Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 8891472" data-attributes="member: 18">They're right on it being predictable, but expressing an opinion or whether it's okay or not ethically/morally (which they are) is going entirely outside of their remit and talking crap (doesn't matter if you're a "Harvard lawyer", your opinion is no more valid than anyone else on that), and attacking a journalist? That's outright messed-up. That is itself unethical - suggesting pitchforks particularly is creepy.I'm interested by this, because what, did Hasbro's lawyers fail? The fact that WotC intentionally released not one, but two SRDs for 5E strongly suggests that, what, WotC overruled Hasbro here?The question is, if you interpret WotC's silence that way, how do you interpret Paizo and CR's silence?Other big 3PPs, including Kobold, who were undoubtedly part of any "secret negotiations" and NDA, have stopped being silent, but those two still are. Those closest we've had to breaking it is Paizo suggesting a guy redoing PF2 intro videos hold off.</blockquote>