I understood 5e has been out since around 2014/15. What is the sudden change that has happened in 2023 that will open the doors to a slew of such content. I ask this as I understand a thing was going to change... and didn't change. So it's as it's always been right? So why would bad things suddenly start to happen if there's been no change?
I'm assuming I'm missing some piece of the puzzle that has suddenly changed things for the worst and hoping you (or anyone that knows) can enlighten me?
What changed was an extremely public SNAFU went out through international media about how Wizards of the Coast was trying to replace the OGL with a new one, with one of the main stated reasons for doing so being to close the opening that meant Wizards had no legal recourse to shut down or distance the game from hateful content. Effectively, it was loudly announced to the entire world that D&D has absolutely no protections against hate, exclusionism, and bigotry and the people who champion those "values" are welcome to come into our house and do whatever they like.
Anyone who thinks that's not going to have repercussions is out of their gourd.
You are very pessimistic. I think you should look at the community with a bit more confidence.
Are there racist, homophobic, sexist, etc... hicks in the D&D community? Of course. But I, without data, I would bet an arm that they are a minority.
In fact, how much material of that type has come out for 5e? The truth is that I do not dominate the market that much, but I would dare to say that not much. If something like that has come out. And much less that it has had a good commercial reception.
I understood 5e has been out since around 2014/15. What is the sudden change that has happened in 2023 that will open the doors to a slew of such content. I ask this as I understand a thing was going to change... and didn't change. So it's as it's always been right? So why would bad things suddenly start to happen if there's been no change?
I'm assuming I'm missing some piece of the puzzle that has suddenly changed things for the worst and hoping you (or anyone that knows) can enlighten me?
What changed was an extremely public SNAFU went out through international media about how Wizards of the Coast was trying to replace the OGL with a new one, with one of the main stated reasons for doing so being to close the opening that meant Wizards had no legal recourse to shut down or distance the game from hateful content. Effectively, it was loudly announced to the entire world that D&D has absolutely no protections against hate, exclusionism, and bigotry and the people who champion those "values" are welcome to come into our house and do whatever they like.
Anyone who thinks that's not going to have repercussions is out of their gourd.
You are very pessimistic. I think you should look at the community with a bit more confidence.
Are there racist, homophobic, sexist, etc... hicks in the D&D community? Of course. But I, without data, I would bet an arm that they are a minority.
In fact, how much material of that type has come out for 5e? The truth is that I do not dominate the market that much, but I would dare to say that not much. If something like that has come out. And much less that it has had a good commercial reception.
It would be easier to be optimistic if more of the active community was willing to actually talk about the issue and compromise rather than insisting WotC do nothing but uphold an archaic license.
This is no victory, this is just evidence that WotC doesn’t give a 💩 about 5e anymore and they’re already dumping everything into 1DD which will in no way be covered under OGL1.0a.
But that's up to them. I mean, the win is that they're not going to touch OGL 1.0a, which was what the community was asking for.
And they have also included the SRD 5.1 in CC, which can no longer be reversed.
What they do with One D&D is up to them. And we'll see how it turns out. 4e was put in GSL and it was a flop. We'll see what happens with One D&D. If One D&D is released under a license whose terms are acceptable to publishers who publish third-party content, we will see third-party content. If they're not acceptable, hardly anyone will put out third-party content for One D&D. And the consumer will decide if it is worth buying that edition, or if he prefers to stick with 5e.
It is a victory. And a greater victory than anyone expected, dare I say.
Don’t you understand that all those 3PPs will be out of work in two years unless 1DD/6e/whatever they call it has an OGL?!? This was a pyrrhic “victory.”
Ultimately, it comes down to this: If 6e is a superior product to 5e, or whatever other product you want to talk about, then you are correct, as the customer base abandons previous editions. But if 6e is inferior and/or paywalled by wotc, and that combination makes a significant portion of the customer base stick with older versions, well, then wotc has a big big problem. As others have stated, 4e all over again.
