Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="kenmarable" data-source="post: 4708340" data-attributes="member: 40359">I think the debate isn't that Scott Rouse didn't say it how WE wanted it said. The debate is whether WotC said it how the LICENSE said they had to say it (which was vague anyway). Your phrasing is just gunning for the straw man. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />But as many others have pointed out, minute legal technicalities and the real pragmatic world of business rarely meet, and the d20 STL is dead, no matter whether it was officially revoked in accord with the terms specified in the license itself or not.Just don't confuse the issue to think that it's just some publishers wanting to cause trouble. The d20 STL was a license that both WotC and 3rd party publishers entered into, and BOTH sides were bound by its terms. Although WotC did have the advantage of being able to change the terms at any time - but that is decidedly different from them not being bound by those terms at all.</blockquote>