Why We Should Work With WotC

[Arakhor]

“When someone shows you who they are believe them the first time.” (Maya Angelou)

WotC won't put in safeguards to ensure it won't happen again, because they already don't want to be bound by safeguards. The outright lies of the last week should have shown you that, if nothing else.

 

[Aspirinsmurf]

The better D&D does the better 3rd Party Publishers do. 5e 3PP have been the #2 and #3 best selling RPG products a few times now, outselling Pathfinder. Those companies are doing very, very well. And if we want them to continue to do well, the new OGL needs to be good. We need to provide excellent feedback and find the pinch points and problem areas. We need to forgive WotC for messing up, so long as they learn their lesson and establish safeguards in the new OGL so they don't do so again.
If we're not willing to work with WotC, then this time we're the ones harming open gaming...

You appear to believe that their deceptive tactics to try to kill the old OGL are somehow lawful and sound. Why is that?

 

[Argyle King]

WoTC released 4E without using the OGL.

So, why not just release an actual 6E and have that (and everything going forward) be part of the new license?

 

[FormerLurker]

You appear to believe that their deceptive tactics to try to kill the old OGL are somehow lawful and sound. Why is that?

There's a difference between "believing" and "accepting."
They're going to do it. They're not going to change their mind. They're willing to give the fans the benefit of the doubt and listen to some feedback, but don't believe for a second that this is going to end in any way other than the OGL 1.0a going away and the new OGL replacing it. They're hoping they can convince the majority of holdouts that the new license can be made to work.... but if they can't then the people complaining are a replaceable number of gamers. And by taking feedback and holding up the changes, they can spin the survey & its numbers to sell this as a success.

So we can either struggle endlessly against an unwinnable battle, wasting our time and effort on a hopeless fight.
Or we can work with them and make the final product better, winning the war.

Because what's the actual goal? It's not "preserve the 1.0a" Not really. It's protect 3rd Party Publishers, small publishers, and Open Gaming. And if we work at it, we can achieve that goal with WotC and the new license, ensuring the next generation of 3PP and small gaming studios has a chance.

 

[MarkB]

WoTC released 4E without using the OGL.

So, why not just release an actual 6E and have that (and everything going forward) be part of the new license?

Because 5e is still extremely popular and they don't want to try and build a completely new 6e that won't be compatible with it.

And so long as what they're building is compatible with 5e, it's also compatible with all the 3PP 5e products.

 

[MoonSong]

If 1.0a goes away, I cannot write Level Up! content because I'm no longer covered under the OGL 1.0a's sublicensing. At least not without risking lawsuits from both WotC and EN Publishing (though I know the latter wouldn't start anything)

Though - hear me out- it wouldn't be so bad if EN publishing got to sue you under the premise that the OGL is gone. That way you would get to defend yourself under the argument that the OGL is irrevocable and since this isn't so different from sueing your family so the insurance pays, discovery would go super fast and then you getba summary judgement . Then you get an affirmation that the OGL is irrevocable after all for way cheaper than fighting Hasbro lawyers. The community would pay your costs and even if things go sour, and we get a definitive precedent that the OGL wasn't irrevocable, you can always settle with EnPublishing for a dollar.

 

[Aspirinsmurf]

Though - hear me out- it wouldn't be so bad if EN publishing got to sue you under the premise that the OGL is gone. That way you would get to defend yourself under the argument that the OGL is irrevocable and since this isn't so different from sueing your family so the insurance pays, discovery would go super fast and then you getba summary judgement . Then you get an affirmation that the OGL is irrevocable after all for way cheaper than fighting Hasbro lawyers. The community would pay your costs and even if things go sour, and we get a definitive precedent that the OGL wasn't irrevocable, you can always settle with EnPublishing for a dollar.

That's a brilliant plan. If EnPublishing can't retract their contribution from the OGC commons "post-deauthorization", neither can WotC. There would be precedent against it.

 

[Argyle King]

Because 5e is still extremely popular and they don't want to try and build a completely new 6e that won't be compatible with it.

And so long as what they're building is compatible with 5e, it's also compatible with all the 3PP 5e products.

At this point, "compatible" is a somewhat vague term. There are already changes in how a character is created. I imagine those changes will eventually be accompanied by advice on how to "update" to being compatible with 5.1 Adventurer’s League.

Is that wholly different than providing a pdf or something digital which walks through the process of updating a game element to being compatible with a 6E game?

With a good PR team and a better approach to engaging the customer base, presenting a 6E as a better path forward ("with better rules and better digital tools to play 'Advanced' Dungeons and Dragons anytime and anywhere with the growing worldwide community, we're helping you take your game Beyond...") it might even be welcomed.

On top of that, if there is corporate pressure to better monetize the game, it might be more cost efficient to leave the OGL behind by just not using it with a new ("improved") version of the game.

 

[Minigiant]

WotC believed (wrongly, as it turned out) that writing adventures were fundamentally unprofitable.

But it isn't unprofitable unless you shift your whole business strategy to adventure like Paizo did with PF 1e/2e. And Paizo did so be giving out their core rules for free.

What 5e and PF 2e proves is that the main RPG holder can only be profitable with adventures or core books, not both. No one has done both and stayed big yet.

 

[Aspirinsmurf]

Because what's the actual goal? It's not "preserve the 1.0a" Not really. It's protect 3rd Party Publishers, small publishers, and Open Gaming. And if we work at it, we can achieve that goal with WotC and the new license, ensuring the next generation of 3PP and small gaming studios has a chance.

I disagree. This isn't my goal at all. But here's the difference between our positions. My position is fairly and equitably in solidarity with yours, whatever your interests are going forward. By that I mean we would both achieve what we wanted if OGL 1.0a was the line in the sand. Your position, however, is letting the adversary frame the discussion and invites attempts to divide and conquer. And you fail to even mention VTTs or video games, for example.