Judging the playtest materials, 6E will not be a superior product. It can be better - I like the playtest materials. At my table we are using some playtest materials as a houserule - like gaining inspiration on a natural 1 roll. But ultimately 6E doesn't seem a must have upgrade over 5E. As a GM I can live without it.
Don’t you understand that nobody will be spending money on 5e once the new edition comes out?!? Who cares that I’ll be able to release content for an edition that nobody buys anymore for all eternity?!? It’s the next edition I care about. 5e is dying, and nothing to do with it will matter soon.
I'm sure there were people who felt the same when 4e was announced. Fortunately, they were wrong. I suspect, considering what the owners seem to have in mind, we'll see something very similar this iteration.
This is no victory, this is just evidence that WotC doesn’t give a 💩 about 5e anymore and they’re already dumping everything into 1DD which will in no way be covered under OGL1.0a.
But that's up to them. I mean, the win is that they're not going to touch OGL 1.0a, which was what the community was asking for.
And they have also included the SRD 5.1 in CC, which can no longer be reversed.
What they do with One D&D is up to them. And we'll see how it turns out. 4e was put in GSL and it was a flop. We'll see what happens with One D&D. If One D&D is released under a license whose terms are acceptable to publishers who publish third-party content, we will see third-party content. If they're not acceptable, hardly anyone will put out third-party content for One D&D. And the consumer will decide if it is worth buying that edition, or if he prefers to stick with 5e.
It is a victory. And a greater victory than anyone expected, dare I say.
Don’t you understand that all those 3PPs will be out of work in two years unless 1DD/6e/whatever they call it has an OGL?!? This was a pyrrhic “victory.”
No, they can continue releasing material for 5e. SRD 5.1 is on CC, and that's forever. There is no going back. It cannot be cancelled.
If One D&D comes out under an abusive license, those companies will be able to just keep releasing their material for 5e. Something that already happened in 4e, and that led, among other reasons, to the creation of Pathfinder.
In any case, WoTC has no moral obligation to allow third-party content for One D&D. That is a business decision. If they don't want to do it, they are within their rights. And the consumer will decide whether to buy that edition or let it die like they did with 4e.
What they couldn't do was retire OGL 1.0a. They had no right to do that. And besides, it was very unethical. And they won't. And they have also included SRD 5.1 in CC, shielding third-party content for 5e. That's more than I expected, frankly. And a move that should begin to restore WoTC's lost credibility, IMO.
Don’t you understand that nobody will be spending money on 5e once the new edition comes out?!? Who cares that I’ll be able to release content for an edition that nobody buys anymore for all eternity?!? It’s the next edition I care about. 5e is dying, and nothing to do with it will matter soon.
We'll see. Maybe your predictions come true, or maybe not. I'm just telling you to look to the past, to what happened in the step from 3.5 to 4e
We have that precedent. And we don't know what that new license for One D&D will be like either. Perhaps WoTC has learned its lesson, and is not so abusive. Maybe it's a license people want to publish under. Or maybe not. We do not know.
What we know is what has happened. And what has happened is that the SRD 5.1 is in CC, and that the OGL 1.0a is not touched. That's a fact. There is no need to get bitter thinking about what could be or not be, because we still don't know.
You are very pessimistic. I think you should look at the community with a bit more confidence.
Are there racist, homophobic, sexist, etc... hicks in the D&D community? Of course. But I, without data, I would bet an arm that they are a minority.
In fact, how much material of that type has come out for 5e? The truth is that I do not dominate the market that much, but I would dare to say that not much. If something like that has come out. And much less that it has had a good commercial reception.
You haven't fought a hundred times against a thousand people in this very forum about brilliant ideas like "IT'S NOT RACIST IF IT'S FANTASY!" , "FANTASY RACES HAVE NO BEARING ON REALITY, THEY CAN'T POSSIBLY BE RACIST!", "EVERYBODY'S ALWAYS OFFENDED ANYWAYS SO WHO CARES IF WE OFFEND PEOPLE?!", or "YOU CAN'T CALL LORE RACIST BECAUSE IT'S LORE, IT'S TRADITION! IF SOMEBODY DOESN'T LIKE IT THEY CAN PLAY A DIFFERENT GAME!"
