Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dire Bare" data-source="post: 9862348" data-attributes="member: 18182">That's one way to parse what he said.Dancey worked for a game company that wanted to sell more games. He came up with a way to do that, which also preserved D&D 3E (and eventually 5E) as an open game. How terrible.The OGL put D&D 3E into the community as a game anyone could design content for, even if WotC went out of business, or sold D&D to somebody else, or something else done by future management. The OGL was also intended to put D&D 3E even more in the center of the hobby than it already was going to be and offload low-yield (but important) products to other companies.The creation of the OGL wasn't an evil plan by Dancey to destroy non-D&D games. The later attempt to revoke the OGL by WotC decades later was an "evil" plan that was negative for the publishing community and the fan community.The OGL helped raise the tide on the entire industry, which resulted in an explosion of content for D&D . . . but also an explosion of non-D&D games. It took time, and there were obviously other factors, but D&D being an open game is an important reason for D&D's continued success and the overall rise of the industry at large.Dancey has put his foot in his mouth multiple times over the years, but this was not one of them.</blockquote>