I have yet to see any proof about said contracts, nor the proof that anything was NOT a draft.
Because non-disclosure agreements prevent direct confirmation from official, corporate sources in the know. Neither have there been any official comments from business partners saying "we only saw this to solicit out opinion, as an initial starting point."
The leak is a leak because someone had it in hand and made it available for a journalist to report upon. Someone employed in roleplaying game development, concerned for the health of the hobby, now that it has become subject to the vagaries of corporate culture of monetization above all else.
People who don't get tabletop roleplaying shouldn't really be involved in trying to profiteer from it. They will get it wrong, and not understand why.
Nope, my name is John. I'm just a guy who likes this system and this website more than he likes panicking.
People are mentioning the "draft", because it's not really common practice for a company to send a draft, open for comment, to various parties - each of which would be able to make alterations or stipulations - whilst also accompanying it with a contract that needs signing.
What would happen if two out of say five sign immediately, and then the other three make various changes? It'll be a repeated legal runaround. The fact that they NDA'd people and forces extremely short deadlines doesn't help either.
Whether it is common practice or not, WOTC has maintained the entire time (and I've heard it from some of the content creators as well) that they sent advanced copies to some of their partners to work out the details. They probably expected to do some tweaking before finalizing and sending it out to the public. They probably did not expect someone to violate the NDA and cause a tsunami of panic.
As for other creators, yes, this naturally affects everyone, some to greater and lesser degrees. That said, many of the YouTube creators have stated and asked their viewer for alternatives so they're not as reliant on DnD. It's not fun, but neither would having your entire business collapsing because of one company.
Luckily enough, TTRPGs aren't just DnD and Pathfinder. There are hundreds of different ones, some better and some worse. And 3PP are also just looking into agnostic systems, versus solely DnD ones. So they can work with many things versus one.
Even Critical Role which is massive in the DnD sphere, said they had reasons for going the own publisher route on their second manual, compared to WotC with their first.
People adapt.
If Dnd/Wizards/Hasbro goes down it will drag a lot of 3rd party content creators in its wake. Yes people do adapt, but people also fail. TTRPGs aren't just DnD and Pathfinder, but big name TTRPGs are really just D&D, Pathfinder, Shadow Run and Call of Cthulhu. D&D and Pathfinder make up 59% of Roll20 games played 53% of that comes from D&D 5e. D&D has over 5x the search results of the next most searched game (Shadowrun).
If D&D dies the best hope for 3rd party creators is that the whole 53% block moves together. Call of Cthulhu definitely will not be a satisfying game for people coming from 5e Heroic Fantasy. I have never played it, but I understand that Shadowrun is a lot more gritty than most players are used to. So Pathfinder 2e sounds like the best option. But the rules are sooo much more crunchy than D&D. And they require a lot more optimization. In 5e I've seen people run an 8 int wizard very successfully, you almost can't make an unplayable build. But the majority of builds in Pathfinder 1e are unplayable, you have to know exactly what feat progression you are going to use from start to finish or you get crushed. I've heard multiple popular 5e optimizers who have recently tried Pathfinder 2e say that their builds were bad. In 5e if you know the basics of ability score bonuses the rest of the build tends to fall in line. Pathfinder has a much steeper learning curve.
So maybe we can get everyone on board with dungeon crawl classics or gurps or the new black flag project. Maybe the rules are complex enough to make engaging homebrew and adventures, and maybe the rules will be simple enough that we can get people on board and content creators can make quality content. Or maybe we kill this game that has brought so many into the hobby and we lose this influx of players.
People often say that DnD owes much of its success to Critical Role and Stranger things and to the Open Gaming License. But it is equally true that it owes it's success to being a solid game with a low barrier to entry, that remains fun, and offers new things to discover, even after a decade of play. Wizards is offering a big olive branch here and it's time someone cast mass calm person before we tear down the hobby we love in a relentless rage.
Don't fall for the little things. It's why the OGL 1.0a is the key. The deauthorization is a must, because of 2008 and PF1. The rest is just fog that goes with it.
A lot of people are calling the characterization of the leaked 1.1 as a draft a lie. But think about this logically, if there were no plans to revise or change the document based on feedback why did it have to be leaked?
Maybe draft is the wrong term if reports that D&D was ready to sign are to be believed, but initial offer perhaps. In either case the document was sent out with the understanding that it might be changed and should not be made public. Those who were sent the document and had concerns should probably have raised the concerns with WOTC instead of leaking the document with the intent to cause panic among the player base.
None of this reaction has been good for content creators. I've heard multiple content creators talk about how they feel pressure to switch away from Dungeons and Dragons. But where are they going to go? To Pathfinder? They are not prepared to make content for Pathfinder, it's a wildly different system and has a much steeper learning curve.
It's important to remember, as well, that while WOTC is a big company and Hasbro is a giant Dungeons and Dragons is a small team that was on the verge of being shut down just a handful of years ago. 5th edition is a great game because it is made by a team that really cares about it and listens to the fans. DnDbeyond is an unparalleled digital tool set, because it was made by a small team of people enthusiastic about this game.
So Hasbro gets a little greedy (and anyone who plays magic knows that this is low levels of greed for Hasbro), and now we want to put all of the people who made this awesome game, and this incredible site out of a job? And probably tank the majority of third party content creators, that we are outraged on behalf of, while we are at it?
Who paid you how much to say this?
It's ALL Hasbro, now, desperately shoving poor Kyle Brink into the line of fire in an attempt to staunch the bleeding of subscription dollars from it's expensive acquisition, D&D Beyond.
Hasbro no doubt shoved Kyle to the front lines, but it's not them who are shooting. Every white flag they put up gets riddled with bullet holes.
I get that people are mad but, "It's time for you to look inward and begin asking yourself the big [question]... what do you want?” General Iroh
Nope, my name is John. I'm just a guy who likes this system and this website more than he likes panicking.
People are mentioning the "draft", because it's not really common practice for a company to send a draft, open for comment, to various parties - each of which would be able to make alterations or stipulations - whilst also accompanying it with a contract that needs signing.
What would happen if two out of say five sign immediately, and then the other three make various changes? It'll be a repeated legal runaround. The fact that they NDA'd people and forces extremely short deadlines doesn't help either.
Whether it is common practice or not, WOTC has maintained the entire time (and I've heard it from some of the content creators as well) that they sent advanced copies to some of their partners to work out the details. They probably expected to do some tweaking before finalizing and sending it out to the public. They probably did not expect someone to violate the NDA and cause a tsunami of panic.
As for other creators, yes, this naturally affects everyone, some to greater and lesser degrees. That said, many of the YouTube creators have stated and asked their viewer for alternatives so they're not as reliant on DnD. It's not fun, but neither would having your entire business collapsing because of one company.
Luckily enough, TTRPGs aren't just DnD and Pathfinder. There are hundreds of different ones, some better and some worse. And 3PP are also just looking into agnostic systems, versus solely DnD ones. So they can work with many things versus one.
Even Critical Role which is massive in the DnD sphere, said they had reasons for going the own publisher route on their second manual, compared to WotC with their first.
People adapt.
If Dnd/Wizards/Hasbro goes down it will drag a lot of 3rd party content creators in its wake. Yes people do adapt, but people also fail. TTRPGs aren't just DnD and Pathfinder, but big name TTRPGs are really just D&D, Pathfinder, Shadow Run and Call of Cthulhu. D&D and Pathfinder make up 59% of Roll20 games played 53% of that comes from D&D 5e. D&D has over 5x the search results of the next most searched game (Shadowrun).
If D&D dies the best hope for 3rd party creators is that the whole 53% block moves together. Call of Cthulhu definitely will not be a satisfying game for people coming from 5e Heroic Fantasy. I have never played it, but I understand that Shadowrun is a lot more gritty than most players are used to. So Pathfinder 2e sounds like the best option. But the rules are sooo much more crunchy than D&D. And they require a lot more optimization. In 5e I've seen people run an 8 int wizard very successfully, you almost can't make an unplayable build. But the majority of builds in Pathfinder 1e are unplayable, you have to know exactly what feat progression you are going to use from start to finish or you get crushed. I've heard multiple popular 5e optimizers who have recently tried Pathfinder 2e say that their builds were bad. In 5e if you know the basics of ability score bonuses the rest of the build tends to fall in line. Pathfinder has a much steeper learning curve.
So maybe we can get everyone on board with dungeon crawl classics or gurps or the new black flag project. Maybe the rules are complex enough to make engaging homebrew and adventures, and maybe the rules will be simple enough that we can get people on board and content creators can make quality content. Or maybe we kill this game that has brought so many into the hobby and we lose this influx of players.
People often say that DnD owes much of its success to Critical Role and Stranger things and to the Open Gaming License. But it is equally true that it owes it's success to being a solid game with a low barrier to entry, that remains fun, and offers new things to discover, even after a decade of play. Wizards is offering a big olive branch here and it's time someone cast mass calm person before we tear down the hobby we love in a relentless rage.
My ex-wife told me several times she was only meeting with a friend from school. He ended up being her second ex-husband. Just because somebody repeatedly tells you something, does not make it true. (EDIT fingers got too fast for the keyboard)
Nope, my name is John. I'm just a guy who likes this system and this website more than he likes panicking.
People are mentioning the "draft", because it's not really common practice for a company to send a draft, open for comment, to various parties - each of which would be able to make alterations or stipulations - whilst also accompanying it with a contract that needs signing.
What would happen if two out of say five sign immediately, and then the other three make various changes? It'll be a repeated legal runaround. The fact that they NDA'd people and forces extremely short deadlines doesn't help either.
Whether it is common practice or not, WOTC has maintained the entire time (and I've heard it from some of the content creators as well) that they sent advanced copies to some of their partners to work out the details. They probably expected to do some tweaking before finalizing and sending it out to the public. They probably did not expect someone to violate the NDA and cause a tsunami of panic.
As for other creators, yes, this naturally affects everyone, some to greater and lesser degrees. That said, many of the YouTube creators have stated and asked their viewer for alternatives so they're not as reliant on DnD. It's not fun, but neither would having your entire business collapsing because of one company.
Luckily enough, TTRPGs aren't just DnD and Pathfinder. There are hundreds of different ones, some better and some worse. And 3PP are also just looking into agnostic systems, versus solely DnD ones. So they can work with many things versus one.
Even Critical Role which is massive in the DnD sphere, said they had reasons for going the own publisher route on their second manual, compared to WotC with their first.
People adapt.
If Dnd/Wizards/Hasbro goes down it will drag a lot of 3rd party content creators in its wake. Yes people do adapt, but people also fail. TTRPGs aren't just DnD and Pathfinder, but big name TTRPGs are really just D&D, Pathfinder, Shadow Run and Call of Cthulhu. D&D and Pathfinder make up 59% of Roll20 games played 53% of that comes from D&D 5e. D&D has over 5x the search results of the next most searched game (Shadowrun).
If D&D dies the best hope for 3rd party creators is that the whole 53% block moves together. Call of Cthulhu definitely will not be a satisfying game for people coming from 5e Heroic Fantasy. I have never played it, but I understand that Shadowrun is a lot more gritty than most players are used to. So Pathfinder 2e sounds like the best option. But the rules are sooo much more crunchy than D&D. And they require a lot more optimization. In 5e I've seen people run an 8 int wizard very successfully, you almost can't make an unplayable build. But the majority of builds in Pathfinder 1e are unplayable, you have to know exactly what feat progression you are going to use from start to finish or you get crushed. I've heard multiple popular 5e optimizers who have recently tried Pathfinder 2e say that their builds were bad. In 5e if you know the basics of ability score bonuses the rest of the build tends to fall in line. Pathfinder has a much steeper learning curve.
So maybe we can get everyone on board with dungeon crawl classics or gurps or the new black flag project. Maybe the rules are complex enough to make engaging homebrew and adventures, and maybe the rules will be simple enough that we can get people on board and content creators can make quality content. Or maybe we kill this game that has brought so many into the hobby and we lose this influx of players.
People often say that DnD owes much of its success to Critical Role and Stranger things and to the Open Gaming License. But it is equally true that it owes it's success to being a solid game with a low barrier to entry, that remains fun, and offers new things to discover, even after a decade of play. Wizards is offering a big olive branch here and it's time someone cast mass calm person before we tear down the hobby we love in a relentless rage.
Your assessment of Pathfinder is just wrong. 2e is not difficult to learn, it's easy to play any kind of character you like (yes even those that aren't optimized), and doesn't blind or scare anyone with too much crunch. Also, using roll20 data for your proof of a system's popularity when the vast majority of 2e players prefer using foundry makes you come across as diehard D&D fan who's never played Pathfinder and have based your opinions on bad takes from certain youtubers with obvious agendas.
1. They have an audacity to play victim. "These past days and weeks have been incredibly tough for everyone. As players, fans, and stewards of the game, we can’t–and we won’t–let things continue like this. I am here today to talk about a path forward." Yes, Wizard, and it is a situation, when one person attacked other person, and suddelny got his ass kicked. And now attacker tries to "you know, this was tough to me also".
2. They use smokescreens. "our core goals of protecting and cultivating an inclusive play environment and limiting the OGL to TTRPGs". No, that was not their goals. They literally using inclusivity as a shield, but let me ask you a question - what was last time you've heard about OGL product that is against inclusivity? Many people involved in hobby are quite progressive, some too much so (I cannot get over Paizo bullshit stoplist for creators, sorry).
3. They use dismissive language, when they get a narrative chance. "Finally, you deserve some stability and clarity". Screw you, Wizards, screw you. Either you really see your customers as obstacle between you and your money, or you lost ability to speak normally and take responsibility. Whole community fought for that right with tooth and nail, and now we "deserve" it. It was different story month ago, wasn't it?
4. It still reeks of corporate editing. First part may have been written by Kyle himself, but there are certain points that remain consistent with original version of OGL 1.1 and following statements by WotC.
6. They still want to go on, and give us 14 days to discuss OGL and respond. "Then we will compile, analyze, react to, and present back what we heard from you." There are certain contracts that are being in the work for months, if not years. Revision of revision of revision of the draft. 14 days is laughable. But still better than originally intended "surprise mechanic".
7. "...much like Unearthed Arcana playtest feedback surveys. It will ask you specific questions about the document and include open form fields to share any other feedback you have". Questions will be formulated by Wizards. And unless this is open, public and not anonimous survey or not survey by third party without huge interest in results, even if they won't manipulate its numbers, they can still manipulate it by questions and ignoring open form fields.
8. Main problem is not adressed - unless they remove Darth Vader clause (their ability to change deal any moment), nothing they put in this version is worth anything.
9. They use careful language to hide their true position on content publishing. They backpedaled direct unsueable theft, it is true. But there is very big difference "Nothing will impact any content you have published under OGL 1.0a." and "Nothing will impact any content you are publishing under OGL 1.0a.". Essentially as it is of now it means "OK, Paizo, what you've printed and have on shelves, you can keep selling. But please, stop new printing of OGL 1.0a books immediately. And, by the way, those PC games, Kingmaker and Wrath of Righteous, our PC games suck, so please, talk to Owlcat Games and their publisher about removing them from steam" (of course, Paizo will never sign 1.1 and will sue, but it's a different question).
10. They try to obfuscate murky legality of revoking 1.0a. There is a strong opinion that it is not strictly legal, and they are trying to make you sign off your right to use OGL 1.0a volutaraly.
Essentially, they have only one good move. To leave 1.0a alone while simultaneously creating new OGL that will have better legal wording and some kind of other benefits to creators (such as future access to their AI DM program and VTT). They've lost too much trust to push it through without loosing more. Standart damage control won't fix this debacle.
What a lot of people aren't realising is that Kobold and Paizo stand to gain a lot from WOTC failing, which might explain why they are at the forefront of this.
Kobold, based on their filings, makes at least $5 million selling products labeled as 5e compatible. They are making a lot of money by directly associating their products with WOTC, whilst at the same time being a direct competitor. Show me any other IP owner that would allow a competitor to use their brand as a selling point and not expect a kickback.
Paizo, well it's obvious how they stand to benefit. They operate the biggest alternative system to D&D.
While they both say that they are acting on behalf of the gaming community it's pretty obvious that their motivations are based on financial gain.
Did Hasbro and WOTC make mistakes? Yes, of course they did and they should make amends for them, and by the sounds of it they are. They listened to us, even when our cries where based on speculation and rumours.
But let's face facts, D&D 5e is still a great system. It's easy to learn, it's fun, and simple, and none of the proposed changes affect the gamers. WOTC has invested millions into making it easier for people to get involved, the buyout of Beyond, the funding of AAA games like Baldurs Gate 3 (which looks awesome!), as well as blockbuster movies like Honor among Thieves. All of these things make D&D more mainstream (which is a good thing), which brings in more money so that they can expand the hobby and produce more great products which benefit all of us.
Kobold and other third-party companies should be allowed to use D&D to sell their product, they help expand the universe... but there should be recognition of the fact that they owe their success to the work of the employees of WOTC who continue to develop the core gaming system upon which their products are based. And if that recognition is a licensing fee then that's only fair.
Out of all of the people that WotC could have made their figurehead for this controversy, Kyle is an interesting choice... He has a long and storied history in the "gaming" industry, but his specific history could be an indicator of WotC's planned direction. The vast majority of Kyle's resume is based around videogames. Over the past 30 years in the industry, he has worked for big names MicroProse, EA, Activision, NCSoft, and Sega, but he has also worked in smaller venues like iWin and Viggle. To me, it appears that after working on The Sims for EA, his career tended to lean more towards the online, "free-to-play" side of the industry; that was actually the entire focus of iWin: free-to-play Facebook games full of microtransactions.
He has only been at WotC for 2 years, and only 7 months of that was as the executive producer of D&D. Combining Kyle's background in indirect monetization of videogames, with WotC's and Hasbro's statements about D&D being under-monetized and how they wanted to pump the game with videogame-style subscription fees and microtransactions, I think tthat it is clear that WotC plans on trying to squeeze every penny out of their users.
If WotC wants to regain some measure of the trust they have lost, then they will hire an independent accounting firm to compile the results of the promised OGL survey and release a report. In addition to that, they will release EVERY BIT of the data from the survey, including every single open-text response. At this point, I have no confidence whatsoever that WotC will even read a survey. To me, it seems like a nifty way to channel all of the anger into a non-public space so, at the end of the day, WotC can come back and say, "Hey, the survey shows this is what t he community wants."
If they want to regain some measure of trust, this is how they could. I suspect, however, they don't care.
Nope, my name is John. I'm just a guy who likes this system and this website more than he likes panicking.
People are mentioning the "draft", because it's not really common practice for a company to send a draft, open for comment, to various parties - each of which would be able to make alterations or stipulations - whilst also accompanying it with a contract that needs signing.
What would happen if two out of say five sign immediately, and then the other three make various changes? It'll be a repeated legal runaround. The fact that they NDA'd people and forces extremely short deadlines doesn't help either.
Whether it is common practice or not, WOTC has maintained the entire time (and I've heard it from some of the content creators as well) that they sent advanced copies to some of their partners to work out the details. They probably expected to do some tweaking before finalizing and sending it out to the public. They probably did not expect someone to violate the NDA and cause a tsunami of panic.
As for other creators, yes, this naturally affects everyone, some to greater and lesser degrees. That said, many of the YouTube creators have stated and asked their viewer for alternatives so they're not as reliant on DnD. It's not fun, but neither would having your entire business collapsing because of one company.
Luckily enough, TTRPGs aren't just DnD and Pathfinder. There are hundreds of different ones, some better and some worse. And 3PP are also just looking into agnostic systems, versus solely DnD ones. So they can work with many things versus one.
Even Critical Role which is massive in the DnD sphere, said they had reasons for going the own publisher route on their second manual, compared to WotC with their first.
People adapt.
If Dnd/Wizards/Hasbro goes down it will drag a lot of 3rd party content creators in its wake. Yes people do adapt, but people also fail. TTRPGs aren't just DnD and Pathfinder, but big name TTRPGs are really just D&D, Pathfinder, Shadow Run and Call of Cthulhu. D&D and Pathfinder make up 59% of Roll20 games played 53% of that comes from D&D 5e. D&D has over 5x the search results of the next most searched game (Shadowrun).
If D&D dies the best hope for 3rd party creators is that the whole 53% block moves together. Call of Cthulhu definitely will not be a satisfying game for people coming from 5e Heroic Fantasy. I have never played it, but I understand that Shadowrun is a lot more gritty than most players are used to. So Pathfinder 2e sounds like the best option. But the rules are sooo much more crunchy than D&D. And they require a lot more optimization. In 5e I've seen people run an 8 int wizard very successfully, you almost can't make an unplayable build. But the majority of builds in Pathfinder 1e are unplayable, you have to know exactly what feat progression you are going to use from start to finish or you get crushed. I've heard multiple popular 5e optimizers who have recently tried Pathfinder 2e say that their builds were bad. In 5e if you know the basics of ability score bonuses the rest of the build tends to fall in line. Pathfinder has a much steeper learning curve.
So maybe we can get everyone on board with dungeon crawl classics or gurps or the new black flag project. Maybe the rules are complex enough to make engaging homebrew and adventures, and maybe the rules will be simple enough that we can get people on board and content creators can make quality content. Or maybe we kill this game that has brought so many into the hobby and we lose this influx of players.
People often say that DnD owes much of its success to Critical Role and Stranger things and to the Open Gaming License. But it is equally true that it owes it's success to being a solid game with a low barrier to entry, that remains fun, and offers new things to discover, even after a decade of play. Wizards is offering a big olive branch here and it's time someone cast mass calm person before we tear down the hobby we love in a relentless rage.
Your assessment of Pathfinder is just wrong. 2e is not difficult to learn, it's easy to play any kind of character you like (yes even those that aren't optimized), and doesn't blind or scare anyone with too much crunch. Also, using roll20 data for your proof of a system's popularity when the vast majority of 2e players prefer using foundry makes you come across as diehard D&D fan who's never played Pathfinder and have based your opinions on bad takes from certain youtubers with obvious agendas.
I admit that my RPG of choice is Dnd 5e, but I started with 3.5 and have played a good bit of Pathfinder, so I know my assessment is correct for 1e. I haven't played 2e yet, but before this whole thing blew up I did start looking into it (I have a friend who thinks Dnd doesn't offer enough character options and thinks combat is too repetitive.) My assessment of 2e so far does come from being hit by a wall of text as I try to figure out the rules. It also comes from the youtubers I mentioned before (who I don't think have an agenda besides keep making content that people will watch).
But it also comes from watching videos from the pathfinder community where they talk about the differences between 5e and 2e. I'd love to add Pathfinder 2e to my gaming repertoire so I hope you are right about it being "not difficult to learn" and "easy to play."
I obviously can not include foundry statistics as that program is self hosted and not even foundry would have access to those.
I notice they're still calling the leaked OGL a "draft," which still seems hard to believe.
Not just "hard to believe" but patently insulting to anyone with intelligence. You don't make people sign a draft and give them a one week deadline to do so under duress.
They tried to sneak this evil contract through, and they got caught. Now they're dealing with the consequences.
And only the first wave of consequences. The mass exodus from this platform was only the start. There will be many more people who, like me, are in the middle of running a campaign, and are waiting until they can set up their alternative before jumping ship. The only reason we haven't gone yet is that it's inconvenient, and once we have our alternative sorted out, we're gone. Probably before our next subscription bill date.
This can, and will, only get worse for Wizards. They sold their souls to a megacorporation who care only about the bottom line, and ironically, that's where they're going to suffer the most. There is no recovering from this. It's already done. You can't buy back good will.
I notice they're still calling the leaked OGL a "draft," which still seems hard to believe.
Not just "hard to believe" but patently insulting to anyone with intelligence. You don't make people sign a draft and give them a one week deadline to do so under duress.
Who did they do this to? Specifically?
I keep hearing this happened to top 3rd party publishers and the like but no actual names. No actual proof. I'd like to see the original document they were told they had to sign... Should be easy enough, scanners exist, right? Digital cameras? Or is it just a claim made by people with an axe to grind?
The burn the fields and salt the earth outlook is not going to help the 3rd party creators we want to protect from this. Many of them make thier money because of 5e. Like it or not dungeons and dragons fills the most seats at the table.
Before you attack. Yes F'd up big with this mess. Yes thier first response was as helpful as driving a school bus full of kittens into a burning building to put it out.
I'm not saying all praise the 5e overlords but can we try to have some cautious optimism? They have apologized now twice. Yes they both sucked. Let's see what the next ogl looks like before we pick the pitchfork back up shall we.
To those saying OGL 1.0 or nothing, you will probably be disappointed.
They need to be able to revoke it case by case if people try to make brand damaging offensive content. This comes because people HAVE tried to make this garbage.
Any legal expert will tell you that having some kind of protections in there to protect a billion dollar company for being sued for similarities is needed.
Let's see what we get from this when one comes out and then if need be, react accordingly.
You know how Lucas used to turn into a jerk every time someone said "Use the force" and file for copyright infringement? You're coming across the same way, except twice as hard. George Lucas actually authored his IP. Wizards purchased it from a failing company that was likewise being a jerk about their IP. It would be akin to Disney coming along and trying to sue you for running a Star Wars game.
You have a somewhat effective monopoly on the TTRPG market. The thing is, this market is only profitable because fans love the game. Fans love the game because for the better part of the last two decades, you haven't been a jerk about your IP, and through the OGL you've fostered a symbiotic relationship and in turn fans helped your product expand and become profitable again.