I will never trust this community to have the best interests of minority and marginalized people at heart. And you shouldn't, either.
This is no victory, this is just evidence that WotC doesn’t give a 💩 about 5e anymore and they’re already dumping everything into 1DD which will in no way be covered under OGL1.0a.
But that's up to them. I mean, the win is that they're not going to touch OGL 1.0a, which was what the community was asking for.
And they have also included the SRD 5.1 in CC, which can no longer be reversed.
What they do with One D&D is up to them. And we'll see how it turns out. 4e was put in GSL and it was a flop. We'll see what happens with One D&D. If One D&D is released under a license whose terms are acceptable to publishers who publish third-party content, we will see third-party content. If they're not acceptable, hardly anyone will put out third-party content for One D&D. And the consumer will decide if it is worth buying that edition, or if he prefers to stick with 5e.
It is a victory. And a greater victory than anyone expected, dare I say.
Don’t you understand that all those 3PPs will be out of work in two years unless 1DD/6e/whatever they call it has an OGL?!? This was a pyrrhic “victory.”
No, they can continue releasing material for 5e. SRD 5.1 is on CC, and that's forever. There is no going back. It cannot be cancelled.
If One D&D comes out under an abusive license, those companies will be able to just keep releasing their material for 5e. Something that already happened in 4e, and that led, among other reasons, to the creation of Pathfinder.
In any case, WoTC has no moral obligation to allow third-party content for One D&D. That is a business decision. If they don't want to do it, they are within their rights. And the consumer will decide whether to buy that edition or let it die like they did with 4e.
What they couldn't do was retire OGL 1.0a. They had no right to do that. And besides, it was very unethical. And they won't. And they have also included SRD 5.1 in CC, shielding third-party content for 5e. That's more than I expected, frankly. And a move that should begin to restore WoTC's lost credibility, IMO.
Don’t you understand that nobody will be spending money on 5e once the new edition comes out?!? Who cares that I’ll be able to release content for an edition that nobody buys anymore for all eternity?!? It’s the next edition I care about. 5e is dying, and nothing to do with it will matter soon.
We'll see. Maybe your predictions come true, or maybe not. I'm just telling you to look to the past, to what happened in the step from 3.5 to 4e
We have that precedent. And we don't know what that new license for One D&D will be like either. Perhaps WoTC has learned its lesson, and is not so abusive. Maybe it's a license people want to publish under. Or maybe not. We do not know.
What we know is what has happened. And what has happened is that the SRD 5.1 is in CC, and that the OGL 1.0a is not touched. That's a fact. There is no need to get bitter thinking about what could be or not be, because we still don't know.
I’m well aware of what happened, I lived through it. It was the reason I boycotted WotC for 10 years until 5e brought me back. I would rather not pin all my hopes on WotC effing up that badly againagain.
This is no victory, this is just evidence that WotC doesn’t give a 💩 about 5e anymore and they’re already dumping everything into 1DD which will in no way be covered under OGL1.0a.
But that's up to them. I mean, the win is that they're not going to touch OGL 1.0a, which was what the community was asking for.
And they have also included the SRD 5.1 in CC, which can no longer be reversed.
What they do with One D&D is up to them. And we'll see how it turns out. 4e was put in GSL and it was a flop. We'll see what happens with One D&D. If One D&D is released under a license whose terms are acceptable to publishers who publish third-party content, we will see third-party content. If they're not acceptable, hardly anyone will put out third-party content for One D&D. And the consumer will decide if it is worth buying that edition, or if he prefers to stick with 5e.
It is a victory. And a greater victory than anyone expected, dare I say.
Don’t you understand that all those 3PPs will be out of work in two years unless 1DD/6e/whatever they call it has an OGL?!? This was a pyrrhic “victory.”
No, they can continue releasing material for 5e. SRD 5.1 is on CC, and that's forever. There is no going back. It cannot be cancelled.
If One D&D comes out under an abusive license, those companies will be able to just keep releasing their material for 5e. Something that already happened in 4e, and that led, among other reasons, to the creation of Pathfinder.
