Newsgroup: it.hobby.giochi.gdr.dnd
Titolo: QUARTA edizione 4th - nuova OGL

la nuova versione ogl, doppia fase (per pubblicare prima del 2009 si
devono cacciare 5000$) e maggior controllo dei prodotti
a occhio meno caos
su enworld trovate le info del caso 
www.enworld.org
qui l'annuncio ufficiale 
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4news/20080108a
+++
WotC announces plans for 4e SRD and OGL
On January 7th, Wizards of the Coast held a courtesy call with the 3rd
party publishers who had expressed close interest in gaining advance
access to the 4e rules.
Attending the call were:
Adamant Entertainment
EN Publishing
Expeditious Retreat Press
Fantasy Flight Games
Goodman Games
Green Ronin Publishing
Mongoose Publishing
Necromancer Games
Paizo Publishing
Paradigm Concepts
Privateer Press
On the line for WotC were Scott Rouse, Linae Foster (Licensing
Manager), Andy Collins, Bill Slavicsek, and Chris Perkins.
Their formal announcement can be found here, but here's what we
learned from the call.
4e publisher support will be released in two phases.
Phase One is for publishers who want access to the 4e rules early.
Taking a lesson from software publishers, WotC will be making
available an OGL Designers Kit. This gives early access to rules and
is offered to any publisher, not just the ones on the conference call.
Access to the kit requires a legitimate business license, a signed
NDA, and a one-time $5000 fee.
This kit will be available within a matter of weeks, as soon as
several legal logistics are complete. It provides three hardcopy pre-
publication versions of the three core rule books, copies of the OGL
and SRD, and a FAQ. Publishers will continue to receive updates to
these rules as changes are made, one in the beginning of February and
possibly one in March. Publishers will also receive advance copies of
the final rule books. Importantly, publishers who purchase the kit may
begin selling product on August 1, 2008 - earlier than other
publishers.
Phase Two is free and begins on June 6th, when the OGL goes live. Any
publisher can then produce D&D supplements under the OGL, but these
cannot be published until January 1, 2009.
Effectively, this means that publishers who pony up the $5000 fee get
four months of advance production time for their products, can sell
their products at GenCon and Christmas without a whole lot of
competition, and have a five month grace period when theirs are the
only 4e products available. Publishers who choose not to pay the fee
will enter the market at a later date.
I took notes during the Question and Answer portion of the call, and
the following Q&A comes from my notes. In some cases the information
is paraphrased instead of an exact quote.
1. What's the current status of the core rules?
The Players Handbook heads to typesetting on Wednesday. The Monster
Manual heads off at the end of January, and the Dungeon Masters Guide
in the middle of February. Additional changes and corrections will
continue to be made in the galley through the end of March, but the
rules are largely complete. Lots of playtester feedback, both internal
and external, has been incorporated.
2. Tell us about the 4e OGL and SRD.
The 4e OGL will contain some aspects of the old d20 license, and is
more restrictive in some areas than the prior Open Gaming License. We
are tying the OGL more closely to D&D. There is a free registration
process, a community standards clause, enforceability clauses, and no
expiration date. Phase One publishers who sign a NDA will have the
opportunity to read the OGL before they pay the $5000 early licensing
fee.
The 4th edition SRD will be much more of a reference document than the
3e SRD. The current edition contains almost all of the rules and
allows "copy and paste" publishing. WotC would prefer to see 3rd party
publishers to use their creativity and talent instead of reformatting
or slightly changing pre-existing rules. As such, the 4e SRD will
contain more guidelines and pointers, and less straightforward rules
repetition.
The community standards clause will follow the same spirit as the
current version. It will lay out in broad brushstrokes what's
appropriate and what isn't in a D&D-compatible product. If publishers
have any questions, they're always welcome to ask WotC about
specifics. This clause applies to content, and wouldn't apply to (say)
a shoddy or ugly cover. (Note that this is a rare occurrence anyways;
according to Scott Rouse, there has only been one case in the last two
years where the community standards clause came into effect, and that
was amicably resolved.)
In any case, material that's open under the 3.5 OGL remains open, and
there will be no language in the 4e OGL to restrict 3.0 or 3.5
products.
3. How will publishers indicate 4e compatibility with D&D?
There will be no front-cover logo. There will be specific
compatibility language that indicates a book is "compatible with 4th
Edition Dungeons & Dragons," or something similar. There will also be
verbiage to be included in the book that includes an official "visual
statement" linking the product to D&D.
WotC will work to educate distributors and the market about D&D-
compatible products, but expects publishers to help educate consumers
as well.
4. Will subsequent core releases be promptly added to the SRD?
Subsequent content will be added when it is Open Source.
(In my opinion, Scott Rouse sounded a little abashed when he added
that subsequent rules would be added more promptly than 3rd edition
rules were. That's probably a good sign for publishers who want to
utilize rules and monsters from subsequent releases.)
5. Under Phase One, how are rules distributed to freelancers?
A company's NDA covers their agents and contractors. As such, any
freelancer for a publisher is legally bound by their NDA. The pre-
release rules will be three copies of a physical document (although
WotC is flexible on the quantity, and may provide more copies if
necessary.) Companies working together as partners only pay one fee.
6. Can 3rd party publishers get involved with Gleemax or DDI?
Publishers are welcome to have a product support page in Gleemax. At
this stage, plans to integrate 3rd party publisher support in the DDI
have not reached beyond the discussion phase.
7. With the OGL tied more closely to D&D, how would that impact the
future impact of games like Spycraft or Mutants and Masterminds -
games that in 3e used the core d20 concept but diverged radically from
D&D?
The new version of the OGL isn't as open-ended as the current version.
Any 4e OGL product must use the 4e PHB as the basis of their game. If
they can't use the core rule books, it won't be possible to create the
game under this particular version of the OGL.
Future versions of the OGL, including a 4e d20 Modern version, may
make certain games possible where they weren't before.
8. Does the NDA prevent publishers from announcing that they are
participating in Phase One?
Absolutely not. They're free to promote their involvement.
9. Will the Phase One program make subsequent releases (the PHB 2, for
instance) available to publishers more quickly?
No, it won't. The program only applies to the games' launch and the
first three core books. However, we will likely allow Phase One
developers to distribute free 4e material on Free RPG Day, and to show
(but not sell) sample books at Origins.
10. Who's the contact person for publishers interested in Phase One?
Linae Foster (linae dot foster at wizards dot com) is WotC's contact
person for purchasing or learning more about the OGL Developers Kit.
+++

