Such a public statement would have about the same effect as Wizards making a public statement to the effect of "blue socks are not green socks." Which is to say it would have zero impact and likely make people suspicious about why they bothered saying it in the first place.
Again - nothing, and I mean NOTHING, Wizards can do will shield them ahead of time from the fallout of a Bad Book. No amount of pointless "the content contained in Bad Book does not reflect our views and we do not endorse Bad Book" will matter for shit. All that will matter is "A D&D book was released and it was super awful and hateful", and people will excoriate Wizards for it. The only thing they can do is take steps to quell the content and show people they're actively seeking to excise hatred from their brand, except that 1.0a doesn't allow them to do that. So anyone could release a Bad Book at any time and Wizards would be able to do precisely dick monky nada about it. They're not willing to take that gamble anymore, no matter what diehards have to say.
Since you guys are generally against Wizards being able to protect their players, their IP, their employees, or anything else...let me ask you this. As a hypothetical.
Lets just comment on your first statement since it's a backhanded slap to those who have made D&D what it is today.
You clearly have no understanding of what is happening. Well, either that or you're a planted pawn by Wizards / Hasbro.
The entire reason that clause is there is not to protect D&D players, but to provide an ability to REVOKE a license. Think I'm lying? Let me ask you something. The OGL 1.0a is 20+ years old. How many books where released and sold in volume that was racist? Also, if one was produced. Who would be FORCING YOU to buy and play it?
”It’s just a love tap baby? Why do you make me hurt you so baby.”
Ism’s, ists, and phobe excuses, the claims of hate, have become industry code for “We are going to, have done, or are doing something awful to our employees, brand, lore, and/or customers and need a barrier to hide behind and fling mud”.
Here's the reality of the situation. The OGL1.0a or DIE crowd is not the majority. The vast majority would be perfectly fine with an updated OGL....AS LONG AS IT IS AN IMPROVEMENT which neither 1.1 nor 1.2 are.
OP will not believe that however because she/they (not trying to offend you but you have both in your bio how the hell am I supposed to know which one to apply without a degree in gender studies?) actively wants to restrict content she personally finds distasteful. Content SHE finds hateful, aweful, bigotted, etc. but other people might see nothing wrong with (mostly because they don't project their own biases unto the content like OP does). The problem is that this is subjective and by these standards (as outlined in 1.2) you can ban ANY content at ANY time.
And now here's the final little truth bomb.
"Again - nothing, and I mean NOTHING, Wizards can do will shield them ahead of time from the fallout of a Bad Book. No amount of pointless "the content contained in Bad Book does not reflect our views and we do not endorse Bad Book" will matter for shit. All that will matter is "A D&D book was released and it was super awful and hateful", and people will excoriate Wizards for it."
This is not true at all. Most of these issues are only seem like an issue because a portion of the media is very passionate about it. In reality most people don't care...and only a very very very tiny minority will blame WotC for that. If tomorrow some tiny publisher would release a module under OGL letting you play as a party that gets a quest from Adolf Hitler to find the 4 magical components he needs for his super-gas...there is going to be a tiny controversy, barely any store would sell it and it would not affect WotC or Hasbro in any way shape or form. And that's not even the issue we are talking about here. The problem OP is having is not with the black, but with the gray. OP has a problem with players genocide goblins.....I mean how do you talk to someone like that? That's not even dark-grey, that's like the lightest shade of grey you get.
And regardless of your opinions on it: if my players want to go murderhobo on every goblin in sight because of their edgelord backstories and I as a DM have no problem with that. WHO THE **** ARE YOU TO DEMAND WOTC TO TAKE ACTION AGAINST US. Seriously, the whole point of TTRPG is that you and your friends can create your own story. If you don't like content with certain elements, here's a pro tip: don't buy it. Don't play in games with people who want to genocide goblins. But leave the rest of us alone.
... OP will not believe that however because she/they (not trying to offend you but you have both in your bio how the hell am I supposed to know which one to apply without a degree in gender studies?) ...
When someone provides two sets of pronouns, it's because they accept two sets of pronouns. Many people are uncomfortable referring to me in the feminine because of my regrettably masculine body and my distinct tendency to not be a Nice Girl. I offer the option of they/them because there was no she/they button for me to use instead, and because I try not to make my gender issues other people's problem. 'They'' is nicely neutral for people who don't want to support but also don't want to offend, and at the very least it puts a stop to me getting "sir"-d. Dead gods I hate 'Sir'.
The rest of your post isn't worth responding to, but I figured I'd address this issue of address as it's a valid point of confusion given my signature. People who like me go with she/her. People who don't know or care go with they/them.
I mean if the system dies it is because wizards threw it under the bus. They were making RECORD money. They were doing well. And they could have got away with a small tweak in their favour if they didn’t do… all of this. The community didn’t do this. They did. And then they handled it in the worst way possible. Things did NOT need updating. It was overreach and greed.
so don’t blame is IF this fails. Wizards could have stopped this so easy, or avoided it. They still can save face. This is their fault. Not ours.
the third party work was amazing. I can’t name a single offensive one. I’d have to go looking for that and I am confident it would be a small and barely known product. I can point to a racist wizards published thing within the last year… so maybe they shouldn’t be making such sweeping things if they can’t do it themselves
so don’t blame is IF this fails. Wizards could have stopped this so easy, or avoided it. They still can save face. This is their fault. Not ours.
As far as I'm concerned, Cynthia Williams and Chris Cocks time is up. They MUST go. This is their doing, they are 100% at fault for the damage to the community and they will be DIRECTLY responsible for the destruction of corporate asset values which means they will also have to answer to their shareholder for the cluster you know what they created it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Info, Inflow, Overload. Knowledge Black Hole Imminent!
