Crow Eating thread

[doctorbadwolf]

I feel like I did my part (along with tens of thousands of other gamers) to encourage them to do the right thing. I don't feel embarrassed about that at all.

I mean...okay. I think this happened in spite of the cynicism, not in any way because of it, but at least everyone being loudly against what they were trying to do helped, so sure.

My guess is that they will make a new, more restrictive, license entirely separate from OGL for OneDnD/5.5/6e/whatevertheycallit. Similar to what they tried with 4e.

goes back to eating my crow doused in apple vinegar

I think this is the least likely of all possible future, tbh. Like yeah in theory it could happen, but...nah.

They backed down on everything! They’re leaving OGL 1.0a completely alone, released the full 5.1 SRD under Creative Commons, and closed the 1.2 survey. Technically they could still release 1D&D under a new license, but it would be a pretty tone-deaf move, and moreover, unless it’s truly incompatible with 5e, it should be easy to clone using the CC license.

Yep. They've made it actively harder to get away with pulling a 4e like some folks think is inevitable. Making OneDnD less compatible with 5e than they originally planned would just lead to:
1) tons of people yelling that they knew wizards was just going to try to do the same thing again, etc,

2) it would do more damage to 3pp, which the community has soundly rejected

3) It would make Tasha's, Xanathar's, and the setting books totally useless for any group that switches, which they very strongly don't want. Remember, unlike every other edition of dnd, those books are still selling well.

The math simply isn't the same as previous editions, in this case, and the math is much harder against "4e GSL redux" than it has been in the last 8 years.

I will gladly bet one person $50 right now, that you will be able to use Tasha's subclasses with OneDND classes without any house rules or homebrew needed, and the license will be similar to the OGL 1.2 proposal minus deauthorization at worst.

 

[wingsandsword]

I thought they would back down, but I didn't expect this. Of course, now I'm greedy for more - bring on the 3.0 & 3.5 SRD to CC!

3.0, 3.5 AND Modern to CC!

There's a lot in the d20 Modern SRD that's still useful too.

. . .and I'd say release the OGC that was released in the 3e Unearthed Arcana too, but they never made a specific SRD of it, just an announcement that the game rules in there were OGC, so I could see them not going to the trouble of preparing a SRD for it just to release it.

 

[Richards]

I have to say, my former Skylanders D&D character, Sam Crow, is very nervous about this particular thread....

Johnathan

 

[DragonBelow]

Tastes like chicken

 

[Charlaquin]

Yep. They've made it actively harder to get away with pulling a 4e like some folks think is inevitable. Making OneDnD less compatible with 5e than they originally planned would just lead to:
1) tons of people yelling that they knew wizards was just going to try to do the same thing again, etc,

2) it would do more damage to 3pp, which the community has soundly rejected

3) It would make Tasha's, Xanathar's, and the setting books totally useless for any group that switches, which they very strongly don't want. Remember, unlike every other edition of dnd, those books are still selling well.

The math simply isn't the same as previous editions, in this case, and the math is much harder against "4e GSL redux" than it has been in the last 8 years.

I will gladly bet one person $50 right now, that you will be able to use Tasha's subclasses with OneDND classes without any house rules or homebrew needed, and the license will be similar to the OGL 1.2 proposal minus deauthorization at worst.

Yeah, I’ll be very surprised if they turn around and make 1D&D incompatible with 5e. There are a lot of reasons that would be a terrible move right now. I guess WotC has a bit prone to making terrible moves lately, but I strongly suspect that’s been mostly on the part of the corporate folks, not the design folks.

 

[Reynard]

Yeah, I’ll be very surprised if they turn around and make 1D&D incompatible with 5e. There are a lot of reasons that would be a terrible move right now. I guess WotC has a bit prone to making terrible moves lately, but I strongly suspect that’s been mostly on the part of the corporate folks, not the design folks.

I think the next playtest packet -- including how long it takes to appear -- will tell us a lot about the direction of the game going forward and at least provide hints about what they may do from an Open Gaming perspective.

 

[Charlaquin]

I think the next playtest packet -- including how long it takes to appear -- will tell us a lot about the direction of the game going forward and at least provide hints about what they may do from an Open Gaming perspective.

That’s the other thing though, I don’t see any way they could take 1D&D far enough from 5e not to be cloneable under CC without revealing the playtest to be a sham, which would just be the worst PR move since trying to deauthorize the OGL. If they quietly stop running the playtest, then I think it becomes more reasonable to expect the 2024 rules to be significantly different than the 2014 rules. But that too seems like a PR misstep, though admittedly not as severe a blunder.

 

[Reynard]

That’s the other thing though, I don’t see any way they could take 1D&D far enough from 5e not to be cloneable under CC without revealing the playtest to be a sham, which would just be the worst PR move since trying to deauthorize the OGL. If they quietly stop running the playtest, then I think it becomes more reasonable to expect the 2024 rules to be significantly different than the 2014 rules. But that too seems like a PR misstep, though admittedly not as severe a blunder.

It wouldn't have to be a sham. They could just make a sudden course change to account for the failure to "deauthorize" the OGL 1.0a. If that had happened, they could have GSL'd 1D&D without too much trouble.

Who knows what the plan is now, though. If the next playtest packet fits with the design pradigm we have seen thus far -- 5.1E, essentially -- then that is a good sign for Open Gaming going forward. If there is no new playtest packet, or if the contents introduce some totally novel mechanics, we might have cause to be concerned on that front.

Really I think it comes down to who won out in the internal struggle for control of D&D inside WotC. it appears that pro-Open Gaming forces won, but we haven't heard anything official yet on the future of D&D, so it remains to be seen.

 

[MockingBird]

At first I didn't believe all the leaks, then when more appeared I changed my view on it. I didn't think they would walk it back. I knew it was the only way they could save themselves just didn't think they would do it. I did my part in the survey even though I had no skin in the 3pp game. I find it hard to believe they will wall oneD&D behind a closed license. I'm not saying they won't, but it will be a dumb move if they do.

 

[Charlaquin]

At first I didn't believe all the leaks, then when more appeared I changed my view on it. I didn't think they would walk it back. I knew it was the only way they could save themselves just didn't think they would do it. I did my part in the survey even though I had no skin in the 3pp game. I find it hard to believe they will wall oneD&D behind a closed license. I'm not saying they won't, but it will be a dumb move if they do.

Thats a good point, I followed the same pattern.