I mean, he was the one who issued a clarification after Wizards posted a refutation of some of his claims, yes.
But why would you trust Wizards over him? At best, he's unreliable. They're confirmed liars, multiple times over, in the recent weeks.
DnDShorts described his verification process. The information shared is extremely concerning.
You're trusting WotC waaaay too much if you aren't at least concerned this may be true.
Wizards aren't confirmed liars. As has been explained numerous times, the Open Game License was a draft, which is proven by the fact that it wasn't finalized and Kickstarter was still negotiating terms for it.
He issued a clarification, so what? That doesn't change the fact that he got information wrong. And I listed several other things he also got wrong, but didn't bother to correct.
I believe Wizards of the Coast when they say what they are going to do. It doesn't exactly go well when a corporation as big as themselves is accused of lying to their fans. I mean, the whole thing about Open Game License 1.1 being a draft got loads of people angry, even though it was correct and wasn't a lie.
D&D Shorts on the other hand has repeatedly gotten things wrong. He has repeatedly spread false information. The first time I heard him talk about how the world was ending and how Wizards of the Coast wanted to be evil just to hurt us fans, I believed him. But then we learned that he was wrong. The next time we also learned that he was wrong. So please forgive me if I don't think he's right this time.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explainHERE.
Wasn't D&D Shorts the one who was wrong about D&D Beyond raising subscriptions? Wasn't D&D Shorts the one who was wrong about Wizards not listening to their feedback? Wasn't D&D Shorts the one who made ridiculous statements about your Open Game License being revoked for jaywalking?
Why are we listening to this guy? Basically every insider leak he spread recently has been wrong. He might have been trustworthy once, but he certainly isn't now. You say 5 people verified all his sources, without providing any links or actual facts.
Where did Linda Codega say that D&D Shorts sources were correct? I dunno. I haven't found anything she said that sounded remotely like that.
Treantmonk did not independently confirm this at all. He merely stated that this video was one that us D&D fans might want to watch.
The executives at Wizards and Hasbro aren't idiots. Some of you may believe they're evil jerks, but I highly doubt they would actively make moves that would completely destroy their profit. And again, something isn't true just because D&D Shorts said it was. At this point in time, I think anyone who believes that his insider sources are trustworthy is actively deceiving themself.
I mean, he was the one who issued a clarification after Wizards posted a refutation of some of his claims, yes.
But why would you trust Wizards over him? At best, he's unreliable. They're confirmed liars, multiple times over, in the recent weeks.
DnDShorts described his verification process. The information shared is extremely concerning.
You're trusting WotC waaaay too much if you aren't at least concerned this may be true.
A “clarification” where he basically did his best to pretend he didn’t jump the gun and report a bunch of hearsay as hard fact. And yet no one is screaming about him attempting to gaslight the viewers. Ah, gotta love the double standard.
He's an amateur at investigative reporting who appears to be over his head trying to disseminate information. That much seems genuine, and legitimate.
He's not a billion dollar corporation clearly trying to cover itself after it got caught engaged in sneaky anticompetitive shenanigans which they then lied about.
Reliability is relative, and I'm inclined to believe he may be what he appears to be - and that's "not malicious".
He's an amateur at investigative reporting who appears to be over his head trying to disseminate information. That much seems genuine, and legitimate.
He's not a billion dollar corporation clearly trying to cover itself after it got caught engaged in sneaky anticompetitive shenanigans which they then lied about.
Reliability is relative, and I'm inclined to believe he may be what he appears to be - and that's "not malicious".
Being malicious and having untrustworthy or malicious sources are two very different. Personally, if someone repeatedly spreads inaccurate information (intentionally or not), I stop trusting them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explainHERE.
Wasn't D&D Shorts the one who was wrong about D&D Beyond raising subscriptions? Wasn't D&D Shorts the one who was wrong about Wizards not listening to their feedback? Wasn't D&D Shorts the one who made ridiculous statements about your Open Game License being revoked for jaywalking?
