# Important! Interview opportunity - what do you want to know about the GSL?



## Piratecat (Apr 21, 2008)

We have a unique opportunity for an exclusive interview about the GSL. Morrus and I will select a handful of questions to ask WotC and get answers. Quick, what are the most important things you want to know?

I'll be submitting a list in approximately an hour from this post.

Thanks, everyone.


----------



## Alzrius (Apr 21, 2008)

Does the GSL really carry a "poison pill" clause that forbids companies making GSL-based products from making any OGL-based products?

If so, will there be an exception to allow for the continued sale of existing OGL products indefinitely, so long as no more are made?

Also (if the "poison pill" clause is there) will there be language to prevent companies from creating subsidiary/sister companies to publish OGL products while the main company publishes GSL products (or vice versa)?

Also (if the "poison pill" clause is there) will there be penalties for companies who make GSL-based products, and then produce an OGL product?

Also (if the "poison pill" clause is there) is there a chance it could be limited solely to products that reference the d20 or Modern d20 SRDs in the OGL Section 15, rather than extending to the entire OGL?

EDIT: Will the GSL allow for certain parts of third-party products to be used in other third-party products? That is, will certain sections of third-party books be similar to "Open Game Content" that others can re-use?


----------



## 2WS-Steve (Apr 21, 2008)

If Mongoose Publishing chooses to publish under the GSL, will they have to discontinue publishing games completely unrelated to the 3.5 SRD but using the OGL, such as Mongoose Runequest and Mongoose's Traveler?


----------



## Greylock (Apr 21, 2008)

Is it truly all or nothing? That's the question everyone wants an answer to.


----------



## Kristian Serrano (Apr 21, 2008)

Will WotC continue to sell its own d20 PDFs (D20 Modern, 3.5 D&D, 3.5 Eberron, 3.5 Forgotten Realms, etc.) after the d20STL expiration date or will those d20 products be retired or expired?


----------



## Arrond Hess (Apr 21, 2008)

How will the GSL affect fan sites and the posting of 4.0/3.x materials?


----------



## nothing to see here (Apr 21, 2008)

How permissive will the licence be when it comes to brand?  Will the GSL allow third parties to clearly identify themselves as "Dungeons and Dragons" compatible in their advertising or trade dress?


----------



## TheRaven (Apr 21, 2008)

We all know, that a thriving and vivid fanbase is a huge factor in deciding the success of a new product. How will he GSL affect the fans who like to create their own rules, classes, feats, spells and adventures? Will they be restricted or even prohibited from sharing their work freely by way of hosting this material on their own personal websites?


----------



## AZRogue (Apr 21, 2008)

Alzrius said:
			
		

> Does the GSL really carry a "poison pill" clause that forbids companies making GSL-based products from making any OGL-based products?
> 
> If so, will there be an exception to allow for the continued sale of existing OGL products indefinitely, so long as no more are made?
> 
> ...




I would ask all 5 of these.


----------



## Bacris (Apr 21, 2008)

What types of products will *not* be allowed under the GSL?

Will the GSL allow to re-use rules, or will it require cross-referencing back to the WotC books?  (I.e. can we keep page-flipping to a minimum)


----------



## Arrond Hess (Apr 21, 2008)

amaril said:
			
		

> Will WotC continue to sell its own d20 PDFs (D20 Modern, 3.5 D&D, 3.5 Eberron, 3.5 Forgotten Realms, etc.) after the d20STL expiration date or will those d20 products be retired or expired?



And, if so, will 3pp companies be given the same concessions with their own products?


----------



## Pinotage (Apr 21, 2008)

Can existing OGL be updated to the GSL and what are the restrictions, if any?

Pinotage


----------



## GMSkarka (Apr 21, 2008)

Does the so-called "poison pill" non-compete clause apply to ALL OGL, or only D&D-based fantasy?   (I.E. what if it's based on d20 Modern, d20 Future, or a non-d20 source?)


----------



## kenmarable (Apr 21, 2008)

Will the GSL license 3rd party to 3rd party content sharing, like the OGL, or will it just license WotC to 3rd party content sharing?


----------



## Mondbuchstaben (Apr 21, 2008)

If the poison pill clause is there, what effect does that have on products "Published By Lulu" (or similar venues)?

(Some PoD services provide ISBNs so that products can be sold through Amazon and the book trade, making those PoD services legally the publishers of the books. But how should a prospective GSL user know if the PoD service acted as publisher of a 3e OGL product - that is still in print - before?)


----------



## Ourph (Apr 21, 2008)

Does the GSL have a revocation clause, if so what are the conditions under which it can be revoked?  Does the GSL contain a morality or quality clause similar to the revised d20 STL?


----------



## Papa-DRB (Apr 21, 2008)

Regarding Character Generators, PCGen, DMGenie, etc.

Can they provide the 4E "crunch" data?

If they can supply the 4E data, do they have to drop all 3E data?


----------



## Relique du Madde (Apr 21, 2008)

Ourph said:
			
		

> Does the GSL have a revocation clause, if so what are the conditions under which it can be revoked?  Does the GSL contain a morality or quality clause similar to the revised d20 STL?



IF there is a "poison pill clause" and if GSL has a revocation clause, what happens when the license is revoked after the product was placed on the shelves? Does that product automatically become OGL? Does the publisher/producer loose their ability to make GSL products?


----------



## Morrus (Apr 21, 2008)

OK, thanks guys.  We've compiled a list of questions which we believe covers everything.  We're not looking for more.

Thanks again!


----------



## Alkiera (Apr 21, 2008)

What kind of time frame for a response?  Should I keep hitting cmd-R, wait till the morning, or check back over this week?  Just trying to plan my day.  8)


----------



## Piratecat (Apr 22, 2008)

I'm guessing two days at the earliest, four at the latest. We're not entirely sure, though.


----------



## JohnRTroy (Apr 22, 2008)

Is it possible you could show us the final list of questions you asked before we receive the answers?  

That might help temper the anticipation that "threatens to crack the Internet in half", or something like that.


----------



## GRIMJIM (Apr 22, 2008)

It would be super if we could get something up tomorrow as I'm off to the south of France for a long weekend Thursday and won't be able to relax on my first holiday in years if we don't know more.

Cheers.

(Yeah, the world revolves around my needs  )


----------



## Morrus (Apr 22, 2008)

Unfortunately, folks, I have some bad news.

WotC has elected not to go forward with the interview, in favour of a formal Q&A on their own site.

For those interested, I have attached the list of questions we sent to them. 

[Edit - I've just received clarification from WotC on their intentions (apparently there was a misunderstanding via email earlier today) - they do intend to answer all of the questions, some of which will be exclusive to EN World and the rest of which will be addressed on both sites.]


----------



## Dark Mistress (Apr 22, 2008)

Not reassuring, their inability to get out solid information is one of the things hurting them the most. And it seems every time they get a chance to get out some solid information they miss it. Frustrating to say the least, hopefully soon they will post their FAQ. I just hope it addresses all the questions and issues.


----------



## Delta (Apr 22, 2008)

Good freaking lord. Now this is the most ridiculous thing I've ever seen.


----------



## Wicht (Apr 22, 2008)

Did they say when they would post their own question and answer session?


----------



## Morrus (Apr 23, 2008)

Wicht said:
			
		

> Did they say when they would post their own question and answer session?




There's this thread started today on their site:

http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1022007

I've pasted our questions in there.  *shrug*


----------



## JohnRTroy (Apr 23, 2008)

Ironically, I heard they were supposed to do one of these Q&A sessions in the near future--I think I remember something about a podcast.  To be fair, they said they weren't releasing the GSL to everybody until June or July, IIRC.

I wonder if some of the wording of the questions scared them off.  I personally would have re-written the term "poison pill" into something more neutral, since that terminology is (a) is probably not how WoTC sees it and (b) has an accusatory tone to it.  (Although that might have slipped through, it looks like the gang worked hard to make it as neutral as possible).

Still, they really need to deal with this.  I wrote in another thread about the "In Search With Stupidity" book.  There was another story about dBase and how the company ended up shooting itself in the foot because their leader decided he was going to war with the ecosystem that developed around dBase.  Soon everybody hated Ashton-Tate, xBase was formed, and it was ugly for the guy who was the engineer behind that strategy.

While I don't think WoTC is in the same situation yet, and the dBase system is more complex, Wizards have built up an ecosystem with the whole OGL/D20STL and they really need to address it.


----------



## xechnao (Apr 23, 2008)

Morrus said:
			
		

> Unfortunately, folks, I have some bad news.
> 
> WotC has elected not to go forward with the interview, in favour of a formal Q&A on their own site.
> 
> ...




Nevertheless, I have to thank you for the effort. 
 I guess its up to Wizards and only Wizards from now on. I wonder if this turn of events is casual or just makes part of some kind of policy of theirs. Perhaps it wasn't unexpected.


----------



## GMSkarka (Apr 23, 2008)

Thank you, Morrus and Piratecat, for your efforts.


....Jeez.   Just when I thought there wasn't any possible way for WotC to further screw up this process, they have to go and prove me wrong.


