Yuku free message boards

My Recent Posts · (11/26/08

Tags : None

(Double Posted from "Upcoming Releases" -where most people probably won't see it)

I'm a D&D fan. I am a necromancer fan. I prefer 3rd edition. I actually was convinced to play 4th edition because Necromancer Games was getting on board. Then the GSL happened. Or didn't.

I know Scott Rouse supposedly has been working on it, but it's been FOREVER and I see no new Necromancer products.

I suggest that Necromancer games (either independently, or in a "union" or "coalition" along with other companies that want to produce 4th edition products) set a deadline to WotC. If there is not a viable GSL at that point, Necro (or all the companies) will go with Pathfinder.

I'll be buying Necromancer products either edition. But, GODS, I want SOMETHING!

I'd love to see this move along with some haste.

Thanks!

Similar posts at:

Green Ronin:
http://www.greenronin.com...ewtopic.php?p=73146#73146

Enworld:
http://www.enworld.org/fo...ds-coast.html#post4564442

My Recent Posts · (11/26/08

Since Necromancer Games is a hobby for Bill and Clark, they can afford to wait as long as they want.

However, I think there *is* a deadline in the sense that once Pathfinder is finalized, if there is no GSL that Necromancer can use, it's all Pathfinder (or nothing) - unless Necromancer terminates its arrangement with Paizo and publishes through another partner.

I certainly wouldn't have the patience that Clark and Bill seem to have, but it's not my dime.

My Recent Posts · (11/26/08

What DaveMage said, but I endorse your suggestion.

My Recent Posts · (11/26/08

I dont see the point in an artificial deadline. I dont think it will cause WotC to move any faster or slower. NG will decide when it wants to get going with Paizo, so any realistic deadline vis a vie commited capital and labor resources would be contingent upon Paizo finishing its Pathfinder system first. A deadline that holds no water just makes NG seem silly.

That being said, the frustration is still valid.

My Recent Posts · (11/26/08

Hi, Aber!

I don't WotC would care too much about a deadline from Necro, but Rouse has been posting on EnWorld that he is in regular contact with Clark about the GSL (though Clark himself has been silent on the subject on these boards. Maybe he lost his yuku password?

).

I'm still of the opinion that Necro should move forward with the GSL as-is for now - just be selective about what they release (such as adventures-only for now, as there is very little IP to protect with that as opposed to a new JG product or Tome of Horrors). I think they are legally savvy enough to operate under the current restrictions without endangering anything, and once the GSL kinks are worked out they can focus on moving forward with the other products with the added oomph of being already back on shelves and in the "public eye" as it were. But that's just my opinion, and I have no stake in the business to risk like they do.

I'm unsure what exactly makes the difference between a publisher like Goodman who feels (and seems to be thriving) he can operate under the GSL as-is, and a publisher like Green Ronin, who feels they cannot do anything. Its hard to cross-reference the pros and cons involved when no one's really talking about it.

I hope we get a post from Clark soon on the issue - I imagine he's been lurking here still, so perhaps he has been waiting for something he knows to be close on the horizon before announcing it to everyone...

My Recent Posts · (11/26/08

Scott Rouse just posted on EN World, and if I read it right, he hopes to have the revised GSL complete before year's end.

My Recent Posts · (11/26/08

TheRavyn wrote:
I'm unsure what exactly makes the difference between a publisher like Goodman who feels (and seems to be thriving) he can operate under the GSL as-is, and a publisher like Green Ronin, who feels they cannot do anything. Its hard to cross-reference the pros and cons involved when no one's really talking about it.

The answer would be different legal advice. Didnt you know that is what makes the world go round? ;-)

My Recent Posts · (11/26/08

I understand the well-meaning intent of requesting a deadline, but if I were WotC and cared enough to weigh in, I'd say, "You want a deadline? Here it is: now. Sign the existing GSL like the rest have or go pound salt." They hold the cards, folks. From their perspective, and rightly so, the GSL is more or less them doing a favor for people to begin with, so making demands isn't going to work.

My Recent Posts · (11/26/08

Yeah, I think it's past time that it matters.

