ProfessorDetective's latest activity

The Pathfinder brand . . . products designed to work with D&D 3E, was in response to Paizo losing the Dragon & Dungeon magazine licenses...

Probably. But I'd still be curious to visit my alternate-world self to see how well an open 4E did. Would there be a Pathfinder? Would...

I don't think so. I'm sure 4e's shelf life would have been longer, but they would have still iterated to a new edition eventually.

In an alternate universe, where WotC made 4E just as open as 3E was . . . Would we still be playing 4E?

Yeah. And all you have to do to really drive the point home is look at the transition to 4E and the emergence of Pathfinder. All the...

they might regret it, but I believe Ryan was right and WotC gained a lot more from it than they might have lost in sales. D&D is pretty...

IMO . . . the original SRD, OGL, and d20 license served their purpose admirably . . . with a few hiccups (d20 Bust). It's not that the...

I think folks are talking past eacxh other on this. It is true that Ryan Dancey saw the commercial viability of the Open Gaming License...

I've always thought Dancy was too clever by half. The point of the OGL was to get a bunch of companies (big and small) to support WotC...

He says as much in his interview (i.e. chapter 6) in the Fifty Years of Dungeons & Dragons book: "The most important thing the OGL did...

It was Dancey's idea

While I am leaning towards agreeing, this line of thought is slightly fallacious. SRD 5.2 having Bastions does not prevent 3rd party...

SRDs are not for divulging your corporate intellectual property into the public either. I'm not a Hasbro bootlicker or anything but you...

WotC went through the process of designing Bastion rules, including a playtest round. That suggests they consider it an important part...

This does seem to be a far more intentional document than the 5.1 SRD. WoTC have thought carefully about what should be included and...