This is much better and more reassuring. Heres the thing though. We have a sort of inertia in our habits and games. Switching takes time and effort. Even just deciding to switch away from something you’re invested in takes mental effort.
Imagine for a moment that they were slowly increasing prices. $7 a month might be fine. So might $8. I have all my books here. I’m in the middle of a campaign. At $10 I might start grumbling and would decide to maybe not start a new campaign or buy more books, recommend other people use something else, but I’d keep paying. Maybe $12 as well. And then suddenly at say $13, I’d say “**** this” and tell my players I’m cancelling and go through the effort of figuring out what to do instead. At that point, if they said “oh no, we’re sorry” and roll it back to $12, I’m still not coming back even though that was seemingly fine before. They would need to drop it way back to like $6 again before I’d even consider going back and even then I’d still be wary.
This is where we are at. They can roll back the OGL changes entirely, and that would be great. I really hope they do. But it wont get me to resubscribe. If they want that they need to bring more to the table, to fix a whole bunch of the *other* complaints that have been bubbling up.
They want me to resubscribe to dndbeyond? Make an official API for Roll20 and Foundry to use. Sell books on foundry. Sell Kobold Press books on dndbeyond. Make searching the dndbeyond app not terrible (if I search “Assassin”, why is the assassin statblock the 46th thing that shows up?) Make things like rage or bless work. Restart the work on stuff like shared inventories that was obviously killed when Wizards took over.
They want me to buy books again? Sell better books. Flesh out the campaigns. Give DMs more support and explain some of the reasons things are the way they are and how they should be used. Make good separate fleshed out settings, adventures, player options books instead of jamming a few halfasses bits of each into a book to try to appeal to everyone. Actually use UA feedback to improve the books, not as just advertisement and maybe a last minute check for whether something needs to get removed.
Fix the OGL stuff *and* do some of that and maybe I’ll consider it again. But just rolling back the OGL only gets me back to a point where I was already pretty unsatisfied.
Multiple industry professionals have confirmed it was not a draft. Drafts don't have dates they go into effect. WotC is lying. A contract that is indented to be signed isn't a draft. Some people did sign these contracts they sent out.
WotC is still heavily intent on lying and obscuring their shady dealings as much as possible. They're trying to see how much carrot it will take for us to give in and forget and just buy their stuff and watch their movie.
Drafts have dates for going into effect all the time - you draft the document as if it was going to be approved in that round of negotiations, even if everyone at the table knows it won’t be. That includes having performance dates (that everyone knows will be pushed back) or saying things during negotiations like “well, I’m giving you a deadline of X” since deadlines will get responses (and you can always say, “okay, since you’re negotiating in good faith, I guess we can push our deadline back”).
That’s just standard contract negotiation - every draft looks like a final version, and you keep going back and forth with “will you accept this as the final version?” “No, but would you accept this?” “Nope, how about this?” until you finally have an agreement.
I like the clarification that things published 1.0a will always be licensed under OGL 1.0a and the survey sounds great, but I'm still mildly skeptical about the actual change.
But with all this I'm more than tempted to just leave for Paizo. dndbeyond just seem to be getting worse, I'm still pretty annoyed that all the listings heavily push content to me that I don't own (with the one I own marked as "Legacy") and this is a service I not only buy the content on but also pay a monthly fee for ._.
Our language and requirements in the draft OGL were disruptive to creators and not in support of our core goals of protecting and cultivating an inclusive play environment and limiting the OGL to TTRPGs.
The "draft" you sent to companies and creators with a legal contract they were being asked to sign?
Here's the big issue, Wizards - you lost our trust. The previous apology further proved we couldn't trust you. And this apology, while magnitudes better than the previous, still doubles down on a proven lie.
I don't care what the rest of the update says because this one line, just that one word, proves you can't be trusted. Your promises, kind words, and jokes can't be taken at face value.
Our language and requirements in the draft OGL were disruptive to creators and not in support of our core goals of protecting and cultivating an inclusive play environment and limiting the OGL to TTRPGs.
The "draft" you sent to companies and creators with a legal contract they were being asked to sign?
Here's the big issue, Wizards - you lost our trust. The previous apology further proved we couldn't trust you. And this apology, while magnitudes better than the previous, still doubles down on a proven lie.