In any case, WoTC has no moral obligation to allow third-party content for One D&D. That is a business decision. If they don't want to do it, they are within their rights. And the consumer will decide whether to buy that edition or let it die like they did with 4e.
What they couldn't do was retire OGL 1.0a. They had no right to do that. And besides, it was very unethical. And they won't. And they have also included SRD 5.1 in CC, shielding third-party content for 5e. That's more than I expected, frankly. And a move that should begin to restore WoTC's lost credibility, IMO.
Don’t you understand that nobody will be spending money on 5e once the new edition comes out?!? Who cares that I’ll be able to release content for an edition that nobody buys anymore for all eternity?!? It’s the next edition I care about. 5e is dying, and nothing to do with it will matter soon.
Yep, just like how 4th edition TOTALLY killed off 3.5...
I would expect that. And, from what I've seen so far, 1DnD may actually be as popular as DnD4E, so if they do... Eh? As far as VTTs are concerned, though, if they stick to their word and make OGL 1.0a truly irrevocable, then people will still be able to release VTTs under 1.0a.
Agree that WotC likely learned a LOT from this little exercise. I also expect we haven't yet seen the end of new proposed licenses. This is still a win if that's the case, because it will allow the company to work WITH the community, to develop a better license for 6E. The objective, obviously, is to have legal recourse clearly written against harmful stuff and they still have a LOT of time to draft it, to make sure it's good. I stand with WotC on the notion that they need some form of legal separation ability, or shut down ability on things that could hurt their image or reputation. I don't agree on them being the sole decider of what those things might be, but I support their want to be able to handle it legally, with a contracts or license to back them. That's going to be a tough license to write and get it right, balancing freedom with protection, but it CAN be done. If they're smart, they will GET it done for 6E release.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Talk to your Players.Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
What changed was an extremely public SNAFU went out through international media about how Wizards of the Coast was trying to replace the OGL with a new one, with one of the main stated reasons for doing so being to close the opening that meant Wizards had no legal recourse to shut down or distance the game from hateful content.
This is not exactly news to anyone who has actually paid attention to the hobby over the years. Their protection has always been that you can release stuff but you can't claim that Wizards has anything to do with it.
This is what I (and many others) were asking for. I will happily un-cancel my D&D Beyond subscription. If WotC tries this again down the road, as so many here seem to be worrying, I'll cancel again. Simple. As long as I like the product, I will buy it.
One really bright thing to come from this mess is the renewed interest in other systems, too. As long as this situation lasts, it really is the best of all worlds.
You are very pessimistic. I think you should look at the community with a bit more confidence.
Are there racist, homophobic, sexist, etc... hicks in the D&D community? Of course. But I, without data, I would bet an arm that they are a minority.
In fact, how much material of that type has come out for 5e? The truth is that I do not dominate the market that much, but I would dare to say that not much. If something like that has come out. And much less that it has had a good commercial reception.
You haven't fought a hundred times against a thousand people in this very forum about brilliant ideas like "IT'S NOT RACIST IF IT'S FANTASY!" , "FANTASY RACES HAVE NO BEARING ON REALITY, THEY CAN'T POSSIBLY BE RACIST!", "EVERYBODY'S ALWAYS OFFENDED ANYWAYS SO WHO CARES IF WE OFFEND PEOPLE?!", or "YOU CAN'T CALL LORE RACIST BECAUSE IT'S LORE, IT'S TRADITION! IF SOMEBODY DOESN'T LIKE IT THEY CAN PLAY A DIFFERENT GAME!"
I will never trust this community to have the best interests of minority and marginalized people at heart. And you shouldn't, either.
I have read you in those threads, believe me. And I have participated in some. And usually most people were on the inclusive side.
There is still a lot of work to be done, of course. There are people who have a hard time changing their way of seeing the world, and people who never will. One have to learn to live with it, and try to explain it to those who don't understand that the world is plural. Something you do often, by the way.
