D&D General Are You Seriously Planning to Stop Playing and/or Running D&D Over The Recent OGL Developments?

[Yaarel]

Yes, I will no longer play 5e or 6e.

I care more about the liberty of open gaming culture than I do about protecting Hasbro profit.

I am confident that Hasbro will never repent, so am changing my lifestyle accordingly.

There are several roleplaying games that I am curious about. I will now make a serious effort to explore them.

I am watching with a keen eye, the new open gaming license − the ORC (Open Gaming Creative) license − that Paizo and many other roleplaying corporations are putting together to ensure that an Anti-OGL never happens again.

 

[GreyLord]

Yes, I will no longer play 5e or 6e.

I care more about the liberty of open gaming culture than I do about protecting Hasbro profit.

I am confident that Hasbro will never repent, so am changing my lifestyle accordingly.

There are several roleplaying games that I am curious about. I will now make a serious effort to explore them.

I am watching with a keen eye, the new open gaming license − the ORC (Open Gaming Creative) license − that Paizo and many other roleplaying corporations are putting together to ensure that an Anti-OGL never happens again.

Some that I have enjoyed that people could look at if they are curious.

I've enjoyed the Age system, particularly Fantasy Age. They've branched out with variations on the AGE system (Such as it's originations in Dragon Age). It's very familiar to the D&D ecosystem and yet very different.

I enjoyed Star Wars WEG, though that probably is out of print again (FFG anniversary edition).

Cyberpunk 2020 is always awesome. I thought about picking up Cyberpunk Red recently but can't seem to find it in print recently.

I prefer the WH40K inquisitor system, but Wrath and Glory is a decent system as well. Very different feel than the older WH40K FFG put out.

 

[Yaarel]

For a new gaming system, I have several interests, prioritizing in the following order from most important to less important.

• Nonconvtrovertable Open Gaming License
• Mechanical gaming rules engine that I like for my playstyles
• Narrative content, like settings and class options, the appeal to me.

 

[Lidgar]

Just played today. Party finally finished the second level of ToEE.

And it was guilt-free enjoyment.

 

[gamerprinter]

While I voted "No", I have to qualify myself, in that I stopped playing D&D at the start of Pathfinder 1e. Not due to any preferential need, but because I wanted to publish a Japanese horror setting and I was planning to use 3.5, but it was then that 3.5 stopped releasing content and WotC was gearing up for 4.0 and the GSL. With Paizo's pass of doing that, and creating Pathfinder, I was in development at the time, and needed an active game system in play to publish. That was the only reason I left D&D for Pathfinder - and released the Kaidan setting of Japanese Horror (PFRPG). Historically, aside from Kaidan, the only things I've ever published were map products and map symbol sets. However, five years ago, one of the authors I'd worked with on Kaidan approached me about publishing a sci-fi adventure and with Starfinder coming out at the time, I opted to publish it under those rules. And have since released a dozen products for Starfinder. All this means, is I haven't published anything intended for Dungeons & Dragons ever, nor had I planned to...

So insult to injury, when WotC released Spelljammer (which I picked up and was disappointed with), I finally decided to attempt my first D&D 5e product. I've spent 4 months creating 3D illustrations and deck plans for custom Spelljammer ships, which I'm creating stat blocks now for, and was planning on a release maybe a week or two from now - when this OGL fiasco raises it's head!? Is it fate, that the moment I decide to finally create a product supporting D&D, the owners are now stopping me from doing that!! This is nuts for timing. So I guess I'm not going to publish that supplement. I was going to do it with One D&D selling at the Dungeon Master's Guild, and now they won't sell 3PP products for it.

Depending on how this OGL thing goes may not matter at all. I haven't published a D&D third party product, and I guess I never will. I'll just have to wait on ORC license release to move forward with any of my publications.

 

[AK81]

I voted yes. But what I mean by that is that I won't buy anymore products from WotC. At least until they fix this mess.

But that does not mean that I will stop playing DnD. I will still play my already owned books, 3rd party books and DnD clones.

I will also broaden my horizon with other non DnD game rules. So I plan to continue playing DnD, just not pay WotC for the pleasure.

 

[Clint_L]

Played tonight. It was fun. Next session, we are doing a D&D/Fiasco fusion game, and I am really looking forward to each of us taking turns as the DM. I am excited to see how the story turns out.

 

[Jd Smith1]

I don't play D&D, and don't plan to ever again. I prefer d100.

I am hoping that this will cause publishers to the d100 system, or even more innovative systems.