As I said...somewhere...I think that if the GSL (well, an improved one) had come out initially, it would have been much harder for many gamers to resist the switch to 4E. With Pathfinder, though, those that are/were resistant to switching now don't need to worry about good ongoing support material since many of the best 3.5 adventure writers are still making new ones.

In my opinion, WotC's failure to deliver the license on time is a great contributor to the 3.5/4E schism that has developed. Not only does this failure not allow companies like Necro & Paizo to support 4E, but it has allowed an out (Pathfinder) for gamers that have tried 4E and didn't find it to their taste.

My Recent Posts · (11/26/08

I'm unsure what exactly makes the difference between a publisher like Goodman who feels (and seems to be thriving) he can operate under the GSL as-is, and a publisher like Green Ronin, who feels they cannot do anything. Its hard to cross-reference the pros and cons involved when no one's really talking about it.

It's related to how the GSL interacts with IP.

If you just do modules that are more or less by the book like Goodman does, you shouldn't have any troubles with the GSL.

If you want to do more than that, then the GSL is bad.

My Recent Posts · (11/26/08

moorg wrote:
If you just do modules that are more or less by the book like Goodman does, you shouldn't have any troubles with the GSL.

On the contrary, GG is doing 4E monster books, race books, campaign settings, IP-related sourcebooks (like Frazetta's Death Dealer), player/dm aids, and an APG-like book of characters like Druids, Bards, etc.

Joe's posted here a couple of times, it would be interesting if he'd chime in on the subject...

My Recent Posts · (11/26/08

aberzanzorax wrote:
(Double Posted from "Upcoming Releases" -where most people probably won't see it)

Ha ha! I just noticed that... :-)

My Recent Posts · (11/27/08

TheRavyn wrote:

moorg wrote:
If you just do modules that are more or less by the book like Goodman does, you shouldn't have any troubles with the GSL.

On the contrary, GG is doing 4E monster books, race books, campaign settings, IP-related sourcebooks (like Frazetta's Death Dealer), player/dm aids, and an APG-like book of characters like Druids, Bards, etc.

Joe's posted here a couple of times, it would be interesting if he'd chime in on the subject...

In that case, I wish his good luck. He's stepping on some dangerous ground. Frazetta's stuff will be safe, as it's an established IP and no one's gonna snipe it. But the other stuff is what people are worried about.

My Recent Posts · (11/27/08

We'll see what Scott comes up with. I have been in contact with him and he is a great guy. I hope he can get things to where they are acceptable for us.

I wont be setting any deadlines. That would have zero impact on Wizards. On the other hand, while very slow, I believe I have had a significant impact on this whole revision process. You cant just run around demanding things. You have to work with people if you want results.

We'll see.

Clark

My Recent Posts · (11/27/08

Orcus wrote:
You cant just run around demanding things. You have to work with people if you want results.

Well, that really depends on the size of the club you're carrying or the number of hostages you have.

Unfortunately, in this case, WotC is the one with the club/hostages.

My Recent Posts · (11/29/08

I think that Clark, along with other 3pp who have spoken up, has had about as much impact on getting the GSL out and revised as is possible. I don't see the point of setting deadlines. Stipulating that everyone will support Pathfinder is also odd, because it's too early to say if Pathfinder is going to be accepted by enough 3.x fans to warrant 3pp support.

While the endless problems and delays with the GSL are very frustrating, I don't think the issue is critical by any means unless you're Clark or another 3pp who has been on the fence. If you need 3pp support to be interested in 4e, then you're really not interested in 4e. If you are interested in 4e, then you already have some 3pp products to choose from, with more to come.

My Recent Posts · (12/01/08

DaveMage wrote:
Yeah, I think it's past time that it matters.

As I said...somewhere...I think that if the GSL (well, an improved one) had come out initially, it would have been much harder for many gamers to resist the switch to 4E. With Pathfinder, though, those that are/were resistant to switching now don't need to worry about good ongoing support material since many of the best 3.5 adventure writers are still making new ones.

In my opinion, WotC's failure to deliver the license on time is a great contributor to the 3.5/4E schism that has developed. Not only does this failure not allow companies like Necro & Paizo to support 4E, but it has allowed an out (Pathfinder) for gamers that have tried 4E and didn't find it to their taste.

