It is time to forgive WOTC and get back onboard.

[mamba]

Being mad at WoTC executives isn’t going to magically make other games, and some people shift to, popular enough for 3pp to switch as well.

I can think of one way that will ensure that 3pp RPGs never get to a position where they can support an ecosystem of their own. I am not interested in that path.

 

[Corporate Dog]

I don’t play much D&D. My tie to various editions is 100% based on what their licensing says I can use, should the creative bug hit me.

So I own the 3.5 core rulebooks, own nothing from 4e (as much as I’d love to write something based on it), and came back for 5e (which I still thought had somewhat of a lacking SRD).

All the words flying around regarding ‘trust’ and ‘betrayal’ and ‘forgiveness’ don’t hit home for me at all. The simple question for me is, “Can I use what I want in their licensing?”

Creative Commons licensing implies, “Yes, and they can’t pull the rug out from beneath you again either.” So I’m mostly happy with that resolution.

But what I’m really jazzed about are all of the other systems looking at covering their rules under other open licenses (like ORC). Wizards’ screw-up could be the harbinger of a new golden age of third-party publishing.

 

[billd91]

Right and if you did not buy them because of what happened with the OGL or because you are swearing off WOTC then you hurt those creators of the stuff you did not buy/watch/interact with.

And you're hurting the people who are creating material for non-D&D games if you only buy D&D stuff.

No, and No. I'm not really hurting anyone by not being their customer, particularly if I've never been one of their customers - which is true for over 95% of the producers out there. The idea that someone would be actually hurting a publisher because they didn't buy their product is utterly hyperbolic.

 

[Alzrius]

I think that there is often a fundamental misunderstanding when it comes to these conversations.

I will reiterate one thing that I have said repeatedly- the people that I have seen that have been most vocal about stirring up things on this forum are those that are not currently playing 5e.

I'll point out that no small part of this is because at least some of those people play games that couldn't be supported if the OGL v1.0a were to be revoked, due to their having been based on the 3.5 (or Modern) SRD, and for which third-parties were still generating content, sometimes after even those games' original publisher had moved on. I'm thinking PF1, M&M, and various OSR games, etc.

In that regard, the topic of "forgiving WotC and coming back onboard" is (as I see it) them saying that they were previously open to the possibility of WotC winning them back, either with 1D&D or some other alternative setting, game, or other option for play, and that after what WotC tried to do with the OGL, that possibility is closed.

 

[Faolyn]

No, and No. I'm not really hurting anyone by not being their customer, particularly if I've never been one of their customers - which is true for over 95% of the producers out there. The idea that someone would be actually hurting a publisher because they didn't buy their product is utterly hyperbolic.

That was actually my point.

 

[Velderan]

I think that there is often a fundamental misunderstanding when it comes to these conversations.

I will reiterate one thing that I have said repeatedly- the people that I have seen that have been most vocal about stirring up things on this forum are those that are not currently playing 5e. It is interesting to see the people that have been most loudly proclaiming that they have moved to other systems prior to this debacle (or that never played 5e) now saying that they are just unable to morally support WoTC.

That doesn't minimize the very real feelings that some people are having- I noticed that some other people, like darjr, really are looking for fresh alternatives. That's a true loss for D&D to the extent that it isn't temporary.

But getting to the question of the overall ecology, I think that a lot of people are simply wishcasting. We live in a weird time- and some of us remember the last truly weird time (the early 80s). Right now ... we live in a golden era for 3PPs. For all publishers. For kickstarters. And why is this? It's because of the amazing (and, honestly, unforeseen) success of 5e. A lot of people are making a strange assumption- that there is some overall "TTRPG" (RPG) market, and that it will keep on at the current trajectory, and that there will just be a fight over marketshare.

In other words, the assumption is that this is an increasing pie, and that any part of the pie that D&D doesn't have will just go to 3PPs and other games.

That might be correct. But it probably isn't, just based on history and the market. We have had tons of competing games throughout history. Tons. With the exception of a very (VERY) brief blip in the 90s with WoD, none of them has even come close to D&D. Not a one. Instead, we are looking at a market of D&D (current editions, prior editions) and D&D clones, with a few other games sprinkled in. And when the "D&D" market declines, all the other games decline too. After all, one reason for the success of all those 3PPs with 5e is that Hasbro hasn't had a very aggressive release schedule ... even today! There's plenty of room for tweaks, modules, APs, campaign settings, and even "Advanced" versions of the game- because the market itself is so large.

Based on history, when D&D catches a cold, the rest of the industry, especially the 3PPs that depend on scale, catch pneumonia. Maybe this time will be different- maybe we just needed the big bad witch to die for everyone to start playing FiTD, and Fate, and PF2e will soon be growing the market and we will see articles about how there is a need for PF2e DMs that are paid and there are corporate retreats with people playing it!

Maybe. This is certainly possible! But this feels a lot more like 1984 than it does 2014.

Yup, it's probably why WotC was so focused on cancelled DDB subs since those were definitely customers for them to keep or lose. A lot of the complaints are just people who had an axe to grind with WotC for whatever reason and this was just a good opportunity to join the mob. Personally, I have a 5e game scheduled for tonight on a campaign we're winding down. The OGL situation just got me to look at other games and found one that did things better from my perspective. I'll continue to pay attention to 1D&D's development, provide feedback on the playtest material, and see where they land to decide if down the road my gaming path and WotC cross again.

My objection to the stance we need WotC in 2023 is that I don't think it's so clear. Would the market contract in the extremely unlikely event they shelved the system? Almost certainly, because no other system has the recognition that ampersand carries. As you noted, the TTRPG market isn't a fixed sized pie with bigger slices adding up to the same total going out to the publishers left in the hypothetical absence of WotC. The market shrinking isn't the same as it vanishing and yes that would lead to some creators failing which is why I stressed I will continue supporting talented people I currently like even if I'm not planning to play 5e any time soon.