 

[gamerprinter]

Here's a sneak peak at what will never be pubilshed (see my post above to explain).

Shown below is the Anubian Scarab Spelljammer destroyer, then the 4 decks: top deck gunnery and temple, deck two is gunnery support, deck three is crew quarters and helm, deck four is the cargo stores and slave pens (Anubians are jackal headed gnolls, evil slavers that worship Anubis).

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Here's a sneak peak at what will never be pubilshed (see my post above to explain).

Shown below is the Anubian Scarab Spelljammer destroyer, then the 4 decks: top deck gunnery and temple, deck two is gunnery support, deck three is crew quarters and helm, deck four is the cargo stores and slave pens (Anubians are jackal headed gnolls, evil slavers that worship Anubis).

View attachment 272623View attachment 272624View attachment 272625View attachment 272626View attachment 272627

My group is probably sticking with 5e (Rules inertia more than anything), I do not know if you ever feel you can publish this but I would be interested.

 

[Hexmage-EN]

I need to learn to word polls to better reflect what I meant...

 

[Aldarc]

I don't understand the desire to turn gods of the dead like Anubis, Hades, and the like into villains.

 

[gamerprinter]

I don't understand the desire to turn gods of the dead like Anubis, Hades, and the like into villains.

I never stated Anubis was evil nor a villain, rather the Anubians who worship Anubis are. The Anubians are slavers, by that alone, one could define such a species as evil, and the fact that necromancy is their primary use of magic, aside from Spelljammer magic. Anubis was the chief deity of the Egyptian mythos during the 1st Dynasty of Egypt, a time when Osiris and Horus, didn't exist yet. Anubis was responsible for weighing your soul against the weight of the feather. Anubians are "old school". In no way does that suggest Anubis being evil...

 

[Aldarc]

I never stated Anubis was evil nor a villain, rather the Anubians who worship Anubis are. The Anubians are slavers, by that alone, one could define such a species as evil, and the fact that necromancy is their primary use of magic, aside from Spelljammer magic. Anubis was the chief deity of the Egyptian mythos during the 1st Dynasty of Egypt, a time when Osiris and Horus, didn't exist yet. Anubis was responsible for weighing your soul agains the weight of the feather. Anubians are "old school".

This take is a little too essentialist for my tastes.

 

[FitzTheRuke]

Here's a sneak peak at what will never be pubilshed (see my post above to explain).

Shown below is the Anubian Scarab Spelljammer destroyer, then the 4 decks: top deck gunnery and temple, deck two is gunnery support, deck three is crew quarters and helm, deck four is the cargo stores and slave pens (Anubians are jackal headed gnolls, evil slavers that worship Anubis).

View attachment 272623View attachment 272624View attachment 272625View attachment 272626View attachment 272627

Aside from the principle of the thing, is there any reason you can't create this product under OGL 1.1? I'm curious how that kind of thing is going to shake out in the long run. WotC keeps insisting that it won't make a difference to most 3P publishers, but it seems like everyone assumes that it's just ALL OVER for 3PP.

 

[bloodtide]

Stop playing D&D....well, no.

Of Course I play 1E, BECMI, 2E, 3X more then I ever played 5E. So even if WotC went out of business it won't effect my 2E Spelljammer game.

Other then the Core books, I have bought no 5E stuff. Gotten some as gifts, and bought some at used discount stores.

 

[Redwizard007]

This take is a little too essentialist for my tastes.

Really?

 

[Vael]

No. We just had session 0 of me running Light of Xaryxis. I don't pay for DnD Beyond, though I'll use it as a free search engine, and I already own a lot of 5e books.

The OGL fiasco has mainly killed a lot of my interest in One DnD (but I do intend to continue following the playtest) and have gone from "probably won't" to "definitely won't" buy this year's books.

 

[gamerprinter]

Aside from the principle of the thing, is there any reason you can't create this product under OGL 1.1? I'm curious how that kind of thing is going to shake out in the long run. WotC keeps insisting that it won't make a difference to most 3P publishers, but it seems like everyone assumes that it's just ALL OVER for 3PP.

Honestly I don't know. I was considering publishing this OGL 1.0a, and through One D&D at the Dungeon Master's Guild. So it looks like that isn't going to happen. Can an OGL 1.1 suffice? I don't know. The Dungeon Master's Guild isn't selling any 3PP right now that means more at this time. than which flavor of OGL might actually work. I am not a lawyer, I have no real idea and am just waiting out to whether I can publish this or not.

 

[Aldarc]

Really?

Really. I would prefer not get into the why, however, as that risks further derailing the thread.