Slashdot Log In
D&D 4th Edition Game System License Announced
Posted by
Zonk
on Thu Apr 17, 2008 06:36 PM
from the listen-to-foreplay/long-time-for-me dept.
from the listen-to-foreplay/long-time-for-me dept.
Wizards of the Coast has announced plans for a brand-new system license for the fourth edition of Dungeons and Dragons . As with the d20 STL for Third Edition, this is a royalty-free license that will allow third parties to publish products using the rules developed by WotC. The new system reference document will be made available early in June (just after the release of the new edition). That license only covers fantasy gaming, but a second license (the d20 GSL) will be released allowing for any type of gaming product to be developed. For analysis and follow-up on the announcement, the ENWorld boards have full details.
Related Stories
[+]
The Dungeons and Dragons Fourth Edition Preview Books 378 comments
It's a big year for tabletop gamers. In just a few months the first books for the Fourth Edition of Dungeons and Dragons (D&D) will be released by publisher Wizards of the Coast (WotC). The last major update to the game rules was released in 1999, and sparked interest in D&D not seen since the early 80s. To attempt to answer some of the biggest questions about this newest edition, WotC has learned from mistakes made in 99', and is previewing their game updates with a pair of softcover books. Called "Races and Classes" and "Worlds and Monsters", the two titles cover everything from character creation to the new default world's pantheon. More importantly, it includes a large amount of commentary from the designers about why things are going to be as they are. In short: they're must-haves for hardcore D&D fans. Read on for my impressions of these highly entertaining (and vastly overpriced) chapbooks.
[+]
D&D 4th Edition Details Released 171 comments
Wired is reporting that some juicy details of Wizards of the Coast's new 4th edition for Dungeons and Dragons are being leaked on to the web from the D&D Experience in Arlington, VA this week. "Wizards of the Coast, the current custodians of the D&D universe, have been talking about the upcoming fourth edition of the game for months, but they've been fairly cagey about hard details, preferring to tell us more about how elves love footraces than how much damage a fireball does. They're running actual 4e games at D&D Experience, though, and thanks to people with scanners, you can too!"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Game Rules (Score:5, Informative)
My understanding is that the WOTC gaming licenses give you some extra rights (for instance, you could use their skill and magic descriptions verbatim), but takes away others (you are given certain restrictions, such as requiring use of the D20 logo). I'm not criticizing WOTC, just saying that using their licenses are not the only way to write compatible rules and expansions.
Re: (Score:2)
One point that is often forgotten when discussing the OGL and D20 license is that game rules cannot be copyrighted
Neither can a story. Or a collection of facts. But if you add enough details to a story, or enough specificity to those facts, you have a fairly solid case that you have something distinct and copyrightable.
The game rules for D&D are "everyone sits around a table, and one person describes the world. The referee asks players what they want to do, has them roll dice to determine specifics, and the game continues as a collaborative drama."
Where exactly the line between the above (which anyone can, and
Re:Game Rules (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Game Rules (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
The 'improvements' of D&D 4 (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:The 'improvements' of D&D 4 (Score:5, Funny)
My DM had even harder challenges in the past... The most complicated one involved a lock controlled by four rotating discs, where I had to mathematically proof to him that there is no solution to his puzzle before he let us pass :)
Parent
Re:The 'improvements' of D&D 4 (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:The 'improvements' of D&D 4 (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:The 'improvements' of D&D 4 (Score:4, Funny)
Her? Now I know you're lying!
Parent
Re:Oh, no! No Decipher Script? D&D is ruined! (Score:4, Informative)
Why isn't using a grappling hook under Climb? Why not fold tying someone up under getting out of it (i.e. Escape Artist)? Who finds drama or challenge in trying to splice rope together? (For that matter, Profession (Sailor) doesn't include any of this?)
It's a senselessly fine-grained skill definition that wastes precious resources (i.e. skill points) that could be spent on things like Survival or Move Silently or Climb -- you know, skills people would actually *use* every adventure.
