D&D 5E Will you continue to give WotC D&D your $$$

[Nebulous]

I haven't been a real customer of WotC in a long time. I didn't even buy Tasha's or Xanathar. I don't use or subscribe to DnDB (although the character builder is excellent) and the last adventure I bought was CoS for Roll20 three years ago. If they come out with a particularly amazing sourcebook in 2023 I MIGHT think about it, but that's a big if. I play exclusively on Roll20 now, so really all I want are good premade maps with dynamic lighting and the PDF of an adventure to reference. I have a garage full of old DnD stuff I don't use and don't have anywhere to put it, and I don't want to add to the pile.

 

[moriantumr]

This makes me think I should look at Free League's books (I see they have a bundle on Humble right now), are they particularly well-presented in terms of explaining rules, setting, etc.?

I love Vaesen and Tales from the Loop. I have not picked up anything else because the other offerings would not get played by my group. I would buy every game they offer if I had the budget to do so. Their rules for each game are designed to support the setting and fiction.

 

[BigZebra]

No.

I think it's time for someone else to lead our hobby.

Definitely not Paizo. They are really really great adventure writers. That’s it. But have they really ever made something unique? No. And that’s fine. They are really good at what they do.
Free League is were its at.

 

[Oofta]

Dude, lawyers have looked at that section. Even the lawyers who did a hit piece of on Linda Codega agreed that that section you're describe was so legally messed up that in their legal opinion, no-one should ever have signed the OGL 1.1. The wording was not normal or okay, even if we believe the intention was fine.

So you coming here and saying "OH TINFOIL HATS THE LOT OF YOU!!!" is just silly at this point.

WotC themselves completely walked it back.

Also note that WotC couldn't copy things under the OGL 1.0a in the same way at all, even if they weren't marked PI. Why you ask? Because the PI clause bit only matters where something that might be considered OGC is also PI. WotC could only ever have copied stuff that was OGC and not PI. Which was never a significant amount of the 3PPs, it's just the mechanics, in general.

Maaaan, come on.

Please, I'm begging you, keep up to date if you're going to post about this! Weren't you the guy who didn't even know they'd dropped the royalties until yesterday?

Guess what the other thing they dropped at the same time as? That ENTIRE CLAUSE that you're saying is "fine". The dropped it. They promised it won't come back! We already beat them on that! If does come back, the firestorm will reignite on it because they specifically said it wouldn't!

Your post is from minutes ago. WotC dropped that stuff 2 days ago.

100% agree.

But why did they ever include it? It was perverse and insulting. But they did include it, and indeed in the OGL 2.0, they only dropped it to 20% (for everyone, not just KS), before finally dropping it entirely in the Friday letter. The fact they're doing actively dumb stuff like that is why people are so upset with them.

This is absolutely this:


The only reason it "barely registers" is because they screwed it up so bad, and the likely end result is just that people will publish stuff that say "For the world's most popular RPG", or "For 5E" or even (according Legal Eagle, this is probably fine - note consult a lawyer before doing though) "Compatible with Dungeons & Dragons", entirely without the OGL (probably with ORC or the like, but they don't even NEED that).

You can't say you're not evil because you got caught before you could murder the wealthy heiress, nor because your gun jammed, or your knife turned out to have been swapped with a fake knife.

And no, it won't "have no effect on anyone". The biggest impact will be that anyone who was publishing under OGL 1.0a, and using OGC, will have to basically go back and re-licence all their books, if they even can, and risks WotC coming after them in court because the legal safe harbour provided is gone.

Now you can say "Hahaha WotC aren't that dumb", but did you just see what happened? WotC are now 150% that dumb.

That was quite the screed that ignored (and conveniently didn't quote) my second sentence where I state that the OGL 1.0a is likely not [edit ] enforceable revocable [/edit] I'm talking about the proposed OGL 2.0 as it stands now. I think it would have little or no impact. The silly hyperbole theories have been things like "The only reason to publish a new edition is to force the sale of DndBeyond because they were too successful!" Tell me how buying DDB for $146 million is "forcing" anyone to sell? How an updated version to the game that's been out for a decade, that could use some updates, that corresponds with a 50th anniversary wasn't going to happen anyway?

This whole thing was a monumentally stupid and completely avoidable mistake. It was, and still is, a mistake most likely pushed by some clueless HASBRO exec. If the OGL 2.0 is actually made official and if the OGL 1.0a can even be revoked, I see no reason to jump to conclusions that WOTC will use it in extreme and nefarious ways.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Not a penny to WotC or their "brand" until OGL1.0(a) is publicly acknowledged as irrevocable (or the equivalent).

I've got enough D&D products on my shelf for several lifetimes of game play.

 

[Velderan]

Poll should probably have some different options..

Until the suits are gone? What does that even mean? They fire all the people currently in charge and bring in gamers to run things? That's unnecessary to me, I was actually interested in seeing where they were going with DDB's potential until the OGL fiasco. I figured they were intending to just build the proverbial better mousetrap and attract customers with a different product (3D VTT). That can only be good because it makes 3pp innovate and the consumer wins.

What I'm still hoping for is the people in charge to really listen and realize you can still have a ridiculously lucrative business model without all the changes they were trying to make to how 3pp operate. I would love to see them open the door on allowing 3pp development on DDB.

My cancelled DDB sub expires in October and I'll likely still use the service to run my campaign until I figure out different ways of achieving the functions I currently use. I won't be buying any books or licensed minis in the meantime. They still have time to keep my business, though admittedly I feel like that chance gets smaller as time passes and each time they release a statement where they lie and make vague promises that don't actually alleviate the concerns being expressed. We'll see.

 

[BigZebra]

What a nice a level headed response. Pretty much agree.

 

[aco175]

I, like several already said, do not buy much from them at the moment. I was looking forward to the Phandalin book coming out as a possible next campaign, but hope is is not just a book form of the original box set. I was looking at the Saltmarsh book, but have the new Stormwreck box that I plan on running and that is a year campaign since I will add several things and stretch it to level 10 or something. This will likely bring us to the new core books which I hope also brings all of this to conclusion in one form of another.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

I have a fairly mercenary view of these things. In that most of the parties involved are commercial entities trying to make a buck of me. I will buy what I think gives me value.

 

[jgsugden]

There is a lot of knee jerk reaction going on here.

If you 'kill D&D' you are putting a lot of people out of work within WotC, in the supporting community, etc... We need to take more time to think about the ramifications of our actions, and to consider options.

For me - I am not buying anything else additional at this time - and I am waiting to see what happens in the next 6 to 12 months. That is the full extent of my planning.