----------



## Starman (Apr 23, 2008)

This is starting to get ridiculous. While much of what I have seen of 4E hasn't appealed to me, I bore WotC no ill will and hoped that the new version would be successful for them, but I'm having a hard time feeling that way now. Their handling of this whole thing has been ludicrous. I can't be the only one feeling this way. I'm almost to a point of actively encouraging people I know to _not_ adopt 4E because of this mess.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Apr 23, 2008)

Hmm...

You know, while it would've been nice for ENWorld to get the scoop on this, I don't it's ultimately that important _where_ the info comes out--as long as it _does_, and sooner rather than later.

As to whether this Q&A on the WotC site actually will fit those parameters, I of course can't say. But _if_ this is basically just a change of venue, as opposed to a further delay or a "culling" of the questions, I'm okay with that.


----------



## GMSkarka (Apr 23, 2008)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> But _if_ this is basically just a change of venue, as opposed to a further delay or a "culling" of the questions, I'm okay with that.




Calling for a new batch of questions will almost certainly mean a further delay.


Plus, there's also the rather unpleasant possibilities this whole thing raises about WOTC's future attitude towards this site, vis-a-vis their own attempts to kick-start Gleemax.....

I mean, fer chrissakes -- THEY approached EN World with the interview idea.   Once they had the questions, they opted instead to put forth a new call for questions on their own site?

No matter how you look at it, it's yet another PR screw-up in a staggeringly long chain of them.


----------



## nytflyr (Apr 23, 2008)

Ive been following this with a bit amusement as I have no intention of purchasing 4.0, but to see poeple (consumers and potential partners) getting jerked around like this has swayed my neutral positioning on WotC into the negative.

Its really simple WotC, either have your answers ready, or dont release/say anything until you are ready to answer them.


----------



## Orcus (Apr 23, 2008)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> Hmm...
> 
> You know, while it would've been nice for ENWorld to get the scoop on this, I don't it's ultimately that important _where_ the info comes out--as long as it _does_, and sooner rather than later.
> 
> As to whether this Q&A on the WotC site actually will fit those parameters, I of course can't say. But _if_ this is basically just a change of venue, as opposed to a further delay or a "culling" of the questions, I'm okay with that.





I'm with Ari on this. And I know I may be labeled a Wizards apologist, but I truly feel that it doesnt matter where the info comes from. I can see a reason why they'd rather co-opt it to their own site. It makes sense. I would do that if I was them.

It seems like the frustration comes from the change of plan. And that can't be held against Wizards.

In my view, that just comes from the sincerity and earnestness of Scott Rouse. This is important to him, and he wants to clarify it. And if, in his exhuberance, he started going this way only to have Wizards decide to do it on their site, dont hold that against Scott or Wizards. If we bust on them for that, it will just encourage them to remain silent. 

I'd rather have information and be updated and have a change of plans than have no information and thus no change of plans.  

Clark


----------



## kensanata (Apr 23, 2008)

Orcus said:
			
		

> If we bust on them for that, it will just encourage them to remain silent.




That's what I've been thinking as I was reading through all these pages of speculations. If I were them and wanted to have a decent family life I'd have to stop reading rant after rant. Whether those rants are justified or not doesn't even enter the equation: Just having to wade through the masses of comments would be a very inefficient use of my time.


----------



## Morrus (Apr 23, 2008)

I've just received clarification from WotC on their intentions (apparently there was a misunderstanding via email earlier today) - they do intend to answer all of the questions, some of which will be exclusive to EN World and the rest of which will be addressed on both sites.


----------



## AZRogue (Apr 23, 2008)

Just a misunderstanding, then. Hopefully it all gets fed through the pipe at an acceptable pace.


----------



## Goobermunch (Apr 23, 2008)

Morrus said:
			
		

> I've just received clarification from WotC on their intentions (apparently there was a misunderstanding via email earlier today) - they do intend to answer all of the questions, some of which will be exclusive to EN World and the rest of which will be addressed on both sites.




And just as I start to lose faith in WotC, they do something to earn a stay of execution.

I'd seen their retraction earlier today, but hadn't had the chance to comment.  When I saw it, I must say it felt like a bit of a betrayal.  As someone who's been optimistically advising a wait and see approach, this smacks of bad news.

It may still be bad news, but at least they have the fortitude to answer the questions they've solicited.

EDIT:  Morrus, does that mean that they will be answering our questions in an interview here?  And additional questions at their own site?  Just want to be sure I understand what the current plan is.

--G


----------



## Morrus (Apr 23, 2008)

Goobermunch said:
			
		

> EDIT:  Morrus, does that mean that they will be answering our questions in an interview here?  And additional questions at their own site?  Just want to be sure I understand what the current plan is.




I *think* (don't quote me on this in case I misunderstood again!) that the plan is to use all our questions, plus questions from their boards and perhaps elsewhere, and to put together a FAQ from them.  Then that FAQ gets published on both sites, with us getting a few exclusive questions.


----------



## Mike_Lescault (Apr 23, 2008)

Hi All,

You can blame me for the mix up. I've been hoping to get some questions answered from the community on multiple fronts, and I thought it would be a great idea to combine the GSL answers for both the Wizards and ENWorld communities. As a way of showing our appreciation for ENWorld and all the support the site has given to the community, we're going to provide some exclusive answers to Morrus. When we post the answers on the Wizards site, we'll also include a link to ENWorld so folks know where they can see all the answers.

I called Linae and yelled at her (well, not really. No one ever yells at Linae....and lives) and made sure we're all on the same page and I'm not some crazy fool who has no idea what he's talking about. I understand how her email and the timing of my request for questions could have been confusing. My bad!

-Mike


----------



## Orcus (Apr 23, 2008)

Mike_Lescault said:
			
		

> Hi All,
> 
> You can blame me for the mix up. I've been hoping to get some questions answered from the community on multiple fronts, and I thought it would be a great idea to combine the GSL answers for both the Wizards and ENWorld communities. As a way of showing our appreciation for ENWorld and all the support the site has given to the community, we're going to provide some exclusive answers to Morrus. When we post the answers on the Wizards site, we'll also include a link to ENWorld so folks know where they can see all the answers.
> 
> ...




Thanks Mike!


----------



## AZRogue (Apr 23, 2008)

Mike_Lescault said:
			
		

> Hi All,
> 
> You can blame me for the mix up. I've been hoping to get some questions answered from the community on multiple fronts, and I thought it would be a great idea to combine the GSL answers for both the Wizards and ENWorld communities. As a way of showing our appreciation for ENWorld and all the support the site has given to the community, we're going to provide some exclusive answers to Morrus. When we post the answers on the Wizards site, we'll also include a link to ENWorld so folks know where they can see all the answers.
> 
> ...




No big deal, especially now that we know what's going on. And thanks for the clarification "in person". It goes a long way. Much appreciated.


----------



## Jack99 (Apr 23, 2008)

Mike_Lescault said:
			
		

> Hi All,
> 
> You can blame me for the mix up. I've been hoping to get some questions answered from the community on multiple fronts, and I thought it would be a great idea to combine the GSL answers for both the Wizards and ENWorld communities. As a way of showing our appreciation for ENWorld and all the support the site has given to the community, we're going to provide some exclusive answers to Morrus. When we post the answers on the Wizards site, we'll also include a link to ENWorld so folks know where they can see all the answers.
> 
> ...




Hey Mike, maybe I missed it somewhere in all the posts on this subject, but have you stated a tentative ETA yet, regarding the answers?


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Apr 23, 2008)

Huh... I read this news and just assumed that WotC thought the questions were so good and so inclusive that they might as well just make them the official FAQ. Posting them on their own site made perfect sense.


----------



## jmucchiello (Apr 23, 2008)

Jack99 said:
			
		

> Hey Mike, maybe I missed it somewhere in all the posts on this subject, but have you stated a tentative ETA yet, regarding the answers?



Don't you already know the answer to this? When they have all the answers is when it will be ready. Why waste Mike's time on a question you know the answer to?


----------



## Enkhidu (Apr 23, 2008)

Wulf Ratbane said:
			
		

> Huh... I read this news and just assumed that WotC thought the questions were so good and so inclusive that they might as well just make them the official FAQ. Posting them on their own site made perfect sense.




I thought the same thing. I know that we make light of the signal to noise ratio in the Wizard's forums, but I can't help but get the feeling that WotC recognizes it too.


----------



## Jack99 (Apr 23, 2008)

jmucchiello said:
			
		

> Don't you already know the answer to this? When they have all the answers is when it will be ready. Why waste Mike's time on a question you know the answer to?




Sarcasm? Aren't we getting a tad bold now?


----------



## Goobermunch (Apr 23, 2008)

jmucchiello said:
			
		

> Don't you already know the answer to this? When they have all the answers is when it will be ready. Why waste Mike's time on a question you know the answer to?




It's a legitimate question and a decent way of gauging how seriously Wizards is taking this.  If this is a high priority, they'll have an answer soon.  If this has already turned into enough of a PR nightmare and the answers are going to make things worse, they may not have the same motivation to provide the information.