I don't envy the decision making a lot of the industry faces right now. How many folks ordered a PF2e Core Rulebook to spite WotC and will never actually play PF2e? My FLGS had trouble selling their initial batch of PF2e books and said they're hesitant to order more because they have no idea what the actual demand will be going forward. Paizo ordering a reprint that won't arrive until April and accurately knowing how many they need is guesswork at best since they probably have no idea what their actual customer base is anymore. That doesn't even begin to help 3pp figure out how viable making material for PF2e is, both due to an unsure market and a much faster release schedule by Paizo that they'd need to compete with. The next year will be interesting for sure to see how things play out.

 

[mamba]

“I have said this elsewhere but yes it was a draft. However it was as close to a press to go draft as I have ever seen. Stuff missing was like 'email here' and 'link here'" (note that is similar to what I said above)

we have a new video with Kyle Brink


in it he says that the difference between a draft and the final version is that it is a draft until both sides agree to it, then that draft becomes the final version. Skip to about minute 18. So that becomes a pretty disingenuous distinction to me. It actually means everything WotC sends out is the intended final version, which kinda makes this even worse… at a minimum it does not help your case of pointing out that it was ‘only a draft’

 

[Xyxox]

DDB post from Kyle Brink today:

1. Not revoking 1.0a

2. Releasing entire 5E SRD on creative commons

"This Creative Commons license makes the content freely available for any use. We don't control that license and cannot alter or revoke it. It's open and irrevocable in a way that doesn't require you to take our word for it. And its openness means there's no need for a VTT policy. Placing the SRD under a Creative Commons license is a one-way door. There's no going back."

This is what we wanted and it represents a clear reversal from WOTC along with a mea culpa. Putting the SRD under CC is one heck of a show of good faith. I asked for that in the survey, as presumably others did, but I am surprised they did it.

Going forward IMO WOTC can do what they want with ONE. Obviously I would like that to be open as well, but at the end of the day it is up to them and putting a new game under a closed license does not represent the same sort of break in trust that putting 5E under it would have been.

Yeah, too late. already moved on to PF2E.

 

[Bacon Bits]

Based on history, when D&D catches a cold, the rest of the industry, especially the 3PPs that depend on scale, catch pneumonia. Maybe this time will be different- maybe we just needed the big bad witch to die for everyone to start playing FiTD, and Fate, and PF2e will soon be growing the market and we will see articles about how there is a need for PF2e DMs that are paid and there are corporate retreats with people playing it!

Maybe. This is certainly possible! But this feels a lot more like 1984 than it does 2014.

I don't agree. 1984 was wildly different. The game was totally unknown to parents and entirely something nerds and geeks played. In 1984, the pushback against D&D was external. It was the Satanic Panic triggered by the McMartin preschool trial. It was an external group labelling all TTRPGs as "evil" because they featured magic and demons. Going to RuneQuest wasn't really an option. They had magic and demons, too!

Yet, when the satanic panic subsided, people didn't go back to D&D. Why? By then they were to playing the new hotness: console and PCs video games, Vampire (or whatever White Wolf was doing), Cyberpunk 2020, Shadowrun, Call of Cthulu (or whatever Chaosium was doing), and Magic: The Gathering. The real issue was that the product of AD&D was bad at it's descending armor class core by the time 2e AD&D rolled out, and TSR had turned vehemently anti-customer during the rise of the Internet. It took until 3e came out for the fresh new system that actually had a consistent game design to draw people back in to it.

From my memory, 3.x D&D started to "catch a cold" in 2005-2006. People were tired of LFQW and 5MWD. They were tired of two PHBs, 10+ class splatbooks, however many hundreds of prestige classes and alternative rules, etc. It was especially exhausting for new players, who were not interested in reading 3,000 pages of rules to really get into a game. The game was so heavy it was collapsing under it's own weight. And then it split into PF1e and D&D 4e, two games that were even heavier with core mechanics even if they drastically reset the amount of books you needed. (I just happened to read the Pathfinder 1e Power Attack earlier today, and I forgot how obnoxiously intricate it was.) But the fork here was internal to the hobby. People in the hobby wanted something new. So lighter rules likes Deadlands/Savage Worlds got noticed. OSR took off when people realized they could replicate B/X. Then FATE got popular, and PbtA games, and so on. The key, though, is that it was internal. It was the hobbyists that were dissatisfied and left. The ignition was the dispute about 4e (including the GSL) and Paizo leaving to do their own thing.

2023 is also an internal dispute within the hobby. It's not external cultural forces triggering people outside the hobby to prevent their children from participating in the hobby. I also don't think it started with OGL v1.1. I think lots of people have been wanting something better or looking for something better than the basic hamburger of D&D 5e. It's become very clear over the past few years that WotC is interested in appealing to the broadest market, even at the cost of the game itself. At the same time, we've heard 3PPs and YouTube creators squawking about how we need to try other games than 5e for a good solid 3 years at this point. It started prior to Pathfinder 2e, but the cultural shifts since 2014 plus games like Blades in the Dark, Mork Borg, more OSR, etc. The OGL v1.1 just lit the powderkeg that had been brewing for years. WotC missed the pulse of their own industry.

 

[Clint_L]

From my memory, 3.x D&D started to "catch a cold" in 2005-2006. People were tired of LFQW and 5MWD...

From my memory, people were mostly wanting to play World of Warcraft.

Edit: I will be shocked if we don't see a contraction in D&D numbers. It can only expand for so long, and a lot of the current wave of recruits are due to be heading to college, etc. But they'll be back. With their kids. In 30 years.