I’d also add. If there would be so much backlash of a third party published a problematic work…. Where has the backlash been? Like this is a nothingburger of a problem. Can anyone name a single time in this age of third party material, wizards got any notable backlash for third party work?
and the whole nft thing? I mean hasbro sold them so…. They aren’t that morally against them
seriously yurei I don’t know why you feel the need to call has people who want wizards to chill out “bigots, extremists” and all that other lovely stuff. But much ain’t it? Bit dramatic?
... OP will not believe that however because she/they (not trying to offend you but you have both in your bio how the hell am I supposed to know which one to apply without a degree in gender studies?) ...
When someone provides two sets of pronouns, it's because they accept two sets of pronouns. Many people are uncomfortable referring to me in the feminine because of my regrettably masculine body and my distinct tendency to not be a Nice Girl. I offer the option of they/them because there was no she/they button for me to use instead, and because I try not to make my gender issues other people's problem. 'They'' is nicely neutral for people who don't want to support but also don't want to offend, and at the very least it puts a stop to me getting "sir"-d. Dead gods I hate 'Sir'.
The rest of your post isn't worth responding to, but I figured I'd address this issue of address as it's a valid point of confusion given my signature. People who like me go with she/her. People who don't know or care go with they/them.
Thanks for clearing that up.
SInce it appears you have followed my initial suggestion, do please respond to this bit. I know it's worded a bit harshly, I aint no nice girl either, but I am curious about your serious thoughts on the point that's readable between the lines:
And regardless of your opinions on it: if my players want to go murderhobo on every goblin in sight because of their edgelord backstories and I as a DM have no problem with that. WHO THE **** ARE YOU TO DEMAND WOTC TO TAKE ACTION AGAINST US. Seriously, the whole point of TTRPG is that you and your friends can create your own story. If you don't like content with certain elements, here's a pro tip: don't buy it. Don't play in games with people who want to genocide goblins. But leave the rest of us alone.
I don't give **** number one what people do at their own tables. If you're one of those who wants everything with green skin to be irredeemably evil, g'head. Nobody cares. I will think less of you for it, but unless prodded into it - such as by specifically demanding I respond to a given point - I won't bother letting you know. If OSR jackwaffles want to play with hard-coded alignment where everything that isn't human is Evil and there solely to be murdered, that's their business. I consider those books wastes of paper and that attitude backwards, unpleasant, and nothing to be remotely proud of, but I'm also not an OSR gal so who cares. None of y'all give a fat frog **** about me or mine, why should you care what my opinion of your branch of the hobby is.
Ernie ******* G and his ilk, though, deserve their disgusting books thrown back in their teeth. I do not believe the hobby is improved by allowing outright hatred to run freely through it. It drags everybody down, and as I've said before - y'all haven't been here for all the racist forum firestorms I have. You haven't thrown yourself delicates-first into the fire over and over and over again in defense of people's right to sit at the table regardless of their skin, gender, creed, orientation, or Other. You haven't been here for three years of seeing the same stupid arguments in the same stupid threads from a different batch of fresh-off-the-bus stupids every other goddamn week. Everything you're saying about how orcs aren't racist, goblins being evil isn't harmful, and all that other shit is stuff I've already debunked a hundred times in a hundred threads and I'm tired of it.
I don't trust ANY OF YOU to have people's back if real hatred shows its face in this hobby and community.
Anyways. You all do you. But I reserve the right to tell traditionalists off for stubbornly clinging to traditions that have historically driven everybody except white cisgender males away from the table. That's not what this thread is for so Ehhh after this, but consider this Education Part 2. You know how my pronouns work, and now you know what I think of OSR people.
Anything else you want to interrogate me over so you can berate the answer?
I don't give **** number one what people do at their own tables. If you're one of those who wants everything with green skin to be irredeemably evil, g'head. Nobody cares. I will think less of you for it, but unless prodded into it - such as by specifically demanding I respond to a given point - I won't bother letting you know. If OSR jackwaffles want to play with hard-coded alignment where everything that isn't human is Evil and there solely to be murdered, that's their business. I consider those books wastes of paper and that attitude backwards, unpleasant, and nothing to be remotely proud of, but I'm also not an OSR gal so who cares. None of y'all give a fat frog **** about me or mine, why should you care what my opinion of your branch of the hobby is. Not saying that is actually my branch of the hobby, but okay. But hey good for you not caring, **** those people. Why should creators that wish to cater to them not be allowed to do so.
Ernie ****ing G and his ilk, though, deserve their disgusting books thrown back in their teeth. I do not believe the hobby is improved by allowing outright hatred to run freely through it. How does it affect you tho? They are not WotC, their stuff isn't canonical if you care about that, it won't be included in your games, it's not on DDB. Now here's the thing that I think you are missing. What if in 5-10-30 years from now (hypothetical, not wishing for this in any way just to be clear), opinions shift and things you care about...hell....what if transgenderism becomes "obscene"? Do you really want WotC to have the tools in place to purge that from the hobby completely? Because that's the power they would get with 1.2... It drags everybody down, and as I've said before - y'all haven't been here for all the racist forum firestorms I have. You haven't thrown yourself delicates-first into the fire over and over and over again in defense of people's right to sit at the table regardless of their skin, gender, creed, orientation, or Other. Not that is remotely related to this topic or any of your business but my real life job is and always has been to defend freedom, including those rights listed...and I would with my life if need be....You haven't been here for three years of seeing the same stupid arguments in the same stupid threads from a different batch of fresh-off-the-bus stupids every other goddamn week. Everything you're saying about how orcs aren't racist, goblins being evil isn't harmful, and all that other shit is stuff I've already debunked a hundred times in a hundred threads and I'm tired of it.Why? Not why you are tired, why do you care so goddamn much about what other people think (I mean you say you don't but come on seriously)?
I don't trust ANY OF YOU to have people's back if real hatred shows its face in this hobby and community. Have a little faith in humanity, girl, we don't all suck.
