Even the Pathfinder situation fits into this - Pathfinder kept DnD "valuable" through 4e, so players were still in the market for 5e to come in and pick them back up.
To be pretty clear, all Pathfinder did was split the audience and allow an off-ramp for non-adopting players to get their fix without having to adapt to a new edition. People who enjoyed D&D throughout all of the editions (or who picked up the game at any stage along the way) and learned to adapt with their friends and tables got along just fine and adopted 5th Ed in a normal way, as the course of progress leads. On most edition changes there is community shed. I left the game through much of the 3rd ed. era to pursue other game systems with my friends that interested me more. These things happen, and I expect (and WotC also likely expects) that many of those shed player will be reintegrated at some point in the coming cycle.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The mongoose blew out its candle and was asleep in bed before the room went dark." —Llanowar fable
Even the Pathfinder situation fits into this - Pathfinder kept DnD "valuable" through 4e, so players were still in the market for 5e to come in and pick them back up.
To be pretty clear, all Pathfinder did was split the audience and allow an off-ramp for non-adopting players to get their fix without having to adapt to a new edition. People who enjoyed D&D throughout all of the editions (or who picked up the game at any stage along the way) and learned to adapt with their friends and tables got along just fine and adopted 5th Ed in a normal way, as the course of progress leads. On most edition changes there is community shed. I left the game through much of the 3rd ed. era to pursue other game systems with my friends that interested me more. These things happen, and I expect (and WotC also likely expects) that many of those shed player will be reintegrated at some point in the coming cycle.
If Pathfinder hadn't happened, 5e as it exists would not have happened.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Orcs are savage raiders and pillagers with stooped postures, low foreheads, and piggish faces with prominent lower canines that resemble tusks." MM p245 (original printing) You don't OWN your books on DDB: WotC can change them any time. What do you think will happen when OneD&D comes out?
Even the Pathfinder situation fits into this - Pathfinder kept DnD "valuable" through 4e, so players were still in the market for 5e to come in and pick them back up.
To be pretty clear, all Pathfinder did was split the audience and allow an off-ramp for non-adopting players to get their fix without having to adapt to a new edition. People who enjoyed D&D throughout all of the editions (or who picked up the game at any stage along the way) and learned to adapt with their friends and tables got along just fine and adopted 5th Ed in a normal way, as the course of progress leads. On most edition changes there is community shed. I left the game through much of the 3rd ed. era to pursue other game systems with my friends that interested me more. These things happen, and I expect (and WotC also likely expects) that many of those shed player will be reintegrated at some point in the coming cycle.
If Pathfinder hadn't happened, 5e as it exists would not have happened.
I mean, you are not wrong. We would have eventually gotten a different 5th Ed with maybe different lessons learned through 4th Eds development cycle.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The mongoose blew out its candle and was asleep in bed before the room went dark." —Llanowar fable
Hey guys! There's a WotC OGL 1.1 watch party on youtube. There SHOULD be something in about 15 minutes, but that might have changed with the mass unsubs going on.
The stream was cancelled, so I removed the link to stop any confusion. So, clear to say that there is some sort of chaos going on in there right now.
Hey guys! There's a WotC OGL 1.1 watch party on youtube. There SHOULD be something in about 15 minutes, but that might have changed with the mass unsubs going on.
The stream was cancelled, so I removed the link to stop any confusion. So, clear to say that there is some sort of chaos going on in there right now.
By Jove I think they noticed that the Base is very, very angry.
I disagree. I'm in the minority that think maybe asking companies who make millions off of D&D to kick some back to WotC is not terrible. But it needs to be based on profit, not revenue, and it needs to be higher than $750k. And WotC getting a license to everything forever? Abso-freaken-lutely not.
But if they make the required changes I'll re-enable my sub the same day.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I Cancelled my Master Tier Subscription January 12th 2023 because of "OGL" 1.1 - Resubscribed 28th of Jan, now the SRD is in CC-BY-4.0
I disagree. I'm in the minority that think maybe asking companies who make millions off of D&D to kick some back to WotC is not terrible. But it needs to be based on profit, not revenue, and it needs to be higher than $750k. And WotC getting a license to everything forever? Abso-freaken-lutely not.
But if they make the required changes I'll re-enable my sub the same day.
I think the most appropriate response from Wotc was for them to turn around and do partnerships with the more successful 3rd parties wherein they would get a cut and in return provide better exposure on a product by product basis so as to both preserve D&D's image while also giving 3rd parties the creative freedom they desire to make the modules/mechanics they want.
It's also why I find myself struggling to support them at this juncture since everything they're doing seems geared towards expecting greater revenue for products of increasingly suspect quality.
I disagree. I'm in the minority that think maybe asking companies who make millions off of D&D to kick some back to WotC is not terrible. But it needs to be based on profit, not revenue, and it needs to be higher than $750k. And WotC getting a license to everything forever? Abso-freaken-lutely not.
But if they make the required changes I'll re-enable my sub the same day.
What's funny is, a month ago no one could tell you what the OGL was worth to Wizards, or how much money it made them.
Now, WotC could start by telling someone how much money they're going to lose on canceled subs. And soon by missing sales from their projections.
The OGL, and the companies operating under it, didn't need to include royalties to be immensely financially valuable to Wizards. Hopefully they're learning that - but probably not.
Just as an FYI... that D&DBeyond thing that was supposed to happen at 3 yesterday (and was cancelled) was their weekly presentation/release thing they do. The talk was supposedly going to be about Dragonlance. They cancelled because their effort would have been lost in the din of angry mob voices.
