d20 License Revision Creates Controversy

travail_jgd writes "Wizards of the Coast, the makers of Dungeons and Dragons and the owners of the popular d20 license, have made some changes that are very unpopular in the RPG community. The new clauses allows WotC to censor d20-branded books with sexual, excessively violent, or other questionable content by revoking the book's d20 license: 'Wizards of the Coast may terminate this License immediately... if it deems, in its sole discretion, that your use of the Licensed Articles does not meet the above standards.' (The full listing can be found in a 12 KB RTF file.) Needless to say, people aren't happy. BTW, Wizard's own 'Book of Vile Darkness' violates most of the new rules." There are further details about this change, which only affects "any work carrying the d20 logo", over at GamingReport.com.

Comments

meh

[overbom]

Once I discovered West End Games' d6 systems (now called d6 legend and d6 classic, not that I currently understand the difference), I ditched D&D like a bad habit.

I don't really care how much better the 3rd ed. rules were better than the 2nd ed. rules. I had all that junk memorized, and it was tossed out like an old glove.

Skill incrementing systems are faster, easier and better than levelling systems. Systems where one doesn't need to use a table and just need to add numbers end up being faster, and it opens up my gaming groups to people that aren't prone to memorizing tables. And it puts the GM power in my hands, not the hands of some g**d**ned chart.

Even the Victory Point system for Fading Suns is better than the d20 systems. Heck, even Shadowrun's system is faster than d20 systems. While I'm at it, even Traveller lends itself better to faster-paced roleplaying than... okay, I'm done. /jesse ventura voice
There, I said it, it must be true.

Trademarks vs. SRD & OGL

[bildstorm]

First off, I'd like to say that I do understand WotC's attitude regarding the d20 trademark. It is essential that they maintain certain levels of deceny. As to whether or not they released the Book of Vile Darkness and to what level that goes, it was very clear that it was to be sold only to mature audience members (and some gaming stores would NOT sell it to anyone under 17), and they caught flack from long-time D&D-associated individuals.

Additionally, we have to consider that by putting the logo on a product, it is to associated it with D&D (or at least that's how most parents will see it). If you have a clear disclaimer on the cover, fine, but otherwise, you're lumping it in with the same people who make Pokemon cards. WotC's parent, Hasbro, might not like to see some company they have next to no control over coming out with a product filled with erotica that some parents will associated with those people who make Pokemon cards. I also see a lot of potential flack from owners of other brands (e.g. Star Wars) that have licensed those brands to WotC.

Can you still produce D&D compatible stuff without the d20 license? Yes! Matured and experience gamers will know what the SRD is. So call it SRD-fantasy compatible or SRD-modern compatible. Heck, get together and create a logo and have that logo owned by the Open Gaming Foundation for all I care. I won't buy stuff that's overly indecent, but if it's detailed, almost clinical in nature, and gives me rules to pick and choose for realism, I might buy it.

Having been published using the SRD, it's very, very important to not violate those things that WotC explicitly says no to and to avoid, for the most part where possible, things the SRD doesn't say yes to. Basically, create individually, and use the SRD and nothing else to look at, and you'll do well. Come up with something really unique and useful like Expeditious Retreat did and you'll be amazed at how quickly everyone likes your stuff.