We All Won – The OGL Three Years Later

[Morrus]

Even more so, thanks to the Commons, D&D isn't really dependent on WotC. My table can play it from now until we don't, no matter what WotC does.

Well, you always could as long as you'd bough the book(s). The stuff on my shelves would last me several lifetimes.

 

[Corinnguard]

I'm just happy I moved to Level Up before the OGL Debacle, and also that A5e is based on 5.0 rather than 5.5.

Agreed. I also made the move to Level Up before the OGL Debacle. There are a lot of elements in A5e to like.

 

[TheSword]

I’ve made my opinions on the state of things pretty clear. We’re living in a great time. The latest update for 5e is the best it’s ever been and ticks a lot of boxes I wanted to see resolved from 2014. That’s surrounded by more 3pp products than ever before, some of the highest quality I’ve seen. Digital tools are pretty darn great and have increased accessibility and reduced cost. In short. These are the good days.

Thread 'These are the Good Days [+]'

Wednesday at 11:12 AM

This thread might not be what you are expecting. I’m not going to tell you that everything that WotC does is amazing and we’re living in a WotC utopia of TTRPG gaming. It is about why it’s important to recognize what we have and not focus on what we don’t have.

Happiness matters, it enhances our physical health by boosting immune systems & can even help us live longer. It improves mental health, increasing resilience & reducing stress & anxiety. From a TTRPG community point of view happiness can improve productivity & creativity. Whereas the reverse, is a blight that can have serious...

• TheSword
• Replies: 20
• Forum: *TTRPGs General

• 

 

[GothmogIV]

Ultimately my group and I stopped playing 5e because we don't like the power gaming vibe or the softer tone of the game. If WotC was making something we liked, I'd buy it and play it without hesitation. But we all need to be clear-eyed: WotC/Hasboro is a big corporation that will do what big corporations do: anything to make money. Personally I'd rather support smaller companies--SlyFlourish, Goodman Games, Troll Lords, etc.--than a giant corporation that has been a very bad actor in the not too distant past.

 

[Reynard]

Even more so, thanks to the Commons, D&D isn't really dependent on WotC.

This isn't really true "D&D" is a brand and only WotC can control what it looks like going forward. This is why it is important for folks to both vote with their wallets and let WotCknow what they like and don't.

Admittedly, this is harder when WotC won't put out books...

 

[Micah Sweet]

For the record, I was fairly certain Pathfinder was #2. Anecdotally, it's the game I see played more often after D&D. For a number of years it's also taken up an impressive amount of shelf space compared to most other games.

In many ways I think we all lost. I think it's unhealthy for so many companies to be dependent on WotC.

The whole point of putting the SRD into the Creative Commons was to free the rules from WotC's control. No 3pp needs them anymore. But a good many have chosen to attach themselves to them.

The real problem IMO is WotC's enormous weight in the industry and the community.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Even more so, thanks to the Commons, D&D isn't really dependent on WotC. My table can play it from now until we don't, no matter what WotC does.

Using the full ecosystem if Hasbro/WotC go under or get bought by a vile party I will still get fresh content from publishers who have robust support for the system.

Add those systems you've mentioned plus so many more, the Golden Age of RPGs is here

To be fair, your tables's ability to play D&D has never been dependent on WotC.

 

[Morrus]

The whole point of putting the SRD into the Creative Commons was to free the rules from WotC's control.

That was the whole point of the OGL, too. As Ryan Dancey famously said in 2010, "I also had the goal that the release of the SRD would ensure that D&D in a format that I felt was true to its legacy could never be removed from the market by capricious decisions by its owners."

Thread 'On the Goals of the Open Gaming License'

Nov 23, 2010

The purpose of the OGL was to act as a force for change. In that sense I think it is an unquaified success.

It changed the relationship of fans to publishers - any person with an idea could participate in the market if they wished.

It changed the relationship of developers to publishers - instead of having to make "Fantasy Heartbreakers", developers were free to show their creativity using a widespread system (which also meant that their talent could more easily be determined instead of having to first decipher a whole new set of notation and rules).

It changed the way TRPGs are...

• RyanD
• Replies: 6
• Forum: *Dungeons & Dragons

• 
• 
• 

 

[Micah Sweet]

IMO, we got something close to the least-worst possible outcome. That's not a 'win' for anybody. To hear it described as such frankly turns my stomach.

Can you expand on that opinion?

 

[Micah Sweet]

This isn't really true "D&D" is a brand and only WotC can control what it looks like going forward. This is why it is important for folks to both vote with their wallets and let WotCknow what they like and don't.

Admittedly, this is harder when WotC won't put out books...

If theoretically the entire ENWorld community stopped buying WotC products and let them know we didn't like their stuff, I severely doubt WotC would care. At all. I don't think the same is true of any other publisher.

This is what I was saying. WotC is simply far too influential compared to the rest of RPG-dom.