You hit the nail on the head here......right in the center. Have you seen all the banter by oldschollers either returning to 3.5e or even going to 1e? I think at this point, a revised GSL, what-ever that is, will not make much difference. Will this new GSL (yet non-existant) have the changes needed to make publishing 4e material worth it? Dont bet the farm just yet.

Frost is dead on as well. WotC owns D&D. They hold the cards. I moved on to Pathfinder. Some have moved on to 4e or back to 1e. Deadlines for WotC is kind of mute really. 3pp's wait on the GSL, the GSL does not wait for them. I think that was the plan. WotC has pretty much removed everyone from this scene in the capacity in which they hoped. Remember that 3pp's who were supporting D&D 3.5 ended up competing with WotC, even if it were unintended. Creature Collections I and II and then Tome of Horrors? Those competed with MM2, 3, 4, 5.....

My Recent Posts · (12/09/08

DaveMage wrote:
Scott Rouse just posted on EN World, and if I read it right, he hopes to have the revised GSL complete before year's end.

Remember when we were told by Scott Rouse that the reason for missing the third promised date for release of the GSL was to add PHB II material to the SRD? Where, when somebody on the WotC boards said they'd rather just have the GSL and SRD now, he said that a short delay was a small price to pay for the inclusion of psionics in the SRD?

There might be a revision of the GSL happening, and one might someday be delivered. Similarly, there might be intelligent life on a planet orbiting Alpha Centauri. I have been provided exactly as much evidence of the first as of the second, statements from WotC in general and Scott Rouse in particular having shown no particular tendency to conform with reality.

My Recent Posts · (12/10/08

Are you saying you dont believe? You dont believe that on Holloween the Great GSL does not come to visit all the good little boys and girls in the pumpkin patch? Giving them presents and candy?

My Recent Posts · (12/10/08

It was all so different in the days when the industry was actually run by individuals who actually played the games. But, such talk only shows my age.
Today's legalities: It isn't so much running around to protect what you got (or have created), as it is running about keeping others from being creative too. It's really sad. I think that perhaps, a long while back, the "establishment" of known (board)game makers saw a little privately-owned upstart of an industry (RPG's) begin to take some of their pie. It grew regardless of their power (because it encouraged creativity and free-thought), until they finally got a grip on it (or enough of a grip), and now they do not care if they strangle it altogether... it always was a thorn in their side anyway. They will go right on selling you games with chance-cards and spinners, just so long as you are told the outcome of your game, and whether or not you've truly won.

My two-cents (Oi! Oi! Rebellion!),
Bob Bledsaw II

My Recent Posts · (12/10/08

I think that's part of the reason why I love Necromancer and Paizo so much - their CEOs still play the game!