I don't care what the rest of the update says because this one line, just that one word, proves you can't be trusted. Your promises, kind words, and jokes can't be taken at face value.
Stop spinning lies and then we'll talk.
Contract "drafts" always contain signature lines and dates. I write and modify contracts as part of my job, and every one has had those in every version, from first iteration, middle, and final. A "draft" contract is just one that hasn't been signed yet.
Yeah, it's progress but it reads a little bit like a lower level employee that was tasked by management to write an essay that would placate the fans while not ever actually admitting just exactly how badly they dun fudged up. Which from a PR standpoint I totally get.
My main issue is the fact that they seem to have not entirely learned their lesson; they're still talking about updating the OGL, when after all of this I'm not sure I could ever expect anyone to trust a new OGL of any kind. Outside of them promising to simply abandon this entire insanity and re-evaluate their plans going forward into the future, I'm not sure that there's any fixing the issue? We already know they're liars, they're lying about it being a draft over and over when we know it wasn't - we know from leaks that they want to be horribly greedy and proprietary, so outside of a full 180 I'm not sure that there's anything that could calm the waters enough to get the fanbase to properly settle.
Like, I think at the end of the day it's about trust, and re-establishing trust requires a certain amount of sacrifice or humility that I'm just not yet seeing in terms of action here. The words aren't half bad, but words are easy.
The statement is a step in the right direction, but a huge amount of damage has already been done and there are still a lot of things up in the air. Trust is trivial to destroy and incredibly difficult to repair. The execs who believed they could get away with the OGL 1.1 are still in place as far as I know, and as long as they remain then trust is off the table. An apology doesn't cut it - the lives and businesses of countless people have been upturned as a direct result of OGL 1.1 and the way the situation was handled. The actions of Hasbro and WotC have wounded an entire industry and those responsible must be held accountable in real, tangible terms.
The statement is a starting point. It is not a resolution.
The statement is a step in the right direction, but a huge amount of damage has already been done and there are still a lot of things up in the air. Trust is trivial to destroy and incredibly difficult to repair. The execs who believed they could get away with the OGL 1.1 are still in place as far as I know, and as long as they remain then trust is off the table. An apology doesn't cut it - the lives and businesses of countless people have been upturned as a direct result of OGL 1.1 and the way the situation was handled. The actions of Hasbro and WotC have wounded an entire industry and those responsible must be held accountable in real, tangible terms.
The statement is a starting point. It is not a resolution.
Or another way to put it: "This is the bare minimum. To rebuild your good faith & fair dealings, you have to exceed all expectations, not do the bare minimum."
Exactly - I understand from a business perspective that this definitely is the consequence of out of touch executives.
But at the end of the day people's livelihoods are at stake; I table conventions where I see creators who make their entire living on D&D content in one way or another, dice or modules or miniatures or DMing, it's not a flashy living but they make enough to get by and they all love doing it, it's what they're passionate about! All of these people having the risk of WotC suddenly pulling the legal agreement out from under their feet [with questionable legality to whether or not they can even do that] is just such a sh!tty move for a billion dollar corporation - these people are barely making teacher's salaries on average, a few like Wyrmwood or Critical Role are making good money but they are rare, and even they don't make a fraction of the amount of money WotC makes.
Unless they actually tell us that they understand what they did wrong and say they aren't going to do that, there's no way we can know they won't just... do it a year from now. Or two years from now. And we'll all be kicking ourselves for not having bailed and gone to play Pathfinder instead when they did -this-.
I’m gonna be completely honest, no matter how much they backtrack and apologize, the damage is done. I looked at pathfinder 2e and found it to be a better and more interesting system. Unless OneDnD can absolutely knock it out of the park, I think I’m done with DnD once my current campaign is finished
The new statement is a start. But it still has not addressed to core issue. OGL 1.0 is not on the table. Either it stays or many people go. (Or best case of all, sign the ORC)
Unless they actually tell us that they understand what they did wrong and say they aren't going to do that, there's no way we can know they won't just... do it a year from now.
Actually, that part is irrelevant. The question is whether the license is written in a way that permits them to do it a year from now. Good intentions are fine, but new management happens.
Who cares?? The OGL is dead. We know what kind of people are in charge of WotC. There's no reason to support such a company just because they're holding OUR GAME hostage.