That said, "soon" depends on the schedules of the individuals who need to provide input into the answers.  A reasonable delay should be expected so that we can be sure we're getting correct answers.

--G


----------



## JVisgaitis (Apr 24, 2008)

I hope this is posted before the weekend. I'm leaving for Florida really early Saturday morning and if I don't find out by then, I'll have to wait 2 weeks...


----------



## jmucchiello (Apr 24, 2008)

Jack99 said:
			
		

> Sarcasm? Aren't we getting a tad bold now?



Sarcasm? Realism. This isn't a questionnaire with 18 true/false answers. Those answers will be written, debated, rewritten and copy-edited 3 times and then sent to legal. I'd like to be wrong and see the answers tomorrow. But I will be shocked if they are released before May 1.


----------



## DaveMage (Apr 24, 2008)

JVisgaitis said:
			
		

> I hope this is posted before the weekend. I'm leaving for Florida really early Saturday morning and if I don't find out by then, I'll have to wait 2 weeks...




Um, we do have the internet in Florida.


----------



## Goobermunch (Apr 24, 2008)

DaveMage said:
			
		

> Um, we do have the internet in Florida.




Yes, but in other parts of the world you can get it at more than 300 bps.  

--G


----------



## DaveMage (Apr 24, 2008)

Goobermunch said:
			
		

> Yes, but in other parts of the world you can get it at more than 300 bps.
> 
> --G


----------



## dmccoy1693 (Apr 24, 2008)

AZRogue said:
			
		

> And thanks for the clarification "in person". It goes a long way. Much appreciated.



Ditto this.


----------



## joela (Apr 24, 2008)

*florida*



			
				Goobermunch said:
			
		

> Yes, but in other parts of the world you can get it at more than 300 bps.
> 
> --G




ouch


----------



## JVisgaitis (Apr 24, 2008)

DaveMage said:
			
		

> Um, we do have the internet in Florida.




I'm getting married in Disney and our hotel doesn't have internet access. If you can convince my soon to be wife that I need to find a place that has internet access so I can find out about the Open Game License, you're welcome to try...  She loves D&D and plays with the rest of our group, but I'd feel bad even asking her considering the circumstances.


----------



## Jack99 (Apr 24, 2008)

JVisgaitis said:
			
		

> I'm getting married in Disney and our hotel doesn't have internet access. If you can convince my soon to be wife that I need to find a place that has internet access so I can find out about the Open Game License, you're welcome to try...  She loves D&D and plays with the rest of our group, but I'd feel bad even asking her considering the circumstances.




Congratulation mate, welcome to the club of misery and despair!


----------



## jgbrowning (Apr 24, 2008)

JVisgaitis said:
			
		

> I'm getting married




Congrats! 

joe b.


----------



## jmucchiello (Apr 24, 2008)

JVisgaitis said:
			
		

> I'm getting married in Disney and our hotel doesn't have internet access. If you can convince my soon to be wife that I need to find a place that has internet access so I can find out about the Open Game License, you're welcome to try...  She loves D&D and plays with the rest of our group, but I'd feel bad even asking her considering the circumstances.



Congrats. Where are you staying? If you are staying at a WDW resort, the McDonalds on the corner of hotel plaza drive and 535 has the nearest WiFi.

(Yes, I live in NJ. Yes, my wife drags me to WDW too often. The mental map of the WDW properties in my head is about as clear as the one of my home town. Welcome to married life.)


----------



## JVisgaitis (Apr 24, 2008)

Thanks guys its been a long time coming, but its finally happening.



			
				jmucchiello said:
			
		

> Congrats. Where are you staying? If you are staying at a WDW resort, the McDonalds on the corner of hotel plaza drive and 535 has the nearest WiFi.




We're staying at Pop Century. It's a destination wedding (obviously) so there are like 25 people going. Hopefully I'll be able to sneak away. If not, I figure I can get wifi next Friday to download Battlestar as she'll go crazy if she misses is. I haven't been to Disney in like 10 years so I have no idea what to expect.


----------



## DaveMage (Apr 24, 2008)

Congrats!


----------



## Mike_Lescault (Apr 24, 2008)

JVisgaitis said:
			
		

> I hope this is posted before the weekend. I'm leaving for Florida really early Saturday morning and if I don't find out by then, I'll have to wait 2 weeks...




It won't be this week for sure, sorry about that. But don't cancel the wedding yet!  

I am hoping sooner rather than later, but it's not out of the realm of possibility that it won't be ready next week either. 

Oh, and congrats. =)


----------



## DaveMage (Apr 24, 2008)

Mike_Lescault said:
			
		

> It won't be this week for sure, sorry about that. But don't cancel the wedding yet!
> 
> I am hoping sooner rather than later, but it's not out of the realm of possibility that it won't be ready next week either.
> 
> Oh, and congrats. =)





Mike,

Can you give us an overview of the internal process that something like this has to go through before publication?

Thanks!


----------



## jmucchiello (Apr 25, 2008)

JVisgaitis said:
			
		

> We're staying at Pop Century. It's a destination wedding (obviously) so there are like 25 people going. Hopefully I'll be able to sneak away. If not, I figure I can get wifi next Friday to download Battlestar as she'll go crazy if she misses is. I haven't been to Disney in like 10 years so I have no idea what to expect.



Actually, I just assumed you were honeymooning down there. Are you getting married at the Wedding Pavilion? That's one of those places at WDW I'd love to see but you can't just wander in off the street. Enjoy wearing the tophat ears.


----------



## Pale (Apr 25, 2008)

Egads... 'Monday' has become 'maybe by Thursday or Friday' has become 'maybe next week, but don't hold your breath'? (all paraphrased, of course)

I don't blame the messengers here, but this is becoming quite frustrating.


----------



## Scipio202 (Apr 25, 2008)

Pale said:
			
		

> Egads... 'Monday' has become 'maybe by Thursday or Friday' has become 'maybe next week, but don't hold your breath'? (all paraphrased, of course)
> 
> I don't blame the messengers here, but this is becoming quite frustrating.



 Well, the optimistic take could be that things are back open for discussion.  If they had intended a poison pill, they may be thinking about taking it back out (perhaps based on the reaction).


----------



## jmucchiello (Apr 25, 2008)

Pale said:
			
		

> Egads... 'Monday' has become 'maybe by Thursday or Friday' has become 'maybe next week, but don't hold your breath'? (all paraphrased, of course)



No, he said maybe not even next week. That means my May 1 prediction is not far enough into the future either. But look on the bright side: JV won't miss the announcement during his wedding/honeymoon.


----------



## Emerald Lich (Apr 25, 2008)

Mike_Lescault said:
			
		

> I am hoping sooner rather than later, but it's not out of the realm of possibility that it won't be ready next week either.




Wow.  Just ... wow.

At this point, why even bother?

This is just utterly ludicrous.


----------



## JVisgaitis (Apr 25, 2008)

Mike_Lescault said:
			
		

> It won't be this week for sure, sorry about that. But don't cancel the wedding yet!
> 
> I am hoping sooner rather than later, but it's not out of the realm of possibility that it won't be ready next week either.
> 
> Oh, and congrats. =)




Thanks! That long? Wow. I thought it would be a lot sooner especially considering Scott Rouse's post. Other than being impatient, I guess there really isn't a rush. Not like I don't have our 4e line up planned anyway. I'm just curious what to do with our back stock. Is there any other info forthcoming sooner? I know when Morrus first posted, he said there was a podcast and other details coming from you guys the next day and we never got any of that unless I missed it.


----------



## JVisgaitis (Apr 25, 2008)

jmucchiello said:
			
		

> Actually, I just assumed you were honeymooning down there. Are you getting married at the Wedding Pavilion? That's one of those places at WDW I'd love to see but you can't just wander in off the street. Enjoy wearing the tophat ears.




We're actually not getting married through Disney. We're getting married at the Hyatt Regency Grand Cyprus in downtown Orlando. We didn't do the actual Disney wedding because with the amount of guests we had, it would have been over $10K which is just insane.



			
				jmucchiello said:
			
		

> But look on the bright side: JV won't miss the announcement during his wedding/honeymoon.




True that!


----------



## BSF (Apr 25, 2008)

JVisgaitis said:
			
		

> I'm getting married in Disney and our hotel doesn't have internet access. If you can convince my soon to be wife that I need to find a place that has internet access so I can find out about the Open Game License, you're welcome to try...  She loves D&D and plays with the rest of our group, but I'd feel bad even asking her considering the circumstances.




To continue the complete threadjack - Congratulations!  I hope you and your wife have a great time and many, many happy years together ahead of you.


----------



## Flynn (Apr 25, 2008)

Congratulations, JVisgaitis, you lucky man! You sure have her fooled, don't ya? 

Seriously, I wish you guys the best, and I hope you and your bride have a wonderful time at WDW.

Enjoy,
Flynn


----------



## JVisgaitis (Apr 25, 2008)

BSF said:
			
		

> To continue the complete threadjack - Congratulations!