Why are we listening to this guy? Basically every insider leak he spread recently has been wrong. He might have been trustworthy once, but he certainly isn't now. You say 5 people verified all his sources, without providing any links or actual facts.
Where did Linda Codega say that D&D Shorts sources were correct? I dunno. I haven't found anything she said that sounded remotely like that.
Treantmonk did not independently confirm this at all. He merely stated that this video was one that us D&D fans might want to watch.
The executives at Wizards and Hasbro aren't idiots. Some of you may believe they're evil jerks, but I highly doubt they would actively make moves that would completely destroy their profit. And again, something isn't true just because D&D Shorts said it was. At this point in time, I think anyone who believes that his insider sources are trustworthy is actively deceiving themself.
I mean, he was the one who issued a clarification after Wizards posted a refutation of some of his claims, yes.
But why would you trust Wizards over him? At best, he's unreliable. They're confirmed liars, multiple times over, in the recent weeks.
DnDShorts described his verification process. The information shared is extremely concerning.
You're trusting WotC waaaay too much if you aren't at least concerned this may be true.
A “clarification” where he basically did his best to pretend he didn’t jump the gun and report a bunch of hearsay as hard fact. And yet no one is screaming about him attempting to gaslight the viewers. Ah, gotta love the double standard.
He's an amateur at investigative reporting who appears to be over his head trying to disseminate information. That much seems genuine, and legitimate.
He's not a billion dollar corporation clearly trying to cover itself after it got caught engaged in sneaky anticompetitive shenanigans which they then lied about.
Reliability is relative, and I'm inclined to believe he may be what he appears to be - and that's "not malicious".
Really? Because he’s been running hardline yellow journalism on this since he first started on it. Clickbait thumbnails, lots of “rawr, WotC is out to get you” pics and animations, generally presenting his “leaked” info as hard fact. If not malicious, it’s still grossly negligent/unprofessional reporting.
Wizards aren't confirmed liars. As has been explained numerous times, the Open Game License was a draft, which is proven by the fact that it wasn't finalized and Kickstarter was still negotiating terms for it.
Assuming for a second they weren't being intentionally misleading by describing 1.1 as a draft (they were) and claiming it was submitted for review (it wasn't), they also lied directly and deliberately about the history and intent of the OGL.
It was clearly intended to last forever and allow for electronic products and video games - based on their own words, and FAQs hosted on their site for nearly two decades. You can't find it there now because they buried the evidence, clearly forgetting nothing is ever truly gone from the internet. It's found easily enough if you go looking for it.
Even without the FAQ, we have the word of the people who wrote 1.0a for Hasbro/Wizards.
Wizards aren't confirmed liars. As has been explained numerous times, the Open Game License was a draft, which is proven by the fact that it wasn't finalized and Kickstarter was still negotiating terms for it.
Assuming for a second they weren't being intentionally misleading by describing 1.1 as a draft (they were) and claiming it was submitted for review (it wasn't), they also lied directly and deliberately about the history and intent of the OGL.
It was clearly intended to last forever and allow for electronic products and video games - based on their own words, and FAQs hosted on their site for nearly two decades. You can't find it there now because they buried the evidence, clearly forgetting nothing is ever truly gone from the internet. It's found easily enough if you go looking for it.
Even without the FAQ, we have the word of the people who wrote 1.0a for Hasbro/Wizards.
The current management of Hasbro/WotC are liars.
I know this is probably going to come as a shock to you, but intentions can change. Yes, at the time they released 1.0a they intended for it to just be a simple, you’re good to produce 3PP content affirmation. And then D&D jumped way up in popularity/visibility and WotC had to take someone to court over attempting to use one of their properties as a platform for hate speech, and they realized the old intentions don’t fit the new situation. Thus they are moving to adapt, and as the current offer for licensing specifically prohibits meaningful amendments, that means they perforce must withdraw it if they’re going to change anything. Simply repeating “but they promised” ad nauseum doesn’t change the fact that the actual language of the agreement is not explicit on the point, and despite all the “the sky is falling” rhetoric and appeals to tradition, the new OGL is not going to meaningfully change the dynamic of 3PP works.
