WotC D&D Historian Ben Riggs says the OGL fiasco was Chris Cocks idea.

[Parmandur]

did WotC somehow control access to the books?


that means it is not a monopoly, it still is a walled garden

I can buy stuff on iTunes or another site, iTunes is still a walled garden

But not a monopolistic walled garden, just one where I can feel safe letting my son browse their catalog (in theory, he just has the books).

 

[mamba]

For you, me, and "in the know" hobbyists? No.

for the general public, seeing a licensed "anti-woke game the way Gary Gygax would have wanted it, using the current rules of the world's first roleplaying game"?

it still is licensed, the difference is the license text. I do not think most people would notice that

 

[mamba]

Thst really isn't the case here, though: particularly since WotC is basically stuck with rules that they cannot make Beyond dependent now (which they honestly tried with 4E).

they could not publish 2024 on Roll20 etc. the SRD by itself is not a substitute for the PHB and doing so would mean most players either move to DDB or do not buy 2024, there would be hardly anyone using the 2024 rules on Roll20

 

[Parmandur]

it still is licensed, the difference is the license text. I do not think most people would notice that

I think most people would not understand the OGL, but do understand Public Dpmain (and that Creative Commons is essentially PD).

At any rate, whether they would or not...I do believe that is logical and reasonable enough that Cocks & Co. could themselves earnestly believe that very easily.

I just think there is a straightforward, charitable read that doesn't require anyone (other than maybe LaNassa and Meta) to be nefarious or underhanded. Just mistaken.

 

[Parmandur]

they could not publish 2024 on Roll20 etc. the SRD by itself is not a substitute for the PHB and doing so would mean most players either move to DDB or do not buy 2024, there would be hardly anyone using the 2024 rules on Roll20

The SRD is sufficient for a home to create an alternate PHB, easily. As such, by committing to CC, WotC kills the possibility of a monopoly.

What I think they cleverly gain is the ability to have their open gaming cake while eating it, too (creating a clear legal separation for anyone who doesn't want to follow community standards).

 

[mamba]

But not a monopolistic walled garden, just one where I can feel safe letting my son browse their catalog (in theory, he just has the books).

agreed, not a monopoly, but a first necessary step towards one. That does not mean a monopoly is the unavoidable end point, only that having a walled garden is a prerequisite for establishing one

 

[mamba]

I just think there is a straightforward, charitable read that doesn't require anyone (other than maybe LaNassa and Meta) to be nefarious or underhanded. Just mistaken.

agreed, they can be mistaken about the threat and the impact on 3pps, it does not require them to be evil and wanting to wipe 3pps out

 

[Parmandur]

agreed, they can be mistaken about the threat and the impact on 3pps, it does not require them to be evil and wanting to wipe 3pps out

Here, check this out, and consider that the WotC executive team does have enough tech world connections that they may have know this was in the pipeline in some form, and they couldn't necessarily have predicted that the Metaverse would be a dud (from an outside MBA perspective, this could seem like the next big thing):

A Snoop Dogg AI named 'The Dungeon Master' joins Meta's new fleet of bots, which you can 'invoke' in your group chats at-will

Mr Beast and Paris Hilton also join the list of celebs you can summon at the push of a button.

www.pcgamer.com

 

[mamba]

The SRD is sufficient for a home to create an alternate PHB, easily. As such, by committing to CC, WotC kills the possibility of a monopoly.

eh, yes, a table could create their homebrew, that does not mean WotC cannot become a monopoly, a monopoly does not require 100% market share.

A stronger case against them becoming a monopoly is that other TTRPGs exist. They could be the only ones offering D&D (via DDB and VTT), and it still might not be enough to make them a monopoly rather than just the biggest fish in the pond

 

[DEFCON 1]

The disparity in revenue between 3PP and WotC is obviously massive, so I don’t blame 3PP from wanting to be part of DDB. If someone told you, you could increase your revenue 100x (I have no idea what the actual revenue diff is) for awhile but have the risk of getting knifed in the back later, most are going to take the money.

Oh believe me, I don't blame these companies for going where the money is... but I just find it funny that it is occurring even after all the talk from everybody the past couple years about how "bad" it is that WotC controls the D&D / 5E space, and that everyone should be breaking away from WotC in case they ever tried to do another OGL type of revocation again, or that WotC has broken the trust of the entire gaming populace etc. etc. etc.

At the end of the day it's always about money. It's why so many people hitched their wagon to D&D / 5E / OGL in the first place, and why so many people will get back into bed with WotC and D&D Beyond (and probably the VTT) even after all the supposed horrible actions the company took against them.

No one HAS to make 5E-adjacent material or use DMs Guild or anything like that. People are free to make completely independent and separate RPGs that have nothing to do with the D&D / 5E sphere. But they all know they ain't going to make any real money at all if they do. So they bite the bullet and strap on their waterskiis to follow along in WotC's wake-- hoping they can hold on for as long as they can and make as much money as possible before they fall off.