D&D 5E So did that employee ever return from his Jury Duty?

[Evenglare]

So a while back it was announced that one of the employees at WOTC had to do like..6 months of jury duty. From what I remember he was the guy that had to sign off on stuff, specifically the presentation of an OGL regarding 5e. So... it's nearly september now and I remember the story was back in... january or something? So what's the deal with that?

 

[The Grassy Gnoll]

You want the truth? YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!

 

[Uchawi]

The jury is still out. I choose the blue pill.

 

[graves3141]

There is no WotC employee on jury duty, there never has been a WotC employee on jury duty. Oceania has never been at war with Eastasia...

 

[Mirtek]

He liked it so much he now works at court fulltime

 

[Umbran]

From what I remember he was the guy that had to sign off on stuff, specifically the presentation of an OGL regarding 5e. So... it's nearly september now and I remember the story was back in... january or something? So what's the deal with that?

Given that even telling us that was kind of stretching propriety, don't expect much other direct comment from WotC on it.

And, I don't think *they* ever said that the person in question was holding up an "OGL regarding 5e". I think they said conversion documents were delayed because of this (and, by extension, I'd expect a lot of things may have been delayed), but not an OGL.

We ought to stop referring to "an OGL for 5e" anyway. The OGL is something very specific, with specific features, many of which may not be in whatever licenses they have for 5e. We should talk about a license for 5e, not an OGL for 5e, otherwise we are setting ourselves up for disappointment when, through our own unfounded assumptions, we feel they reneged on promises that *they* were never a party to.

 

[Wicht]

We ought to stop referring to "an OGL for 5e" anyway.

You are probably right. The problem is that people in the company used the term OGL for what they were going to do, thus raising expectations.

 

[delericho]

And, I don't think *they* ever said that the person in question was holding up an "OGL regarding 5e". I think they said conversion documents were delayed because of this (and, by extension, I'd expect a lot of things may have been delayed), but not an OGL.

Yep, it was the conversion documents.

We ought to stop referring to "an OGL for 5e" anyway. The OGL is something very specific, with specific features, many of which may not be in whatever licenses they have for 5e. We should talk about a license for 5e, not an OGL for 5e, otherwise we are setting ourselves up for disappointment when, through our own unfounded assumptions, we feel they reneged on promises that *they* were never a party to.

In fairness, Chris Perkins did indicate that they were intending to bring the OGL back for 5e. Though it should be noted that that was, at most, a statement of intent rather than a promise.

 

[Queer Venger]

You are probably right. The problem is that people in the company used the term OGL for what they were going to do, thus raising expectations.

You and many others should lower your expectations, considerably low...

 

[Sunseeker]

You and many others should lower your expectations, considerably low...

In situations like this, I always reflect on Calvin and Hobbes: