WOTC/Hasbro have officially waited far too long to get out in front of the raging trash fire that is the OGL 1.1 situation; presumably hoping that it will just blow over if they ignore it long enough. Unfortunately: I've already seen/read the word of over half a dozen third-party creators who are planning, regardless of what the final OGL looks like, to completely divorce their work from not only One D&D in future, but D&D generally now. And why not? It's the smart business decision to make. If WotC/Hasbro's attitude toward those that support its system is the same as Darth Vader's toward Cloud City, IE: "I am altering the deal, pray I do not alter it further.", why WOULDN'T people abandon the system? It's what created Pathfinder in the first place.
WotC/Hasbro appear to be gambling that D&D is synonymous with TTRPG gaming in its entirety, and are rolling the dice that people will be too wedded to its brand in particular to leave. Well: no king rules forever, I'm sure Sega and Nintendo felt pretty secure atop the fortress of home console development circa 1990-2000, but we know how that ended.
Welllllll, what does it matter, if what you’re saying is true, why should we be worried that third party creators are leaving the one dnd operation? I don’t think that that spells doom for dungeons and dragons in general.
It certainly looks bad. I wonder how many people that enjoy playing this game have no idea about the ogl changes and won't find out until long after content creators have fled. The ogl alone stands a solid chance of making one d&d worse than 5e not better.
I'm sure . . . Nintendo felt pretty secure atop the fortress of home console development circa 1990-2000, but we know how that ended.
You mean with the Switch selling some 114.3 million units, only a little behind the PlayStation 4's 117.2 million units (which released in 2013, while the Switch has only been around since 2017) and selling vastly more than the Xbox One's 58.5 million units (also released four years earlier than the Switch)?
Here's the thing, yes, this is a big deal to the folks who care enough about D&D to talk about it on the internet. Yes, it is a big deal to third-party content creators. No, it probably is not as big of a deal as everyone makes it out to be. Think of it this way--there are millions upon millions of people who play D&D globally. Even if you saw 100,000 unique people complaining about this change (which there's only a couple hundred who regularly complain on these forums and maybe a couple thousand on Reddit), that would be a pretty small minority, even if they are super vocal.
D&D has survived much worse things than "a bunch of people who do not understand the rather obvious and widely known fact that corporations take some time to formulate a response to the unexpected taking to the internet to complain." They survived one of the game's founders forcing other early creators out; they survived that founder's forced exodus from the company; they survived the unfairly maligned 4e.
You'll have to pardon me if I am inclined to wait rather than trust the doom and gloom prediction of someone who implied the company which is making the best-selling of the modern consul generations is not a "atop the fortress of home counsel development."
I'm sure . . . Nintendo felt pretty secure atop the fortress of home console development circa 1990-2000, but we know how that ended.
You mean with the Switch selling some 114.3 million units, only a little behind the PlayStation 4's 117.2 million units (which released in 2013, while the Switch has only been around since 2017) and selling vastly more than the Xbox One's 58.5 million units (also released four years earlier than the Switch)?
Here's the thing, yes, this is a big deal to the folks who care enough about D&D to talk about it on the internet. Yes, it is a big deal to third-party content creators. No, it probably is not as big of a deal as everyone makes it out to be. Think of it this way--there are millions upon millions of people who play D&D globally. Even if you saw 100,000 unique people complaining about this change (which there's only a couple hundred who regularly complain on these forums and maybe a couple thousand on Reddit), that would be a pretty small minority, even if they are super vocal.
D&D has survived much worse things than "a bunch of people who do not understand the rather obvious and widely known fact that corporations take some time to formulate a response to the unexpected taking to the internet to complain." They survived one of the game's founders forcing other early creators out; they survived that founder's forced exodus from the company; they survived the unfairly maligned 4e.
You'll have to pardon me if I am inclined to wait rather than trust the doom and gloom prediction of someone who implied the company which is making the best-selling of the modern consul generations is not a "atop the fortress of home counsel development."
I'm sure . . . Nintendo felt pretty secure atop the fortress of home console development circa 1990-2000, but we know how that ended.
You mean with the Switch selling some 114.3 million units, only a little behind the PlayStation 4's 117.2 million units (which released in 2013, while the Switch has only been around since 2017) and selling vastly more than the Xbox One's 58.5 million units (also released four years earlier than the Switch)?
And in the intervening period of the N64 and Gamecube Nintendo lost a massive share of the market, and Sega lost their peice of the home console market entirely. There was a time when, like D&D: Nintendo was synonymous with "video game". But then: I'm old enough to remember that.
If that is truly what you meant then you should have clarified that, because, like Glyndwr said, Nintendo has had a big piece of the home console pie for a long time.
If that is truly what you meant then you should have clarified that, because, like Glyndwr said, Nintendo has had a big piece of the home console pie for a long time.
What two other companies entered the home console market in that time span and subsequently largely supplanted the "old kings" of Nintendo and Sega as they themselves had Atari? The parallel with Sony being particularly apt: since they went on to dominate the 5th and 6th console generations; thanks largely to Nintendo's decision to stick with cartridges making the Playstation a far more inviting prospect for third party developers.