I actually feel kinda bad about the threadjack thing... Thank you though.



			
				Flynn said:
			
		

> Congratulations, JVisgaitis, you lucky man! You sure have her fooled, don't ya?




Indeed. I had to put ALL my ranks in Bluff.


----------



## Flynn (Apr 25, 2008)

Oh, then to get this thread back on target, let's try this:

Q: What do I want to know about the GSL?
A: At the moment, I'd like someone from WOTC to set a reasonable expectation for publishers and fans as to when they feel they will be able to provide the answers to the questions ENWorld has sent them earlier this week.

Does that help?

With Regards,
Flynn


----------



## jaldaen (Apr 25, 2008)

Although we don't have anything official about a "grandfather" clause for OGL products in the GSL I would like to make one suggestion to WotC if they do decide to put one in:

Please have the grandfather clause kick in for anything producted *before* Oct. 1st rather than when the GSL is signed. I ask this mainly because if it kicks in when the GSL is signed then a "dead zone" for product release is created between the time a publisher signs the GSL and Oct. 1st when they can finally release 4e related products.

Thanks,
Joseph Miller
IANAP (I am Not a Publisher)


----------



## jmucchiello (Apr 25, 2008)

Flynn said:
			
		

> Q: What do I want to know about the GSL?
> A: At the moment, I'd like someone from WOTC to set a reasonable expectation for publishers and fans as to when they feel they will be able to provide the answers to the questions ENWorld has sent them earlier this week.



Wasn't Mike_Lescault's response good enough for you? He basically said 2 or more weeks. With that time frame, how much more accurate could he be? A better question would be to reiterate DaveMge's request about how many hands the questions will go through before release. Mike might be able to give us a ballpark figure on that.


----------



## Goobermunch (Apr 25, 2008)

jmucchiello said:
			
		

> Wasn't Mike_Lescault's response good enough for you? He basically said 2 or more weeks. With that time frame, how much more accurate could he be? A better question would be to reiterate DaveMge's request about how many hands the questions will go through before release. Mike might be able to give us a ballpark figure on that.




And to me, that's beginning to sound a lot like "We know you're not going to like what we have to say, so we're sandbagging it."

Must say, I'm losing my faith in WotC.

--G


----------



## JVisgaitis (Apr 25, 2008)

Goobermunch said:
			
		

> And to me, that's beginning to sound a lot like "We know you're not going to like what we have to say, so we're sandbagging it."




Tell me, if that is the case, what is the advantage in them "sandbagging it"?



			
				Goobermunch said:
			
		

> Must say, I'm losing my faith in WotC.




Great we lost another one!


----------



## Flynn (Apr 25, 2008)

jmucchiello said:
			
		

> Wasn't Mike_Lescault's response good enough for you? He basically said 2 or more weeks. With that time frame, how much more accurate could he be? A better question would be to reiterate DaveMge's request about how many hands the questions will go through before release. Mike might be able to give us a ballpark figure on that.




It probably would have been, had I actually read it. Sadly, I'm operating on under two hours of sleep and the effects of a few cough suppressants, so I just missed it entirely. Thanks for pointing that out for me, kind sir. It would appear by your choice of words that you found my statement/question, uninformed as it was, to be somewhat irritating, and for that, I do most sincerely apologize.

And now, having been properly chastised and redirected in my efforts, I shall endeavor to disturb you no more. Instead, I will bid you all adieu, and depart from such esteemed company for a time, perchance to dream of matters that are best not described in polite company.

(Man, I usually don't get this verbose save when I'm drinking. What did they put in these "antibiotics" and "cough suppressants", anyway?)

With Regards,
Flynn


----------



## Goobermunch (Apr 25, 2008)

JVisgaitis said:
			
		

> Tell me, if that is the case, what is the advantage in them "sandbagging it"?
> 
> 
> 
> Great we lost another one!




The advantage is that until WotC owns up, it will have fans, like myself who will argue that it's a good company and that we don't have enough reliable information to reach the conclusion that OGL publishers are being screwed out of the opportunity to participate in 4e because of their non-d20 lines.

You know, I've spent a lot of time since the announcement that the GSL may have a poison pill clause publicly standing up for Scott and Linnae and WotC, both here and in other communities, and arguing that we don't have enough information to reach the kind of paranoid conclusions some people have been jumping to.  We've been told that our concerns are important to WotC, and that we'd have more information "soon."  Soon has slipped from Monday to Thursday or Friday, to maybe more than two weeks.  That suggests that our concerns are not so important.

WotC benefits from delay because without solid information, people can't make informed decisions.  If I want to vote with my dollars, I will need to do so soon.  But at the same time, I prefer not to vote without information.  If they can delay until after my preorder ships, that deprives me of the opportunity to vote with my dollars.  Now, I can go ahead and cancel, but then, if there's been a miscommunication, I'll feel bad for jumping to conclusions.  So I continue to think long and hard about what the right thing to do is.

That said, being mocked for confessing that I'm not as confident that WotC will do the right thing as I was a week ago, that just pisses me off.  If I screw up, I'll cop to it.  But that doesn't give you the right to cop an attitude about it.

--G


----------



## JohnRTroy (Apr 25, 2008)

I honestly suspect now that WoTC will decide they will release the information on June 6th and no earlier.  A comprehensive FAQ will be made available and placed on their web site where they put the terms of the GSL.

I predict this in part because (a) the company keeps making changes until the very last minute and (b) the best way to bury "bad news" is to release it when people are distracted--which is why some government laws or policies are released on Friday evenings.  

If WoTC suspects negative PR, what better day to release the GSL when 95% of the fans are happy that 4e is finally released, and most press and media coverage won't give the GSL a second thought.


----------



## JVisgaitis (Apr 25, 2008)

Goobermunch said:
			
		

> The advantage is that until WotC owns up, it will have fans, like myself who will argue that it's a good company and that we don't have enough reliable information to reach the conclusion that OGL publishers are being screwed out of the opportunity to participate in 4e because of their non-d20 lines.




I don't agree. The backlash that would happen if they made us sit on it and finally dropped a bomb like that would be far worse. You think people actually are sticking up for them? It seems like everyone just complains that they have no faith in WotC and they're evil.

I'm a publisher and I have almost 1,000 copies of Denizens of Avadnu sitting in my friends garage. I don't feel like I'm being screwed. There were a lot of plans we had for True20, but business is business. Of course they don't want people to continue to play 3.5. Why is that so surprising? I feel really bad for Green Ronin and Paizo, but nothing is set in stone and we'll see what happens.



			
				Goobermunch said:
			
		

> We've been told that our concerns are important to WotC, and that we'd have more information "soon."  Soon has slipped from Monday to Thursday or Friday, to maybe more than two weeks.  That suggests that our concerns are not so important.




In your opinion. To me, it suggests exactly the opposite. They want to make sure that what they decide on is going to be something that weighs the community response. What would you rather?

Option 1: Announcement made right away: "All products need to be destroyed and no publisher can continue to support OGL Systems. Its all GSL or nothing."

Option 2: Several weeks later: "After listenting to the concerns of the community for the past couple weeks, this is what we came up with ________________."

I'll take option 2 every time. You're just over reacting and buying into all of the "Wizards is The Man" crap.



			
				Goobermunch said:
			
		

> If I want to vote with my dollars, I will need to do so soon.




You have to June 6th and they are only asking you to wait for 2 weeks. I don't understand the whole sense of urgency thing....



			
				Goobermunch said:
			
		

> So I continue to think long and hard about what the right thing to do is.




Be patient. The preorder won't ship until long after you have a firm idea of what is going on with the GSL.



			
				Goobermunch said:
			
		

> That said, being mocked for confessing that I'm not as confident that WotC will do the right thing as I was a week ago, that just pisses me off.  If I screw up, I'll cop to it.  But that doesn't give you the right to cop an attitude about it.




Come on! I'm in a good mood and excited for obvious reasons. I didn't mean anything personal by that and I wasn't trying to cop an attitude. Sorry if I offended you.


----------



## Oldtimer (Apr 25, 2008)

JohnRTroy said:
			
		

> I honestly suspect now that WoTC will decide they will release the information on June 6th and no earlier.  A comprehensive FAQ will be made available and placed on their web site where they put the terms of the GSL.
> 
> I predict this in part because (a) the company keeps making changes until the very last minute and (b) the best way to bury "bad news" is to release it when people are distracted--which is why some government laws or policies are released on Friday evenings.
> 
> If WoTC suspects negative PR, what better day to release the GSL when 95% of the fans are happy that 4e is finally released, and most press and media coverage won't give the GSL a second thought.



You don't often see me and John agreeing much in this forum, but to this I must say: QFT!

I think this is exactly what is happening.


----------



## Goobermunch (Apr 25, 2008)

JVisgaitis said:
			
		

> I don't agree. The backlash that would happen if they made us sit on it and finally dropped a bomb like that would be far worse. You think people actually are sticking up for them? It seems like everyone just complains that they have no faith in WotC and their evil.