Author	Comment
aberzanzorax	How about a deadline to WotC?	Lead	[-]
Posts: 2 (11/26/08 05:58:09) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Tags : None (Double Posted from "Upcoming Releases" -where most people probably won't see it) I'm a D&D fan. I am a necromancer fan. I prefer 3rd edition. I actually was convinced to play 4th edition because Necromancer Games was getting on board. Then the GSL happened. Or didn't. I know Scott Rouse supposedly has been working on it, but it's been FOREVER and I see no new Necromancer products. I suggest that Necromancer games (either independently, or in a "union" or "coalition" along with other companies that want to produce 4th edition products) set a deadline to WotC. If there is not a viable GSL at that point, Necro (or all the companies) will go with Pathfinder. I'll be buying Necromancer products either edition. But, GODS, I want SOMETHING! I'd love to see this move along with some haste. Thanks! Similar posts at: Green Ronin: http://www.greenronin.com...ewtopic.php?p=73146#73146 Enworld: http://www.enworld.org/fo...ds-coast.html#post4564442 Last Edited By: aberzanzorax 11/26/08 06:20:46. Edited 2 times.
DaveMage		#1	[-]
Posts: 1980 (11/26/08 06:40:02) Wilderlands Pathfinder Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Since Necromancer Games is a hobby for Bill and Clark, they can afford to wait as long as they want. However, I think there is a deadline in the sense that once Pathfinder is finalized, if there is no GSL that Necromancer can use, it's all Pathfinder (or nothing) - unless Necromancer terminates its arrangement with Paizo and publishes through another partner. I certainly wouldn't have the patience that Clark and Bill seem to have, but it's not my dime.
leadjunkie		#2	[-]
Posts: 1865 (11/26/08 07:32:04) Necromancer Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	What DaveMage said, but I endorse your suggestion. Aspiring Killer DM 221 "4rons vs 3tards debate!" - Bowbe (Put me in the 3tards camp)
Deepcut		#3	[-]
Posts: 4468 (11/26/08 08:50:48) Pimp of the Planes Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I dont see the point in an artificial deadline. I dont think it will cause WotC to move any faster or slower. NG will decide when it wants to get going with Paizo, so any realistic deadline vis a vie commited capital and labor resources would be contingent upon Paizo finishing its Pathfinder system first. A deadline that holds no water just makes NG seem silly. That being said, the frustration is still valid. "...In ancient times, hundreds of years before the dawn of history, an ancient race of people... the Druids. No one knows who they were or what they were doing... "
TheRavyn		#4	[-]
Posts: 1632 (11/26/08 09:53:15) Vampire Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Hi, Aber! I don't WotC would care too much about a deadline from Necro, but Rouse has been posting on EnWorld that he is in regular contact with Clark about the GSL (though Clark himself has been silent on the subject on these boards. Maybe he lost his yuku password? ). I'm still of the opinion that Necro should move forward with the GSL as-is for now - just be selective about what they release (such as adventures-only for now, as there is very little IP to protect with that as opposed to a new JG product or Tome of Horrors). I think they are legally savvy enough to operate under the current restrictions without endangering anything, and once the GSL kinks are worked out they can focus on moving forward with the other products with the added oomph of being already back on shelves and in the "public eye" as it were. But that's just my opinion, and I have no stake in the business to risk like they do. I'm unsure what exactly makes the difference between a publisher like Goodman who feels (and seems to be thriving) he can operate under the GSL as-is, and a publisher like Green Ronin, who feels they cannot do anything. Its hard to cross-reference the pros and cons involved when no one's really talking about it. I hope we get a post from Clark soon on the issue - I imagine he's been lurking here still, so perhaps he has been waiting for something he knows to be close on the horizon before announcing it to everyone... Dungeons and Dragons: Rules for Fantastic Medieval Wargames Campaigns Playable with Paper and Pencil and Miniature Figures (from cover of 1974 boxed set) Join the O.A.F - Old School 4E Needs You!
DaveMage		#5	[-]
Posts: 1981 (11/26/08 10:36:36) Wilderlands Pathfinder Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Scott Rouse just posted on EN World, and if I read it right, he hopes to have the revised GSL complete before year's end.
Deepcut		#6	[-]
Posts: 4471 (11/26/08 11:30:18) Pimp of the Planes Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	TheRavyn wrote: I'm unsure what exactly makes the difference between a publisher like Goodman who feels (and seems to be thriving) he can operate under the GSL as-is, and a publisher like Green Ronin, who feels they cannot do anything. Its hard to cross-reference the pros and cons involved when no one's really talking about it. The answer would be different legal advice. Didnt you know that is what makes the world go round? ;-) "...In ancient times, hundreds of years before the dawn of history, an ancient race of people... the Druids. No one knows who they were or what they were doing... "