Anyways. You all do you. But I reserve the right to tell traditionalists off for stubbornly clinging to traditions that have historically drove everybody except white cisgender males away from the table. That's not what this thread is for so Ehhh after this, but consider this Education Part 2. You know how my pronouns work, and now you know what I think of OSR people. Awesome
Anything else you want to interrogate me over so you can berate the answer? Yes actually: what is your favorite colour, I demand an answer.
My question for 1.0a die-hards is what about it they even like so much. Completely disregarding the issues with the proposed new versions, if there exists a hypothetical new and objectively better license, why should anyone care about deprecating 1.0a?
I like that it has operated for 20 years and provided both Wizards of the Coast the ability to become a Billion dollar company, bringing D&D to the forefront of gaming and making it more popular than ever, -and- allowed third party content creators to fourish and thrive, creating a symbiotic ecosystem in which we have seen, tested and established for two decades. That history is nothing to sniff at, simply throwing that away for no reason is stupid.
If the new OGL actually were an upgrade, no one would be upset. Do you really, genuinely think people are against the new OGL for no reason?
Yeah there's some people who like yelling, but there's also 1500 business signed on to Paizo's new ORC license, and many lawyers who have weighed in and given their professional opinion on the proposed changes - all of them have pointed out the many, many flaws in both the first one that Wizards tried to hammer in secretly and this new 1.2 license - BOTH have big issues, and the fact that both of them remove our rights to use the current license that we have been using as a community for 20 years, again I cannot stress that enough, is a BIG DEAL.
You're acting like we should all be okay with Wizards showing up and stealing our lunch and somehow we're being unreasonable about it; I'm not sure why you care so much about a billion dollar company taking the rights away from content creators or why you're on their side, but if you really want to talk about it you should at least hear what the complaints ARE before dismissing them so blithely.
Excuse me could you please lower your nose a bit so I can hear you better? I also recommend trimming those nose hairs they are a bit too long and unseemly. There are some huge issues I take with the tone of your post.
The first is your snotty pretentious and arrogant attitude. I can tell from the undertone of your post that you believe the d&d beyond customers are stupid, evil, and you consider all homebrew not personal approved by you to be bad.
Need I remind that one of the most recent controversies involving racism came not from the customers but from Wotc/Hasbro. Yes I am referring to the Hadozee. Most contracts and business rul ules nowadays include a clause specifying against racism and homophobia.
We saw no specific mention of that in the draft of the morality clause. I am glad that Wotc /Hasbro are making strides to work with their customers on this issue. You claiming it is all about stamping out bigotry is laughable. The previous license worked quite well for 23 years.
The insistence on a new license is all about money and control. Your claims it is about bigotry are as disingenuous as russia's statement that they were invading ukraine to stamp out neo nazis. The vast majority of creators just want to be able to create without having to worry about a corpo suit jumping them for any perceived wrong.
The customers are not evil, their homebrew is creative and refreshing compared to some of the low effort barebones content that Wotc/Hasbro has produced recently. You are the evil one for hating on the customers for not wanting to live under the iron glad grip of controlling and arrogant people who look down on everyone like you do.
Here's a question for the Let's Get Rid of 1.0a to Save the Children Diehards:
In 2000, the ACLU deployed lawyers to defend the apparent right of on organization to provide its members with an instruction manual in the hows of doing something I will not even type here: Curley v. [insert name of that organization].
Am I to believe that you are filled with more anger and disgust over yet-to-be-made imaginary game products than you are a nonprofit organization you most likely support making the argument that printed matter normalizing the most heinous of crimes should be protected under law?
Um what? I feel like this is missing like half the post. What organization? And why does it matter to this discussion?
I don’t think Yeuri is in the right here—but I think with a modicum of empathy, one could see why she is frustrated. D&D has a bad history with how it treats people who are a bit different - and, though Wizards has tried to make the game itself more tolerant, there still are a large number of people who want to drag the game backward. To recreate a time where the game Yeuri loves actively attacked people like her. Attacks that led to her feeling marginalised. Lesser. Attacks that are statistically tied to vastly high rates of depression and worse.
And when people try to paint a false equivalency between “please don’t call me a bigot because I don’t support who you are as a person” and “please don’t call me something less than human”… and they do that within the very vehicle one can engage in escapism? I can never imagine how painful that must be.
Of course, this cuts both ways politically. I have left campaigns before in part because militant atheists were actively insulting the Christian player for their beliefs, and I left in a showing of solidarity. Hate for the sake of harm alone is wrong, regardless of what “side” is doing it. Hate for the sake of retaliation against others’ harm is also not great either, but it is the lesser on the culpability scale.
And trying to paint some kind of equivalency between folks who are actively trying to deny Wizards the tools Wizards requires so folks can’t use Wizards’ property to dehumanise real people - many of whom appear to be doing so for nefarious reasons - and someone who is angry that, after years and years of struggles; years and years of gains, there are still people who see her as less than human and want to deny her protections that are still clearly needed? Surely any but the least empathetic could see why that might lead to some understandable (if somewhat unproductive) anger?
And trying to paint some kind of equivalency between folks who are actively trying to deny Wizards the tools Wizards requires so folks can’t use Wizards’ property to dehumanise real people - many of whom appear to be doing so for nefarious reasons - and someone who is angry that, after years and years of struggles; years and years of gains, there are still people who see her as less than human and want to deny her protections that are still clearly needed? Surely any but the least empathetic could see why that might lead to some understandable (if somewhat unproductive) anger?
If Wizards had demonstrated any intent at all to actually follow through and protect anyone with the update to the OGL, there might be something to discuss here.
Instead, they're transparently using this as a cover to advance their business ambitions of suppressing peoples right to use 1.0a to develop VTTs and potential video games. That's their play here.