His latest video, which is what this thread is in response to, is pretty clear on what is being said by actual people in WotC. And all of them okayed the script from what he said. So I don’t think he’s unfairly risking anyone’s job, or bending the truth. Seems he said sorry for the thing about feedback not being read being a misunderstanding on his part, but everything else is just coming straight out of WotC with him acting as the mouthpiece.
I absolutely believe DnDshorts, WOTC's ridiculous repeated lies are getting tiresome, you keep digging a deeper hole and annihilating your reputation even further with every move.
Chris Cao and Cynthia Williams need to be fired, Wendy doesnt give a shit, and Chris is a delusional asshat who ran a failed MMO and wants to repeat the mistakes of 4th edition and make a garbage microtransaction riddled video game while suing the competition out of existence because he cant distinguish between tabletop gamers and video gamers.
Okay, I went ahead and found an org chart for Wizards of the Coast. I'm not willing to give the site money so I can't verify names, but it appears there are the following relevant branches
Digital Gaming. Presumably developing the VTT.
Business Development and Digital Licensing (subhead: Publishing and Licensing, Dungeons and Dragons). Probably responsible for the movie.
Brand Strategy and Marketing. Would actually be the ones making decisions about things like prices.
Dungeons and Dragons. Probably actually decides on things like the publishing schedule.
Digital Development (subhead: Digital Publishing). Most likely actually responsible for D&D Beyond.
Chris Cao has been mentioned as a VP in Digital Gaming. He may well have a lot of schemes for monetization of the VTT, but he's simply not the one in charge of the things people claim he's going to destroy.
I mean, he was the one who issued a clarification after Wizards posted a refutation of some of his claims, yes.
But why would you trust Wizards over him? At best, he's unreliable. They're confirmed liars, multiple times over, in the recent weeks.
DnDShorts described his verification process. The information shared is extremely concerning.
You're trusting WotC waaaay too much if you aren't at least concerned this may be true.
Wizards aren't confirmed liars. As has been explained numerous times, the Open Game License was a draft, which is proven by the fact that it wasn't finalized and Kickstarter was still negotiating terms for it.
He issued a clarification, so what? That doesn't change the fact that he got information wrong. And I listed several other things he also got wrong, but didn't bother to correct.
I believe Wizards of the Coast when they say what they are going to do. It doesn't exactly go well when a corporation as big as themselves is accused of lying to their fans. I mean, the whole thing about Open Game License 1.1 being a draft got loads of people angry, even though it was correct and wasn't a lie.
D&D Shorts on the other hand has repeatedly gotten things wrong. He has repeatedly spread false information. The first time I heard him talk about how the world was ending and how Wizards of the Coast wanted to be evil just to hurt us fans, I believed him. But then we learned that he was wrong. The next time we also learned that he was wrong. So please forgive me if I don't think he's right this time.
I send out a lot of contracts for people to sign. I would never put out a "draft" for someone to sign.
Clearly Wizards is "lying" about the OGL. They obviously don't see it as this.
This video does kind of come off as a group of employees with an axe to grind. This doesn't mean it's any less true however. Having worked IT in several corporations I feel their frustration with the direction that Hasbro is taking and not being able to do anything.
Unfortunately turning higher profits every year is the life blood of corporations. While D&D was the small fish in the Hasbro pond, it was fairly safe. Alas, those heady days are no longer.
Below the top level, org charts are fairly useless. I've seen VPs from other groups totally control a whole org. In totally unrelated areas.
I am guessing and this total speculation on my experience with similar organizations, that Ray saw who was grasping for power and the direction of WotC and didn't like it. I am guessing he lost the power play. Which seems to be bad for my enjoyment of D&D.
Shorts clearly states that he only published this video because he promised the WotC employees he would and now he is done. Probably due to the Hasbro schills harassing him.