Frost		#7	[-]
Posts: 2984 (11/26/08 13:26:23) Lich Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I understand the well-meaning intent of requesting a deadline, but if I were WotC and cared enough to weigh in, I'd say, "You want a deadline? Here it is: now. Sign the existing GSL like the rest have or go pound salt." They hold the cards, folks. From their perspective, and rightly so, the GSL is more or less them doing a favor for people to begin with, so making demands isn't going to work. Lord Frost Official Killer DM #0076 Baron of the Pitt Castles & Crusades Society Last Edited By: Frost 11/26/08 13:29:51. Edited 1 times.
DaveMage		#8	[-]
Posts: 1982 (11/26/08 15:18:54) Wilderlands Pathfinder Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Yeah, I think it's past time that it matters. As I said...somewhere...I think that if the GSL (well, an improved one) had come out initially, it would have been much harder for many gamers to resist the switch to 4E. With Pathfinder, though, those that are/were resistant to switching now don't need to worry about good ongoing support material since many of the best 3.5 adventure writers are still making new ones. In my opinion, WotC's failure to deliver the license on time is a great contributor to the 3.5/4E schism that has developed. Not only does this failure not allow companies like Necro & Paizo to support 4E, but it has allowed an out (Pathfinder) for gamers that have tried 4E and didn't find it to their taste.
moorg		#9	[-]
Posts: 2954 (11/26/08 15:34:15) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I'm unsure what exactly makes the difference between a publisher like Goodman who feels (and seems to be thriving) he can operate under the GSL as-is, and a publisher like Green Ronin, who feels they cannot do anything. Its hard to cross-reference the pros and cons involved when no one's really talking about it. It's related to how the GSL interacts with IP. If you just do modules that are more or less by the book like Goodman does, you shouldn't have any troubles with the GSL. If you want to do more than that, then the GSL is bad.
TheRavyn		#10	[-]
Posts: 1633 (11/26/08 15:41:24) Vampire Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	moorg wrote: If you just do modules that are more or less by the book like Goodman does, you shouldn't have any troubles with the GSL. On the contrary, GG is doing 4E monster books, race books, campaign settings, IP-related sourcebooks (like Frazetta's Death Dealer), player/dm aids, and an APG-like book of characters like Druids, Bards, etc. Joe's posted here a couple of times, it would be interesting if he'd chime in on the subject... Dungeons and Dragons: Rules for Fantastic Medieval Wargames Campaigns Playable with Paper and Pencil and Miniature Figures (from cover of 1974 boxed set) Join the O.A.F - Old School 4E Needs You!
TheRavyn		#11	[-]
Posts: 1634 (11/26/08 15:47:58) Vampire Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	aberzanzorax wrote: (Double Posted from "Upcoming Releases" -where most people probably won't see it) Ha ha! I just noticed that... :-) Dungeons and Dragons: Rules for Fantastic Medieval Wargames Campaigns Playable with Paper and Pencil and Miniature Figures (from cover of 1974 boxed set) Join the O.A.F - Old School 4E Needs You!
moorg		#12	[-]
Posts: 2955 (11/27/08 06:37:24) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	TheRavyn wrote: moorg wrote: If you just do modules that are more or less by the book like Goodman does, you shouldn't have any troubles with the GSL. On the contrary, GG is doing 4E monster books, race books, campaign settings, IP-related sourcebooks (like Frazetta's Death Dealer), player/dm aids, and an APG-like book of characters like Druids, Bards, etc. Joe's posted here a couple of times, it would be interesting if he'd chime in on the subject... In that case, I wish his good luck. He's stepping on some dangerous ground. Frazetta's stuff will be safe, as it's an established IP and no one's gonna snipe it. But the other stuff is what people are worried about.
Orcus		#13	[-]
Posts: 5013 (11/27/08 11:18:38) Demon Lord Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	We'll see what Scott comes up with. I have been in contact with him and he is a great guy. I hope he can get things to where they are acceptable for us. I wont be setting any deadlines. That would have zero impact on Wizards. On the other hand, while very slow, I believe I have had a significant impact on this whole revision process. You cant just run around demanding things. You have to work with people if you want results. We'll see. Clark
Sykoholic		#14	[-]
Posts: 2869 (11/27/08 12:32:29) Not of this World Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Orcus wrote: You cant just run around demanding things. You have to work with people if you want results. Well, that really depends on the size of the club you're carrying or the number of hostages you have. Unfortunately, in this case, WotC is the one with the club/hostages. ________________________________ "Not all who wander are lost." - J.R.R. Tolkien
Kobold Curry Chef		#15	[-]