If they were to drop all functional changes to the OGL and only add protections against hateful products, and find out some way to ensure their power to use 'bad' content as a pretense for killing content creators licenses they don't like... then, I might believe their intentions.
But they don't. They're trying to kill 1.0a because it allows for people to make electronic products, and they want a monopoly. They're barely even hiding it with their VTT policy.
Which is all besides the point - even if the community was fully in support of de-authorizing 1.0a, it wouldn't matter. If they insist on deauthorizing it, it will be challenged in court - and if Wizards loses that, they will potentially lose all ability to influence what content is made using it.
There are other methods both Wizards and the Community can pursue to target and destroy hateful content - not in the least of which, Wizards can strictly control what content can be associated with its actual brand and Product Identity, and they should do so. Egregiously offensive content can also be kept out of stores and reputable internet storefronts, and banished to the dark depths of the internet where it can rot.
And again, you can't make people the bad guys for asking a company to honor their own word, to prevent them from making monopolistic moves to keep other companies from making competitive products using a license they themselves offered and protected from their own interference... that's not evil. Its holding big business accountable.
I don’t think Yeuri is in the right here—but I think with a modicum of empathy, one could see why she is frustrated. D&D has a bad history with how it treats people who are a bit different - and, though Wizards has tried to make the game itself more tolerant, there still are a large number of people who want to drag the game backward. To recreate a time where the game Yeuri loves actively attacked people like her. Attacks that led to her feeling marginalised. Lesser. Attacks that are statistically tied to vastly high rates of depression and worse.
And when people try to paint a false equivalency between “please don’t call me a bigot because I don’t support who you are as a person” and “please don’t call me something less than human”… and they do that within the very vehicle one can engage in escapism? I can never imagine how painful that must be.
Of course, this cuts both ways politically. I have left campaigns before in part because militant atheists were actively insulting the Christian player for their beliefs, and I left in a showing of solidarity. Hate for the sake of harm alone is wrong, regardless of what “side” is doing it. Hate for the sake of retaliation against others’ harm is also not great either, but it is the lesser on the culpability scale.
And trying to paint some kind of equivalency between folks who are actively trying to deny Wizards the tools Wizards requires so folks can’t use Wizards’ property to dehumanise real people - many of whom appear to be doing so for nefarious reasons - and someone who is angry that, after years and years of struggles; years and years of gains, there are still people who see her as less than human and want to deny her protections that are still clearly needed? Surely any but the least empathetic could see why that might lead to some understandable (if somewhat unproductive) anger?
D&D as a community has a false stigma of treating people differently. If anything it has always been open to those who have felt outcast, and a very open community over all. Are there "that guys/gals/etc" among the ranks trying to feel some sort of moral or greater superiority in their own miserable lives? Yes, there are, and plenty of people have dealt with them on some level or another. But that's not the grand scope of things, and I don't think anyone who is honest thinks that.
Can games explore real topics via a fantasy setting indirectly, sure, I do it all the time with the express consent that everyone wants to participate in it and handle it maturely. Do I respect those who wish not to? Hell yeah because that's your game and your groups story you wish to tell. Have a different way of looking at alignment than the core rules? Great! No Alignment system? Perfect! Using the old classic? If it works it works!
Wizards should not be the judge, jury, and executioner of morality in table top games. Sometimes people have/want to explore societal taboos, your evil campaigns are a thing after all. If your ever in a game that makes you uncomfortable, especially if it's veering off course from what should have been set at the start, then it's always better to step away. And if anyone judges you for doing so, then they are not worth the time.
My assumption is that people want 1.0a for one (or both) of precisely two reasons:
1.) "You promised! You promised!" I.e. Wizards said twenty years ago that they would operate under these terms and people take that to mean the market cannot grow, change, evolve, or in any other way transform around D&D and Wizards MUST stick to those terms EXCLUSIVELY FOREVER, no matter how bad that turns out to be for D&D. The Promise(C) is more important than any other reality surrounding this whole fracas, and people will ride that promise into an early, fiery grave if that's what it takes to Hold Wizards Accountable(TM). It doesn't matter if Wizards is trying to offer a provably better deal, it doesn't matter if the new license is equivalent-or-better to the older one, it doesn't matter that the old license is causing all sorts of issues - literally the only thing that matters is Wizards Promised(P) and that is that.
2.) "OGL 1.0a lets us get away with shady questionably sketchy shit and 1.2's trying to stop us! Wizards doesn't get to decide what constitutes Sketchy Shit, we deserve to be able to do whatever we want no matter how sketchy it is!" Which doesn't need explanation, really. It's the same argument we've had from hundreds of people on these forums for the past three years - people want to be explicitly endorsed by Wizards for being evil hateful bigots and Wizards would rather not endorse that. I'm not inclined to ever let that argument slide, no matter how people try to dismiss it as a 'smokescreen'.
And that's it. One (or both) of those two reasons is the stance taken by actually factually every single proponent of abandoning 1.2 and the efforts to craft a newer, better license in favor of championing 1.0a. There is no other justification.
That is complete nonsense. In the absence of a respectable argument, you have chosen to vilify those you disagree with, showing the weakness of your argument and your ignorance.
No one is even arguing that the OGL cannot be updated and made clearer, hell, the OSR community has been begging Wizards of the Coast to update the OGL for years because of some of the ambiguity in the wording.
The issue at hand here is the purpose of the OGL. That purpose is to allow 3rd party content creators to contribute to the community unimpeded without having to answer to Wizards of the Coast and the reason this is important is that Wizards of the Coast does not own D&D, the community does. They are the proprietors of the franchise and from that they get to profit, but the OGL ensures that D&D belongs to the community at large and WE will do with it as we, please.