a occhio meno caos
Ho letto il malloppo, e mi sembra decisamente interessante, pur se con
alcune limitazioni davvero... limitanti :-(
La nuova impostazione è davvero accattivante, e commercialmente molto
interessante la suddivisione in fase uno e fase due.
I limiti imposti dalla nuova ogl dovrebbero evitare l'uscita di
porcherie come è stato per il d20.
D'altra parte mi sembra che le clausole poste costringano i publisher
a discotarsi davvero pochissimo dalla versione "normale" di D&D 4e.
Una specie di cappio in cui alcuni publisher potrebbero infilare il
collo (interessante quando fanno notare l'impossibilità di creare
giochi come spycraft o mutant and masterminds).
Dal punto di vista commerciale comunque mi sembra una cosa molto
interessante.

interessante.
A me no. E' un passo indietro molto netto.
Del resto, l'uscita dei "giochi OGL" si diffuse dopo che la 3.5 era
uscita da un bel po'. In questo momento, se uscissero giochi simili
(soprattutto da quegli editori che potrenno pubblicare a partire da
agosto 2008) farebbero concorrenza diretta ai nuovi manuali base di
D&D - e posso ben capire perche' formulino una licenza che lo vieti.
Vediamo che risponderanno gli altri.
Parvati V
-- 
UnaMoleDiDadi (TreEmme Torino):
http://umdd.altervista.org/
IHGGera #1069, IAFa #182 ^^^
http://parvatiquinta.altervista.org

 almeno per come le cose stanno ora.
non è un caso che la moongoose sia passata al sistema runequest per
molti suoi giochi :)
ma non capisco perchè dici che non sarebbero possibili, a occhio tutti
i prodotti ogl sarebbero possibili richiederebbero solo un po' di
lavoro in più (niente srd in formato elettronico devi riscrivere un
po' tutto) ma a quel punto a che pro rifare lo stesso gioco?
a occhio lupo solitario è più facile da rendere con la 4' edizione

 po' tutto) ma a quel punto a che pro rifare lo stesso gioco?
Fondamentalmente il problema non è di diritti ma di opportunità. E'
vero che, riscrivendo il testo, chiunque può riutilizzare le stesse
meccaniche (vedi il caso di OSRIC, un clone di AD&D 1e che però usa il
testo dell'SRD d20), ed è anche probabile che qualcuno prima o poi
crei una srd adattata a 4e (con lo stesso sistema di OSRIC, appunto).
Però con l'OGL WotC in sostanza dava il suo placet a queste
operazioni, mentre ora dice l'esatto contrario. E' chiaro che le
microaziende che vivono dell'indotto WotC non hanno interesse a
svegliare il can che dorme, e con ogni probabilità seguiranno
l'indicazione data.
Commercialmente parlando, la mossa WotC sembra buona: invece di
coltivarsi la concorrenza in casa, costringe gli aspiranti concorrenti
a tirare acqua al suo mulino (i.e., a focalizzarsi sui prodotti a
minore rendimento), che poi era l'obiettivo originario.
GP

aggiungo che è stata confermata la presenza nella ogl dei contenuti
dei futuri phb, dmg e mm
@Agathokles grazie del punto di vista: pero credo anche che alla fine
il risultato sarà meno manuali fotocopia che sicuramente per il
cliente meno attento erano una brutta sorpresa

a occhio lupo solitario è più facile da rendere con la 4' edizione
Direi che sara' tutto da vedersi. Chissa' se Mongoose e' interessata a
riprendere la linea comunque; il mio era piu' che altro un esempio che
non una considerazione precisa.
