D&D 5E Don't Throw 5e Away Because of Hasbro

[Micah Sweet]

For the same reason why Pathfinder was still called D&D 3.75. It's both the origin point for the ruleset AND its biggest part of the market. It's going to be the starting point of most discussions and comparisons. I don't think its avoidable nor it particularly egerious unless your specifically trying to exclude D&D from the conversation.

I kinda feel you have to exclude WotC D&D from the conversation, because if you don't it ends up being nearly all the conversation.

 

[The Soloist]

I stopped playing D&D 5e at the beginning of COVID because of edition fatigue. With D&D5.5 not being a 'new edition' according to WoTC, I won't be playing it because it's more of the same.

 

[TheSword]

This is completely tone-deaf to the current situation. You are saying we should show goodwill to a company that just burned down 20 plus years of goodwill within the community?

All those smaller companies, publishers, writers, artists & commenters very nearly got put out of business due to the 1.1 OGL. You can't honestly expect the entire industry to just roll over like a good doggy after they tried to burn the entire industry to the ground.

Were you around during the d20 glut? because that almost destroyed the entire industry as well. When they killed the d20 STL, they destroyed thousands of jobs, businesses, and ttrpg's. FLGS's went out of business. It took years for many to recover from the damage.

Its been about a year since the OGL 1.1 debacle, and the damage is still very real. My 5e projects and my 5e business are dead, as are countless other projects that creators were forced to abandon when they were faced with the threat of a large corporation hanging the sword of Domacles over the entire industry.

You don't get to speak for those who were harmed by the companies shady business practices. Those who suffer harm at the hands of others deserve to have their voices heard without you trying to debase their claims by boiling it down to "outrage."

What did you lose? nothing at all? Then maybe its time you took a moment to think about the people who were in fact harmed by these events, and perhaps have a bit of empathy for fellow human beings, rather than a big corporation that doesn't care about the community.

I’m sorry if you were not able to continue publishing 5e products. Was it because you no longer wanted to or because work wasn’t available? I see large quantities of 5e products still in the works and being published.

Corporations are generally collections of people too. Also our fellow human beings. Putting a logo on something doesn’t cause it to stop being operated and staffed. Yet many people seem to talk as if the corporate logo gives them license to get pretty darn nasty. Many of those corporate employees are just as passionate and committed to the hobby as you are.

The whole fiasco happened over the course of about two weeks as I recall. Which is about as long as it takes a large corporation to tie its shoelaces. In relative terms the turn around happened about as quickly as it’s possible to do. I’m very surprised that in such a short time any established business’ was shut down.

To say that ‘all those companies nearly went out of business’ is pretty hyperbolic. Many would have continued under the new agreement, many were DM’s Guild and already publishing under different terms, many were system agnostic (such as art and cartography) and benefiting from the 5e boom. Many were always big enough to go it on their own.

Any business is entitled to try and vary their terms. You have the right to push back. WotC listened (in a very short space of time) and even extended the creative commons even further. That’s a win and an example of a company listening to its customers. Hence me questioning whether folks know lucky they are. So many companies would never do that.

I was around in the D20 glut, there were many good products published, and many many terrible ones.

 

[mamba]

The whole fiasco happened over the course of about two weeks as I recall. Which is about as long as it takes a large corporation to tie its shoelaces. In relative terms the turn around happened about as quickly as it’s possible to do. I’m very surprised that in such a short time any established business’ was shut down.

it was considerably longer than that. OGL 1.1. was leaked in November 2022, the end of the OGL polling WotC did to see what we found acceptable was at the end of January 2023. So about three months

To say that ‘all those companies nearly went out of business’ is pretty hyperbolic. Many would have continued under the new agreement,

that is at best speculation. I doubt many would have, it was rather draconian

Any business is entitled to try and vary their terms.

not if that violates existing contracts, which it did here

WotC listened (in a very short space of time) and even extended the creative commons even further. That’s a win and an example of a company listening to its customers.

we can argue about the short space of time but yes, they did listen, once their arm got twisted enough. They are not getting much sympathy from me for what they did, but I do acknowledge that the CC is a decent step to make amends

 

[MichaelSomething]

What rules do you think they wrote, expecting them to be ignored? I would assume they write rules they expect to be used, knowing that different tables will tweak them in different directions (but most probably just use them)

I'm thinking more older editions on that one...

 

[Art Waring]

I’m sorry if you were not able to continue publishing 5e products. Was it because you no longer wanted to or because work wasn’t available? I see large quantities of 5e products still in the works and being published.

I am no longer working on 5e projects because I won't give any more support to a system that reinforces a dnd-only monoculture at the expense of everything else in the industry. I kind of feel like I am repeating myself at this point.

it was considerably longer than that. OGL 1.1. was leaked in November 2022, the end of the OGL polling WotC did to see what we found acceptable was at the end of January 2023. So about three months


that is at best speculation. I doubt many would have, it was rather draconian


not if that violates existing contracts, which it did here


we can argue about the short space of time but yes, they did listen, once their arm got twisted enough. They are not getting much sympathy from me for what they did, but I do acknowledge that the CC is a decent step to make amends

Mamba sums up the rest of your responses very well.

I don't think you can speak for any publishers, at all. This was a serious crisis. Your constant downplaying of the incidents at play are akin to chronic denial, like this happened in some alternate universe.

According to you this was no biggy. Business as usual. But you have been saying as much for an entire year now.

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

it was considerably longer than that. OGL 1.1. was leaked in November 2022, the end of the OGL polling WotC did to see what we found acceptable was at the end of January 2023. So about three months

The Gizmodo article was published on January 5th 2023. Apparently Roll for Combat got some insider info on January 4th and discussed it on their show - https://www.enworld.org/forums/publishing-business-licensing.704/. The WotC rollback was on January 27th. So, not 3 months!