4e's philosophy on skills is that skills will generally be broad and cover common adventuring challenges. Their system is designed so that party members aren't excluded from the fun when a rare type of challenge is needed, like the party that won't use horses because only one player has the Ride skill. Lastly, their system is designed with versatility in mind, encouraging players to find creative uses of their skills to defeat challenges, like using History to escape pursuers by remembering an entrance into the ancient catacombs under the city.
If deciphering documents is essential to your game, then there's no reason you couldn't let someone make an Arcane, History, or Thievery check for it, representing their experience with tomes of cryptic lore, translating dead languages, or espionage, respectively. Having a largely one-trick skill is limiting and either forces the DM to find contrived ways to make it relevant or leaves the player with wasted skill points. 4e gets rid of that.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Trust me, a good Use Rope scores when attempting to take down and deliver alive a rogue with many ranks in Escape Artist.
Only because 3e has those specific skills. In 4e this would be an opposed Dex-check or Thievery check. No need for narrow skills that provide absurd results.
What absurd result, you might ask? Look up the Escape Artist checks for getting out of chains and manacles sometime. It's a fixed DC. At high levels, it's better to bind someone with a rope than it is to put them in irons -- because apparently you can get more skilled with ropes but not with chains (which has no skill).
This is the end result of an
Memories... (Score:5, Funny)
Does a 21 save? (Score:5, Funny)
I put on my robe and wizard hat...
Parent
Re:Does a 21 save? (Score:4, Insightful)
For mods that don't get the joke [bash.org]
Parent
Re:Does a 21 save? (Score:5, Funny)
> I put on my robe and wizard hat...
Oh, I like to play dress up.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
I put on my robe and wizard hat.
I for one do not welcome the new 4th ed overlords (Score:3, Interesting)
Good quality books.
While I was never a fan of Drizzit (sorry emo/angsty/goth kids), Eliminster wasn't a bad series and anything with Raistlin was a lot better. In fact, most of Dragon Lance books were amazing, some greyhawk were decent, a lot of Forgotten Realms books were also quite good. There were some good authors writing these books too!
I think most of these books were done by TSR/random house, I do think it is sad that Wizards of the Coast decided that they can just cash in on the long time fans by spewing out more and new shiny books without remembering ALL the things that made dungeons and dragons great:
The inspiring, awesome, fun stories.
I don't think I am the only person who 1st read the various fantasy books and thought "hey, this is pretty cool, I wish I could play a game based on this, I'd totally be a female dwarf cleric"
While there is plenty of ad&d games to go around, I think the number of new/good ad&d books entering the market is depressingly low - sure, they are there, but it looks like the effort just isn't quite there like there used to be. Sure, someone could argue that you can read the old books and they do translate quite well into 3rd or 4th edition ruleset but
It really seems like in the good old days (doh) the holders of the license were like "hey, you can write and you know our world, why don't you write something cool for us ? no pressure, no big lawyery contracts, you write something good, we help you get it published, we'll split profit 3 ways, no worries, lets make a great world" What this means is that lots of good and/or new books would come out all the time.
I read fantasy very rarely, reading mostly sci-fi these days, but forgotten realms and dragonlance are a special place for me. I wish these two places got as much attention as shiny new rulebooks, plastic-manufactured Ebberon, etc
Re:I for one do not welcome the new 4th ed overlor (Score:5, Interesting)
I also find it amusing that you point out stereotypically whiny kids groups and then spend the next five paragraphs complaining about how everything used to be better "back in the day". Fourth edition D&D is all about stripping out rules that shouldn't matter, because it gets in the way of telling a good story. After playing a few of the public play tests, I have to say that I haven't been this excited about D&D since my uncle described my first dungeon, back in '85. Combat is tactically interesting and flows quickly. In all of the earlier editions of D&D encounters ate up most of the play time, because it took so damn long to get through big fights. In fourth edition, instead of spending 10 minutes on plot and 2 hours on combat, most games will be able to split their time more or less evenly between the two.
