Search results

Exactly. So people are already signing a morality clause. What's the problem with adding one more that protects WotC and the hobby from bad actors and closes the loophole of people selling on their own website?

But so many people here won't even accept that anymore or a reversion to how things were two months ago. They don't just need to preserve the 1.0a OGL but provide reparations of some kind. The poster I was responded wanted nothing less than multiple firings of key executives.

There's lots of different ways. Yes, they could use the list of people who signed up for ORC to assemble plaintiffs for a class action lawsuit. But just because someone signed up for one doesn't mean they signed up for the other. They are. That's literally what ORC is. Keyword of "if it comes...

And by having a projector aimed down or flat TV built into the table you can have animated spell FX too...

Um.... no. 1,500 publishers agreed to consider publishing under Paizo's license when it's released. Not all are consulting lawyers. Maybe. But Paizo isn't going to sue just to get brownie points with gamers. They were likely willing if the 1.0a was revoked and they couldn't keep selling content...

So.... your argument is that if someone makes a hateful and racist D&D product and WotC says "sorry, not our book, we can't do anything" the angry activists exerting tremendous pressure will just stop and say "oh, okay, sorry to bug you" and drop the issue?

When filling out the survey I had to think on this police and decided it's easily the worst thing in the 1.2 OGL. Think of it this way: it's banning features that cannot be done on a physical tabletop and replace imagination. That's the policy "What isn’t permitted are features that don’t...

You literally have to sign Amazon's seller Terms of Service to sell content on their platform.

They need the customers. Where or not we're representative of the customers is another issue. We're probably not. Kickstarters for 3rd Party products only sell to people in the thousands while millions play D&D. 50,000 people unsubscribed to DnDBeyond, but that's likely a single percentage point...

So rather than WotC dealing with it through a license people sign with them, they should deal with it through a license people sign with DriveThru and Kickstarter? Isn't that worse because WotC is avoiding any blame and doesn't have to get their hands dirty? They don't have to take any personal...

I don't mind the idea of a content/ morality clause. DriveThruRPG has content guidelines and the ability to report violations, and has removed content for violating its guidelines in the past. Paizo also has rules for it's Community Content policy, which allows you to use its IP. Most gamers...

That was the Dungeon Master's Guild and people at DriveThruRPG. WotC weren't consulted.

I’ve been arguing with other posters about this for a while, outlining things piecemeal. I decided it made more sense to just present my thoughts and arguments in a big, concise post. Now, I like the Open Game License (hereafter referred to as the “OGL1”). Back when I operated a blog I wrote...

WotC doesn't have any real competitors. Paizo is leagues beneath them. If WotC wanted to crush them, they wouldn't even need to use the OGL. It's not a reasonable fear.

There's a lot of people here saying it's impossible to decide if something is racist or not, despite Twitter, Facebook, Google, ENWorld, Kickstarter, Reddit, and endless other groups having policies on acceptable and unacceptable content.

I've seen that and also know he brings up the Nazi Bar analogy, which ties into the paradox of tolerance. If you allow Nazis to come into a bar and let them stay, they'll drive out the non-Nazis and you'll have a Nazi bar. And we don't need that for the hobby. We don't need the racists and...

It's funny that people are so against WotC now that "defending literal bigots" has now become a hill they will die on. Yeah, there's fuzzy stuff that WotC has decided is unacceptable or not desirable for their books but that some people like. But then there's actual hate speech in books like...

You can't copyright mechanical ideas. But you can copy the expression of said rules. The actual text. Having it be Creative Commons means people don't have to rewrite the entire block of rules text, rephrasing the rules in their own words. It keeps creators safe from accidental copyright...

This all seems incredibly reasonable and fair. I don't want people making racist and offensive games. They're making the new license irrevocable. They're making the core rules creative commons, so they can never go away and WotC can't every touch them. I can't wait to see how the community and...

Cynicism is often realistic. Lawyers can do a lot. They just need to as for an injunction or pause of the old license or both licenses until a ruling, which cuts off their opposition from funding. This is also presuming it even goes to trial. That's bad publicity WotC doesn't want. They're...