Search results

I 100% agree with you on all of that.

It might. But you don't see the likes of Matt Colville betting their future livelihoods on it, do you?

And yet ~1500 3rd party publishers feel the need to sign onto a project to create a replacement, and companies like Kobold Press and MCDM announced or accelerated plans to move away from WOTC and create their own games. There's the academic question of OGL1.0(a)'s revocability/deauthorization...

No, it does not. OGL 1.0(a) is not irrevocable and does not include the legal language that makes it irrevocable under the law as it has evolved since its original creation. It includes language that can be interpreted to mean it can be deauthorized, which in effect revokes the license. And this...

OGL 1.0(a) is a weak and out of date agreement. If it weren't, we wouldn't be in this spot today. Just getting WOTC to leave 1.0(a) alone is NOT sufficient. It just kicks the can down the road until WOTC tries again. And it wouldn't matter in the short term anyways. The 3rd party publishers...

No. WOTC's business strategy is bad for the hobby I love and I will not support them with either my money or my silence. Nothing about OGL 1.2 suggests they are negotiating, just buying time for things to cool off. So the answer is NO.