D&D 5E So this is how D&D 5e dies, a beautiful start only to die in disgrace because of mismanagement. RIP 5e

[MonsterEnvy]

It's not dying.

 

[Charlaquin]

I mean, to be fair, if WotC put out something like 4E again they would lose my business. Same of they drop physical books and go all digital. Or it turns out that WotC is an elaborate front for sexual abuse. There are limits. The OGL just...isn't a limit for me.

That’s wild to me that “something like 4e” is a harder limit to you than the OGL. Like, ok, you don’t like 4e, fine, lots of people don’t. But making a game you don’t like very much is a bigger deal to you than killing many small publisher’s livelihoods? The OGL was what made the alternative to 4e possible. I would think if nothing else you would at least want the OGL around in case they took the game in a similar direction again.

 

[MGibster]

That’s wild to me that “something like 4e” is a harder limit to you than the OGL. Like, ok, you don’t like 4e, fine, lots of people don’t. But making a game you don’t like very much is a bigger deal to you than killing many small publisher’s livelihoods? The OGL was what made the alternative to 4e possible. I would think if nothing else you would at least want the OGL around in case they took the game in a similar direction again.

It's wild to me that something like the OGL has people more upset than WotC's announcement to their shareholders that D&D was under monetized and their intentions to create a "recurrent spending environment" using very similar language to what video companies have been using these last few years. To my ears, that sounded an awful lot like, "we intend to treat our customers like the garbage they are," but most people here seemed to take it in stride saying I was overreacting. But, there you go, we all have our limits and care about different things.

 

[Zardnaar]

It's wild to me that something like the OGL has people more upset than WotC's announcement to their shareholders that D&D was under monetized and their intentions to create a "recurrent spending environment" using very similar language to what video companies have been using these last few years. To my ears, that sounded an awful lot like, "we intend to treat our customers like the garbage they are," but most people here seemed to take it in stride saying I was overreacting. But, there you go, we all have our limits and care about different things.

Altogether now "we told you so".

 

[masdog]

Unwanted attention from whom? They're asserting their right to their IP. Nothing illegal in that. Pushing out competitors is also perfectly legal.

Except they've released that IP into the wild with a copyleft license attached. It's hard to pull that back just because they want to change their business model. Their attempt to do so, based on what we've seen so far, are very anti-competitive.

Even if they can revoke the current OGL and force people to stop using it, it could be perceived as anti-competitive and attract the attention of various governmental competition authorities. Taking anti-competitive actions that competitors out of the market is not legal if it results in you having a monopoly position.

Walled-garden approaches are also coming under fire right now. Just ask Apple and Google...

There would be a period of adjustment. But look at at the move of video games from arcades to PCs to gaming platforms. The transition of movies to storage systems to steaming systems.

And RPGs from dead tree to pdfs to...

Change is inevitable. Full service and independant gas stations, gaming arcades, movie theaters, movie rental businesses: with change comes the elimination or drastic reduction of certain business models. Look at the FLGS: definitely on the decline.

I think you're missing my point here. My point wasn't that change is bad. It isn't, and this change was going to happen regardless.

My point is that, for WotC, this change is a huge risk to their business. And they're making missteps early in the transition process.

I also don't think movies are a good example here. Technology changes have expanded the movie industry. VCRs didn't get rid of theaters. In the US, we have more theaters with more screens. Video rental stores went away, but they weren't completely supplanted by streaming services. Video Rental Kiosks like Redbox are still a thing, and many public libraries have larger video collections than Blockbuster.

Hardly. THe value is both tremendous and obvious. On-line gaming is booming, and the tech infrastructure is maturing. I had an all-European group for a year, and with only average Net service we has absolutely no tech issues.

Can you articulate how the platform's value is tremendous and obvious? Why should I give WotC money for this instead of Foundry, Roll20, or Fantasy Grounds?

It isn't an attack, it is evolution. And evolution in business works exactly as Darwin envisioned.

I believe we are seeing the end of what will be seen as a golden era of small-time publishers.

Evolution would be putting out a superior product. How is removing the OGL enabling a superior product? How is D&D Beyond a superior product?

 

[Charlaquin]

It's wild to me that something like the OGL has people more upset than WotC's announcement to their shareholders that D&D was under monetized and their intentions to create a "recurrent spending environment" using very similar language to what video companies have been using these last few years. To my ears, that sounded an awful lot like, "we intend to treat our customers like the garbage they are," but most people here seemed to take it in stride saying I was overreacting. But, there you go, we all have our limits and care about different things.

I mean, I definitely found that statement alarming too. But I’d say the OGL thing is just (part of) them acting on that statement, so it doesn’t surprise me at all that people would be more upset by the action than by the words.

 

[Parmandur]

That’s wild to me that “something like 4e” is a harder limit to you than the OGL. Like, ok, you don’t like 4e, fine, lots of people don’t. But making a game you don’t like very much is a bigger deal to you than killing many small publisher’s livelihoods? The OGL was what made the alternative to 4e possible. I would think if nothing else you would at least want the OGL around in case they took the game in a similar direction again.

Making products thst I do not want to buy is a hard line for buying products, yes. The OGL is just business...and it ain't my business.

 

[Charlaquin]

Making products thst I do not want to buy is a hard line for buying products, yes. The OGL is just business...and it ain't my business.

It’s your business if it affects your experience of the hobby, which it almost certainly will, even if D&D is the only RPG you play, unless you also never use 3rd party content. And, I mean, if it’s not a hard line for you, ok I guess. Just weird to me that a product you don’t much care for is a harder line for you than a decision that will have massive repercussions throughout the entire industry.

 

[Aldarc]

I mean, I definitely found that statement alarming too. But I’d say the OGL thing is just (part of) them acting on that statement, so it doesn’t surprise me at all that people would be more upset by the action than by the words.

I suspect that WotC has only scratched the surface of their plans. WotC expected some backlash from OGL 1.1 but this feels like we are still in the opening phase of their monetization strategy.

Making products thst I do not want to buy is a hard line for buying products, yes. The OGL is just business...and it ain't my business.

But it is the business for 3pp who make products that you would potentially buy.

 

[Parmandur]

It’s your business if it affects your experience of the hobby, which it almost certainly will, even if D&D is the only RPG you play, unless you also never use 3rd party content. And, I mean, if it’s not a hard line for you, ok I guess. Just weird to me that a product you don’t much care for is a harder line for you than a decision that will have massive repercussions throughout the entire industry.

If I don't care for a product, I won't buy it. I'm not sure how hard that is to understand...? The OGL thing did bother me enough to sign a couple Change.org petitions, but I'm not a paid Beyond subscriber, and it isn't enough to dissuade me from buying a product I do want in the future.

Want product, buy product. Don't want product, don't buy product. Simple as that.