You obviously haven't seen my posts in the GSL thread.  



> In your opinion. To me, it suggests exactly the opposite. They want to make sure that what they decide on is going to be something that weighs the community response. What would you rather?
> 
> Option 1: Announcement made right away: "All products need to be destroyed and no publisher can continue to support OGL Systems. Its all GSL or nothing."
> 
> Option 2: Several weeks later: "After listenting to the concerns of the community for the past couple weeks, this is what we came up with ________________."




Option 3: Wow, you know we had this idea (Option 1), but after listening to the community, we're reviewing it to see if we can find a revision that will make everyone happy.  We don't know whether we can, but we're devoting serious effort to it.



> I'll take option 2 every time. You're just over reacting and buying into all of the "Wizards is The Man" crap.




You obviously haven't seen my posts in the GSL announcement thread.  I invite you to take a look.



> You have to June 6th and they are only asking you to wait for 2 weeks. I don't understand the whole sense of urgency thing....




Today, they're only asking me to wait 2 weeks.  Two days ago, it was until today.  A week ago, it was until last Monday.  See the trend line?



> Be patient. The preorder won't ship until long after you have a firm idea of what is going on with the GSL.




Assuming no further delays.



> Come on! I'm in a good mood and excited for obvious reasons. I didn't mean anything personal by that and I wasn't trying to cop an attitude. Sorry if I offended you.




And I'm in a demoralized and crappy mood for less obvious reasons.  Which means I'm probably overreacting and being unnecessarily touchy.  Apology accepted and extended in return.

--G


----------



## jaldaen (Apr 25, 2008)

HalWhitewyrm (a.k.a. Daniel M. Perez from Highmoon Media Productions) just posted this in the GSL News thread in the 4e Forum:



			
				HalWhitewyrm said:
			
		

> Just got back from GTS this morning. I sent this info to some friends who were asking about the GSL and related stuff, and I think it would apply to post it here as well.
> 
> I attended a seminar on Thursday morning with Aldo Ghiozzi and Joe Goodman where they, with permission, talked about some of the things they had learned from WotC in regards to the GSL and its interaction with the OGL. In short, from Joe Goodman, WotC is not interested in destroying the non-3.5 OGL games in the market; they want M&M, True20, C&C, etc. to continue, and they especially do not want to hamper other systems released under the OGL that are completely unrelated to D&D/d20 (Fudge, Action!, SotC, etc.). What they DO want from the GSL is a clear distinction of support for the new edition over the older one, which is just sound business sense, regardless of how one may feel about it. The GSL has not been released yet, few have seen the language of the license at the moment, and the rumors are based on things said in unofficial channels (I have my personal speculations about what may have happened since the Rouse posted his comments here last week, but I'll keep those to myself for now). There is still work to be done in that license in order to properly define what constitutes a product that is supported by the GSL, what constitutes a product not supported (and possibly rejected) by the GSL, the interaction of the GSL and the OGL, and what constitutes a product not affected at all by the GSL even though it may use the OGL. This seminar was recorded by Pulp Gamer and will be available in the near future. I also recorded some thoughts right after the seminar which I'll be releasing to my podcast soon.
> 
> ...




The GSL looks a least a bit more promising then it did yesterday... but only time and the license will tell.


----------



## Goobermunch (Apr 25, 2008)

jaldaen said:
			
		

> HalWhitewyrm (a.k.a. Daniel M. Perez from Highmoon Media Productions) just posted this in the GSL News thread in the 4e Forum:
> 
> 
> 
> The GSL looks a least a bit more promising then it did yesterday... but only time and the license will tell.




But it sounds like Option 3 may be the truth.  The language about having work that needs doing with regard to the GSL and OGL suggests to me that our concerns have been heard and may be being addressed.

Hope . . . rising.  Urge to despair . . . falling.

WotC's bought another two weeks of patience.

--G


----------



## JVisgaitis (Apr 25, 2008)

Goobermunch said:
			
		

> If I screw up, I'll cop to it.




I'm waiting...


----------



## Goobermunch (Apr 25, 2008)

JVisgaitis said:
			
		

> I'm waiting...




Hain't screwed up yet.  I didn't cancel my pre-order.    

And my faith isn't entirely restored, but I'm giving them the two more weeks.

Oh, alright, I jumped to conclusions too.

There, are you happy now.

ARE YOU?  Huh? Huh?



--G


----------



## Greylock (Apr 26, 2008)

JVisgaitis said:
			
		

> I'm a publisher and I have almost 1,000 copies of Denizens of Avadnu sitting in my friends garage.




Sheeesh! THAT's why it took me three danged years to get a copy! And believe me, I tried many times through many avenues to get it. Finally turned up in my mailbox as a Secret Santa gift of all things [this past Christmas - Thanks BillyBeanbag!]. Brand spanking new and beautiful. Must have come straight from your friend's garage.


----------



## JVisgaitis (Apr 26, 2008)

Goobermunch said:
			
		

> Oh, alright, I jumped to conclusions too.
> 
> There, are you happy now.
> 
> ...




 Yes, I'm happy. I'll be even happier if I come home and I find out all the license stuff is straightened out and everyone is happy. No matter how good the news is though, I'm sure there'll be some sort of spin or something that raises people's ire. We'll see what happens...


----------



## JVisgaitis (Apr 26, 2008)

Greylock said:
			
		

> Sheeesh! THAT's why it took me three danged years to get a copy! And believe me, I tried many times through many avenues to get it. Finally turned up in my mailbox as a Secret Santa gift of all things [this past Christmas - Thanks BillyBeanbag!]. Brand spanking new and beautiful. Must have come straight from your friend's garage.




Three years? You ever go to our website? I hear you can actually use the Internets to buy stuff.  I actually remember that order. The excess is at a friend's garage. Your copy come out of the closet right behind me.


----------



## Big Mac (Apr 27, 2008)

JVisgaitis said:
			
		

> I actually feel kinda bad about the threadjack thing... Thank you though.




You realise that by (accidentally) hijacking the thread you are duty bound to release your wedding video under the OGL! 

Congratulations.



			
				JVisgaitis said:
			
		

> In your opinion. To me, it suggests exactly the opposite. They want to make sure that what they decide on is going to be something that weighs the community response. What would you rather?
> 
> Option 1: Announcement made right away: "All products need to be destroyed and no publisher can continue to support OGL Systems. Its all GSL or nothing."
> 
> ...




I love that "Wizards is The Man" thing. You are right on the ball there. This is after all a discussion about an RPG system that, when TSR sold it, was totally closed. The fact that 4e is open at all is great. Maybe it isn't as open as 3e, but Wizards executives certainly don't eat people's babies.

Most of my concerns about 4e are connected to their setting reboot policy. I'm not really looking forward to the idea of *Forgotten Realms: The Next Generation*.

But I do also have some concerns about the _infererred policy_ of trying to force publishers to abandon 3.5. I'm actually wanting to stick with 3.5 (for at least the next 4-5 years) and want to buy up a lot of Wizards of the Coast books. I'd like to continue to buy things that support their product line. (I'm assuming that they want people like me to be their customers. I'm assuming they don't want their 3.5 stock to sit on shelves unsold.)

I am hoping that WotC will do something that enables fans to buy 4e products and make fan-retro conversions (back to 3.5 or earlier D&D rules). I'm hoping for a retro-version of the ESD Conversion Agreement that enables people to buy the new (1 per year) campaign settings that WotC are promising us even if they don't want to use the 4e rules.

And on top of that, I'm hoping that WotC will negotiate a *new* agreement with MWP, so that 4e customers can continue to buy 3rd edition Dragonlance PDFs and use them with the 4e conversions that Cam Banks has promised to do for Dragonlance Nexus. (I think that an agreement that gives WotC a percentage of royalties and doesn't expire would be fair to both companies and *more importantly* good for their mutual customers.) Dragonlance goes above the d20 System licence as it is one of TSRs campaign settings and it is very important for WotC to realise that fans will always want (or even need) to get hold of out of print products to check things that are not covered in the new rules.


----------



## jmucchiello (Apr 27, 2008)

Big Mac said:
			
		

> The fact that 4e is open at all is great.



The thing is, it's not open. You can (er, will be able to) obtain a license to 4e material for free. But that is not the same as open. If it were open, they could not stop you from supporting 3.5e. Since they can and they might you can't call it open. Semantics are important, especially in licensing/contracts/legal stuff. You sentence should read, "The fact that 4e will have a free licensing option at all is great." "Open" is not shorthand for "a free licensing option." 

That said, I agree with most of what you said.


----------



## Big Mac (Apr 27, 2008)

jmucchiello said:
			
		

> The thing is, it's not open. You can (er, will be able to) obtain a license to 4e material for free. But that is not the same as open. If it were open, they could not stop you from supporting 3.5e. Since they can and they might you can't call it open. Semantics are important, especially in licensing/contracts/legal stuff. You sentence should read, "The fact that 4e will have a free licensing option at all is great." "Open" is not shorthand for "a free licensing option."
> 
> That said, I agree with most of what you said.