I understand that you're offended by some of the 3rd party content and you are not wrong and perfectly in your right to be offended, some of it is sexist, some of it is racist and much of it is crap. That however is a judgment for the community to make and we vote with our wallets, your offense is irrelevant to anyone else. If the content offends you.. tough shit! Don't buy it, but you do not get to dictate based on your morale judgments what content is created and what content anyone but you can consume. Take that communist bullshit somewhere else! You want to control bigotry as you define it and I'm here to tell you, mind your own business. Neither you or Wizards of the Coasts gets to decide what is or isn't offensive in 3rd party content. People are free to make it and they will be judged by the community of D&D players as to whether or not it's any good.
The freedom to create whatever people want is the purpose of the OGL and if Wizards of the Coast tries to change that deal, this community WILL kill D&D, I assure you, hell, I will make it my personal mission in life to destroy it. I rather watch it burn, than have it managed by communists who think they know better than I do what is good for me.
Besides, you have to be pretty bloody naive to believe even for a second that the OGL as written is some sort of effort to stamp out inappropriate or bigoted content. This is about murdering 3rd party content so that the only D&D content available is behind a Wizards of the Coast pay wall, that is it. They do not give a squirt of piss about bigotry of any kind, that is just a cover story used by Wizards to the Coast to deal with us "Obstacles".
And finally and perhaps most importantly you do not get to demand that "offensive content" as you see it, is outlawed. That is a right you simply do not have because the only way that right can exist is by infringing on someone else's rights to decide for themselves what is and isn't offensive. I don't care what offends you, you matter exactly ZERO to me, what I care about is my freedom to decide for myself what I consume or create.
No one is even arguing that the OGL cannot be updated and made clearer, hell, the OSR community has been begging Wizards of the Coast to update the OGL for years because of some of the ambiguity in the wording.
so..to ignore the rest as it wasnt directed at me, there are very actively a number of threads on this forum literally stating they want the ogl 1.0a, to be left as is, no changes, that they need to not do any further update it and wotc is gonna be in trouble unless they actively do that from lawsuits otherwise have a nice night yall!
No one is even arguing that the OGL cannot be updated and made clearer, hell, the OSR community has been begging Wizards of the Coast to update the OGL for years because of some of the ambiguity in the wording.
so..to ignore the rest as it wasnt directed at me, there are very actively a number of threads on this forum literally stating they want the ogl 1.0a, to be left as is, no changes, that they need to not do any further update it and wotc is gonna be in trouble unless they actively do that from lawsuits otherwise have a nice night yall!
No that is not the argument, I have been following the discussions.
The demand is to not retroactively apply the new updated OGL to existing material that is running under the old OGL and this is for obvious reasons. Material written for one license may not be able to pass the scrutiny of an updated version of that license.
Whatever content exists today under the original OGL, needs to be able to continue to exist indefinitely even when reprinted and updated, without change or exception under that original OGL.
And THEY, those who have content out based on the original OGL would definitely have a case in a court of law (not saying they would win or lose, but certainly sufficient cause) given that the license was designed without an expiration date. Since it explicitly does not state "valid until X", and has wording that suggests it's indefinite, not to mention the original creator of the license has gone on record saying that it was intended to be a license without an expiration date, I do believe THEY would have a very strong case.
All of this however is beside the point as the part that you chose to ignore is actually the most important part which is the intent of the OGL. Again, the intent is for 3rd party creators to have complete freedom, unimpeded by Wizards of the Coast to create content as they see fit for D&D (and the D&D community) which includes the right to create ANY type of content, even if Wizards of the Coast or people, in general, find it offensive. Being offended cannot be justification for outlawing content. You can and have the right to be offended, you can speak out against offensive content, you can choose not to buy offensive content, you can do whatever you want so long as you do not ban its creation.
Wizards of the Coasts wants to control content created for its game and it can do that in its own game if they want, but going after 3rd party publishers (after the community) that see's things differently is wrong. They cannot be allowed the power to control 3rd party content, that is not their place, the community will decide, not Wizards of the Coast, what is good and bad content and we will do so with our wallets and with our voices. We don't need big brother making decisions for us.
And I know what you are thinking. They own D&D, they can do whatever they want.. No.. they do not own D&D.. WE, the community, own D&D, they are simply the proprietors of official content, everything else belongs to the community because we created it, which is most of it.
The fight here is not about OGL's, it's about corporate ownership and control of a game created by and for gamers, this corporation thinks they have a right to it, but they do not and if they don't comply, I believe this community will not yield and will take Wizards of the Coast and D&D down with it. That is my prediction and I'm going to play my part in it, because I rather there be no official D&D rather than a D&D controlled by a corporation.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Such a public statement would have about the same effect as Wizards making a public statement to the effect of "blue socks are not green socks." Which is to say it would have zero impact and likely make people suspicious about why they bothered saying it in the first place.
Again - nothing, and I mean NOTHING, Wizards can do will shield them ahead of time from the fallout of a Bad Book. No amount of pointless "the content contained in Bad Book does not reflect our views and we do not endorse Bad Book" will matter for shit. All that will matter is "A D&D book was released and it was super awful and hateful", and people will excoriate Wizards for it. The only thing they can do is take steps to quell the content and show people they're actively seeking to excise hatred from their brand, except that 1.0a doesn't allow them to do that. So anyone could release a Bad Book at any time and Wizards would be able to do precisely dick monky nada about it. They're not willing to take that gamble anymore, no matter what diehards have to say.
Please do not contact or message me.
Lets just comment on your first statement since it's a backhanded slap to those who have made D&D what it is today.
You clearly have no understanding of what is happening. Well, either that or you're a planted pawn by Wizards / Hasbro.
The entire reason that clause is there is not to protect D&D players, but to provide an ability to REVOKE a license. Think I'm lying? Let me ask you something. The OGL 1.0a is 20+ years old. How many books where released and sold in volume that was racist? Also, if one was produced. Who would be FORCING YOU to buy and play it?
The Emperor has no clothes.
