Search results

Iron Gods? Back in PF1 era, it was one of the more popular ones, from what I recall. Since PF2, I don't know, I've been out of the loop. And, it would be great for Blackmoor to get it's due. I don't want to be dismissive of it. But when it comes to popularity, it's never caught on (or...

And, honestly, except for a small subset of grognards, it dropped out of memory/interest long, long ago. My friends and I started playing in 1983 and we were only dimly aware of it. Nearly all of my current group started playing mid-80s to late-90s and I don't think any of them even know what it...

Chris Pine smiling for the max and crying for the 1.

Yep! From my (limited and amateur) research on copyleft court cases, one of the biggest was over model railroad control software, I believe. Pretty sure it was just two individuals and it wound up with all sorts of the heavy hitters stepping in. So even if the immediate context is very niche...

Yep, current execs no longer see WotC as selling a gaming experience and a how healthy ecosystem around that game can benefit those experiences and keep customers playing. Instead it's a brand company now, and people "using the brand for free" is the worst thing that can happen when your main...

Not sure I can dig into 38 pages to see where this started, but as a backer at that level, I did in fact get access to the first 2 or 3 episodes early and not behind an Amazon paywall. CR fully delivered on that despite it not even being in our tiers. Anyone who claims CR didn't give backers...

Implied in "content already released" is the clear statement that future content will not be permitted. That is only possible with revoking 1.0a. They are just talking about not making anyone pulp existing books. They are still clearly trying to de-authorize 1.0a.

No to mention the use of "you" and "they" clearly divides the fans they are talking separate from "those people over there complaining." Very telling.

Oh, absolutely it could use updating. The licenses it is based on have been improved in that time. However, the original intent to not allow de-authorization was deliberately by WotC themselves to prevent a future version of themselves to make the terms worse. Simple "not onerous" is not...

There was also Clark Peterson of Necromancer Games who is/was a lawyer. Not sure his specific field of practice, but at least was VERY active in early industry discussions and feedback during drafting of the OGL.

Exactly! The OGL was designed as a "safe harbor" that defined what was ok or not. It allowed some things that "you can't copyright game mechanics" does not but also limited some things that approach does. But the biggest benefit of the OGL was clarity for all involved so that they could avoid a...

To be fair, if I recall, the GPL didn't even include that word until v3 in 2007. So Ryan basing the OGL on standard language of open-source software licenses of 2000 not having it makes sense. Although, of course, I'm right there with you in wishing it was different to avoid this ambiguity.

Oh, exactly! DMs Guild can help with discoverability if you don't have some other solid marketing plan or existing recognition with fans. But if you can build a big enough following there's plenty more you can do elsewhere - especially for someone like MT Black who managed to ride the early wave...

I don’t have stats to back that up either but plenty of publishers who would be in the position to have hard numbers have said in the past that unless you have a Kickstarter or Patreon to pre-fund it, 5e content goes to DriveThruRPG to die. If I recall, many have said the difference in sales for...

But also keep in mind that the language of the OGL is specifically based on open-source software licenses, and if WotC wanted to try taking it to court to revoke an irrevocable license, there would be many interested parties even larger than Hasbro that would be quite keen on making sure that...

Yep and that matches how Ryan Dancey as official representative of WotC at the time explained it. That’s also why 4e had a GSL rather than updated OGL. If OGL v1.1 is going to have increased restrictions it better also have benefits as good or better (such as access to sell on DDB or their VTT)...

Are you saying that just maybe a short marketing video might not get into the nuanced minutia of their weeks and weeks of data analysis??? gasp ;) Yeah, after seeing so many posts claim that survey was clearly poorly designed and ambiguous because it didn't ask all sorts of questions that it...

There actually was a question asking about satisfaction with feats as part of backgrounds overall and not just of specific backgrounds. (Sorry for graining image, but I grabbed it from someone who posted filling it out on YouTube.) I mostly recalled it because I remember being glad I didn't have...

Then what concerns is the post below referring to then?

Yup. He at least threatened (according to multiple of the admins, I was just a spectator on that Discord). To be fair, I doubt it actually went anywhere past being threats and more YouTube content to generate views, but I don't know. It was in September 2020, I believe. Hope this isn't too much...