Before I jump into my main question, I need to provide a little background about myself. I have a university degree in rhetoric. Yes, they offer a degree solely in rhetoric. We studied Plato and the usual classics, but a large portion of the degree covered how to analyze the influence of words and images on an audience. We spent hours looking at advertising and dissecting the tricks used to influence the audience to buy a product. Ultimately, it was about using emotion to influence perception. Words or images of smiling, healthy people on a cruise tries to touch a part of our psyche that desires that state of affairs. It is a visceral, subconscious response that influences our conscious behavior (buy a cruise).  Just a picture of a boat without the smiling people has far less impact. There is no emotional “distortion” of the image. A ship is just a ship.

It is this distortion that interests me. A few days ago it occurred to me that much of my perception of anything “Dungeons and Dragons” is colored by decades of memories. This is simply a part of life, but it did inspire my question: How much is the historical, emotional attachment to Dungeons and Dragons affecting perceptions of 4th edition rules? Would you be as satisfied ( or unsatisfied) with the rules set if it did not wear a D&D cloak?

This is not an attempt to start an old vs new school argument or bashing the rules set. I truly am interested to hear if gamers would play 4e rules without 30+ years of D&D emotional baggage and expensive marketing. I came up with an answer for myself. What that is does not really matter. I would rather not taint the results with my opinion.  I challenge you, gentle reader, to embrace your biases and seek the answer to this question yourself: If you wandered into a book store and found a plain, photocopied booklet of 4e rules would you use them ?

Trask, The Last Tyromancer

The Essence of the GSL

locations, creatures) in their products. It was originally released in the summer of 2008 and very few companies signed it. In fact, it was roundly criticized as draconian and grossly unfair to the 3rd party publishers. WOTC quickly withdrew the GSL for “revision” and released a new version this week.

There are some improvements over the original document, but I am still very, very unimpressed. A particularly onerous section that forced 3PP to remove/destroy old inventory when they leave the GSL contract now has a 6-month grace period to allow them to sell off non-compliant inventory. This is an improvement, but then you get down to the truly evil section.

By the way, I should mention that I am skipping some sections related to the SRD, logo use and “approved” content (ie no sex, excessive violence, hurting anyones feelings, etc) and the clause that allows Wizards to produce a competing product “substantially similar” to what the 3PP publishes. No, I think that true evil in the GSL begins at section 9.3. I reprint it here for your convenience.

9.3 Protection of Wizards’ Rights. Licensee will assist Wizards to the extent necessary or as requested by Wizards to protect any of Wizards’ rights in and to Wizards Intellectual Property. Wizards will reimburse Licensee for any reasonable out-of-pocket costs incurred as a result of providing such assistance, provided that Wizards has approved such costs in advance. Licensee will not institute any suit or take any action on account of any such infringements or imitations, or otherwise institute any suit or take any action relating to Wizards Intellectual Property. Licensee will take no action that will harm, misuse or bring into disrepute the activities, properties or products of Wizards or Wizards Intellectual Property.

Yes, once you sign the GSL, you are now a potential “draftee” in any IP infringement action Wizards undertakes. They kindly offer to pay “reasonable” expenses incurred by the 3PP. Lovely, letting lawyers decide what is reasonable is like letting pigs decide how much slop to eat. No thank you.

Just as a thought experiment, let us assume you want to take Wizards to court and let the lawyers sort out a problem between the two of you. Problem is, WOTC picks the venue and you gave up the right to trial by jury.

18. Choice of Law; Jurisdiction. This License will be governed by the laws of the State of Washington, USA, without reference to its choice of law rules. Licensee  irrevocably consent to the exclusive jurisdiction and venue of the federal and state courts located at King County, Washington with respect to any claim or suit brought by Licensee arising out of or related to this License, and Licensee agrees not to commence or prosecute any such claim or suit other than in the aforementioned courts. LICENSEE EXPRESSLY WAIVES ITS RIGHT TO A JURY TRIAL OF ANY DISPUTE, CLAIM OR CAUSE OF ACTION RELATED TO OR ARISING OUT OF THIS LICENSE.

The uppercase lettering was in the original document. At least they are being upfront about what you give up.

I am done. I cannot read this thing any longer without spasms of laughter. I do not t speak for anyone except myself, but I would never sign this contract. There is too much power in the hands of Wizards and too little benefit to the 3PP. There is one great thing that might come of the new GSL If this version is an unpopular as the last one ( and I believe it will be), then more companies will start producing their own systems and worlds and variety can only be good for the gaming community.

Trask, The Last Tyromancer

This weekend I went to the local “Living Forgotten Realms”  game day for some 4E RPG action. As 4E players know, the new way creatures are effected can be a little tedious. They can be marked, cursed, queried, and succumb to a host of temporary or “until save” conditions.  Having some sort of management system for all of these effects is crucial for a smooth running game.