I know that, as I used to be on the OGF mailing lists. I suppose with this forum being full of experts, I should be careful what I say, because it is your *duty* to nitpick so that I don't confuse a newbie into misunderstanding the law.

I think that WotC have even argued that they "needed" to move away from the OGL because it contained the word "open" and people were not happy that it was a non-open licence using the word "open" in its name.

Thanks for the nit-pick, by the way. 

EDIT: By the way if you agree with most of what I said, do you want the OGL wedding video too?


----------



## jmucchiello (Apr 27, 2008)

Big Mac said:
			
		

> I know that, as I used to be on the OGF mailing lists. I suppose with this forum being full of experts, I should be careful what I say, because it is your *duty* to nitpick so that I don't confuse a newbie into misunderstanding the law.



Well I didn't single you out. I've been doing it to everyone using the word open and GSL.


> EDIT: By the way if you agree with most of what I said, do you want the OGL wedding video too?



Sure. But not an OGL wedding night video. That would be a bit too open.


----------



## Delta (Apr 28, 2008)

Big Mac said:
			
		

> I think that WotC have even argued that they "needed" to move away from the OGL because it contained the word "open" and people were not happy that it was a non-open licence using the word "open" in its name.




Huh? That doesn't make any sense. The OGL really is open. It's qualified as open by the Open Gaming Foundation ( http://opengamingfoundation.org/licenses.html ).

Maybe you mean how their proposed OGL v.2 (now named the GSL) would not be open?


----------



## Pale (Apr 28, 2008)

That's exactly what he said, Delta.


----------



## Delta (Apr 28, 2008)

No, he literally said that "it", the OGL, was a non-open license, which is not the case.


----------



## Pale (Apr 28, 2008)

Delta said:
			
		

> No, he literally said that "it", the OGL, was a non-open license, which is not the case.




I see your point. "It" refers, at first, to the OGL and the second "it" is the GSL, but he doesn't clarify his pronoun. I infered it, however, as his statement doesn't otherwise make any sense.


----------



## see (Apr 28, 2008)

Of course, another reason to pick a different name was that it avoided any potential trouble with the OGL 1.0a section 9.


----------



## smetzger (Apr 29, 2008)

What the heck is going on?

Wasn't WOTC gona answer these questions in a day or two?
Then we heard from someone saying that everyone was at a show, or in a meeting, or in a different part of the country.  But they would answer the questions 'real soon'.

Do I have my story straight?

So, what is the latest?  When will WOTC step up to the plate with some real explanations?

Getting frustrated,
Scott


----------



## JohnRTroy (Apr 29, 2008)

One of their reps said it could be up to a few weeks.  

Personally, I think they'll release it no earlier than the launch of D&D on June 6th, but I could be wrong.  Technically, I think they weren't gonna talk about it to the general public until they created a FAQ on June 6th for the GSL.


----------



## smetzger (Apr 29, 2008)

JohnRTroy said:
			
		

> One of their reps said it could be up to a few weeks.
> 
> Personally, I think they'll release it no earlier than the launch of D&D on June 6th, but I could be wrong.  Technically, I think they weren't gonna talk about it to the general public until they created a FAQ on June 6th for the GSL.




Yeah, thats my guess as well.  But I had hopes that they would answer the questions.  Its looking more and more like they will just wait until June 6.


----------



## jaldaen (Apr 29, 2008)

JohnRTroy said:
			
		

> Personally, I think they'll release it no earlier than the launch of D&D on June 6th, but I could be wrong.  Technically, I think they weren't gonna talk about it to the general public until they created a FAQ on June 6th for the GSL.




I think they will release the answers earlier than June 6th... at least to those publishers who showed initial interest in 4e support. These publishers need WotC's answers before they can decide on the GSL and 4e support. If WotC waits until June 6th it will be very difficult to get product written and to print by Oct. 1st (WotC's target date for "going live" with 4e 3PP support) due to the month of "lost" development time for 3PPs.


----------



## BryonD (Apr 29, 2008)

smetzger said:
			
		

> Getting frustrated,
> Scott



I am hoping that the delay means an increased chance that they are revising the plan to be some level of compatible with OGL publishing.

Probably better to be optimistic than frustrated.  
Either way won't change anything....


----------



## Scylla (Apr 29, 2008)

smetzger said:
			
		

> Yeah, thats my guess as well.  But I had hopes that they would answer the questions.  Its looking more and more like they will just wait until June 6.




I also agree with this guess, I'm very sorry to say.


----------



## Goobermunch (Apr 30, 2008)

smetzger said:
			
		

> What the heck is going on?
> 
> Wasn't WOTC gona answer these questions in a day or two?
> Then we heard from someone saying that everyone was at a show, or in a meeting, or in a different part of the country.  But they would answer the questions 'real soon'.
> ...




Scott,

I understand how you feel.  There are two possibilities that I can see right now.  First, WotC is going forward with a license that will make publication of products under the GSL and the OGL impossible.  This is the one hinted at in "the other thread."  This option, when leaked, created a bit of a firestorm, and will be unduly harsh on publishers of non-d20 OGL products.  Under this option, the delay in releasing the answers is a sign of bad news.

The second option is that WotC was going to do that and saw the reaction from the community (and also realized that the proposed license would unfairly hit publishers of non-d20 OGL product) and so has pulled the license back into legal to refine it so that it better achieves WotC's goal--namely not permitting publishers to make money from 3.5e while making money from 4e.  The delay in responding to the questions then becomes a sign of good news, because you can't really answer questions until you know what your new improved GSL says.

Right now, I'm feeling very optimistic, and believe that option two will prevail.

--G


----------



## Goobermunch (Apr 30, 2008)

Mike_Lescault said:
			
		

> It won't be this week for sure, sorry about that. But don't cancel the wedding yet!
> 
> I am hoping sooner rather than later, but it's not out of the realm of possibility that it won't be ready next week either.
> 
> Oh, and congrats. =)




Mike posted this on April 24.  So we know it wasn't done between 4/21-4/25 (obviously).  It's not outside of the realm of possibility that it won't be ready next week either.  That would be between 4/28 and 5/2.  So that gets us through Friday.

He has not said that it won't be available the week of 5/5.  So, I'm hopeful we'll see it by then.  

--G


----------



## Mike_Lescault (Apr 30, 2008)

Goobermunch said:
			
		

> Mike posted this on April 24.  So we know it wasn't done between 4/21-4/25 (obviously).  It's not outside of the realm of possibility that it won't be ready next week either.  That would be between 4/28 and 5/2.  So that gets us through Friday.
> 
> He has not said that it won't be available the week of 5/5.  So, I'm hopeful we'll see it by then.
> 
> --G




It always pays to hedge your bets when predicting the date of major announcements, since it's really hard to know when someone might step forward and say, "Hold on, let me make sure I'm on board with this before you say that." Or someone calls in sick. Or an emergency comes up that cancels a meeting, etc.  I've seen this happen many many times in my *cough*thirteen*cough* years working in the game industry, so please don't read into my words of caution as any indication of anything to do with the GSL. I just like to play it safe with announcements in general, so we don't build any expectations we might not be able to meet.

-Mike


----------



## Goobermunch (Apr 30, 2008)

Mike_Lescault said:
			
		

> It always pays to hedge your bets when predicting the date of major announcements, since it's really hard to know when someone might step forward and say, "Hold on, let me make sure I'm on board with this before you say that." Or someone calls in sick. Or an emergency comes up that cancels a meeting, etc.  I've seen this happen many many times in my *cough*thirteen*cough* years working in the game industry, so please don't read into my words of caution as any indication of anything to do with the GSL. I just like to play it safe with announcements in general, so we don't build any expectations we might not be able to meet.
> 
> -Mike




So are you suggesting we might not see the response to the questions by 5/5?  Because that might make people nervous about whether we're going to see them before June 6.  Having dealt with similar kinds of issues in my own professional life, I know that things come up, and schedules shift.  However, given the level of paranoia regarding the announcement, it might be a good idea to at least provide some expectation moderating information if you've got it (and are able to share).

--G


----------



## Mike_Lescault (Apr 30, 2008)

Goobermunch said:
			
		

> So are you suggesting we might not see the response to the questions by 5/5?




No, not at all. =)


----------



## Brown Jenkin (Apr 30, 2008)

My own personal take which is nothing more than a gut feeling, is that if we don't see answers by 5/5, that means that the firestorm over this has caused them to send it back to legal and we won't hear anything else until 6/6 at the earliest.


----------



## Voadam (Apr 30, 2008)

Mike_Lescault said:
			
		

> No, not at all. =)




Heh.


----------



## Starman (May 1, 2008)

Mike_Lescault said:
			
		

> I just like to play it safe with announcements in general, so we don't build any expectations we might not be able to meet.




Unfortunately, I think a lot of people's expectations have already been let down with the whole GSL mess.


----------



## Arrond Hess (May 1, 2008)

Starman said:
			
		

> Unfortunately, I think a lot of people's expectations have already been let down with the whole GSL mess.