It is now 2023. You do not have the manpower to chase down every player using your resources across the internet. Even if you could, the entire TTRPG community would about face on you and instead of those who love the product buying it to support it, even the people who love the genre would most likely boycott and kill your entire franchise. Is the D&D brand doing so poorly that you need to fundamentally alter the entity that enabled us to get to this point?
I'm here to tell you that modifying the OGL is a mistake. If your players, fans, or creators have to worry about what which words they can use without you giving them a digital pocket-check, no one will bother.
The OGL as-written enabled D&D to go from being a nerdy, niche hobby that gangly awkward teens only performed in the secrecy of their basement so that no one would find out how big of a nerd they really are, to being a worldwide phenomenon that allows things like Acquisitions Incorporated to exist, and be cool.
Let that sink in for a moment. It's 2023, and cool still sells. The OGL made D&D cool. Your approach is wrong. Find a new, more interactive one where you reach out to the community and offer them support to do things like Acq Inc for a cut of the profits.
Sincerely,
Someone whose first D&D game happened before the first Friday Night Magic.
Because non-disclosure agreements prevent direct confirmation from official, corporate sources in the know. Neither have there been any official comments from business partners saying "we only saw this to solicit out opinion, as an initial starting point."
The leak is a leak because someone had it in hand and made it available for a journalist to report upon. Someone employed in roleplaying game development, concerned for the health of the hobby, now that it has become subject to the vagaries of corporate culture of monetization above all else.
People who don't get tabletop roleplaying shouldn't really be involved in trying to profiteer from it. They will get it wrong, and not understand why.
Nope, my name is John. I'm just a guy who likes this system and this website more than he likes panicking.
Whether it is common practice or not, WOTC has maintained the entire time (and I've heard it from some of the content creators as well) that they sent advanced copies to some of their partners to work out the details. They probably expected to do some tweaking before finalizing and sending it out to the public. They probably did not expect someone to violate the NDA and cause a tsunami of panic.
If Dnd/Wizards/Hasbro goes down it will drag a lot of 3rd party content creators in its wake. Yes people do adapt, but people also fail. TTRPGs aren't just DnD and Pathfinder, but big name TTRPGs are really just D&D, Pathfinder, Shadow Run and Call of Cthulhu. D&D and Pathfinder make up 59% of Roll20 games played 53% of that comes from D&D 5e. D&D has over 5x the search results of the next most searched game (Shadowrun).
If D&D dies the best hope for 3rd party creators is that the whole 53% block moves together. Call of Cthulhu definitely will not be a satisfying game for people coming from 5e Heroic Fantasy. I have never played it, but I understand that Shadowrun is a lot more gritty than most players are used to. So Pathfinder 2e sounds like the best option. But the rules are sooo much more crunchy than D&D. And they require a lot more optimization. In 5e I've seen people run an 8 int wizard very successfully, you almost can't make an unplayable build. But the majority of builds in Pathfinder 1e are unplayable, you have to know exactly what feat progression you are going to use from start to finish or you get crushed. I've heard multiple popular 5e optimizers who have recently tried Pathfinder 2e say that their builds were bad. In 5e if you know the basics of ability score bonuses the rest of the build tends to fall in line. Pathfinder has a much steeper learning curve.
So maybe we can get everyone on board with dungeon crawl classics or gurps or the new black flag project. Maybe the rules are complex enough to make engaging homebrew and adventures, and maybe the rules will be simple enough that we can get people on board and content creators can make quality content. Or maybe we kill this game that has brought so many into the hobby and we lose this influx of players.
People often say that DnD owes much of its success to Critical Role and Stranger things and to the Open Gaming License. But it is equally true that it owes it's success to being a solid game with a low barrier to entry, that remains fun, and offers new things to discover, even after a decade of play. Wizards is offering a big olive branch here and it's time someone cast mass calm person before we tear down the hobby we love in a relentless rage.
Don't fall for the little things. It's why the OGL 1.0a is the key. The deauthorization is a must, because of 2008 and PF1. The rest is just fog that goes with it.
Hasbro no doubt shoved Kyle to the front lines, but it's not them who are shooting. Every white flag they put up gets riddled with bullet holes.
I get that people are mad but, "It's time for you to look inward and begin asking yourself the big [question]... what do you want?” General Iroh
My ex-wife told me several times she was only meeting with a friend from school. He ended up being her second ex-husband. Just because somebody repeatedly tells you something, does not make it true. (EDIT fingers got too fast for the keyboard)
Your assessment of Pathfinder is just wrong. 2e is not difficult to learn, it's easy to play any kind of character you like (yes even those that aren't optimized), and doesn't blind or scare anyone with too much crunch. Also, using roll20 data for your proof of a system's popularity when the vast majority of 2e players prefer using foundry makes you come across as diehard D&D fan who's never played Pathfinder and have based your opinions on bad takes from certain youtubers with obvious agendas.
1. They have an audacity to play victim. "These past days and weeks have been incredibly tough for everyone. As players, fans, and stewards of the game, we can’t–and we won’t–let things continue like this. I am here today to talk about a path forward." Yes, Wizard, and it is a situation, when one person attacked other person, and suddelny got his ass kicked. And now attacker tries to "you know, this was tough to me also".
