OGL 1.1/2.0 may doom ONE in the same way GSL doomed 4E

[ECMO3]

To be clear 4E had a lot of problems besides the lack of OGL, but if 4E was published under OGL I am not sure the creator community would have continued to support 3E and Pathfinder to the degree they did. It is my opinion that this support and the alternative it offered to gamers are one major contributing factor for 4E's collapse.

Foundry is now saying the 1.0a license is irrevocable, along with Dancy who was the chief architect of it and a Wizards FAQs dug up from 20 years ago essentially saying the same thing.

Foundry has also stated they will continue to support 5E content under OGL 1.0a. So there will be an avenue to play 5E unless WOTC wants to go to court and shut them down; a move that would likely fail in court in addition to generating severe backlash above and beyond what we have seen already. If foundry is there it is a safe bet the other VTTs will follow and small creators will continue to publish 5E-compatible material.

With a way to continue playing 5E, and a large part of the 5E community unable to transition to ONE because of the new OGL, I think it is likely that ONE will fail.

 

[Lojaan]

Yup. Especially if it is gated behind WotC's own VTT and has no 3PP support.

 

[Zardnaar]

Not by itself except WotC screwed up.

If the left OGL alone, kept 6E on the track it is going you wouldn't have the push effect as well.

 

[Branduil]

I think it doesn't help One's case that it really seems to be a half-edition at best. There's unlikely to be a hugely compelling reason for people to move on. Again, as divisive as 4e was, it was a unique game, and you couldn't go elsewhere for a game like it.

 

[Jadeite]

I think it doesn't help One's case that it really seems to be a half-edition at best. There's unlikely to be a hugely compelling reason for people to move on. Again, as divisive as 4e was, it was a unique game, and you couldn't go elsewhere for a game like it.

That's why we have reason to believe that they want to kill of the SRD based games.

 

[delericho]

Not by itself. But it has been such a PR omnishambles that I now wouldn't be entirety shocked.

Sometimes bubbles deflate; sometimes they pop. Foolish of WotC to start playing with needles.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

I am concerned. But if the OGL 2.0 is reasonable, I think a few companies that under OGL 1.1 will not turn their back.

Right now it is a muscle play between WotC and the 3PP.
I think, if they start a war, everyone could lose. So maybe both sides show goodwill and find an agreement and then everyone is concerned about getting the community back on board.

4e had other problems than the GSL: a rushed out and unpolished system that changed the core of D&D. A great game, but not what about half the people wanted of D&D. It split the community in half. The GSL for some was a factor, for most it was not.
The only factor was that it was an incentive for 3PP to produce what many people considered true d&d. Now, if the 3pp don't support the current edition, the sides are flipped. Now wotc has d&d as it used to be and the 3pp needs to come up with an alternate system.

 

[Retreater]

I'm excited for 3PPs to hopefully get a bigger piece of the pie now that more focus is on them.
I hope this ends up showing that many in the community are gaming fans (not just 'brand' fans as WotC thinks.)
I think this is ultimately a pivotal moment in the industry, probably as significant as when WotC first bought TSR. I see it as a way of gamers saving the industry from suits who don't play games are mismanaging the business.

 

[ECMO3]

The only factor was that it was an incentive for 3PP to produce what many people considered true d&d. Now, if the 3pp don't support the current edition, the sides are flipped. Now wotc has d&d as it used to be and the 3pp needs to come up with an alternate system.

I would agree, but we already have Foundry saying they will continue to support 5E under 1.0a. I think we lose some creators, maybe a lot them, but not all of them.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

One thing I've noticed from sites where this is discussed is that, on sites where it's all people who actually play D&D, people are mad as hell, and WotC's statement hasn't calmed them down. Whereas on sites where people don't play D&D, don't even know what the OGL is and so on, there's a lot of "SEEMS FAIR TO ME!!" because they have literally no idea what they're talking about (that's not the same as someone who does have an idea and holds that opinion - that person may have silly views imo but at least knows the facts, to be clear to anyone seeking offence). It's also notable that on most articles you get some "seems fair to me" ignoramuses first (who again literally have no idea what an OGL is, let alone OGC or the like), then gradually they get completely overwhelmed by people who do understand the situation and disagree.

Anyway what this tells me is that the message they put out works for videogame players who don't play D&D, but doesn't work for actual D&D players lol. So yeah.