Also, the reason why Eberron got so much more love than Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance in the past few years is because Eberron's new. There's an entire universe of things that people don't know about it. On the other hand, between the 100+ novels and sourcebooks, Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance are pretty well defined. It's really hard to fill a sourcebook with new information. They could retread the old material, but that's boring for everyone except new players and people that are really rabid about their campaign setting.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Its been my experience that combat is the most memorable part of the game. People I know recall fun and funny moments of DND combat from nearly 20 years ago, not plot points.
Re:I for one do not welcome the new 4th ed overlor (Score:5, Funny)
As someone who used to play a bard that ended up being the smart ass of the group, I can safely say that more people fell out of their chairs during combat than most other times while we gamed.
For example...
Standing watch by myself late at night.
DM: A lone goblin approaches.
Me: I reach into my pocket, pull out a marshmallow, and toss it to the goblin.
*everyone looks at me*
DM: The goblin pokes it with his spear then picks it up and eats it
Me: I cast Enlarge on the marshmallow.
*several players choke on their drinks*
Then there was the rather large group of monsters coming at us down the stairs while we were still on the floor below.
Me: I cast cantrip to create a banana peel in the middle of the monsters.
*saving throws. A monster fails*
DM: The monster slips, taking half of his comrades with him
Me: Okay, guys. I've done my share. The rest are yours... *grin*
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I was a DM as well, but in one campaign (AD&D 2nd Ed) back in the 80's I was playing a halfling psionicist. My poor DM never saw this one comming...
DM: The ogre approaches.
ME: I place a psionic portal on the ground directly below his feet.
DM: Where is the other end?
ME: About four feet above it.
DM: And why are you doing this?
ME: Do the math. (that was a "catch phrase" we had back then.) He will continue to accelerate due to gravity. Give him a minute or so of freefall and then
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I for one do not welcome the new 4th ed overlor (Score:5, Funny)
my time (I was, for a while, the copy-editor on the "New Adventures of
Doctor Who" novels), but I can say without a single unmitigated shadow
of a doubt that I have never, ever, ever, ever, ever read a pile of shit
so huge, so mouldering and steaming, so slime-encrusted and maggot-
ridden, so bereft of ideas, characterisation, characters, plot,
background, setting, tone, atmosphere, themes, motifs, sense or words
strung together in an even vaguely readable order as the first
Dragonlance book. It is awful. No, it is beyond awful. It is an affront
to literacy, history and humanity. If Gutenberg had been shown a copy of
this book, he would have placed his head in his printing press and
instructed his apprentices to squash it until the brains were running
out of his ears and they heard his skull crack. It should be taken out
and burnt. Everyone associated with its production should be fucked and
burnt. The Nazi pogroms and book-burnings should be reinstated, together
with the Spanish inquisition, purely to erase all traces and records of
this book from our planet's history.
I was once stuck on a train for six hours with nothing to read except a
copy of this book. After sixty pages I decided that spending the
remaining five and a half hours sitting very still and meditating on the
five screaming children in the seat opposite and their appallingly
stupid parents was preferable to having to read one more word of the
drivel before me.
It even has fucking SONGS in it.
The only good thing associated with Dragonlance is Margaret Weis's
daughter, who is a fox.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
God. Jesus. No. For fuck's sake, no, no, no. I've read a lot of shit in
my time (I was, for a while, the copy-editor on the "New Adventures of
Doctor Who" novels), but I can say without a single unmitigated shadow
of a doubt that I have never, ever, ever, ever, ever read a pile of shit
so huge, so mouldering and steaming, so slime-encrusted and maggot-
ridden, so bereft of ideas, characterisation, characters, plot,
background, setting, tone, atmosphere, themes, motifs, sense or words
strung together in an even vaguely readable order as the first
Dragonlance book.
Wow, I don't know whether to give this guy Left Behind or Battlefield Earth. I bet I'll be able to hear the crinkling of his soul withering.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Open source the Magic CCG system? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Open source the Magic CCG system? (Score:5, Insightful)
In RPGs, by contrast, core books outsell supplements, even from the first party publisher, by an order of magnitude, yet the amount of work to produce a book is roughly the same for both. Supplements make the core books more attractive to potential players, yet are much less profitable to produce. So, in a stroke of generosity, WotC enables other companies to tie into their product, thereby increasing the salability and appeal of the D&D brand without having to invest in supplements no one will buy.
