Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 8925311" data-attributes="member: 18">I'm saying that WotC will be telling us what they want for the future of D&amp;D with how they licence 1D&amp;D. You might want to take this all a bit less personally. It's not about &quot;holding people to standards&quot; or whatever. It's about listening when WotC tell you who they are. They've had a big moment here. They tried to do something entirely crazy. People yelled at them. WotC realized it was crazy, and completely stood down. The question is, what did they take from that? What did they learn from that?I don't have any &quot;demands&quot; or &quot;standards&quot; I specifically want from the 1D&amp;D SRD/licencing (if there even is licencing, if there isn't that's a whole other interesting message). But I want to know what they do before I say &quot;Well, WotC went crazy but then they got it back together!&quot;. There's a huge range of different things they could do, different things they could learn.If they want to make 1D&amp;D a sort of locked-off system with a very tight licence, that's no skin off my nose, for example. But it'd be interesting. If they want to release the 1D&amp;D SRD under CC/OGL 1.0a that's a huge statement, a gigantic one. I don't require it of them, but that would really be saying something. But those are only two in a myriad of possibilities.Indeed.On top of that, an awful lot of mid-range publishers, those closest to WotC in terms of success (though it's not very close!) do actually have SRDs and open licences, at least where possible.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ruin Explorer, post: 8925311, member: 18"] I'm saying that WotC will be telling us what they want for the future of D&D with how they licence 1D&D. You might want to take this all a bit less personally. It's not about "holding people to standards" or whatever. It's about listening when WotC tell you who they are. They've had a big moment here. They tried to do something entirely crazy. People yelled at them. WotC realized it was crazy, and completely stood down. The question is, what did they take from that? What did they learn from that? I don't have any "demands" or "standards" I specifically want from the 1D&D SRD/licencing (if there even is licencing, if there isn't that's a whole other interesting message). But I want to know what they do before I say "Well, WotC went crazy but then they got it back together!". There's a huge range of different things they could do, different things they could learn. If they want to make 1D&D a sort of locked-off system with a very tight licence, that's no skin off my nose, for example. But it'd be interesting. If they want to release the 1D&D SRD under CC/OGL 1.0a that's a huge statement, a gigantic one. I don't require it of them, but that would really be saying something. But those are only two in a myriad of possibilities. Indeed. On top of that, an awful lot of mid-range publishers, those closest to WotC in terms of success (though it's not very close!) do actually have SRDs and open licences, at least where possible. [/QUOTE]

Verification