2. They use smokescreens. "our core goals of protecting and cultivating an inclusive play environment and limiting the OGL to TTRPGs". No, that was not their goals. They literally using inclusivity as a shield, but let me ask you a question - what was last time you've heard about OGL product that is against inclusivity? Many people involved in hobby are quite progressive, some too much so (I cannot get over Paizo bullshit stoplist for creators, sorry).
3. They use dismissive language, when they get a narrative chance. "Finally, you deserve some stability and clarity". Screw you, Wizards, screw you. Either you really see your customers as obstacle between you and your money, or you lost ability to speak normally and take responsibility. Whole community fought for that right with tooth and nail, and now we "deserve" it. It was different story month ago, wasn't it?
4. It still reeks of corporate editing. First part may have been written by Kyle himself, but there are certain points that remain consistent with original version of OGL 1.1 and following statements by WotC.
5. Method they are going to get community feedback (use One DnD survey model) is not representative of whole community. There are a number of videos on YouTube dissecting that problem. Here is a link to The First Arcadian video, he is not big youtube personality, but happens to be a data scientist.
6. They still want to go on, and give us 14 days to discuss OGL and respond. "Then we will compile, analyze, react to, and present back what we heard from you." There are certain contracts that are being in the work for months, if not years. Revision of revision of revision of the draft. 14 days is laughable. But still better than originally intended "surprise mechanic".
7. "...much like Unearthed Arcana playtest feedback surveys. It will ask you specific questions about the document and include open form fields to share any other feedback you have". Questions will be formulated by Wizards. And unless this is open, public and not anonimous survey or not survey by third party without huge interest in results, even if they won't manipulate its numbers, they can still manipulate it by questions and ignoring open form fields.
8. Main problem is not adressed - unless they remove Darth Vader clause (their ability to change deal any moment), nothing they put in this version is worth anything.
9. They use careful language to hide their true position on content publishing. They backpedaled direct unsueable theft, it is true. But there is very big difference "Nothing will impact any content you have published under OGL 1.0a." and "Nothing will impact any content you are publishing under OGL 1.0a.". Essentially as it is of now it means "OK, Paizo, what you've printed and have on shelves, you can keep selling. But please, stop new printing of OGL 1.0a books immediately. And, by the way, those PC games, Kingmaker and Wrath of Righteous, our PC games suck, so please, talk to Owlcat Games and their publisher about removing them from steam" (of course, Paizo will never sign 1.1 and will sue, but it's a different question).
10. They try to obfuscate murky legality of revoking 1.0a. There is a strong opinion that it is not strictly legal, and they are trying to make you sign off your right to use OGL 1.0a volutaraly.
Essentially, they have only one good move. To leave 1.0a alone while simultaneously creating new OGL that will have better legal wording and some kind of other benefits to creators (such as future access to their AI DM program and VTT). They've lost too much trust to push it through without loosing more. Standart damage control won't fix this debacle.
What a lot of people aren't realising is that Kobold and Paizo stand to gain a lot from WOTC failing, which might explain why they are at the forefront of this.
Kobold, based on their filings, makes at least $5 million selling products labeled as 5e compatible. They are making a lot of money by directly associating their products with WOTC, whilst at the same time being a direct competitor. Show me any other IP owner that would allow a competitor to use their brand as a selling point and not expect a kickback.
Paizo, well it's obvious how they stand to benefit. They operate the biggest alternative system to D&D.
While they both say that they are acting on behalf of the gaming community it's pretty obvious that their motivations are based on financial gain.
Did Hasbro and WOTC make mistakes? Yes, of course they did and they should make amends for them, and by the sounds of it they are. They listened to us, even when our cries where based on speculation and rumours.
But let's face facts, D&D 5e is still a great system. It's easy to learn, it's fun, and simple, and none of the proposed changes affect the gamers. WOTC has invested millions into making it easier for people to get involved, the buyout of Beyond, the funding of AAA games like Baldurs Gate 3 (which looks awesome!), as well as blockbuster movies like Honor among Thieves. All of these things make D&D more mainstream (which is a good thing), which brings in more money so that they can expand the hobby and produce more great products which benefit all of us.
Kobold and other third-party companies should be allowed to use D&D to sell their product, they help expand the universe... but there should be recognition of the fact that they owe their success to the work of the employees of WOTC who continue to develop the core gaming system upon which their products are based. And if that recognition is a licensing fee then that's only fair.
Out of all of the people that WotC could have made their figurehead for this controversy, Kyle is an interesting choice... He has a long and storied history in the "gaming" industry, but his specific history could be an indicator of WotC's planned direction. The vast majority of Kyle's resume is based around videogames. Over the past 30 years in the industry, he has worked for big names MicroProse, EA, Activision, NCSoft, and Sega, but he has also worked in smaller venues like iWin and Viggle. To me, it appears that after working on The Sims for EA, his career tended to lean more towards the online, "free-to-play" side of the industry; that was actually the entire focus of iWin: free-to-play Facebook games full of microtransactions.