I remember a post of yours from a few months ago in which you explained the first time a friend explained to you why black live matters. And it was a sobering post to read. That seems to me a better path than doubting everyone. Explain to those who do not understand, and try to make them understand.
So I have an extremely dumb question about today's announcement. It says "You choose which you prefer to use."
I thought the original OGL and SRD were basically symbiotic/connected licenses and documents? That any third party creating 5E-compatible content and using the OGL was also agreeing to operate under the terms of the SRD?
But today's announcement makes it an either/or thing...so was it always? Is that new?
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin
Ben would 100 percent have been a bard main
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
So I have an extremely dumb question about today's announcement. It says "You choose which you prefer to use."
I thought the original OGL and SRD were basically symbiotic/connected licenses and documents? That any third party creating 5E-compatible content and using the OGL was also agreeing to operate under the terms of the SRD?
But today's announcement makes it an either/or thing...so was it always? Is that new?
The OGL is the licensing agreement. The SRD is the resource document - the game material - provided under it.
I'm 99% sure what they're saying is, you can choose to access and create content with the SRD under your choice of 1.0a or creative commons.
I have read you in those threads, believe me. And I have participated in some. And usually most people were on the inclusive side.
The problem isn't that most third-party works will be hateful. The problem is that even a very small percentage of bigoted people can still be a lot of people, and they shouldn't have Open Game License 1.0 protect them as they harm an even larger community of D&D players.
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.
So I have an extremely dumb question about today's announcement. It says "You choose which you prefer to use."
I thought the original OGL and SRD were basically symbiotic/connected licenses and documents? That any third party creating 5E-compatible content and using the OGL was also agreeing to operate under the terms of the SRD?
But today's announcement makes it an either/or thing...so was it always? Is that new?
Both the OGL and the Creative Commons license have terms any prospective user must abide by in order to not violate the license and invite legal trouble. Those terms are different between OGL and CC, especially since CC is an actual, professionally written legal document as opposed to OGL 1.0a. A company can decide which set of terms they wish to operate under by deciding which license to utilize the SRD under - OGL or Creative Commons.
I have read you in those threads, believe me. And I have participated in some. And usually most people were on the inclusive side.
The problem isn't that most third-party works will be hateful. The problem is that even a very small percentage of bigoted people can still be a lot of people, and they shouldn't have Open Game License 1.0 protect them as they harm an even larger community of D&D players.
Well yes, that is certainly a problem.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
You are very pessimistic. I think you should look at the community with a bit more confidence.
Are there racist, homophobic, sexist, etc... hicks in the D&D community? Of course. But I, without data, I would bet an arm that they are a minority.
In fact, how much material of that type has come out for 5e? The truth is that I do not dominate the market that much, but I would dare to say that not much. If something like that has come out. And much less that it has had a good commercial reception.
It would be easier to be optimistic if more of the active community was willing to actually talk about the issue and compromise rather than insisting WotC do nothing but uphold an archaic license.
Judging the playtest materials, 6E will not be a superior product. It can be better - I like the playtest materials. At my table we are using some playtest materials as a houserule - like gaining inspiration on a natural 1 roll. But ultimately 6E doesn't seem a must have upgrade over 5E. As a GM I can live without it.
I'm sure there were people who felt the same when 4e was announced. Fortunately, they were wrong. I suspect, considering what the owners seem to have in mind, we'll see something very similar this iteration.
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
We'll see. Maybe your predictions come true, or maybe not. I'm just telling you to look to the past, to what happened in the step from 3.5 to 4e
We have that precedent. And we don't know what that new license for One D&D will be like either. Perhaps WoTC has learned its lesson, and is not so abusive. Maybe it's a license people want to publish under. Or maybe not. We do not know.
What we know is what has happened. And what has happened is that the SRD 5.1 is in CC, and that the OGL 1.0a is not touched. That's a fact. There is no need to get bitter thinking about what could be or not be, because we still don't know.