QFT


----------



## Greylock (May 1, 2008)

Starman said:
			
		

> Unfortunately, I think a lot of people's expectations have already been let down with the whole GSL mess.




Frankly, WotC has lost a number of people I know over this. While folks may not think that the third parties are all that meaningful, what with all the people around ENWorld these days saying they never saw any benefit from them, many of them command fantastic loyalty from people I know, and myself. This... people have taken it poorly. Friends, fellow gamers, and at least two shopkeepers I talk to.


----------



## smetzger (May 1, 2008)

Mike_Lescault said:
			
		

> It always pays to hedge your bets when predicting the date of major announcements, since it's really hard to know when someone might step forward and say, "Hold on, let me make sure I'm on board with this before you say that." Or someone calls in sick. Or an emergency comes up that cancels a meeting, etc.  I've seen this happen many many times in my *cough*thirteen*cough* years working in the game industry, so please don't read into my words of caution as any indication of anything to do with the GSL. I just like to play it safe with announcements in general, so we don't build any expectations we might not be able to meet.
> 
> -Mike




I understand the need to "hedge your bets when predicting the date of major announcements".
However, you are doing a poor job in communicating with the community.

You should be *at least* be posting once a week saying something like "We are not quite ready to answer your questions, we hope to be ready soon.  I will post again on such and such date and give you an update."

If you are going back to the drawing board I would also emplore you to reconsider the software angle.  A lot of 3pp filled the devoid hole for software needed for 3.0/3.5.  When you pulled the plug on d20 software products it wasn't such a big deal, because we had the OGL to drop back to.  Take an honest look at your software you have in dev.  Is that going to be completely ready to meet *all needs* on June 6th?  How about July 6?  How about Dec 6?  I think you are going to need some extra help in this area.


----------



## BSF (May 1, 2008)

Greylock said:
			
		

> Frankly, WotC has lost a number of people I know over this. While folks may not think that the third parties are all that meaningful, what with all the people around ENWorld these days saying they never saw any benefit from them, many of them command fantastic loyalty from people I know, and myself. This... people have taken it poorly. Friends, fellow gamers, and at least two shopkeepers I talk to.




It has definitely impacted my enthusiasm.  There were just too many ideas and products that came out from third parties that enhanced my game for me not to feel passionately about this.  At one point, I was running a game with 8 players and only 1/4 of the PCs were built using core classes.  My current campaign is, perhaps, even more divergent from the core rules.  The third party publishers have done so much to enhance my games!

And this isn't a direct knock on WotC.  Some of the third party products are niche products.  The market they are appealing to is too small to be a good investment for a company such as WotC.  

I am hoping that WotC can get the GSL sorted out soon.


----------



## see (May 1, 2008)

It's rather unfortunate that GSL drafts weren't released early and often.  

It is difficult for the drafting party of any agreement to look at it from a genuine non-drafter perspective; it will often contain some provision that, after discussion, both parties would agree needs to be changed.  These issues are identified when the non-drafter sees the agreement and notices an onerous provision, and then are resolved through negotiation between the two parties.

In the case of a general public license, these issues are only identified when a draft is presented to the general public, and the substitute for private negotiations is public feedback followed by revisions and more feedback.  See the histories of, for example, the Netscape Public License/Mozilla Public License, the BSD license (credit provisions), the Apple Public Source License, the GNU General Public License version 3.

The GSL has remained hidden in the WotC/Hasbro cloister, and that has not stopped bad PR from rumors and public controversy.  It has only prevented any outside vetting that could catch problems in the license.  It was and still is a mistake.


----------



## JVisgaitis (May 2, 2008)

Big Mac said:
			
		

> You realise that by (accidentally) hijacking the thread you are duty bound to release your wedding video under the OGL!




I caught part of it at the after reception yesterday. No way that's ever going public! I'll post a ton of pictures though...



			
				Big Mac said:
			
		

> I love that "Wizards is The Man" thing. You are right on the ball there.




The thing is, I can understand a lot of it, but after all of the times WotC has gone on to prove that they aren't the man, you would think that these comments would be fewer and far between. Examples:

• WotC bought D&D and they don't care about the game and a MTG based RPG is soon to follow.
• WotC is going to add randomization mechanics into D&D.
• WotC is going to make 4e another 3.5 edition and do little to update the system.
• WotC is going to kill off 3rd Party Support for 4e.

Now they have had some questionable calls. The release of 3.5 which they admit was a mistake. The total disregard for the Mac community with the DDI. The revoking of Dragon and Dungeon Magazines from Paizo. In my mind, the jury is still out on D&D Insider and the license is still up in the air. WotC has earned enough of my respect to give them the benefit of the doubt.

While I don't think that everything will be to my liking (how could it?), I do believe that they'll find a middle ground that won't leave a bad taste in my mouth. Just give them some time till they get everything straightened out.

There's a good chance that I won't be able to respond to this thread till Wednesday or Thursday, so I'll see you all then.

P.S. You want to talk about insane and unjust? $9.95 for internet access for 24 hours is pretty ridiculous if you ask me....


----------



## JVisgaitis (May 2, 2008)

-Double Post-

Stupid Disney Internet Access....


----------



## Mike_Lescault (May 2, 2008)

smetzger said:
			
		

> I understand the need to "hedge your bets when predicting the date of major announcements".
> However, you are doing a poor job in communicating with the community.
> 
> You should be *at least* be posting once a week saying something like "We are not quite ready to answer your questions, we hope to be ready soon.  I will post again on such and such date and give you an update."




To be fair, this is a slightly different situation than say, if the Magic Online servers or D&Di servers were down, and paying subscribers couldn't access them. In that case, I'd be providing hourly updates with what I knew, with a set time when I would post again to give another update, even if that update had nothing new to add.

In this case, while this topic is certainly important to the community, it's really aimed at the third party publishers. Those folks get their information and updates from the WotC staff managing those relationships (Linae, Scott et al). And while I want to make sure the community has as much information as possible, the information is less time sensitive than it would be for someone deciding...oh, whether to keep banging on the "connect to server" button or to go outside and brave that sun thing. =)

-Mike


----------



## Brown Jenkin (May 2, 2008)

Mike_Lescault said:
			
		

> To be fair, this is a slightly different situation than say, if the Magic Online servers or D&Di servers were down, and paying subscribers couldn't access them. In that case, I'd be providing hourly updates with what I knew, with a set time when I would post again to give another update, even if that update had nothing new to add.
> 
> In this case, while this topic is certainly important to the community, it's really aimed at the third party publishers. Those folks get their information and updates from the WotC staff managing those relationships (Linae, Scott et al). And while I want to make sure the community has as much information as possible, the information is less time sensitive than it would be for someone deciding...oh, whether to keep banging on the "connect to server" button or to go outside and brave that sun thing. =)
> 
> -Mike




Sorry Mike but this is one more instance when keeping your mouth shut (or keeping your fingers off the keyboard) would be better. No one was asking for hourly updates or even remotely thought that this was important as a server crash. In this case though WotC made an announcement that when combined with other communications generated a major firestorm and bad PR for WotC. In order to deal with this firestorm WotC came to ENWorld (not the other way around) and asked ENWorld for questions. It was because of the Rouse and his desire to share info, even it it would take a bit, that people were temporarily satisfied and the subject has died down. This does not mean the community is happy or that we have forgotten, just that we are willing to give the benefit of the doubt and and are waiting on the answers to come back. Given the time frame that Scott gave, people interpreted this to mean May 5th at the latest. The impression I got was that people were asking for at least acknowledgment by that date even if the response was that you needed more time. Popping in to neither inform us of the answer or to say that an extension is needed and for how long is not particularly helpful, especially when combined with a post that says instead that you don't think the issue is particularly time sensitive. Obviously you had time to write a reply here, so why not use that time to say what is going on rather than rambling about how this isn't like a server crash.


----------



## JohnRTroy (May 2, 2008)

Brown Jerkin, while you may feel the update wasn't necessary, smetzer a few posts back, stated 

"You should be at least be posting once a week saying something like "We are not quite ready to answer your questions, we hope to be ready soon. I will post again on such and such date and give you an update."

...So it seems like people disagree on what WoTC should do.



> Obviously you had time to write a reply here, so why not use that time to say what is going on rather than rambling about how this isn't like a server crash.




As upsetting as changes to the GSL might be to the fan base, quite frankly, how WoTC runs their company is not really any of our darn business.  I see a lot of people asking for details on "why did you do this", and "who's responsible for this delay", etc.  

To be fair to the company, I don't think anybody in PR will answer such questions to the general public.  If there are internal arguments in WoTC or Hasbro between individuals, departments, etc, it's just the politics of a company.  We don't get to know all the behind the scenes stuff that might have affected the delay in certain movies or TV shows or computer games.  

Those of us who will use the GSL and might be affected by it have a right to clear answers about what the GSL will entail--but they don't have a right to know who decided this, why they decided to do things this way, what were their motives, etc, anymore than we have a right to know why Coke took a product off the market or why a Magazine removed a popular columnist.

Based on Mike's reply, it sounds like they are already having private conversations with the various big licensees, who are at most affected by the situation.