OneD&D will be unsupported by major 3PP. Just accept it. This is all moot...
As others have said, I won't believe a single word apology or attempted reconciliation until there are legally binding and irrevocable guarantees put in place to protect content creators of all sorts from every bit of BS that the leaked version of updated OGL was going after.
Problem is, the OGL 1.0a was already supposed to be irrevocable, as testified to by people who were there when it was written. Yet here we are, decades later.
Them stamping "irrevocable" all over a document is no longer a guarantee of anything at this point. It's unbelievable how short-sighted they were to go after the original OGL; it pretty much destroys all faith in them for the rest on eternity.
As others have said, I won't believe a single word apology or attempted reconciliation until there are legally binding and irrevocable guarantees put in place to protect content creators of all sorts from every bit of BS that the leaked version of updated OGL was going after.
Problem is, the OGL 1.0a was already supposed to be irrevocable, as testified to by people who were there when it was written. Yet here we are, decades later.
Them stamping "irrevocable" all over a document is no longer a guarantee of anything at this point. It's unbelievable how short-sighted they were to go after the original OGL; it pretty much destroys all faith in them for the rest on eternity.
As others have said, I won't believe a single word apology or attempted reconciliation until there are legally binding and irrevocable guarantees put in place to protect content creators of all sorts from every bit of BS that the leaked version of updated OGL was going after.
Problem is, the OGL 1.0a was already supposed to be irrevocable, as testified to by people who were there when it was written. Yet here we are, decades later.
Them stamping "irrevocable" all over a document is no longer a guarantee of anything at this point. It's unbelievable how short-sighted they were to go after the original OGL; it pretty much destroys all faith in them for the rest on eternity.
There did it because OGL 1.0 did not have that language in it. They want a revision to the OGL? Cool, make it irrevocable.
The new statement is a start. But it still has not addressed to core issue. OGL 1.0 is not on the table. Either it stays or many people go. (Or best case of all, sign the ORC)
1.0 is a terrible legal document for all involved, effectively being the legal equivalent of Calvinball. As this entire affair has shown, its numerous ambiguities, failure to define its basic scope, and general failure to even define what exactly is covered once a party enters into it is bad for not just Wizards, but bad for creators as well.
No sane person should want 1.0 to remain. Ambiguity befits nobody as it renders the future unknowable and unpredictable—which is exactly what you do not want when you are trying to build a business based on someone else’s property. You should want clear rules - something you can point to and say “okay, here are the lines, as long as I stay within these clear lines, I have protection from Wizards.” You don’t get those lines with 1.0, even though they would make everyone’s lives better.
Now, creators should fight to get the best possible terms under an OGL 2.0 - that’s just good contract negotiation. But they would be foolish to fight for 1.0 - that would just be squandering an opportunity to get an actually useful legal document, instead of the incompetently produced garbage Wizards presently released.
Regarding the “give us the OGL back/keep it open” points, it’s obvious that they still have some kind of changes they’re committed to. Could be that they’re looking to head off something like the situation currently going with Ernest Gygax, which would be difficult to do under the current terms. Could be they’re looking to narrow the scope a bit to exclude things like video games, and frankly I don’t have a dog in that fight. I guess they can try to slip in a “terms subject to change” bit, but that’s just going to return us to the point of people rallying to fight it or just ditching for ORC. Basically yes I expect they’re looking to make some changes, but I think they’ve realized they don’t have a strong footing to push with.
lol they removed my previous post so here we go again trust is now gone the only way to regain it is to sign on to the ORC until then not one more penny
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
This is much better and more reassuring. Heres the thing though. We have a sort of inertia in our habits and games. Switching takes time and effort. Even just deciding to switch away from something you’re invested in takes mental effort.
Imagine for a moment that they were slowly increasing prices. $7 a month might be fine. So might $8. I have all my books here. I’m in the middle of a campaign. At $10 I might start grumbling and would decide to maybe not start a new campaign or buy more books, recommend other people use something else, but I’d keep paying. Maybe $12 as well. And then suddenly at say $13, I’d say “**** this” and tell my players I’m cancelling and go through the effort of figuring out what to do instead. At that point, if they said “oh no, we’re sorry” and roll it back to $12, I’m still not coming back even though that was seemingly fine before. They would need to drop it way back to like $6 again before I’d even consider going back and even then I’d still be wary.
