Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer Creatures
Frozen Sick
D&D Beyond Basic Rules
Basic Rules (2014)
Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in- Marketplace
Monstrous Compendium Vol. 1: Spelljammer CreaturesFrozen SickD&D Beyond Basic RulesBasic Rules (2014)Sign in to view your library & saved favorites.
Sign in
Just to comment on what is a supposed statement from WoTC but there's no name attached, and it's byline is DNDBeyond Staff (?). Come on, is this a real statement from WoTC or just bad reporting? Is this an official statement? That's important man.
In any case, as before, when they tell us their intent, which is in the first pages of the leaked OGL2.0, hey great. But that intent completely contradicts the other 90 pages of legalese.
New legal OGL 2.0 document, in full, or I don't care.
Meaning that the next OGL will license the use of Wizard's contents only for traditional products associated with RPG like books and PDFs. This doesn't change anything from the leaked 1.1 draft.
Which means as Wizards is not giving permission for the use of their copyrighted content outside of traditional TTRPG media, they will have to rely on the uncertainties of fair use. Because the next OGL will focus on TTRPGs changes to the OGL are irrelevant to those forms of media.
This doesn't say anything about
They are not listening, they decided which elements of the original OGL 1.1 license agreement are crucial for their plans. Modified or dropped the ones that are not crucial. Their goal remains the same. To regain total control over the D&D IP both old and new.
For example
As several posters demonstrated the actual revenue that Wizards would gain from royalties from 3PP is dwarfed by the profits they made themselves. So this was an easy concession for them to make. With regained control over the IP, Wizards still can use a variety of methods to shut down any would-be Paizos.
Since they are not willing to abide by the promises they made in 2000 and again in 2017. What makes you think they would abide by anything they say now?
No Wizards of the Coast is not listening, they are scheming.
The only acceptable solution is one that leaves the promises they made in 2000 and 2017 intact and binds them to play by the same rules the rest of us has to follow.
Robert Conley
Bat in the Attic Games
Yeah, this ain't it.
I was happy with how things were going. We were finally getting DDB codes in books and the encounter tools were improving and even the integrated VTT looked really promising, but I don't trust them anymore.
They could have been Steam, but it's starting to look more and more like Runescape.
Subscription remains cancelled until they drop this nonsense entirely and/or produce an actual document that doesn't screw over everyone else.
Deception check failed. And I love how comments aren't enabled at the bottom of that post. Sure would be alot of direct feedback to the post.
Yeah; notice that's a recurring trend lately... Always a sign of an "open and honest" corpo when they need to exert death grip control over the narrative and prevent those pesky normal people from ruining it.
I am so enraged by this response that I have decided that I am not even going to go see the movie until it is released on a streaming service that I already pay for and do not have to spend an extra cent on it.
Spoiler: Paizo is a corporation. Whose fundamental business model is leeching off of D&D when WotC does something players don't like. It's a perfectly functional business model, but they're not heroes and you should not trust them.
to be fair..a LOT of companies are going to get a healthy boost in business by white knighting the current situation.
i think it's great; shows up a dumb move by WoTC, spreads interests around to other games and 3pps, and frankly is a super savvy business move that uno reverses the pressure back to WoTC. I dont blame any company for exploiting this to their benefit, more power to them.
but we should all remember...they are companies and corporations themselves and will act in their own best interests.
Yeah, they did - in response to a nasty scandal. They aren't the champions of the downtrodden you're looking for.
The thing is... they CANNOT prevent you from making new content using 1.0a.
That's the thing, they KNOW they can't but sure as hell are attempting to gaslight people to think they can--and are still attempting to revoke it.
They are also attempting to make people think it didn't apply to anything other than books (which is explicitly false based on the language of 1.0 and the FAQ from wizards themselves).
This will go to court and it will end BADLY if they attempt to go those route
(not a lawyer, not legal advice).
Correct, but the actions of a business can build trust, and if the ORC turns out to be a fair, perpetual, irrevocable licence overseen by an independent non-profit then that is an action that instantly makes Paizo more trustworthy than WotC based on recent events. I'd also point out that Paizo have done nothing to make me not trust them, and I really wish I could say the same for WotC.
Theyre trustworthy because they're building in guardrails to their solution in order to provide assurance of their trustworthiness.
Theyre not saying, "Take us at our word."
Theyre saying, "We're going to take steps to ensure this remains a force for good even if we turn evil."
Accountability warrants trust.
Paizo they keep themselves on the same playing field as the rest of us. If you think you can do a better job then you can use their open content to show them how it done. It will take a ton of work on your part but all the tools are there. And the good news they committed to putting open content under a license not controlled by them. The Open Source world has made great use of the FSF and other non-profits controlling the copyright of the license itself. Now we can benefit as well.
So it doesn't matter what their motives are. We are free to cooperate, criticize or compete with them in the manner that we see fit. Just like if somebody doesn't like what I am doing with Blackmarsh (which is also open content), they are free to compete against me.
I'm not taking WotC at their word either. When OGL 2.0 is revealed, I will gladly read it and voice my concerns.
On its own though, this fumble is not worth dumping a superior game for an inferior one, in my eyes.
Hasbro is in a catch 22 if they want to force 3PP to release new 5e content only under OGL 2.0 and have backward compatibility between 5e and 6e.
Their only option here is to get rid of OGL 1.0a (forcing SRD 5.1 under OGL 2.0).
I would imagine that Hasbro will get proactively sued by multiple entities that want to release new 5e content under OGL 1.0a to challenge their right to unauthorize OGL 1.0a.
Otherwise, these 3PP will release content under ORC / Black FlagSRD instead (assuming Black Flag is a 5E clone of the game mechanics but taking extra care to not break copyright law). Black Flag then would also be compatible with One D&D (assuming One D&D is also backwards compatible with 5e). In this situation, I could see Hasbro suing instead for copyright infringement.
Hasbro has a pretty decent chance of being screwed no matter what they do, unless they stop insisting that they can unauthorize 1.0a.
And potentially losing, if "you can't copyright game mechanics" holds up.
Which would be catastrophic for them.
And they put themselves in this situation, intentionally.
It's mind blowingly inept.
Ok, íve been following the ogl discussion. Very interesting, and it´s not over good description of what is going on is being posted by dndshorts on you tube.
Íve a three year old master subscription expiring in March, I buy wotćs books when released, played since I was a kid (Ím a red boxer), and the community, energy they´ve built up in 5e is the best íve seen.
and they´re blowing it! Unfortunate. Very unfortunate. You have to feel for the staff who make those great books and the dndbeyond team that have made this great tool.
here's my two cents: it's not cute to crack "rolled a 1" jokes in your official statement about something as serious as this.
Yeah; I'm getting really sick of the "Tee hee! How do you do fellow kids!" crap in these statements too; the OGL 1.1 document was lousy with them. Like the bits about them being "concerned" about NTFs/Offensive content, or "Love for the game": it's all a distraction to make the actual duplicitous content buried underneath go down easier to people not reading carefully.
In the words of my generation: SILENCE BRAND!