Is the situation annoying to any potential users of the GSL other than those early adopters?  Yes.  But technically nobody outside the NDA were supposed to know anything about the GSL until June 6th.


----------



## Oldtimer (May 2, 2008)

Mike_Lescault said:
			
		

> In this case, while this topic is certainly important to the community, it's really aimed at the third party publishers. Those folks get their information and updates from the WotC staff managing those relationships (Linae, Scott et al).



I think you are misinformed, Mike. The last communication from WotC directly to third party publishers was March 19.

Since then it has only been rumours on Internet forums. We are all in an information vacuum these days. WotC has completely failed with any sort of timely updates - to the community or to third party publishers.


----------



## JohnRTroy (May 2, 2008)

Actually, while the community (EnWorld, the "general public") hasn't been updated, I think Scott had sent Orcus some e-mail privately when this whole "GSL requires giving up the OGL" thing was happening.  So I suspect there might be some discussions we the public won't be privy to.

If Mike's correct, Scott and Linae might be writing to that list of "early adopters".  But then again, Mike should probably clarify that.  Even if it's to say something like "the general public will know see the GSL by June 6th, some early adopters will know sooner but are under NDA", or "Everybody will know by June 6th", etc.


----------



## Brown Jenkin (May 2, 2008)

JohnRTroy said:
			
		

> Brown Jerkin, while you may feel the update wasn't necessary, smetzer a few posts back, stated
> 
> "You should be at least be posting once a week saying something like "We are not quite ready to answer your questions, we hope to be ready soon. I will post again on such and such date and give you an update."
> 
> ...So it seems like people disagree on what WoTC should do.




Actually I agree with smetzer. I think WotC should provide a weekly update even if it is to say they don't have anything yet. What we got however was not that or any statement that things were delayed again or that we would get a reply on Monday. What we got instead was a rambling statement on how this wasn't as important as server crashes. 





			
				JohnRTroy said:
			
		

> As upsetting as changes to the GSL might be to the fan base, quite frankly, how WoTC runs their company is not really any of our darn business.  I see a lot of people asking for details on "why did you do this", and "who's responsible for this delay", etc.
> 
> To be fair to the company, I don't think anybody in PR will answer such questions to the general public.  If there are internal arguments in WoTC or Hasbro between individuals, departments, etc, it's just the politics of a company.  We don't get to know all the behind the scenes stuff that might have affected the delay in certain movies or TV shows or computer games.
> 
> Those of us who will use the GSL and might be affected by it have a right to clear answers about what the GSL will entail--but they don't have a right to know who decided this, why they decided to do things this way, what were their motives, etc, anymore than we have a right to know why Coke took a product off the market or why a Magazine removed a popular columnist.




That was not my point or anyone else's. We already know there is internal fight and most of us don't care about how or why things are going on internally. What we are waiting on is something that WotC came to ENWorld about. WotC asked ENWorld to submit questions. None of the questions had anything to to do with internal processes, just questions about the license itself, which was what was asked of us as a community by WotC. What we want are the answers to these questions. The questions that WotC wanted us to ask.



			
				JohnRTroy said:
			
		

> Based on Mike's reply, it sounds like they are already having private conversations with the various big licensees, who are at most affected by the situation.
> 
> Is the situation annoying to any potential users of the GSL other than those early adopters?  Yes.  But technically nobody outside the NDA were supposed to know anything about the GSL until June 6th.




Again. Wotc wanted us to ask questions about the license. We did and we are now awaiting answers. If Wotc doesn't want to answer those questions anymore they should say so. We are not asking anymore than what they have said they will give us.


----------



## xechnao (May 2, 2008)

Brown Jenkin said:
			
		

> We already know there is internal fight




I don't -or what it could actually mean.


----------



## Morrus (May 2, 2008)

Oldtimer said:
			
		

> I think you are misinformed, Mike. The last communication from WotC directly to third party publishers was March 19.




I would be very careful before correcting a WotC staff member about private emails to which you are not party.  Not that I would confirm or deny anything, but I imagine Mike rolled his eyes at seeing that post.


----------



## Mike_Lescault (May 2, 2008)

In other news, I've emailed Morrus our answers. =) Thanks to everyone for their patience.


----------



## Brown Jenkin (May 2, 2008)

Mike_Lescault said:
			
		

> In other news, I've emailed Morrus our answers. =) Thanks to everyone for their patience.




Thank you for that concise and happy news.


----------



## BryonD (May 2, 2008)

Well well, the delay was time well spent.


----------



## Oldtimer (May 2, 2008)

Morrus said:
			
		

> I would be very careful before correcting a WotC staff member about private emails to which you are not party.  Not that I would confirm or deny anything, but I imagine Mike rolled his eyes at seeing that post.



I'm sorry, Morrus. I should have said "general communications". If WotC chooses to email single parties privately, I obviously would know nothing about it.

But there has been no general communications with the NDA signatories since March 19.


----------



## smetzger (May 4, 2008)

Mike_Lescault said:
			
		

> In this case, while this topic is certainly important to the community, it's really aimed at the third party publishers. Those folks get their information and updates from the WotC staff managing those relationships (Linae, Scott et al). And while I want to make sure the community has as much information as possible, the information is less time sensitive than it would be for someone deciding...oh, whether to keep banging on the "connect to server" button or to go outside and brave that sun thing. =)
> 
> -Mike




WOTC may be in contact with some of the larger 3PP.  However, there are many smaller 3PP that WOTC has not contacted.  Me including.
All we have is rumors, speculation, and no updates or timetables from WOTC.


----------



## JRRNeiklot (May 4, 2008)

JohnRTroy said:
			
		

> ...quite frankly, how WoTC runs their company is not really any of our darn business.




But it  IS our business.  As customers, we ultimately pay their salaries, and we vote with our dollars.  If they don't run their business the way we like, they don't get paid.  Now they can fire us, but they better have replacement bosses handy first.


----------



## Seanchai (May 5, 2008)

JRRNeiklot said:
			
		

> But it  IS our business.  As customers, we ultimately pay their salaries, and we vote with our dollars.  If they don't run their business the way we like, they don't get paid.




Walk into a retail establish - say McDonalds, Blockbuster, or your FLGS - and tell them that because you ultimately pay their salary, you're entitled to see their financial statements. Tell them you want to go in back and inspect operations, and, when you're done, you'll go over their books. 

Sure, you can vote with your dollars - and I highly recommend that you do - but the idea that it gives you the right to know how businesses operate is silly. 

But that aside, I doubt the vast majority of WotC's customers care or know about the OGL, the GSL, how open the latter is, whether or not WotC met the initial deadline they laid out, et al..

Seanchai


----------



## Delta (May 5, 2008)

Seanchai said:
			
		

> Walk into a retail establish - say McDonalds, Blockbuster, or your FLGS - and tell them that because you ultimately pay their salary, you're entitled to see their financial statements. Tell them you want to go in back and inspect operations, and, when you're done, you'll go over their books.
> 
> Sure, you can vote with your dollars - and I highly recommend that you do - but the idea that it gives you the right to know how businesses operate is silly.




This is entirely a political question. For example, we absolutely can access McDonald's and Blockbuster's financial statements, because as publicly-traded companies they're required to openly file them.

McDonald's -- http://finance.yahoo.com/q/sec?s=MCD
Blockbuster's -- http://finance.yahoo.com/q/sec?s=BBI

Voting with one's individual dollars is probably the weakest thing anyone can do. The right to speak, persuade, organize, and petition as a group is always far more powerful, if people think the issue is sufficiently important.


----------



## Seanchai (May 5, 2008)

Delta said:
			
		

> For example, we absolutely can access McDonald's and Blockbuster's financial statements, because as publicly-traded companies they're required to openly file them.




I'll assume you got that asking about financials was just an example used to illustrate the point. (But an individual store's financial information isn't available on Yahoo...)



			
				Delta said:
			
		

> Voting with one's individual dollars is probably the weakest thing anyone can do.




And yet the least annoying for the bystander...



			
				Delta said:
			
		

> The right to speak, persuade, organize, and petition as a group is always far more powerful, if people think the issue is sufficiently important.




What's the point of all that unless you're then going to vote with your dollars? I mean, WotC already knows that there are people out there who think they're not so nice. Unless the movement it going to actually affect WotC, what's the point?


----------



## Fifth Element (May 6, 2008)

Delta said:
			
		

> This is entirely a political question. For example, we absolutely can access McDonald's and Blockbuster's financial statements, because as publicly-traded companies they're required to openly file them.



Poor examples, since as a subsidiary of Hasbro, WotC's financial information is only publicly available in the consolidated numbers of Hasbro and its subsidiaries. Said financial information is combined with the other companies', with no way to split it out without having access to internal information.

Now I'm not familiar with US corporate tax, but in Canada each separate corporation files its own tax return. So maybe we just need to hack into the IRS' database to get what we're looking for. That's probably easier than voting with your wallet.

_
Note: I am not actually advocating hacking into the IRS. That was a joke._


----------

