Search results

No.

I've never gotten the impression that @Snarf Zagyg is really pressed for time.

See, @Snarf Zagyg, they do think I'm a baby seal!

"Wizards of the Coast believes strongly in Open Gaming, but we also believe the OGL must change to meet new challenges that have arisen in the two decades since it was drafted. However, we are strongly committed to the D&D community, and based on the feedback we have received, we believe we've...

Sounds like we have different experiences, which is cool. (y)

The threat is enough. And I understand why the 3PP are doing it, but they're basically giving Wizards what they want without Wizards actually having to revoke the license. Thing is, if it's bad for the 3PP to be forced out of the D&D ecosystem, it's bad for them to be scared out of it too...

I'm worried they think I'm a baby seal!

I maybe haven't caught up on all the "OA" stuff and have never heard of them until now, but, while they apparently disagree on the legalities, they don't seem to disagree with our hero, Ryan Dancey, on the ethics. Ryan was rather matter-of-fact in that interview yesterday that the...

Nah. It dramatically speeds up play compared to trying to play analog in a virtual environment, especially if you have one or more players who don’t know the rules that well. The paid stuff is some of the best money I’ve spent on the hobby - and it’s a hobby that offers a lot of value, so...

At this rate, Wizards is going to clear all the major 3PPs out of the SRD-based ecosystem and onto their own fantasy heartbreakers without actually firing a shot.

Big update from Kit Walsh: UPDATE January 11, 2023: As the community has scrutinized Wizards of the Coast's past statements, it's become very clear that Wizards always thought of this as a contract with obligations for both sides (for instance their 2001 OGL FAQ v 1.0). Unlike a bare license...

I mean, @RyanD makes an interesting argument that Pathfinder retained customers that otherwise would have been irrevocably (heh) lost during the 4e years, and that could then be reclaimed by Wizards when 5e was released.

Actually, and surprisingly on-topic:

This is the only thing they've posted since January 4.

Hey @pemerton my question was answered to my satisfaction upthread. Thank you!

Yeah, but it's never actually done anything, to my understanding. I'm not sure it has the administrative infrastructure to fill the role. But maybe it does -- I don't know.

It seems he's just trying to facilitate a handoff to an impartial third party. "Ultimately, this needs to be in the hands of a recognized and respected independent open source community hub that functions like Linux."

Brian Lewis is Paizo's attorney, which is ::chef's kiss::

I'm grateful for his voice on these issues, but he's an idealist who tends not to grapple with these kinds of practical realities. He's just focused on changing the practical realities.

Is there a distinction in the law between revocation of the license itself and termination of the license w/r/t a particular licensee? ETA for clarification: It seems to me I ought to be able to construct a license that is irrevocable but still provides for termination if a licensee breaches...