Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Justice and Rule" data-source="post: 8942228" data-attributes="member: 6778210">None of this requires nuking the OGL, nor does it require other things present in 1.1 and 1.2, like the stiff morality clause. Much of this stuff destroys the 3PP community very directly.This entire line of argumentation was inane when it was put out by D&D and has always been as such. It's like them claiming they need to put in a stiff morality clause and nuke the OGL because they need to save the the brand from "racism". It doesn't come off as real, it comes off as pretext.It also comes off as even more inane given that they released in all in CC. If that was a true and real reason for doing this, they would have never done that, even if they were trying to get good in the community.I disagree. That they specifically fought and kept the royalties where they were more than indicates that they were looking destroying larger companies in the market, as well as their incredibly stiff terms. None of these are necessary to get "control" of the brand. They are necessary if you want to bring the 3PP market underneath your thumb, though.You keep chalking this up to some sort of "bureaucratic" thing, but this wasn't a mistake on a spreadsheet or a small thing overlooked: this was a strategy, something that had been in the works for multiple years. This isn't like they forgot to flip a monthly switch so that the OGL didn't revoke, they planned this for years. They consulted people like Brink on it and ignored him; we know this because he basically said as such in interviews. This goes beyond just a bureaucratic mistake and shows a complete misunderstanding of what they actually have with D&D.</blockquote>

Verification