WotC Rumor: OGL will not be supported starting with One D&D

[Micah Sweet]

Yeah I'm barely using my existing 5E material so a new edition doesn't appeal when I haven't finished with Xanathars let alone Tasha's.

Yeah. So far, I've seen nothing in 6e worth spending money on. We'll have to see moving forward if that could change.

 

[Zardnaar]

Yeah. So far, I've seen nothing in 6e worth spending money on. We'll have to see moving forward if that could change.

In not seeing much in 5E worth spending the money on.

 

[Micah Sweet]

In not seeing much in 5E worth spending the money on.

No, not anymore really.

 

[teitan]

In not seeing much in 5E worth spending the money on.

It’s kinda like once Mike was gone they started the infinite tweaking that 4e suffered from. MotM was kind of a last straw with reprinting a bunch of monsters I already have because they wanted to revise monster stat blocks. Ya know something that could have waited until after they did D&DOne since it’s so close anyway. The races I get doing a big ol’ race compilation.

 

[Zardnaar]

It’s kinda like once Mike was gone they started the infinite tweaking that 4e suffered from. MotM was kind of a last straw with reprinting a bunch of monsters I already have because they wanted to revise monster stat blocks. Ya know something that could have waited until after they did D&DOne since it’s so close anyway. The races I get doing a big ol’ race compilation.

I bought that book and yeah. The adventures also been meh and other stuff like Fizbans niche. Tasha's itself a lot of power creep.

 

[Blue]

5e was designed purposely as a skeleton. One with tons of open parts for DMs and 3PPs to fill in the flesh and organs or rearranging the bones.

Sometmes WOTC would print the skin.



If your goal is to move organ creation in-house, you have to build a sturdy serious skeleton and start early.

Not playtest reprintings of questionable balance and untold design goals.

That's why I call BS. ONED&D isn't being design as if WOTC is going to heavily shift content creation away from 3PP.

Can you provide some support for this? I've played and have run quite a lot of 5e since it came out and almost noen of the games have any 3pp. It's a complete system as is.

Claiming it's designed as this, can you provide something from the designers?

 

[Blue]

I think this is just fear mongering and there's nothing to it.

But If there's something to it, I think it's more likely like this: 2024!D&D will not be released under the OGL, and there will be no open license SRD. Likely because of the heavy DnDBeyond push which is diluted if DDB doesn't support 3pp that players want, so they are (mistakenly) thinking that this will prevent 3pp creation of material for 2024!D&D.

So "no OGL for OneD&D" just means no parts of it will be released under the OGL, not that the OGL is going away.

If anything about this turns out to be true.

 

[teitan]

Can you provide some support for this? I've played and have run quite a lot of 5e since it came out and almost noen of the games have any 3pp. It's a complete system as is.

Claiming it's designed as this, can you provide something from the designers?

The basic game is a skeleton, it can be downloaded off the WOTC website for free and is complete. Outside of those rules the rest of them in the PHB and DMG are considered and called out as optional rules by WOTC so yes the evidence is very… evident. The optional rules are ways of doing things that aren’t the only way you can do them. Flanking is one called out as “broken” in the “tired of fixing your broken game” videos and blogs that is an optional rule that you don’t have to use and can house rule very easily to be less swingy. Critical hits are another optional rule that are called out as broken that can, again, be house ruled to your liking. That’s what is meant by a skeleton. If you go back and look at the design goals and comments from the designers they accomplished what they set out to do which was to provide a strong base to play with and then house rule and make your own game because that was the preferred playstyle according to feedback in surveys and playtests. So the game supports play styles from very basic, beer and pretzels, very few bells and whistles pick up the dice and play Basic D&D in the pdf below to adding various options to play a more advanced style akin to 1e or 2e up to the very tactically oriented 4e style minis with a grid supported with optional rules in the DMG, which is a toolkit to modify the game how you like and/or provide advice on ways to adjust the game to play to your style following the examples in the DMG. So yes, it’s a skeleton and obviously so if you pay attention to the call outs about what’s optional in the core books (which includes races for example).

The basic rulebook is here: Basic D&D Rules | Dungeons & Dragons

These are for the most part, devoid of 99% of the optional rules you find in the core books, being the bare minimum needed to run a classic D&D style adventure campaign.

 

[Minigiant]

Can you provide some support for this? I've played and have run quite a lot of 5e since it came out and almost noen of the games have any 3pp. It's a complete system as is.

Claiming it's designed as this, can you provide something from the designers?

basically what @teitan

5e was designed as a skeleton for DM's to homebrew or choose options. Feats are optional. Multiclassing are optional. Flanking, weapon mods, advanced skill use, are all optional. In early articles they stated as much claiming groups were too varied.

And WOTC did not block 3PP from making money creating 3P house rules. They actively support ABC Publishing making rule so DMs don't have to.

 

[Blue]

5e was designed as a skeleton for DM's to homebrew or choose options. Feats are optional. Multiclassing are optional. Flanking, weapon mods, advanced skill use, are all optional. In early articles they stated as much claiming groups were too varied.

Options that they provide are not proof that they only delivered a skeleton, they are proof that they delivered more than a skeleton.

And WOTC did not block 3PP from making money creating 3P house rules. They actively support ABC Publishing making rule so DMs don't have to.

Go back and read some of the writings from Ryan Dancy about the OGL. Business plan wise it's to drive sales of the core books, to get everyone playing their game so they have an audience. It's not so that WotC doesn't have to publish options, since they very well do publish options. And again, since it's a complete playable game, DMs don't "have" regardless of if there is 3pp. Like I said, we don't use 3pp in any of the many games I've been in or run, across multiple groups.