He has only been at WotC for 2 years, and only 7 months of that was as the executive producer of D&D. Combining Kyle's background in indirect monetization of videogames, with WotC's and Hasbro's statements about D&D being under-monetized and how they wanted to pump the game with videogame-style subscription fees and microtransactions, I think tthat it is clear that WotC plans on trying to squeeze every penny out of their users.
Not. A. Draft.
Kinda lost me at that, to be honest with you. Bamboozle failed.
If WotC wants to regain some measure of the trust they have lost, then they will hire an independent accounting firm to compile the results of the promised OGL survey and release a report. In addition to that, they will release EVERY BIT of the data from the survey, including every single open-text response. At this point, I have no confidence whatsoever that WotC will even read a survey. To me, it seems like a nifty way to channel all of the anger into a non-public space so, at the end of the day, WotC can come back and say, "Hey, the survey shows this is what t he community wants."
If they want to regain some measure of trust, this is how they could. I suspect, however, they don't care.
I admit that my RPG of choice is Dnd 5e, but I started with 3.5 and have played a good bit of Pathfinder, so I know my assessment is correct for 1e. I haven't played 2e yet, but before this whole thing blew up I did start looking into it (I have a friend who thinks Dnd doesn't offer enough character options and thinks combat is too repetitive.) My assessment of 2e so far does come from being hit by a wall of text as I try to figure out the rules. It also comes from the youtubers I mentioned before (who I don't think have an agenda besides keep making content that people will watch).
But it also comes from watching videos from the pathfinder community where they talk about the differences between 5e and 2e. I'd love to add Pathfinder 2e to my gaming repertoire so I hope you are right about it being "not difficult to learn" and "easy to play."
I obviously can not include foundry statistics as that program is self hosted and not even foundry would have access to those.
Not just "hard to believe" but patently insulting to anyone with intelligence. You don't make people sign a draft and give them a one week deadline to do so under duress.
They tried to sneak this evil contract through, and they got caught. Now they're dealing with the consequences.
And only the first wave of consequences. The mass exodus from this platform was only the start. There will be many more people who, like me, are in the middle of running a campaign, and are waiting until they can set up their alternative before jumping ship. The only reason we haven't gone yet is that it's inconvenient, and once we have our alternative sorted out, we're gone. Probably before our next subscription bill date.
This can, and will, only get worse for Wizards. They sold their souls to a megacorporation who care only about the bottom line, and ironically, that's where they're going to suffer the most. There is no recovering from this. It's already done. You can't buy back good will.
Who did they do this to? Specifically?
I keep hearing this happened to top 3rd party publishers and the like but no actual names. No actual proof. I'd like to see the original document they were told they had to sign... Should be easy enough, scanners exist, right? Digital cameras? Or is it just a claim made by people with an axe to grind?
The burn the fields and salt the earth outlook is not going to help the 3rd party creators we want to protect from this. Many of them make thier money because of 5e. Like it or not dungeons and dragons fills the most seats at the table.
Before you attack. Yes F'd up big with this mess. Yes thier first response was as helpful as driving a school bus full of kittens into a burning building to put it out.
I'm not saying all praise the 5e overlords but can we try to have some cautious optimism? They have apologized now twice. Yes they both sucked. Let's see what the next ogl looks like before we pick the pitchfork back up shall we.
To those saying OGL 1.0 or nothing, you will probably be disappointed.
Let's see what we get from this when one comes out and then if need be, react accordingly.
I've never posted here before. Leave OGL 1.0a alone. I will never honor an updated OGL because I believe deauthorizing is unethical.
Dear Wizards,
You know how Lucas used to turn into a jerk every time someone said "Use the force" and file for copyright infringement? You're coming across the same way, except twice as hard. George Lucas actually authored his IP. Wizards purchased it from a failing company that was likewise being a jerk about their IP. It would be akin to Disney coming along and trying to sue you for running a Star Wars game.
You have a somewhat effective monopoly on the TTRPG market. The thing is, this market is only profitable because fans love the game. Fans love the game because for the better part of the last two decades, you haven't been a jerk about your IP, and through the OGL you've fostered a symbiotic relationship and in turn fans helped your product expand and become profitable again.
It is now 2023. You do not have the manpower to chase down every player using your resources across the internet. Even if you could, the entire TTRPG community would about face on you and instead of those who love the product buying it to support it, even the people who love the genre would most likely boycott and kill your entire franchise. Is the D&D brand doing so poorly that you need to fundamentally alter the entity that enabled us to get to this point?
I'm here to tell you that modifying the OGL is a mistake. If your players, fans, or creators have to worry about what which words they can use without you giving them a digital pocket-check, no one will bother.
The OGL as-written enabled D&D to go from being a nerdy, niche hobby that gangly awkward teens only performed in the secrecy of their basement so that no one would find out how big of a nerd they really are, to being a worldwide phenomenon that allows things like Acquisitions Incorporated to exist, and be cool.
Let that sink in for a moment. It's 2023, and cool still sells. The OGL made D&D cool. Your approach is wrong. Find a new, more interactive one where you reach out to the community and offer them support to do things like Acq Inc for a cut of the profits.
Sincerely,
Someone whose first D&D game happened before the first Friday Night Magic.
The age of the OGL is over.
The time of the ORC has come.