Well, our judge had an interesting solution for managing these effects that I had not seen before; so, I thought I would share. He used the rings from bottles that are left over from holding the cap on until you open it. You know the ones, they are found on soda bottles, milk bottles, juices, pretty much every plastic bottle. And the cool thing is they come in a rainbow of different colors, so he had a color for every effect. To get a large set you would have to strategically buy your soda for a few months to get the right colors. But once you do, you are set. And if you normally get soda anyway, they would be virtually free.

Soda Ring Markers for 4e

In practice they worked pretty well. They were easy to throw on the creature, and due to the plastic “teeth” on the inside of the ring, they stayed in place. They were easier to add and remove then chips you place under the characters because you didn’t have to pick the mini’s up to add/remove them. And they were cleaner on the board then setting markers next to the mini’s, since they didn’t get in the way.

On the negative side, once a creature had 2 or 3 effects, then it didn’t work so well for additional ones. One creature that ended up with 5 effects, we had to take the ball of plastic off and just set it aside, because it was to unwieldy.

I personally am still a fan of the magnetic markers, but this may light some people’s fire.

Regards,
Haaldaar

Chaotic Shiny Character Generator Screenshot (click for larger image)

It looks like a great tool to really crank out quick NPCs  for 4e.  Drop me a comment and let me know if you find it useful.

Trask, The Last Tyromancer

For those coming late to the party the GSL is the license that WOTC makes 3rd party publishers sign before they can sell anything that uses the 4E D&D system. You should read the original GSL. It provides some context for my suggestions. If you are not interested in reading a legal document or old blog posts to catch up on the GSL controversy , let me sum it up for you: it is an evil document. Incredibly unpopular with publishers and pulled within a few weeks of release for “revision.”

Let us move past this old document to the new, “Trask Built” version.

{Lots of Legal Boilerplate, on to the good stuff }

1. Wizards will notify all signatories of any changes to the GSL by mail.

No, this is not a major burden for Wizards. I personally contacted/visited most of the RPG companies in the English-speaking world setting up rpgseek.com. There are less than 400. Not a big deal to do a mass mailing. The original version of “we change it and you have to keep checking back to see if we changed anything” is just rude.

2. You can reprint entire unaltered blocks of text from the SRD, including page numbers for reference.

I get that WOTC wants to sell books, but preventing publishers from reprinting power descriptions and the like was just annoying.

2. You may print an OGL and 4E version of the game simultaneously.

This one really annoyed me in the original GSL. If 4E is so much better than 3.5 in every possible way, what harm does a 3.5 version of the same book cause? Clearly no one is going to buy the “inferior” version, right?

4. “Wizards of the Coast” has final approval on all books published under the GSL. All works must be submitted for approval to the “Community Standards Department” before publication. WOTC reserves the right to require edits before release of any offensive material.

Wizards included a vague “community standards of decency” clause in the original GSL. Vague is not acceptable. Either you let people print what they want or you demand approval on every product, with feedback to fix the problems. Vague is just too dangerous in this age of litigation.

5. If there is a lawsuit between WOTC and the 3rd party publisher, arbitration is the venue of choice. Legal costs are determined by the arbiter.

I am not a lawyer, but even I know that lawyers and trials are expensive. Here is the original GSL’s version of this, “Licensee will be responsible for all legal costs, including Wizards’ attorneys’ fees, associated with any action required by Wizards to enforce the terms of this License.” No small company can afford to pay the legal bills during a protracted suit for both sides! It basically made WOTC lawsuit proof from anyone other than a large company. Arbitration is fair, cost-effective idea.

6. Changes to this document are NOT retroactive. All changes require signatories sign the license again. Currently published products do not have to conform to the new requirements

It will be a cold, dark day in Hell before I ever sign a contract that can change without my consent. Of course, it is very unlikely WOTC would do such a thing, but can you afford to take the risk?

Such is my vision for the new 4E GSL. I am sure there are those that disagree with me or think they have a better idea on how to handle these issues. Feel free to make your feelings known in the comments.

Trask, The Last Tyromancer

It does not take a genius to realize this release is all about “4th Edition Dungeons and Dragons.” The “Authoring Kit” page even uses 4E as an example of what users can build! The reasoning behind the move is quite sound, WOTC is unlikely to  license the game rules to a company in direct competition with their “D&D Insider” subscription service and Lone Wolf cannot sell the game data for “Herolab” without a license (assuming they want to sign the dreaded GSL before it is revised).

Nothing, however, prevents Lone Wolf from making it easy to add 4E rules to their software package for home use. Well done, Herolab! A little competition might rattle Wizard’s cage and encourage some movement towards a less draconian licensing model.

I have “Herolab,” so I will update it and give a brief report about the authoring kit and its  merits (or defects) this weekend.

Trask, The Last Tyromancer