OGL 1.0a or ORC License. Nothing less.
Info, Inflow, Overload. Knowledge Black Hole Imminent!
Stockholm Syndrome the topic.
or
”It’s just a love tap baby? Why do you make me hurt you so baby.”
Ism’s, ists, and phobe excuses, the claims of hate, have become industry code for “We are going to, have done, or are doing something awful to our employees, brand, lore, and/or customers and need a barrier to hide behind and fling mud”.
OP take a chill pill, damn.
Here's the reality of the situation. The OGL1.0a or DIE crowd is not the majority. The vast majority would be perfectly fine with an updated OGL....AS LONG AS IT IS AN IMPROVEMENT which neither 1.1 nor 1.2 are.
OP will not believe that however because she/they (not trying to offend you but you have both in your bio how the hell am I supposed to know which one to apply without a degree in gender studies?) actively wants to restrict content she personally finds distasteful. Content SHE finds hateful, aweful, bigotted, etc. but other people might see nothing wrong with (mostly because they don't project their own biases unto the content like OP does). The problem is that this is subjective and by these standards (as outlined in 1.2) you can ban ANY content at ANY time.
And now here's the final little truth bomb.
This is not true at all. Most of these issues are only seem like an issue because a portion of the media is very passionate about it. In reality most people don't care...and only a very very very tiny minority will blame WotC for that. If tomorrow some tiny publisher would release a module under OGL letting you play as a party that gets a quest from Adolf Hitler to find the 4 magical components he needs for his super-gas...there is going to be a tiny controversy, barely any store would sell it and it would not affect WotC or Hasbro in any way shape or form. And that's not even the issue we are talking about here. The problem OP is having is not with the black, but with the gray. OP has a problem with players genocide goblins.....I mean how do you talk to someone like that? That's not even dark-grey, that's like the lightest shade of grey you get.
And regardless of your opinions on it: if my players want to go murderhobo on every goblin in sight because of their edgelord backstories and I as a DM have no problem with that. WHO THE **** ARE YOU TO DEMAND WOTC TO TAKE ACTION AGAINST US. Seriously, the whole point of TTRPG is that you and your friends can create your own story. If you don't like content with certain elements, here's a pro tip: don't buy it. Don't play in games with people who want to genocide goblins. But leave the rest of us alone.
When someone provides two sets of pronouns, it's because they accept two sets of pronouns. Many people are uncomfortable referring to me in the feminine because of my regrettably masculine body and my distinct tendency to not be a Nice Girl. I offer the option of they/them because there was no she/they button for me to use instead, and because I try not to make my gender issues other people's problem. 'They'' is nicely neutral for people who don't want to support but also don't want to offend, and at the very least it puts a stop to me getting "sir"-d. Dead gods I hate 'Sir'.
The rest of your post isn't worth responding to, but I figured I'd address this issue of address as it's a valid point of confusion given my signature. People who like me go with she/her. People who don't know or care go with they/them.
Please do not contact or message me.
I mean if the system dies it is because wizards threw it under the bus. They were making RECORD money. They were doing well. And they could have got away with a small tweak in their favour if they didn’t do… all of this. The community didn’t do this. They did. And then they handled it in the worst way possible. Things did NOT need updating. It was overreach and greed.
so don’t blame is IF this fails. Wizards could have stopped this so easy, or avoided it. They still can save face. This is their fault. Not ours.
the third party work was amazing. I can’t name a single offensive one. I’d have to go looking for that and I am confident it would be a small and barely known product. I can point to a racist wizards published thing within the last year… so maybe they shouldn’t be making such sweeping things if they can’t do it themselves
As far as I'm concerned, Cynthia Williams and Chris Cocks time is up. They MUST go. This is their doing, they are 100% at fault for the damage to the community and they will be DIRECTLY responsible for the destruction of corporate asset values which means they will also have to answer to their shareholder for the cluster you know what they created it.
Info, Inflow, Overload. Knowledge Black Hole Imminent!
I’d also add. If there would be so much backlash of a third party published a problematic work…. Where has the backlash been? Like this is a nothingburger of a problem. Can anyone name a single time in this age of third party material, wizards got any notable backlash for third party work?
and the whole nft thing? I mean hasbro sold them so…. They aren’t that morally against them
seriously yurei I don’t know why you feel the need to call has people who want wizards to chill out “bigots, extremists” and all that other lovely stuff. But much ain’t it? Bit dramatic?
Thanks for clearing that up.
SInce it appears you have followed my initial suggestion, do please respond to this bit. I know it's worded a bit harshly, I aint no nice girl either, but I am curious about your serious thoughts on the point that's readable between the lines:
I don't give **** number one what people do at their own tables. If you're one of those who wants everything with green skin to be irredeemably evil, g'head. Nobody cares. I will think less of you for it, but unless prodded into it - such as by specifically demanding I respond to a given point - I won't bother letting you know. If OSR jackwaffles want to play with hard-coded alignment where everything that isn't human is Evil and there solely to be murdered, that's their business. I consider those books wastes of paper and that attitude backwards, unpleasant, and nothing to be remotely proud of, but I'm also not an OSR gal so who cares. None of y'all give a fat frog **** about me or mine, why should you care what my opinion of your branch of the hobby is.
Ernie ******* G and his ilk, though, deserve their disgusting books thrown back in their teeth. I do not believe the hobby is improved by allowing outright hatred to run freely through it. It drags everybody down, and as I've said before - y'all haven't been here for all the racist forum firestorms I have. You haven't thrown yourself delicates-first into the fire over and over and over again in defense of people's right to sit at the table regardless of their skin, gender, creed, orientation, or Other. You haven't been here for three years of seeing the same stupid arguments in the same stupid threads from a different batch of fresh-off-the-bus stupids every other goddamn week. Everything you're saying about how orcs aren't racist, goblins being evil isn't harmful, and all that other shit is stuff I've already debunked a hundred times in a hundred threads and I'm tired of it.