Going back to the topic CaptainCorvid put forward, OGL 1.1 comes across as a case of shooting yourself in the dick; the principal groups that will be impacted by this change are the third party creators who have done a lot to help energize and *make* 5e as successful as it is and the idea that anything you create can simply be seized by the company with neither attribution nor compensation to you.
Like, if the goal is to either kill the medium or drive away the player base this is a really good way to do it.
But, though third party creators have contributed to 5e, who is the company that created it in the first place? I’m not saying that we should attack the TPC’s but we need to stop talking all this shit about WoTC.
I know the license isn't the only thing that took it's toll on 4th Edition. But with the rules changes in One D&D, I think WotC is making similar, bad choices they did with 4th Edition.
Is history going to repeat itself? Hopefully we won't have to find out.
TSR created it. Hasbro bought WotC, which bought TSR.
I'm in agreement we need to see how this develops and move out of the rumor stage, but the features proposed (allegedly) are so draconian that they are not only predatory on third party creators, it will demonstrate quite possibly that this will trickly down to the player base as well. If the new OGL 1.1 is in fact a thing that happens, it ups the odds that the cost incurred by any who play by the rules is passed to the consumer, and that WotC, with a more monopolistic share of its internal market, will seek to monetize even more. I am not looking forward to the idea of a seasonal One D&D Battle Pass (and worry that its not hyperbolic to suggest such a thing could happen).
How can I point this out even more simplistically...
Third party support is what helps a system succeed. They allow a system to have more content than a single creator ever could produce alone, AND it allow said content to target audiences that the single creator would never think to or attempt to. There is no way that WOTC alone could equal the amount of content that third party publishers put out. So it was with gaming in the 5th and 6th generations, so it is now in TTRPGs: the third parties are the king-makers, no king rules alone. By making their future uncertain, WOTC has already forced many of these small companies with narrow profit margins to hedge their bets elsewhere. Even if they retreat from the land-grab that OGL 1.1 represents... which they probably won't. With them gone, and a number are already gone; the pool of content for One D&D/6e has already shrunk.
I can not wait for WotC to stop publishing printed books.
At that point you will get instant updates, even if you do not want them, but they can then charge you internet access fees just to read them.
Sure you "own" the books you paid for but the access is very costly for them to provide. You will just have to pay a very small fee monthly for that service. Can you imagine, DM;s will pay a higher fee than simple players because they have to access more books. Bringing in outside content will not be allowed unless a small fee is paid. .........
Hey I am just imagining how bad it could get. I am not saying that it will ever get that bad.
If they ever stop publishing printed material they will soon be out of business. But printed material does not make a continuing revenue stream. Once bought forever owned.
Ah yes: the "walled garden", the dream of the anti-consumer corpo executive... And has been tried several times to always awful results. Anyone else remember when Microsoft had designs of making the Windows Store the only place to get programs that could run on Windows? Pepperidge farms remembers...
It's really simple: DnD5e is what It is due to third party content. Community. VTT. It's even simpler: the only reason DnD 5e is such a success is due to VTT like Roll20 and Foundry. Kill that and you kill the game.
I'm wondering if they're eventually going to attempt to 'force' people onto DnDone by gradually removing all the ******** from DnD Beyond. People would still have access to all their 5e sources on here, but they would no longer be compatible with things like the character creator and encounter builder.
(and the OneDnD tools and rules would all be monthly subscription based to even access)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Begun... the exodus has...
WOTC/Hasbro have officially waited far too long to get out in front of the raging trash fire that is the OGL 1.1 situation; presumably hoping that it will just blow over if they ignore it long enough. Unfortunately: I've already seen/read the word of over half a dozen third-party creators who are planning, regardless of what the final OGL looks like, to completely divorce their work from not only One D&D in future, but D&D generally now. And why not? It's the smart business decision to make. If WotC/Hasbro's attitude toward those that support its system is the same as Darth Vader's toward Cloud City, IE: "I am altering the deal, pray I do not alter it further.", why WOULDN'T people abandon the system? It's what created Pathfinder in the first place.
WotC/Hasbro appear to be gambling that D&D is synonymous with TTRPG gaming in its entirety, and are rolling the dice that people will be too wedded to its brand in particular to leave. Well: no king rules forever, I'm sure Sega and Nintendo felt pretty secure atop the fortress of home console development circa 1990-2000, but we know how that ended.
Welllllll, what does it matter, if what you’re saying is true, why should we be worried that third party creators are leaving the one dnd operation? I don’t think that that spells doom for dungeons and dragons in general.
I uses to be dndlover_2.
It certainly looks bad. I wonder how many people that enjoy playing this game have no idea about the ogl changes and won't find out until long after content creators have fled. The ogl alone stands a solid chance of making one d&d worse than 5e not better.
You mean with the Switch selling some 114.3 million units, only a little behind the PlayStation 4's 117.2 million units (which released in 2013, while the Switch has only been around since 2017) and selling vastly more than the Xbox One's 58.5 million units (also released four years earlier than the Switch)?