This is where we are at. They can roll back the OGL changes entirely, and that would be great. I really hope they do. But it wont get me to resubscribe. If they want that they need to bring more to the table, to fix a whole bunch of the *other* complaints that have been bubbling up.
They want me to resubscribe to dndbeyond? Make an official API for Roll20 and Foundry to use. Sell books on foundry. Sell Kobold Press books on dndbeyond. Make searching the dndbeyond app not terrible (if I search “Assassin”, why is the assassin statblock the 46th thing that shows up?) Make things like rage or bless work. Restart the work on stuff like shared inventories that was obviously killed when Wizards took over.
They want me to buy books again? Sell better books. Flesh out the campaigns. Give DMs more support and explain some of the reasons things are the way they are and how they should be used. Make good separate fleshed out settings, adventures, player options books instead of jamming a few halfasses bits of each into a book to try to appeal to everyone. Actually use UA feedback to improve the books, not as just advertisement and maybe a last minute check for whether something needs to get removed.
Fix the OGL stuff *and* do some of that and maybe I’ll consider it again. But just rolling back the OGL only gets me back to a point where I was already pretty unsatisfied.
Drafts have dates for going into effect all the time - you draft the document as if it was going to be approved in that round of negotiations, even if everyone at the table knows it won’t be. That includes having performance dates (that everyone knows will be pushed back) or saying things during negotiations like “well, I’m giving you a deadline of X” since deadlines will get responses (and you can always say, “okay, since you’re negotiating in good faith, I guess we can push our deadline back”).
That’s just standard contract negotiation - every draft looks like a final version, and you keep going back and forth with “will you accept this as the final version?” “No, but would you accept this?” “Nope, how about this?” until you finally have an agreement.
I like the clarification that things published 1.0a will always be licensed under OGL 1.0a and the survey sounds great, but I'm still mildly skeptical about the actual change.
But with all this I'm more than tempted to just leave for Paizo. dndbeyond just seem to be getting worse, I'm still pretty annoyed that all the listings heavily push content to me that I don't own (with the one I own marked as "Legacy") and this is a service I not only buy the content on but also pay a monthly fee for ._.
The "draft" you sent to companies and creators with a legal contract they were being asked to sign?
Here's the big issue, Wizards - you lost our trust. The previous apology further proved we couldn't trust you. And this apology, while magnitudes better than the previous, still doubles down on a proven lie.
I don't care what the rest of the update says because this one line, just that one word, proves you can't be trusted. Your promises, kind words, and jokes can't be taken at face value.
Stop spinning lies and then we'll talk.
Contract "drafts" always contain signature lines and dates. I write and modify contracts as part of my job, and every one has had those in every version, from first iteration, middle, and final. A "draft" contract is just one that hasn't been signed yet.
Yeah, it's progress but it reads a little bit like a lower level employee that was tasked by management to write an essay that would placate the fans while not ever actually admitting just exactly how badly they dun fudged up. Which from a PR standpoint I totally get.
My main issue is the fact that they seem to have not entirely learned their lesson; they're still talking about updating the OGL, when after all of this I'm not sure I could ever expect anyone to trust a new OGL of any kind. Outside of them promising to simply abandon this entire insanity and re-evaluate their plans going forward into the future, I'm not sure that there's any fixing the issue? We already know they're liars, they're lying about it being a draft over and over when we know it wasn't - we know from leaks that they want to be horribly greedy and proprietary, so outside of a full 180 I'm not sure that there's anything that could calm the waters enough to get the fanbase to properly settle.
Like, I think at the end of the day it's about trust, and re-establishing trust requires a certain amount of sacrifice or humility that I'm just not yet seeing in terms of action here. The words aren't half bad, but words are easy.
The statement is a step in the right direction, but a huge amount of damage has already been done and there are still a lot of things up in the air. Trust is trivial to destroy and incredibly difficult to repair. The execs who believed they could get away with the OGL 1.1 are still in place as far as I know, and as long as they remain then trust is off the table. An apology doesn't cut it - the lives and businesses of countless people have been upturned as a direct result of OGL 1.1 and the way the situation was handled. The actions of Hasbro and WotC have wounded an entire industry and those responsible must be held accountable in real, tangible terms.
The statement is a starting point. It is not a resolution.