I don't trust ANY OF YOU to have people's back if real hatred shows its face in this hobby and community.
Anyways. You all do you. But I reserve the right to tell traditionalists off for stubbornly clinging to traditions that have historically driven everybody except white cisgender males away from the table. That's not what this thread is for so Ehhh after this, but consider this Education Part 2. You know how my pronouns work, and now you know what I think of OSR people.
Anything else you want to interrogate me over so you can berate the answer?
Please do not contact or message me.
Replied inline in pretty colours.
I like that it has operated for 20 years and provided both Wizards of the Coast the ability to become a Billion dollar company, bringing D&D to the forefront of gaming and making it more popular than ever, -and- allowed third party content creators to fourish and thrive, creating a symbiotic ecosystem in which we have seen, tested and established for two decades. That history is nothing to sniff at, simply throwing that away for no reason is stupid.
If the new OGL actually were an upgrade, no one would be upset. Do you really, genuinely think people are against the new OGL for no reason?
Yeah there's some people who like yelling, but there's also 1500 business signed on to Paizo's new ORC license, and many lawyers who have weighed in and given their professional opinion on the proposed changes - all of them have pointed out the many, many flaws in both the first one that Wizards tried to hammer in secretly and this new 1.2 license - BOTH have big issues, and the fact that both of them remove our rights to use the current license that we have been using as a community for 20 years, again I cannot stress that enough, is a BIG DEAL.
You're acting like we should all be okay with Wizards showing up and stealing our lunch and somehow we're being unreasonable about it; I'm not sure why you care so much about a billion dollar company taking the rights away from content creators or why you're on their side, but if you really want to talk about it you should at least hear what the complaints ARE before dismissing them so blithely.
Excuse me could you please lower your nose a bit so I can hear you better? I also recommend trimming those nose hairs they are a bit too long and unseemly. There are some huge issues I take with the tone of your post.
The first is your snotty pretentious and arrogant attitude. I can tell from the undertone of your post that you believe the d&d beyond customers are stupid, evil, and you consider all homebrew not personal approved by you to be bad.
Need I remind that one of the most recent controversies involving racism came not from the customers but from Wotc/Hasbro. Yes I am referring to the Hadozee. Most contracts and business rul ules nowadays include a clause specifying against racism and homophobia.
We saw no specific mention of that in the draft of the morality clause. I am glad that Wotc /Hasbro are making strides to work with their customers on this issue. You claiming it is all about stamping out bigotry is laughable. The previous license worked quite well for 23 years.
The insistence on a new license is all about money and control. Your claims it is about bigotry are as disingenuous as russia's statement that they were invading ukraine to stamp out neo nazis. The vast majority of creators just want to be able to create without having to worry about a corpo suit jumping them for any perceived wrong.
The customers are not evil, their homebrew is creative and refreshing compared to some of the low effort barebones content that Wotc/Hasbro has produced recently. You are the evil one for hating on the customers for not wanting to live under the iron glad grip of controlling and arrogant people who look down on everyone like you do.
Um what? I feel like this is missing like half the post. What organization? And why does it matter to this discussion?
I don’t think Yeuri is in the right here—but I think with a modicum of empathy, one could see why she is frustrated. D&D has a bad history with how it treats people who are a bit different - and, though Wizards has tried to make the game itself more tolerant, there still are a large number of people who want to drag the game backward. To recreate a time where the game Yeuri loves actively attacked people like her. Attacks that led to her feeling marginalised. Lesser. Attacks that are statistically tied to vastly high rates of depression and worse.
And when people try to paint a false equivalency between “please don’t call me a bigot because I don’t support who you are as a person” and “please don’t call me something less than human”… and they do that within the very vehicle one can engage in escapism? I can never imagine how painful that must be.
Of course, this cuts both ways politically. I have left campaigns before in part because militant atheists were actively insulting the Christian player for their beliefs, and I left in a showing of solidarity. Hate for the sake of harm alone is wrong, regardless of what “side” is doing it. Hate for the sake of retaliation against others’ harm is also not great either, but it is the lesser on the culpability scale.
And trying to paint some kind of equivalency between folks who are actively trying to deny Wizards the tools Wizards requires so folks can’t use Wizards’ property to dehumanise real people - many of whom appear to be doing so for nefarious reasons - and someone who is angry that, after years and years of struggles; years and years of gains, there are still people who see her as less than human and want to deny her protections that are still clearly needed? Surely any but the least empathetic could see why that might lead to some understandable (if somewhat unproductive) anger?
If Wizards had demonstrated any intent at all to actually follow through and protect anyone with the update to the OGL, there might be something to discuss here.
Instead, they're transparently using this as a cover to advance their business ambitions of suppressing peoples right to use 1.0a to develop VTTs and potential video games. That's their play here.
If they were to drop all functional changes to the OGL and only add protections against hateful products, and find out some way to ensure their power to use 'bad' content as a pretense for killing content creators licenses they don't like... then, I might believe their intentions.
But they don't. They're trying to kill 1.0a because it allows for people to make electronic products, and they want a monopoly. They're barely even hiding it with their VTT policy.
Which is all besides the point - even if the community was fully in support of de-authorizing 1.0a, it wouldn't matter. If they insist on deauthorizing it, it will be challenged in court - and if Wizards loses that, they will potentially lose all ability to influence what content is made using it.
There are other methods both Wizards and the Community can pursue to target and destroy hateful content - not in the least of which, Wizards can strictly control what content can be associated with its actual brand and Product Identity, and they should do so. Egregiously offensive content can also be kept out of stores and reputable internet storefronts, and banished to the dark depths of the internet where it can rot.
And again, you can't make people the bad guys for asking a company to honor their own word, to prevent them from making monopolistic moves to keep other companies from making competitive products using a license they themselves offered and protected from their own interference... that's not evil. Its holding big business accountable.