Here's the thing, yes, this is a big deal to the folks who care enough about D&D to talk about it on the internet. Yes, it is a big deal to third-party content creators. No, it probably is not as big of a deal as everyone makes it out to be. Think of it this way--there are millions upon millions of people who play D&D globally. Even if you saw 100,000 unique people complaining about this change (which there's only a couple hundred who regularly complain on these forums and maybe a couple thousand on Reddit), that would be a pretty small minority, even if they are super vocal.
D&D has survived much worse things than "a bunch of people who do not understand the rather obvious and widely known fact that corporations take some time to formulate a response to the unexpected taking to the internet to complain." They survived one of the game's founders forcing other early creators out; they survived that founder's forced exodus from the company; they survived the unfairly maligned 4e.
You'll have to pardon me if I am inclined to wait rather than trust the doom and gloom prediction of someone who implied the company which is making the best-selling of the modern consul generations is not a "atop the fortress of home counsel development."
Exactly, well said.
I uses to be dndlover_2.
And in the intervening period of the N64 and Gamecube Nintendo lost a massive share of the market, and Sega lost their peice of the home console market entirely. There was a time when, like D&D: Nintendo was synonymous with "video game". But then: I'm old enough to remember that.
If that is truly what you meant then you should have clarified that, because, like Glyndwr said, Nintendo has had a big piece of the home console pie for a long time.
I uses to be dndlover_2.
Notice the date in the initial post...
So? What about it?
I uses to be dndlover_2.
What two other companies entered the home console market in that time span and subsequently largely supplanted the "old kings" of Nintendo and Sega as they themselves had Atari? The parallel with Sony being particularly apt: since they went on to dominate the 5th and 6th console generations; thanks largely to Nintendo's decision to stick with cartridges making the Playstation a far more inviting prospect for third party developers.
I’m sorry, what the hell is your point?
I uses to be dndlover_2.
Going back to the topic CaptainCorvid put forward, OGL 1.1 comes across as a case of shooting yourself in the dick; the principal groups that will be impacted by this change are the third party creators who have done a lot to help energize and *make* 5e as successful as it is and the idea that anything you create can simply be seized by the company with neither attribution nor compensation to you.
Like, if the goal is to either kill the medium or drive away the player base this is a really good way to do it.
But, though third party creators have contributed to 5e, who is the company that created it in the first place? I’m not saying that we should attack the TPC’s but we need to stop talking all this shit about WoTC.
I uses to be dndlover_2.
I know the license isn't the only thing that took it's toll on 4th Edition. But with the rules changes in One D&D, I think WotC is making similar, bad choices they did with 4th Edition.
Is history going to repeat itself? Hopefully we won't have to find out.
TSR created it. Hasbro bought WotC, which bought TSR.
I'm in agreement we need to see how this develops and move out of the rumor stage, but the features proposed (allegedly) are so draconian that they are not only predatory on third party creators, it will demonstrate quite possibly that this will trickly down to the player base as well. If the new OGL 1.1 is in fact a thing that happens, it ups the odds that the cost incurred by any who play by the rules is passed to the consumer, and that WotC, with a more monopolistic share of its internal market, will seek to monetize even more. I am not looking forward to the idea of a seasonal One D&D Battle Pass (and worry that its not hyperbolic to suggest such a thing could happen).
How can I point this out even more simplistically...
Third party support is what helps a system succeed. They allow a system to have more content than a single creator ever could produce alone, AND it allow said content to target audiences that the single creator would never think to or attempt to. There is no way that WOTC alone could equal the amount of content that third party publishers put out. So it was with gaming in the 5th and 6th generations, so it is now in TTRPGs: the third parties are the king-makers, no king rules alone. By making their future uncertain, WOTC has already forced many of these small companies with narrow profit margins to hedge their bets elsewhere. Even if they retreat from the land-grab that OGL 1.1 represents... which they probably won't. With them gone, and a number are already gone; the pool of content for One D&D/6e has already shrunk.
I can not wait for WotC to stop publishing printed books.
At that point you will get instant updates, even if you do not want them, but they can then charge you internet access fees just to read them.
Sure you "own" the books you paid for but the access is very costly for them to provide. You will just have to pay a very small fee monthly for that service. Can you imagine, DM;s will pay a higher fee than simple players because they have to access more books. Bringing in outside content will not be allowed unless a small fee is paid. .........
Hey I am just imagining how bad it could get. I am not saying that it will ever get that bad.
If they ever stop publishing printed material they will soon be out of business. But printed material does not make a continuing revenue stream. Once bought forever owned.
Ah yes: the "walled garden", the dream of the anti-consumer corpo executive... And has been tried several times to always awful results. Anyone else remember when Microsoft had designs of making the Windows Store the only place to get programs that could run on Windows? Pepperidge farms remembers...
It's really simple: DnD5e is what It is due to third party content. Community. VTT. It's even simpler: the only reason DnD 5e is such a success is due to VTT like Roll20 and Foundry. Kill that and you kill the game.
I'm wondering if they're eventually going to attempt to 'force' people onto DnDone by gradually removing all the ******** from DnD Beyond. People would still have access to all their 5e sources on here, but they would no longer be compatible with things like the character creator and encounter builder.
(and the OneDnD tools and rules would all be monthly subscription based to even access)