Okay, after digesting things, here's my guess about what's going on:
Chris Cao is in charge of the D&D VTT. He thinks it's going to be the best thing since sliced bread and will 'destroy' the competition, and is not afraid to express his opinion. He seems to have come in from an electronic gaming background, and probably brought management processes from electronic gaming studios (which are, frankly, pretty toxic) with him. There's a reasonable possibility that the WotC VTT will be Diablo Immortal level horrible monetization. His priorities in the new OGL were likely the restrictions on VTTs and video games. It is likely that he's the primary mover behind all this.
That doesn't mean he's actually in control and will produce a parade of horribles outside of the VTT space, though.
The licensing department seems to have caved pretty quickly on the topic of royalties, probably because they're looking at this whole situation and going "This is absolutely not what we want to be dealing with when the D&D movie is coming out soon". I wouldn't bet on them as the leakers, though -- for that, I'd bet on traditional and digital publishing, because if he wins... guess who loses?
Assuming for a second they weren't being intentionally misleading by describing 1.1 as a draft (they were) and claiming it was submitted for review (it wasn't), they also lied directly and deliberately about the history and intent of the OGL.
It was clearly intended to last forever and allow for electronic products and video games - based on their own words, and FAQs hosted on their site for nearly two decades. You can't find it there now because they buried the evidence, clearly forgetting nothing is ever truly gone from the internet. It's found easily enough if you go looking for it.
How do you know whether or not Wizards of the Coast was being intentionally misleading? You can't read their minds, can you?
Also, Wizards of the Coast never said they submitted 1.1 for review. I searched through all their articles using Command F, and I couldn't find that anywhere. What they actually said was that they have the License to third-party publishers and let them look it over, see what they thought, and negotiate with Wizards. The Kickstarter Tweet confirms this, if you still don't believe them.
Also, Ace is right that intentions change over time. The world evolves and legal contracts change to match it, that's just how life works.
You seem to have a really strong opinion about how terrible Wizards of the Coast is. In reality though, they aren't nearly as bad as you're making them out to be. Wizards is a for-profit company, and like most corporations that run big name RPGs, they want money.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explainHERE.
I don't own any Hasbro stock and don't follow them. I do have a bit of experience with large public corporations and there is little doubt that they are for profit. Out of that whole statement you picked that to respond to?
I've watched the latest video and... it seems pretty reasonable, attempts to be fair and is peppered with a lot of caveats, and the written bit on the verification process seems about as robust as anyone could want (without naming names, which is unreasonable).
The 'checked by a lawyer' thing means that they are at minimum confident he is protected against a libel suit, which isn't nothing.
Okay, after digesting things, here's my guess about what's going on:
Chris Cao is in charge of the D&D VTT. He thinks it's going to be the best thing since sliced bread and will 'destroy' the competition, and is not afraid to express his opinion. He seems to have come in from an electronic gaming background, and probably brought management processes from electronic gaming studios (which are, frankly, pretty toxic) with him. There's a reasonable possibility that the WotC VTT will be Diablo Immortal level horrible monetization. His priorities in the new OGL were likely the restrictions on VTTs and video games. It is likely that he's the primary mover behind all this.
That doesn't mean he's actually in control and will produce a parade of horribles outside of the VTT space, though.
The licensing department seems to have caved pretty quickly on the topic of royalties, probably because they're looking at this whole situation and going "This is absolutely not what we want to be dealing with when the D&D movie is coming out soon". I wouldn't bet on them as the leakers, though -- for that, I'd bet on traditional and digital publishing, because if he wins... guess who loses?
I'd say Cao doesn't think it will "destroy" the competition, because if it was going to do so there would be no reason to hamstring 3PP's and VTT's specifically in their documentation. Which is what the attempt to "deauthorize" the OGL 1.0a (which they cannot do, they can produce a new authorized version which would cover a new SRD, but that is another discussion) is really about, the insecurity of how "good" OneDND will be, and so by neutering other options and competition. In essense, if one want to only produce a pile of shit, just make sure it is the only shit people have access to so it is the best shit. Which is much different from being THE SHIT.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Wizards aren't confirmed liars. As has been explained numerous times, the Open Game License was a draft, which is proven by the fact that it wasn't finalized and Kickstarter was still negotiating terms for it.
