Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Enkhidu" data-source="post: 6294170" data-attributes="member: 351">I think this is the important part. The OGL was fabulous for D&D's 3rd edition. It did indeed make sure that it could stay in print and supported (in the form of Pathfinder, though I doubt anyone could have predicted that particular variation).But was it good for D&D as a whole (and more importantly WotC's ability to continue to have a D&D business)? I don't think so. Systems need to be able to change with the times to maintain relevance, and catch the next wave of players. The OGL - primarily, I think, because it was so mishandled by WotC after it was initially released - ended up calcifying the rule set, making it harder to introduce different foundational ideas.I think WotC's biggest mistake in regard to the OGL was in releasing the code of the system without regard for how to guide - and more importantly monetize - the flow of development. Certainly WotC never envisioned the OGL allowing for wholly new d20 systems built on baseline mechanics but which no longer required a PHB to play. Simple tweaks before the release of the OGL text could have headed that one off pretty effectively.So while I am very glad that the OGL is in place - it's great for me and like minded people - I can definitely see the POV that says that it was a bad idea for WotC.</blockquote>