We got an official leak of One D&D OGL 1.1! Watch Our Discussion And Reactions!
- Thread starter Stonesnake
- Start date
overgeeked
B/X Known World
It's certainly not the best game out there, but I'd argue that it's mostly name recognition. Which Mercer himself is at least in part responsible for.
I'm thinking a backdoor contract between them.
Greg Benage
Legend
I don't think it's "backdoor" -- I think Hasbro is making all the big guys offers they can't refuse. But Mercer liking that tweet at least suggests, even if it's some wishcasting on my part, that he might be inclined to refuse anyway.
Random Task
Explorer
I unfortunately don't believe that. The OGL was a tactical error that allowed Paizo to grow and flourish using familiar D&D IP. D&D now doesn't need the OGL and all the D20 come along games and third party stuff to be successful. I don't think D&D 5th edition took off because of the OGL.
Similarly Chaosium would be better off having published Delta Green as a branch of Call of Cthulhu, and not allowed it to go off and make someone else successful while being hard to distinguish system and background wise from CoC.
Scribe
Legend
Which tweet? EDIT: NM saw it, fast threads.
DarkCrisis
Sith Lord
Greg Benage
Legend
There wasn't even an SRD when it took off.
Jack Daniel
dice-universe.blogspot.com
But again, what could compel that? If I don't agree to v1.1 — if I just act like v1.1 doesn't exist and go about my merry way publishing under v1.0 — what could stop me?
Clearly, the company to watch in the coming days will be Paizo. They're the biggest fish in what is still basically the retro-clone pond (regardless of PF2e's status as a new game). If Paizo doesn't want to accept any new version of the license or enter into any new agreements or contracts with WotC, what could possibly stop them from continuing to publish PF2e material under the OGL v1.0a forever?
I can't think of a single thing that would accomplish that (without litigation, of course).
That status change... new?I've posted an article summarsing the current situation as best I can at present:
The OGL -- Just What's Going On?
D&D fandom is in uproar again about purported upcoming changes to the Open Gaming License, and rumours are flooding social media regarding WotC's intentions to 'de-authorize' the existing Open Gaming License in favour of a new one. What's the OGL? The Open Gaming License is a share-a-like...www.enworld.org
mamba
Hero
WotC's lawyers
MockingBird
Hero
Does this make anyone else not want to participate in the playtest?
Vaalingrade
Legend
Yeah, makes any help you give them feel a lot like being the accomplice in what could be the ruining of many, many lives.
Scribe
Legend
Even if WotC were to come out and say "we reconsidered", it feels like unless there's a court decision saying it's irrevocable or a 1.0b* that's just like 1.0a except with irrevocable, that it would be silly for anyone not to think this 1.1 wasn't right around the next management-change corner?
*Not that the new things coming up from WotC have to be under it, just that all the old stuff doesn't go away.
*Not that the new things coming up from WotC have to be under it, just that all the old stuff doesn't go away.
Ondath
Hero
I recorded a podcast episode where I played the playtest with a few friends. Even if the episode gets published, only a small portion of it will be on the playtest itself and most of it will be on the OGL.
overgeeked
B/X Known World
It wasn't a play test to begin with, but it makes me want to participate in the surveys even more.
Alzrius
The EN World kitten
Yeah. Casting doubt on the perpetual viability of the OGL v1.0a that was heretofore unquestioned is already a degree of damage that won't be easily undone.
The only tactical error that was made with the OGL, from a money-grubbing perspective, was not binding it to the D20 STL. This would have prevented Pathfinder but allowed most everything else.
I'm not sure what you're going for here.
Similar Threads