Posts: 5641 (11/29/08 10:09:09) Death Knight Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I think that Clark, along with other 3pp who have spoken up, has had about as much impact on getting the GSL out and revised as is possible. I don't see the point of setting deadlines. Stipulating that everyone will support Pathfinder is also odd, because it's too early to say if Pathfinder is going to be accepted by enough 3.x fans to warrant 3pp support. While the endless problems and delays with the GSL are very frustrating, I don't think the issue is critical by any means unless you're Clark or another 3pp who has been on the fence. If you need 3pp support to be interested in 4e, then you're really not interested in 4e. If you are interested in 4e, then you already have some 3pp products to choose from, with more to come.
Snoring Rock		#16	[-]
Posts: 774 (12/01/08 04:42:08) Eternally Unspanked Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	DaveMage wrote: Yeah, I think it's past time that it matters. As I said...somewhere...I think that if the GSL (well, an improved one) had come out initially, it would have been much harder for many gamers to resist the switch to 4E. With Pathfinder, though, those that are/were resistant to switching now don't need to worry about good ongoing support material since many of the best 3.5 adventure writers are still making new ones. In my opinion, WotC's failure to deliver the license on time is a great contributor to the 3.5/4E schism that has developed. Not only does this failure not allow companies like Necro & Paizo to support 4E, but it has allowed an out (Pathfinder) for gamers that have tried 4E and didn't find it to their taste. You hit the nail on the head here......right in the center. Have you seen all the banter by oldschollers either returning to 3.5e or even going to 1e? I think at this point, a revised GSL, what-ever that is, will not make much difference. Will this new GSL (yet non-existant) have the changes needed to make publishing 4e material worth it? Dont bet the farm just yet. Frost is dead on as well. WotC owns D&D. They hold the cards. I moved on to Pathfinder. Some have moved on to 4e or back to 1e. Deadlines for WotC is kind of mute really. 3pp's wait on the GSL, the GSL does not wait for them. I think that was the plan. WotC has pretty much removed everyone from this scene in the capacity in which they hoped. Remember that 3pp's who were supporting D&D 3.5 ended up competing with WotC, even if it were unintended. Creature Collections I and II and then Tome of Horrors? Those competed with MM2, 3, 4, 5.....
see		#17	[-]
Posts: 73 (12/09/08 21:52:31) Skeleton Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	DaveMage wrote: Scott Rouse just posted on EN World, and if I read it right, he hopes to have the revised GSL complete before year's end. Remember when we were told by Scott Rouse that the reason for missing the third promised date for release of the GSL was to add PHB II material to the SRD? Where, when somebody on the WotC boards said they'd rather just have the GSL and SRD now, he said that a short delay was a small price to pay for the inclusion of psionics in the SRD? There might be a revision of the GSL happening, and one might someday be delivered. Similarly, there might be intelligent life on a planet orbiting Alpha Centauri. I have been provided exactly as much evidence of the first as of the second, statements from WotC in general and Scott Rouse in particular having shown no particular tendency to conform with reality.
Snoring Rock		#18	[-]
Posts: 805 (12/10/08 03:54:53) Eternally Unspanked Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Are you saying you dont believe? You dont believe that on Holloween the Great GSL does not come to visit all the good little boys and girls in the pumpkin patch? Giving them presents and candy?
Bob Bledsaw II		#19	[-]
Posts: 21 (12/10/08 04:44:19) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	It was all so different in the days when the industry was actually run by individuals who actually played the games. But, such talk only shows my age. Today's legalities: It isn't so much running around to protect what you got (or have created), as it is running about keeping others from being creative too. It's really sad. I think that perhaps, a long while back, the "establishment" of known (board)game makers saw a little privately-owned upstart of an industry (RPG's) begin to take some of their pie. It grew regardless of their power (because it encouraged creativity and free-thought), until they finally got a grip on it (or enough of a grip), and now they do not care if they strangle it altogether... it always was a thorn in their side anyway. They will go right on selling you games with chance-cards and spinners, just so long as you are told the outcome of your game, and whether or not you've truly won. My two-cents (Oi! Oi! Rebellion!), Bob Bledsaw II
DaveMage		#20	[-]
Posts: 2009 (12/10/08 05:21:20) Wilderlands Pathfinder Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I think that's part of the reason why I love Necromancer and Paizo so much - their CEOs still play the game!

Yuku free message boards

How about a deadline to WotC?

How about a deadline to WotC?