You haven't fought a hundred times against a thousand people in this very forum about brilliant ideas like "IT'S NOT RACIST IF IT'S FANTASY!" , "FANTASY RACES HAVE NO BEARING ON REALITY, THEY CAN'T POSSIBLY BE RACIST!", "EVERYBODY'S ALWAYS OFFENDED ANYWAYS SO WHO CARES IF WE OFFEND PEOPLE?!", or "YOU CAN'T CALL LORE RACIST BECAUSE IT'S LORE, IT'S TRADITION! IF SOMEBODY DOESN'T LIKE IT THEY CAN PLAY A DIFFERENT GAME!"
I will never trust this community to have the best interests of minority and marginalized people at heart. And you shouldn't, either.
Please do not contact or message me.
I’m well aware of what happened, I lived through it. It was the reason I boycotted WotC for 10 years until 5e brought me back. I would rather not pin all my hopes on WotC effing up that badly againagain.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Yep, just like how 4th edition TOTALLY killed off 3.5...
Oh wait...
I would expect that. And, from what I've seen so far, 1DnD may actually be as popular as DnD4E, so if they do... Eh? As far as VTTs are concerned, though, if they stick to their word and make OGL 1.0a truly irrevocable, then people will still be able to release VTTs under 1.0a.
Agree that WotC likely learned a LOT from this little exercise. I also expect we haven't yet seen the end of new proposed licenses. This is still a win if that's the case, because it will allow the company to work WITH the community, to develop a better license for 6E. The objective, obviously, is to have legal recourse clearly written against harmful stuff and they still have a LOT of time to draft it, to make sure it's good. I stand with WotC on the notion that they need some form of legal separation ability, or shut down ability on things that could hurt their image or reputation. I don't agree on them being the sole decider of what those things might be, but I support their want to be able to handle it legally, with a contracts or license to back them. That's going to be a tough license to write and get it right, balancing freedom with protection, but it CAN be done. If they're smart, they will GET it done for 6E release.
Talk to your Players. Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
This is not exactly news to anyone who has actually paid attention to the hobby over the years. Their protection has always been that you can release stuff but you can't claim that Wizards has anything to do with it.
This is what I (and many others) were asking for. I will happily un-cancel my D&D Beyond subscription. If WotC tries this again down the road, as so many here seem to be worrying, I'll cancel again. Simple. As long as I like the product, I will buy it.
One really bright thing to come from this mess is the renewed interest in other systems, too. As long as this situation lasts, it really is the best of all worlds.
I have read you in those threads, believe me. And I have participated in some. And usually most people were on the inclusive side.
There is still a lot of work to be done, of course. There are people who have a hard time changing their way of seeing the world, and people who never will. One have to learn to live with it, and try to explain it to those who don't understand that the world is plural. Something you do often, by the way.
I remember a post of yours from a few months ago in which you explained the first time a friend explained to you why black live matters. And it was a sobering post to read. That seems to me a better path than doubting everyone. Explain to those who do not understand, and try to make them understand.
So I have an extremely dumb question about today's announcement. It says "You choose which you prefer to use."
I thought the original OGL and SRD were basically symbiotic/connected licenses and documents? That any third party creating 5E-compatible content and using the OGL was also agreeing to operate under the terms of the SRD?
But today's announcement makes it an either/or thing...so was it always? Is that new?
Ben would 100 percent have been a bard main
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
The OGL is the licensing agreement. The SRD is the resource document - the game material - provided under it.
I'm 99% sure what they're saying is, you can choose to access and create content with the SRD under your choice of 1.0a or creative commons.
The problem isn't that most third-party works will be hateful. The problem is that even a very small percentage of bigoted people can still be a lot of people, and they shouldn't have Open Game License 1.0 protect them as they harm an even larger community of D&D players.
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.Both the OGL and the Creative Commons license have terms any prospective user must abide by in order to not violate the license and invite legal trouble. Those terms are different between OGL and CC, especially since CC is an actual, professionally written legal document as opposed to OGL 1.0a. A company can decide which set of terms they wish to operate under by deciding which license to utilize the SRD under - OGL or Creative Commons.
Please do not contact or message me.
I don't know, Artificer with proficiency in persuasion makes a strong case.
Well yes, that is certainly a problem.