D&D as a community has a false stigma of treating people differently. If anything it has always been open to those who have felt outcast, and a very open community over all. Are there "that guys/gals/etc" among the ranks trying to feel some sort of moral or greater superiority in their own miserable lives? Yes, there are, and plenty of people have dealt with them on some level or another. But that's not the grand scope of things, and I don't think anyone who is honest thinks that.
Can games explore real topics via a fantasy setting indirectly, sure, I do it all the time with the express consent that everyone wants to participate in it and handle it maturely. Do I respect those who wish not to? Hell yeah because that's your game and your groups story you wish to tell. Have a different way of looking at alignment than the core rules? Great! No Alignment system? Perfect! Using the old classic? If it works it works!
Wizards should not be the judge, jury, and executioner of morality in table top games. Sometimes people have/want to explore societal taboos, your evil campaigns are a thing after all. If your ever in a game that makes you uncomfortable, especially if it's veering off course from what should have been set at the start, then it's always better to step away. And if anyone judges you for doing so, then they are not worth the time.
That is complete nonsense. In the absence of a respectable argument, you have chosen to vilify those you disagree with, showing the weakness of your argument and your ignorance.
No one is even arguing that the OGL cannot be updated and made clearer, hell, the OSR community has been begging Wizards of the Coast to update the OGL for years because of some of the ambiguity in the wording.
The issue at hand here is the purpose of the OGL. That purpose is to allow 3rd party content creators to contribute to the community unimpeded without having to answer to Wizards of the Coast and the reason this is important is that Wizards of the Coast does not own D&D, the community does. They are the proprietors of the franchise and from that they get to profit, but the OGL ensures that D&D belongs to the community at large and WE will do with it as we, please.
I understand that you're offended by some of the 3rd party content and you are not wrong and perfectly in your right to be offended, some of it is sexist, some of it is racist and much of it is crap. That however is a judgment for the community to make and we vote with our wallets, your offense is irrelevant to anyone else. If the content offends you.. tough shit! Don't buy it, but you do not get to dictate based on your morale judgments what content is created and what content anyone but you can consume. Take that communist bullshit somewhere else! You want to control bigotry as you define it and I'm here to tell you, mind your own business. Neither you or Wizards of the Coasts gets to decide what is or isn't offensive in 3rd party content. People are free to make it and they will be judged by the community of D&D players as to whether or not it's any good.
The freedom to create whatever people want is the purpose of the OGL and if Wizards of the Coast tries to change that deal, this community WILL kill D&D, I assure you, hell, I will make it my personal mission in life to destroy it. I rather watch it burn, than have it managed by communists who think they know better than I do what is good for me.
Besides, you have to be pretty bloody naive to believe even for a second that the OGL as written is some sort of effort to stamp out inappropriate or bigoted content. This is about murdering 3rd party content so that the only D&D content available is behind a Wizards of the Coast pay wall, that is it. They do not give a squirt of piss about bigotry of any kind, that is just a cover story used by Wizards to the Coast to deal with us "Obstacles".
And finally and perhaps most importantly you do not get to demand that "offensive content" as you see it, is outlawed. That is a right you simply do not have because the only way that right can exist is by infringing on someone else's rights to decide for themselves what is and isn't offensive. I don't care what offends you, you matter exactly ZERO to me, what I care about is my freedom to decide for myself what I consume or create.
so..to ignore the rest as it wasnt directed at me, there are very actively a number of threads on this forum literally stating they want the ogl 1.0a, to be left as is, no changes, that they need to not do any further update it and wotc is gonna be in trouble unless they actively do that from lawsuits
otherwise have a nice night yall!
No that is not the argument, I have been following the discussions.
The demand is to not retroactively apply the new updated OGL to existing material that is running under the old OGL and this is for obvious reasons. Material written for one license may not be able to pass the scrutiny of an updated version of that license.
Whatever content exists today under the original OGL, needs to be able to continue to exist indefinitely even when reprinted and updated, without change or exception under that original OGL.
And THEY, those who have content out based on the original OGL would definitely have a case in a court of law (not saying they would win or lose, but certainly sufficient cause) given that the license was designed without an expiration date. Since it explicitly does not state "valid until X", and has wording that suggests it's indefinite, not to mention the original creator of the license has gone on record saying that it was intended to be a license without an expiration date, I do believe THEY would have a very strong case.
All of this however is beside the point as the part that you chose to ignore is actually the most important part which is the intent of the OGL. Again, the intent is for 3rd party creators to have complete freedom, unimpeded by Wizards of the Coast to create content as they see fit for D&D (and the D&D community) which includes the right to create ANY type of content, even if Wizards of the Coast or people, in general, find it offensive. Being offended cannot be justification for outlawing content. You can and have the right to be offended, you can speak out against offensive content, you can choose not to buy offensive content, you can do whatever you want so long as you do not ban its creation.
Wizards of the Coasts wants to control content created for its game and it can do that in its own game if they want, but going after 3rd party publishers (after the community) that see's things differently is wrong. They cannot be allowed the power to control 3rd party content, that is not their place, the community will decide, not Wizards of the Coast, what is good and bad content and we will do so with our wallets and with our voices. We don't need big brother making decisions for us.
And I know what you are thinking. They own D&D, they can do whatever they want.. No.. they do not own D&D.. WE, the community, own D&D, they are simply the proprietors of official content, everything else belongs to the community because we created it, which is most of it.
The fight here is not about OGL's, it's about corporate ownership and control of a game created by and for gamers, this corporation thinks they have a right to it, but they do not and if they don't comply, I believe this community will not yield and will take Wizards of the Coast and D&D down with it. That is my prediction and I'm going to play my part in it, because I rather there be no official D&D rather than a D&D controlled by a corporation.