He issued a clarification, so what? That doesn't change the fact that he got information wrong. And I listed several other things he also got wrong, but didn't bother to correct.
I believe Wizards of the Coast when they say what they are going to do. It doesn't exactly go well when a corporation as big as themselves is accused of lying to their fans. I mean, the whole thing about Open Game License 1.1 being a draft got loads of people angry, even though it was correct and wasn't a lie.
D&D Shorts on the other hand has repeatedly gotten things wrong. He has repeatedly spread false information. The first time I heard him talk about how the world was ending and how Wizards of the Coast wanted to be evil just to hurt us fans, I believed him. But then we learned that he was wrong. The next time we also learned that he was wrong. So please forgive me if I don't think he's right this time.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.He's an amateur at investigative reporting who appears to be over his head trying to disseminate information. That much seems genuine, and legitimate.
He's not a billion dollar corporation clearly trying to cover itself after it got caught engaged in sneaky anticompetitive shenanigans which they then lied about.
Reliability is relative, and I'm inclined to believe he may be what he appears to be - and that's "not malicious".
Being malicious and having untrustworthy or malicious sources are two very different. Personally, if someone repeatedly spreads inaccurate information (intentionally or not), I stop trusting them.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.Really? Because he’s been running hardline yellow journalism on this since he first started on it. Clickbait thumbnails, lots of “rawr, WotC is out to get you” pics and animations, generally presenting his “leaked” info as hard fact. If not malicious, it’s still grossly negligent/unprofessional reporting.
Assuming for a second they weren't being intentionally misleading by describing 1.1 as a draft (they were) and claiming it was submitted for review (it wasn't), they also lied directly and deliberately about the history and intent of the OGL.
It was clearly intended to last forever and allow for electronic products and video games - based on their own words, and FAQs hosted on their site for nearly two decades. You can't find it there now because they buried the evidence, clearly forgetting nothing is ever truly gone from the internet. It's found easily enough if you go looking for it.
Even without the FAQ, we have the word of the people who wrote 1.0a for Hasbro/Wizards.
The current management of Hasbro/WotC are liars.
I know this is probably going to come as a shock to you, but intentions can change. Yes, at the time they released 1.0a they intended for it to just be a simple, you’re good to produce 3PP content affirmation. And then D&D jumped way up in popularity/visibility and WotC had to take someone to court over attempting to use one of their properties as a platform for hate speech, and they realized the old intentions don’t fit the new situation. Thus they are moving to adapt, and as the current offer for licensing specifically prohibits meaningful amendments, that means they perforce must withdraw it if they’re going to change anything. Simply repeating “but they promised” ad nauseum doesn’t change the fact that the actual language of the agreement is not explicit on the point, and despite all the “the sky is falling” rhetoric and appeals to tradition, the new OGL is not going to meaningfully change the dynamic of 3PP works.
His latest video, which is what this thread is in response to, is pretty clear on what is being said by actual people in WotC. And all of them okayed the script from what he said. So I don’t think he’s unfairly risking anyone’s job, or bending the truth. Seems he said sorry for the thing about feedback not being read being a misunderstanding on his part, but everything else is just coming straight out of WotC with him acting as the mouthpiece.
Ultimately, WotC's motive is irrelevant.
What is actual in the OGL (or not in) is the important part. And it's not a good license.
I absolutely believe DnDshorts, WOTC's ridiculous repeated lies are getting tiresome, you keep digging a deeper hole and annihilating your reputation even further with every move.
Chris Cao and Cynthia Williams need to be fired, Wendy doesnt give a shit, and Chris is a delusional asshat who ran a failed MMO and wants to repeat the mistakes of 4th edition and make a garbage microtransaction riddled video game while suing the competition out of existence because he cant distinguish between tabletop gamers and video gamers.
Okay, I went ahead and found an org chart for Wizards of the Coast. I'm not willing to give the site money so I can't verify names, but it appears there are the following relevant branches
Chris Cao has been mentioned as a VP in Digital Gaming. He may well have a lot of schemes for monetization of the VTT, but he's simply not the one in charge of the things people claim he's going to destroy.
