Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Goblinoid Games" data-source="post: 4187751" data-attributes="member: 47388">That's exactly what I suggested above, though no one responded.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> (reposted from the RPGnow forums)@Daniel -  I'm so glad someone else has said this (about the OGL !=d20). Every time I bring it up all I hear are crickets in response. I've seen a number of publishers say something like, "The difference between 'OGL' and 'd20' is meaningless to customers."Well, that is true, but it is true because publishers keep advertising that OGL = d20. If you want customers to see a difference, tell them there is a difference. But of course, that's the root of the problem that no one talks about, and that is that publishers have wanted customers to equate OGL with d20 because it allows an indication of compatibility with D&D without the pesky d20 license.I'm not saying anyone was "wrong" to do this, but with 4e moving away from the OGL and more and different systems being released under the OGL, I think it is time to cut the license loose and use it as it was meant to be used, not try to shoe horn it into a brand. IMHO. To me if you want to see it as a "symbol," it should be a symbol of open gaming in general.</blockquote>