Or another way to put it: "This is the bare minimum. To rebuild your good faith & fair dealings, you have to exceed all expectations, not do the bare minimum."
Exactly - I understand from a business perspective that this definitely is the consequence of out of touch executives.
But at the end of the day people's livelihoods are at stake; I table conventions where I see creators who make their entire living on D&D content in one way or another, dice or modules or miniatures or DMing, it's not a flashy living but they make enough to get by and they all love doing it, it's what they're passionate about! All of these people having the risk of WotC suddenly pulling the legal agreement out from under their feet [with questionable legality to whether or not they can even do that] is just such a sh!tty move for a billion dollar corporation - these people are barely making teacher's salaries on average, a few like Wyrmwood or Critical Role are making good money but they are rare, and even they don't make a fraction of the amount of money WotC makes.
Unless they actually tell us that they understand what they did wrong and say they aren't going to do that, there's no way we can know they won't just... do it a year from now. Or two years from now. And we'll all be kicking ourselves for not having bailed and gone to play Pathfinder instead when they did -this-.
I’m gonna be completely honest, no matter how much they backtrack and apologize, the damage is done. I looked at pathfinder 2e and found it to be a better and more interesting system. Unless OneDnD can absolutely knock it out of the park, I think I’m done with DnD once my current campaign is finished
WotC could have said literally anything...
The new statement is a start. But it still has not addressed to core issue. OGL 1.0 is not on the table. Either it stays or many people go. (Or best case of all, sign the ORC)
Actually, that part is irrelevant. The question is whether the license is written in a way that permits them to do it a year from now. Good intentions are fine, but new management happens.
Who cares?? The OGL is dead. We know what kind of people are in charge of WotC. There's no reason to support such a company just because they're holding OUR GAME hostage.
OneD&D will be unsupported by major 3PP. Just accept it. This is all moot...
Problem is, the OGL 1.0a was already supposed to be irrevocable, as testified to by people who were there when it was written. Yet here we are, decades later.
Them stamping "irrevocable" all over a document is no longer a guarantee of anything at this point. It's unbelievable how short-sighted they were to go after the original OGL; it pretty much destroys all faith in them for the rest on eternity.
Sterling - V. Human Bard 3 (College of Art) - [Pic] - [Traits] - in Bards: Dragon Heist (w/ Mansion) - Jasper's [Pic] - Sterling's [Sigil]
Tooltips Post (2024 PHB updates) - incl. General Rules
>> New FOW threat & treasure tables: fow-advanced-threat-tables.pdf fow-advanced-treasure-table.pdf
Yeah ^ Dat!
There did it because OGL 1.0 did not have that language in it. They want a revision to the OGL? Cool, make it irrevocable.
1.0 is a terrible legal document for all involved, effectively being the legal equivalent of Calvinball. As this entire affair has shown, its numerous ambiguities, failure to define its basic scope, and general failure to even define what exactly is covered once a party enters into it is bad for not just Wizards, but bad for creators as well.
No sane person should want 1.0 to remain. Ambiguity befits nobody as it renders the future unknowable and unpredictable—which is exactly what you do not want when you are trying to build a business based on someone else’s property. You should want clear rules - something you can point to and say “okay, here are the lines, as long as I stay within these clear lines, I have protection from Wizards.” You don’t get those lines with 1.0, even though they would make everyone’s lives better.
Now, creators should fight to get the best possible terms under an OGL 2.0 - that’s just good contract negotiation. But they would be foolish to fight for 1.0 - that would just be squandering an opportunity to get an actually useful legal document, instead of the incompetently produced garbage Wizards presently released.
Regarding the “give us the OGL back/keep it open” points, it’s obvious that they still have some kind of changes they’re committed to. Could be that they’re looking to head off something like the situation currently going with Ernest Gygax, which would be difficult to do under the current terms. Could be they’re looking to narrow the scope a bit to exclude things like video games, and frankly I don’t have a dog in that fight. I guess they can try to slip in a “terms subject to change” bit, but that’s just going to return us to the point of people rallying to fight it or just ditching for ORC. Basically yes I expect they’re looking to make some changes, but I think they’ve realized they don’t have a strong footing to push with.
lol they removed my previous post so here we go again trust is now gone the only way to regain it is to sign on to the ORC until then not one more penny