Kinda makes one wish that the outside investors had won their proxy fight to put some actual experienced game industry people on the board.
I send out a lot of contracts for people to sign. I would never put out a "draft" for someone to sign.
Looks like Treantmonk has sent out his own video on all this. Haven't finished watching it but it does seem like a more reasonably measured take.
Clearly Wizards is "lying" about the OGL. They obviously don't see it as this.
This video does kind of come off as a group of employees with an axe to grind. This doesn't mean it's any less true however. Having worked IT in several corporations I feel their frustration with the direction that Hasbro is taking and not being able to do anything.
Unfortunately turning higher profits every year is the life blood of corporations. While D&D was the small fish in the Hasbro pond, it was fairly safe. Alas, those heady days are no longer.
Below the top level, org charts are fairly useless. I've seen VPs from other groups totally control a whole org. In totally unrelated areas.
I am guessing and this total speculation on my experience with similar organizations, that Ray saw who was grasping for power and the direction of WotC and didn't like it. I am guessing he lost the power play. Which seems to be bad for my enjoyment of D&D.
Shorts clearly states that he only published this video because he promised the WotC employees he would and now he is done. Probably due to the Hasbro schills harassing him.
Okay, after digesting things, here's my guess about what's going on:
Chris Cao is in charge of the D&D VTT. He thinks it's going to be the best thing since sliced bread and will 'destroy' the competition, and is not afraid to express his opinion. He seems to have come in from an electronic gaming background, and probably brought management processes from electronic gaming studios (which are, frankly, pretty toxic) with him. There's a reasonable possibility that the WotC VTT will be Diablo Immortal level horrible monetization. His priorities in the new OGL were likely the restrictions on VTTs and video games. It is likely that he's the primary mover behind all this.
That doesn't mean he's actually in control and will produce a parade of horribles outside of the VTT space, though.
The licensing department seems to have caved pretty quickly on the topic of royalties, probably because they're looking at this whole situation and going "This is absolutely not what we want to be dealing with when the D&D movie is coming out soon". I wouldn't bet on them as the leakers, though -- for that, I'd bet on traditional and digital publishing, because if he wins... guess who loses?
How do you know whether or not Wizards of the Coast was being intentionally misleading? You can't read their minds, can you?
Also, Wizards of the Coast never said they submitted 1.1 for review. I searched through all their articles using Command F, and I couldn't find that anywhere. What they actually said was that they have the License to third-party publishers and let them look it over, see what they thought, and negotiate with Wizards. The Kickstarter Tweet confirms this, if you still don't believe them.
Also, Ace is right that intentions change over time. The world evolves and legal contracts change to match it, that's just how life works.
You seem to have a really strong opinion about how terrible Wizards of the Coast is. In reality though, they aren't nearly as bad as you're making them out to be. Wizards is a for-profit company, and like most corporations that run big name RPGs, they want money.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.I don't own any Hasbro stock and don't follow them. I do have a bit of experience with large public corporations and there is little doubt that they are for profit. Out of that whole statement you picked that to respond to?
I've watched the latest video and... it seems pretty reasonable, attempts to be fair and is peppered with a lot of caveats, and the written bit on the verification process seems about as robust as anyone could want (without naming names, which is unreasonable).
The 'checked by a lawyer' thing means that they are at minimum confident he is protected against a libel suit, which isn't nothing.
I'd say Cao doesn't think it will "destroy" the competition, because if it was going to do so there would be no reason to hamstring 3PP's and VTT's specifically in their documentation. Which is what the attempt to "deauthorize" the OGL 1.0a (which they cannot do, they can produce a new authorized version which would cover a new SRD, but that is another discussion) is really about, the insecurity of how "good" OneDND will be, and so by neutering other options and competition. In essense, if one want to only produce a pile of shit, just make sure it is the only shit people have access to so it is the best shit. Which is much different from being THE SHIT.