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.
but we should be. What saved D&D before when it was fast heading into administration was the influx of 3rd party content. Yes, intially they may be ok for a few months or years, but they simply cannot produce the amount of quality 3rd party content that is (soon to be was) currently available. Would you be ok with losing 70-80% of content, adventures, campaigns, etc? I know I wouldnt be.
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)
You can bet that is their aim. I wouldn't put it past them to try some shiesty stuff with the content you bought already.
Rumor has it, WotC hired an actor to deliver the statement, some further rumors are Joe Manganiello. Just cause I think it's amusing and WotC may be trumped by Hasbro, I'm betting they bring out Vin Diesel who will try to use the same "come on back" styling he used for the "let's go to the movies" monologue to get people in theaters for F9 that still creeps me out, almost as much as it does when he says "family."
Nothing official to cite, just rumor mongering.
Friday comes and Morgan Freeman is hired to calmy speak about the OGL rumors. Rebuttal is from Samuel L. Jackson.
Regardless if the 'Response Coming Soon' means we are held in limbo till after March, I feel investors might just start looking for a chopping block and an axe to grind. Two major controversies within a six-month window just begs for a sacrificial scapegoat to be volunteered.
Funny though, took Wotc what 48 hours after YouTube rumors to post a response? Yet a quick "we have heard the community and player base, and after talks with a number of 3rd party individuals, we are working to cast a WISH spell to change the outcry. "
Sad part is had this response come sooner, like as soon as the OGL doc leak report, and a community feed back portal on the rough draft doc had been established, Wotc might have made a clutch saving throw.
To be pretty clear, all Pathfinder did was split the audience and allow an off-ramp for non-adopting players to get their fix without having to adapt to a new edition. People who enjoyed D&D throughout all of the editions (or who picked up the game at any stage along the way) and learned to adapt with their friends and tables got along just fine and adopted 5th Ed in a normal way, as the course of progress leads. On most edition changes there is community shed. I left the game through much of the 3rd ed. era to pursue other game systems with my friends that interested me more. These things happen, and I expect (and WotC also likely expects) that many of those shed player will be reintegrated at some point in the coming cycle.
If Pathfinder hadn't happened, 5e as it exists would not have happened.
"Orcs are savage raiders and pillagers with stooped postures, low foreheads, and piggish faces with prominent lower canines that resemble tusks." MM p245 (original printing)
You don't OWN your books on DDB: WotC can change them any time. What do you think will happen when OneD&D comes out?
Given the option between PF1e and D&D4e, I kept playing 3.5. /shrug
I mean, you are not wrong. We would have eventually gotten a different 5th Ed with maybe different lessons learned through 4th Eds development cycle.
Hey guys! There's a WotC OGL 1.1 watch party on youtube. There SHOULD be something in about 15 minutes, but that might have changed with the mass unsubs going on.The stream was cancelled, so I removed the link to stop any confusion. So, clear to say that there is some sort of chaos going on in there right now.
heh... DNDBeyond just cancelled the stream that was set to start about now...how unsurprising.
By Jove I think they noticed that the Base is very, very angry.
I disagree. I'm in the minority that think maybe asking companies who make millions off of D&D to kick some back to WotC is not terrible. But it needs to be based on profit, not revenue, and it needs to be higher than $750k. And WotC getting a license to everything forever? Abso-freaken-lutely not.
But if they make the required changes I'll re-enable my sub the same day.
I Cancelled my Master Tier Subscription January 12th 2023 because of "OGL" 1.1 - Resubscribed 28th of Jan, now the SRD is in CC-BY-4.0
I think the most appropriate response from Wotc was for them to turn around and do partnerships with the more successful 3rd parties wherein they would get a cut and in return provide better exposure on a product by product basis so as to both preserve D&D's image while also giving 3rd parties the creative freedom they desire to make the modules/mechanics they want.
It's also why I find myself struggling to support them at this juncture since everything they're doing seems geared towards expecting greater revenue for products of increasingly suspect quality.
What's funny is, a month ago no one could tell you what the OGL was worth to Wizards, or how much money it made them.
Now, WotC could start by telling someone how much money they're going to lose on canceled subs. And soon by missing sales from their projections.
The OGL, and the companies operating under it, didn't need to include royalties to be immensely financially valuable to Wizards. Hopefully they're learning that - but probably not.
Just as an FYI... that D&DBeyond thing that was supposed to happen at 3 yesterday (and was cancelled) was their weekly presentation/release thing they do.
The talk was supposedly going to be about Dragonlance.
They cancelled because their effort would have been lost in the din of angry mob voices.
The theme song for all this...
but we should be. What saved D&D before when it was fast heading into administration was the influx of 3rd party content. Yes, intially they may be ok for a few months or years, but they simply cannot produce the amount of quality 3rd party content that is (soon to be was) currently available. Would you be ok with losing 70-80% of content, adventures, campaigns, etc? I know I wouldnt be.
You can bet that is their aim. I wouldn't put it past them to try some shiesty stuff with the content you bought already.
Man Nat 20 on that response check, and the DM smiles with a devil's grin: https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1423-an-update-on-the-open-game-license-ogl
Sad part is had this response come sooner, like as soon as the OGL doc leak report, and a community feed back portal on the rough draft doc had been established, Wotc might have made a clutch saving throw.
It boggles my mind how great things were going and how quickly they took years of good will and damaged it so badly, and irrevocably.