 

[TheSword]

it was considerably longer than that. OGL 1.1. was leaked in November 2022, the end of the OGL polling WotC did to see what we found acceptable was at the end of January 2023. So about three months

As has been said by @Ulorian - Agent of Chaos, Jan 5th for Linda’s article. WotC indicated that it was re-considering things a few days earlier (Jan 20th) than their officiant announcement and If I recall the article launched at the end of a week so two weeks is pretty much on the nose. For WotC the to have made the announcement on the 20th they must have discussed earlier. It was a fast turnaround but not so fast that it was clearly planned.

that is at best speculation. I doubt many would have, it was rather draconian

Are you suggesting that DMs Guild would have closed down? That access to FR IP wouldn’t be worth it for a lot of publishers?

not if that violates existing contracts, which it did here

You can ask! If You buy a building and I’m a tenant and the previous landlord said they’ll never put my rent up. You feel the circumstances have changed and write asking for a rent increase. I respond to you tbat the previous landlord said it would never go up and that I don’t want an increase and my neighbors write in support of this. If you withdrew the suggestion within 3 weeks, and publicly announced there would be no increase and never would. I would take that as a win. I don’t think the landlord is out of line for asking. If they listen that’s a good thing.

I am no longer working on 5e projects because I won't give any more support to a system that reinforces a dnd-only monoculture at the expense of everything else in the industry. I kind of feel like I am repeating myself at this point.

I respect that you’ve chosen to do that. Picking your business partners is really important - and I suspect one of the reasons WotC want to change the license in the first place. However I’m sorry but many people would not consider that to mean that you were shut down or put out of business. You made a business decision. If you stick to it even after WotC retracted their plans then that’s also your choice.

There’s a level risk in any venture. If you felt the level of risk was too great then I totally get you not wanting to invest that time, effort and money. But the reality is many others are - will continue to do. The Sword of Damocles was held by a single hair. The threat of the OGL being revoked seems to be back in the box for the foreseeable future. Comparing one to the other seems hyperbolic. Particularly when even if revocation had happened it wouldn’t have affected previous published works just new products.

I don't think you can speak for any publishers, at all. This was a serious crisis. Your constant downplaying of the incidents at play are akin to chronic denial, like this happened in some alternate universe.

According to you this was no biggy. Business as usual. But you have been saying as much for an entire year now.

It was big - for a month and now it’s back to business as usual.

More importantly maintenance of the terms and their public validation by a more current management team was a big win for 3pp 5e and the fanbase that uses them. Now if only folks could look past their animus and see that.

 

[mamba]

Gizmodo article was published on January 5th 2023. Apparently Roll for Combat got some insider info on January 4th and discussed it on their show

the Gizmodo article was not the start of this though, WotC was talking about a new OGL before that. They discussed it with select 3pp and tried to strongarm them into signing on (none did), they publicly talked about the new OGL at least in December.

Supposedly they did not just react once Gizmodo published but already based on the 3pp feedback, resulting in work on a 1.2 which they then wanted to show.

We can agree that they caved to public pressure within a month of it becoming widely known, after not saying a thing for the first two weeks of that.

If you want to praise some company for how fast they react, this is not the example for it. Imagine a plane crash and the airline saying nothing at all about it for two weeks…

 

[mamba]

For WotC the to have made the announcement on the 20th they must have discussed earlier. It was a fast turnaround but not so fast that it was clearly planned.

that they were making tweaks based on 3pp feedback has nothing to do with the leak and started before there even was the Gizmodo article.

They then started having a public poll that was supposed to run into February for input gathering. A preferred way by companies of stringing people along, hoping the issue goes away before they actually have to do anything.

Seeing that the crisis was only increasing and drawing ever wider circles, they eventually pulled the rope, left the OGL alone and released the SRD under CC, both to appease the crowd and to bring the 3pps back on board, which had lost all trust in the OGL by then. That was an emergency decision, pretty sure that was not being discussed internally for two weeks.

Any way you slice it, WotC tried to break existing, binding contracts and to replace them with draconian versions that would have put pretty much any 3pp using them out of business. What would have survived is the small stuff that sells a few hundred copies on DMsGuild, which ironically does not even need the OGL.

Paizo, Kobold, Frog God, MCDM and the likes all would be dead. Kickstarters would no longer exist, or only for projects that try to raise 10-20k

Are you suggesting that DMs Guild would have closed down?

no, not sure what that has to do with anything, the DMsG does not use the OGL, and is by and large not what 3pps use either

You can ask! If You buy a building and I’m a tenant and the previous landlord said they’ll never put my rent up.

they are the previous landlord… and they did more than ask. Would you say it is also ok for your landlord to send over a biker gang to talk some sense into you?

You have been downplaying and misrepresenting this from day one, not sure why, or why you still brought it up now

If you withdrew the suggestion within 3 weeks, and publicly announced there would be no increase and never would. I would take that as a win.

I don’t, I take it as them having failed at their attempt due to unexpected levels of public resistance. They should not have tried in the first place.

I don’t think the landlord is out of line for asking. If they listen that’s a good thing.

they were not asking, and they were way out of line.

As Monte Cook said back then “Say person A pointed a gun at person B and pulled the trigger, but the gun jammed. Person A then gave a half-hearted apology.

Should person B accept the apology? Should they trust person A ever again?

What if person A starts visibly trying to clear the jam but assures person B that it's all fine?

Asking for a friend.”

That is the equivalent of what WotC did, not ‘renegotiate terms in good faith’, like you pretend