not going to be able to buy your kids much at all, you know.

gdiddy
2010-07-09, 10:17 AM
Soooo...you don't like companies that pursue aggressive business practices? You're...not going to be able to buy your kids much at all, you know.


I dislike companies that's aggressive business practices cause me injury.

Don't get me wrong. I am not crying in my office right now over the state of modern DnD. The biggest crime WotC has perpetrated on me is behaving in a way that both makes me feel old and makes me talk like an angry nerd. But that's enough injury for me.

My children will not have Hasbro toys. I will not buy a single other WotC product, ever. If I outlive the company, I will revel in their ashes.

As a person, you have to enjoy the little pleasures.

AtwasAwamps
2010-07-09, 10:20 AM
I dislike companies that's aggressive business practices cause me injury.

Don't get me wrong. I am not crying in my office right now over the state of modern DnD. The biggest crime WotC has perpetrated on me is behaving in a way that both makes me feel old and makes me talk like an angry nerd. But that's enough injury for me.

My children will not have Hasbro toys. I will not buy a single other WotC product, ever. If I outlive the company, I will revel in their ashes.

As a person, you have to enjoy the little pleasures.


...Can we be friends? Your honesty is incredibly refreshing.

Ormagoden
2010-07-09, 10:30 AM
...Can we be friends? Your honesty is incredibly refreshing.



THAT CAN BE ARRANGED!
http://www.movieforum.com/people/actors/alanrickman/images/sheriff.jpg

gdiddy
2010-07-09, 10:31 AM
How is my honesty refreshing?

I'm curious.

Knaight
2010-07-09, 10:59 AM
No. WotC gained my trust with the SRD after they announced 3.0. "Okay. They're messing with my childhood. They're not really an evil corporation. At least they're expanding the hobby with an open source ruleset and haven't changed the rules around so I have to buy their minis. At least they're not Games Workshop."

My faith was shaken by the whole "We forgot to playtest, so here is 3.5," but I reserved my judgement. It was an obvious money grab, but hey, I still had the SRD.

...

I'm only sorry I partially financed 4e by buying so many 3.5 products.

Also, my primary two roleplaying systems, Fudge and The Pool, both are available for free online.

So, is it that you will only use games with at least a significant portion free? Odds are you are missing out, though D&D in particular needs an SRD as it is so expensive for what it covers. 60-100 dollars just to get started on a tiny subset of fantasy is a bit beyond most other systems. Most of the actual aggressive business practices you mentioned are targeted towards developers, not gamers. The lack of the SRD is a minor nuisance, the "you can't produce one product in both systems" rule is an obnoxious hurdle.

...

Sure, Fudge and The Pool are avaliable for free online. Fudge also has a lot of stuff available as supplements (starting with the entire Fudge Factor magazine). At the same time, you are missing out on a lot of brilliant stuff if you don't buy the 10th anniversary edition. Less brilliant stuff than if you never notice Fudge Factor perhaps, but there are still significant quantities.

Bagelz
2010-07-09, 11:04 AM
I'm a little confused by this whole thread.
There are still 3.x suppliments being printed, most notably piazo's pathfinder
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/
and i believe sword and wizardry are still publishing supplements.

Why would wotc need to sell the rights, the open gaming license still allows for compatible publications. If you are looking for 3.75, that's basically pathfinder, and with the exception of minor combat changes, it is compatible with 3.5.

So what more are you looking for? more "official" 3.5 stuff that wotc says is official? because the dozens of books out there are not enough? (I hear alot more complaints about having to buy another book than I do about a book not coming out fast enough).

Debihuman
2010-07-09, 11:30 AM
I'm still homebrewing in 3.5 so it isn't dead for me.

Debby

Knaight
2010-07-09, 11:44 AM
I'm a little confused by this whole thread.
There are still 3.x suppliments being printed, most notably piazo's pathfinder
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/
and i believe sword and wizardry are still publishing supplements.

Why would wotc need to sell the rights, the open gaming license still allows for compatible publications. If you are looking for 3.75, that's basically pathfinder, and with the exception of minor combat changes, it is compatible with 3.5.

So what more are you looking for? more "official" 3.5 stuff that wotc says is official? because the dozens of books out there are not enough? (I hear alot more complaints about having to buy another book than I do about a book not coming out fast enough).

Not everything in wotc is OGL, so there are restrictions. I couldn't republish the warlock class with a bunch of new invocations for instance, and when some of the most loved stuff in the system (Tome of Battle, Magic of Incarnum) is non OGL, it is inconvenient.

Fax Celestis
2010-07-09, 11:47 AM
Not everything in wotc is OGL, so there are restrictions. I couldn't republish the warlock class with a bunch of new invocations for instance, and when some of the most loved stuff in the system (Tome of Battle, Magic of Incarnum) is non OGL, it is inconvenient.

Pretty much this.

Draz74
2010-07-09, 11:53 AM
My children will not have Hasbro toys. I will not buy a single other WotC product, ever. If I outlive the company, I will revel in their ashes.

As a person, you have to enjoy the little pleasures.

LOL.

Thank goodness German board games have started taking over the board game market ... since Hasbro has a monolithic monopoly over American ones. (No, seriously. Parker Brothers? Milton Bradley? Avalon Hill? All owned by Hasbro. :smallyuk:)

Optimystik
2010-07-09, 11:55 AM
Some of WotC's stuff is derived from elsewhere, however. In Hyperconscious there is a PrC called the Chakra Savant, who has many of the same chakras as the Meditant and Incarnum classes, neither of which are OGL. So it seems that a concept taken from elsewhere can be fair game so long as it is not used in the same way as a non-OGL class uses it.

Knaight
2010-07-09, 12:08 PM
LOL.

Thank goodness German board games have started taking over the board game market ... since Hasbro has a monolithic monopoly over American ones. (No, seriously. Parker Brothers? Milton Bradley? Avalon Hill? All owned by Hasbro. :smallyuk:)

Not that any of them other than Avalon Hill ever produce decent games anyways.