Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Historian Ben Riggs says the OGL fiasco was Chris Cocks idea.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Alzrius" data-source="post: 9413918" data-attributes="member: 8461"><p>No, you don't. But when I say that there's a concern about the potential of WotC's VTT (if it's as successful as they want it to be) to disincentivize the wider range of imaginative play, and the replies are predicated on "you're saying that (all) VTTs discourage creativity," then your disagreement is premised on something I never said.</p><p></p><p>Which is entirely your opinion, and that's fine. I think that they are good arguments, but at this point almost no one is actually replying to them as I've presented them.</p><p></p><p>At this point, the fact that the arguments I made are being acknowledged at all is head and shoulders above most of the responses I've received.</p><p></p><p>In this thread? I have to disagree with your there. The vast majority have put forward a stance that comes across as being not only entirely trusting of WotC, but also protective of them to the point of thinking there's no legitimate cause of ill-will toward them.</p><p></p><p>Then you can't really complain with regard to how a point you're calling attention to in a quoted post is hidden by how the quote box defaults to a collapsed state.</p><p></p><p>The parenthetical part undercuts the rest of what you're saying here. The cited influencer is far, <em>far</em> from being "one of their most vocal critics."</p><p></p><p>Do I need to actively point out that my previous mention of "WotC is known for maintaining relationships with people who don't care for them" was meant to be read ironically? I mean, I can understand Poe's Law being a thing, so I suppose I should have posted an emoji there to make that clear. Mea culpa.</p><p></p><p>See above. You misread my statement, but I'll say that one was my fault for not making it obvious as was absolutely possible.</p><p></p><p>The single best part of this is what comes after. I mean, maybe this is meant to be facetious on your part, but it really doesn't read like it</p><p></p><p>"You have no proof...except for everything they've ever done!" Not the strongest argument there.</p><p></p><p>And exactly what parts do you think that is? Because so far you've only pointed to marketing-approved public statements and them sending products a month early to an influencer who's not <em>completely</em> beholden to them.</p><p></p><p>Among many, many other things, yes. The real question is why so many people insist on looking past those.</p><p></p><p>You left out the important context about how that was during the OGL crisis. I'm not sure why your criteria is "cutting off anyone who ever said a bad word about them," but that's not the standard.</p><p></p><p>See above. Not even WotC can defend their OGL debacle, so they had to walk that one back.</p><p></p><p>Because it was their own actions that convinced me of that. You seem to think that because they lost the OGL fight, and made conciliatory gestures, that means all is forgiven. The real question is why.</p><p></p><p>You're the one who brought them up in the first place, and now you're saying they're not relevant?</p><p></p><p>Which is an absolutist position, again, since now you're talking about things being required instead of what's being incentivized. That's a mindset that's not conducive to anything we're talking about, since there's no aspect of this which is a measure of "forcing" or "requiring" anyone to do anything. The entire point revolves around some things being made more enticing, which distracts from things which are not so enticed.</p><p></p><p>You don't think the window to buy RvB from Rooster Teeth is closing quickly?</p><p></p><p>Wait, so now you're literally asking me to summarize the last few pages of the thread for you, even though it's not only right there for you to peruse but you've even been posting in it this entire time, and yet haven't bothered to actually read what's been posted? As in, the text there has already been passing in front of your eyes, yet you haven't actually taken any of it in? Because literally every single thing you've said here, every incorrect assumption, misstatement, and fallacy, has already been brought up and addressed.</p><p></p><p>No, what you've said isn't right. It's a Billy Madison quote waiting to happen.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Alzrius, post: 9413918, member: 8461"] No, you don't. But when I say that there's a concern about the potential of WotC's VTT (if it's as successful as they want it to be) to disincentivize the wider range of imaginative play, and the replies are predicated on "you're saying that (all) VTTs discourage creativity," then your disagreement is premised on something I never said. Which is entirely your opinion, and that's fine. I think that they are good arguments, but at this point almost no one is actually replying to them as I've presented them. At this point, the fact that the arguments I made are being acknowledged at all is head and shoulders above most of the responses I've received. In this thread? I have to disagree with your there. The vast majority have put forward a stance that comes across as being not only entirely trusting of WotC, but also protective of them to the point of thinking there's no legitimate cause of ill-will toward them. Then you can't really complain with regard to how a point you're calling attention to in a quoted post is hidden by how the quote box defaults to a collapsed state. The parenthetical part undercuts the rest of what you're saying here. The cited influencer is far, [i]far[/i] from being "one of their most vocal critics." Do I need to actively point out that my previous mention of "WotC is known for maintaining relationships with people who don't care for them" was meant to be read ironically? I mean, I can understand Poe's Law being a thing, so I suppose I should have posted an emoji there to make that clear. Mea culpa. See above. You misread my statement, but I'll say that one was my fault for not making it obvious as was absolutely possible. The single best part of this is what comes after. I mean, maybe this is meant to be facetious on your part, but it really doesn't read like it "You have no proof...except for everything they've ever done!" Not the strongest argument there. And exactly what parts do you think that is? Because so far you've only pointed to marketing-approved public statements and them sending products a month early to an influencer who's not [i]completely[/i] beholden to them. Among many, many other things, yes. The real question is why so many people insist on looking past those. You left out the important context about how that was during the OGL crisis. I'm not sure why your criteria is "cutting off anyone who ever said a bad word about them," but that's not the standard. See above. Not even WotC can defend their OGL debacle, so they had to walk that one back. Because it was their own actions that convinced me of that. You seem to think that because they lost the OGL fight, and made conciliatory gestures, that means all is forgiven. The real question is why. You're the one who brought them up in the first place, and now you're saying they're not relevant? Which is an absolutist position, again, since now you're talking about things being required instead of what's being incentivized. That's a mindset that's not conducive to anything we're talking about, since there's no aspect of this which is a measure of "forcing" or "requiring" anyone to do anything. The entire point revolves around some things being made more enticing, which distracts from things which are not so enticed. You don't think the window to buy RvB from Rooster Teeth is closing quickly? Wait, so now you're literally asking me to summarize the last few pages of the thread for you, even though it's not only right there for you to peruse but you've even been posting in it this entire time, and yet haven't bothered to actually read what's been posted? As in, the text there has already been passing in front of your eyes, yet you haven't actually taken any of it in? Because literally every single thing you've said here, every incorrect assumption, misstatement, and fallacy, has already been brought up and addressed. No, what you've said isn't right. It's a Billy Madison quote waiting to happen. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
D&D Historian Ben Riggs says the OGL fiasco was Chris Cocks idea.
Top