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Open source the Magic CCG system? (Score:5, Insightful)
2: Because Ryan Dancy convinced them that it's save tabletop gaming as a whole, and D&D's bottom line in particular, to let smaller companies support D&D.
Parent
one question (Score:5, Insightful)
Does this free license apply only to pen-and-paper games or could you build a [non-commercial] computer RPG based on the WoTC rules?
Re: (Score:2)
def skillCheck("skill", target):
foo = rollD20()
if foo >= target:
return true
else return false
you'd be okay.
(Sorry if my Python isin't 100% correct tonight)
Re: (Score:2)
I think what I had in mind was not the mechanics of the die roll - but of striking the right balance between the different elements of a game.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
2: You'll have better luck trying a COMMERCIAL game than vice versa.
Re: (Score:2)
- The OGL would let you do it but didn't cover things like character generation and a couple of other key parts.
- The D20 license let you use the extra parts, but you couldn't 'create an interactive game.' The translation provided by WOTC was that you could build software but couldn't roll an
d20srd.org (Score:2, Insightful)
Does this license... (Score:5, Funny)
I love me some D&D and I can't imagine much better than girls playing.
Perhaps my wish should be filed along with "Year of Linux on the desktop" and Duke Nukem Forever...
How nice of them... (Score:3, Insightful)
Under what made up law did they think they could stop people from creating 100% original content that works within their game rules?
Re:Sharing the Wealth (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:Sharing the Wealth (Score:5, Informative)
A project I was working on some months back was game-related, and we figured we'd use the D20 system because if someone is going to know how to make a compelling game engine, it's going to be the makers of Dungeons & Dragons.
So we researched the license for D20, were really excited for a while, but eventually found a sentence or two buried deeply in the license which brought us to a screeching halt.
D20 allows you to use the game rules defined by the D20 engine for pretty much any purpose you want, royalty free; I think with some attribution clauses or the like. You never have to pay WotC a dime.
However that one little clause deep in the license basically grants WotC the right to choose to seize the exclusive rights to anything you produced surrounding the D20 system. It grants them full and unrestricted access to all source materials, and it grants them the right to resell and distribute the goods produced from it. Further, it grants them the right to revoke the license from you, barring you from further use.
Essentially the system is open and free for as long as you don't turn into a juicy target for WotC, who reserves the right to take whatever you produced away from you and sell it themselves, and keep you from selling or even using it any longer.
When you have a litigatious-happy company like WotC offering an olive branch, you must watch out for any poison-tipped thorns contained in it, and at least for D20, there is one, and it is deadly.
Parent
Re:Sharing the Wealth (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re:Sharing the Wealth (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Re:Sharing the Wealth (Score:4, Informative)
They can't seize it in the sense of use it and deny you from printing your own books - but they and every other publisher has the right under the OGL to use the game mechanics created by any other publisher under the OGL. This has rarely been capitalized on but it has happened - Mongoose publishing put out a series of collection books on spells, feats and the like regardless of who originally published them.
That is true to the give and take nature of the OGL. You get the right to use materials designated as open under the license - such as Wizard's System Reference Document (which is an open clone of the D&D core rulebooks). You give up the right to close off your unique game mechanics from all other parties to the OGL.
This really isn't any different in principle from the Gnu Public License (No accident - the GPL inspired the OGL) - you get the right to use code from any program released under the license, but you give up the right to keep your derived code closed off from everyone else.
Parent
Citation Needed (Score:3)
However that one little clause deep in the license basically grants WotC the right to choose to seize the exclusive rights to anything you produced surrounding the D20 system. It grants them full and unrestricted access to all source materials, and it grants them the right to resell and distribute the goods produced from it. Further, it grants them the right to revoke the license from you, barring you from further use.
Can you quote the specific language which you are referring to? I see nothing in either the OGL or the d20 License that grants them the rights you speak of. The closest thing I can find is the clause that terminates your license if and only if you are in breach of the contract.