Search results

Funny you should mention Mike Mearls—the man broke a three-and-a-half-year Twitter silence yesterday to retweet two of the tweets denying the “feedback isn’t read” rumor.

Did anybody really expect that someone at WotC was reading the text box responses from 39,000 playtest surveys? Edit: Debunked on Twitter by Ray Winninger as well as Alex Kammer. I trust Ray and Alex on this, so I believe WotC actually does read and compile the written feedback—my cynical hot...

Two corrections: Kyle is 6 months on the job but took over responsibilities from Ray Winninger 3 months ago. And DnD Shorts says this is the doing of Chris Cao, not “Cox.”

Currently running Princes of the Apocalypse and the 5e conversion of Against the Giants. Playing in Waterdeep Dragon Heist.

Steampunkette has the right of it, but I think there's even more to it. (Edit to add: They don't need to revoke 1.0a in order to do what Steampunkette suggests, because they will control the terms for content on their own VTT regardless of what the OGL says.) I've been arguing since early last...

Yeah—I think Michael Tresca's analysis is mostly spot-on but should include a separate category for "Was It Honest?" A tale of two readings: I read the statement on Friday and thought "I do want more concessions, but these modifications make the updated OGL much less egregious than the draft...

I think this is all entirely correct but isn't really impacted by the OGL at all. Once Hasbro's VTT is running they can set whatever terms they like for what's allowed on it without bringing the OGL into it. If that weren't the case, they never would have promised (in their statement on Friday)...

Interesting news—though it seems the Free League games I care most about won’t be included, unsurprisingly since they are based on licensed IPs (The One Ring and Alien).

OK. I assumed otherwise because you wrote that you hoped they would talk with someone who more fully understands the OGL and its history—whereas it seems clear to me from their Twitter that it was already far too late for that from the moment they first tweeted the upcoming episode's topic...

I urge you to read the “Tweets and Replies” section of the podcast’s own Twitter page from the past week. Both before and after the podcast aired. These guys knew exactly what they were doing. And good god, their arrogance and contempt for us might possibly exceed WotC’s. Even if you usually...

It’s nothing but cherry-picked information molded to fit their canned thesis: Journalist with grudge sparks moral panic over almost perfectly normal contract offer with just one unacceptable provision that nobody else is emphasizing! The one unacceptable provision is that WotC gets rights to all...

Oh for God’s sake, I think you’re right. They mean things like paid DMing on VTTs. They got me. That strange hyphenated word did strike me as odd, but like others, I thought they meant VTTs would be unaffected—which surprised me, since my whole theory of the case was that this whole thing was...

I'm in four different 5e campaigns. Two as player, two as DM. All four will be sticking with 5e for the moment, though at least one group will move on to try out another system in a few months. (I'm championing DCC.) Our feeling is: some of us were playing D&D long before WotC was around. D&D...

Exactly. I'll say this: my credence in the veracity of Gale Force Nine's and Weis & Hickman's allegations is up from about 80% to 99%.

There’s only one silver lining about that episode (which I just finished listening to): it is so patently biased in its cherry-picking of the relevant facts—the historical, the industry-related, and even the legal facts—that any listener already well informed about the OGL controversy will...

Yes—and more than just player options and monsters. I’ve used random encounter builders (Loke’s Untold Encounters of the Random Kind), prebuilt locations (Nord’s Remarkable Inns and Their Drinks), and on and on.

But well written and accurate. For a mainstream overview article, it’s the best we’re likely to see. It even mentions canceling your D&D Beyond sub as the most effective protest action.

I am staging a perpetual, but not irrevocable, boycott.

Just saying it’s valid to decide not to play it anymore—or to decide not to spend any more money on it, but keep playing. Presumably the latter course doesn’t break up groups and friendships? (And then adding a gag about reduced spending on 5e stuff I mostly haven’t been using anyway.)

I’m not buying D&D anymore. But I’ll still be playing it for the foreseeable future. (My spouse is not at all unhappy with this development.)