Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 8865888" data-attributes="member: 18">That's doomsayer hand-wringing nonsense, frankly.A clear statement that they're keeping the OGL absolutely would shut these people up for the very simple reason that nerds love to be right on the internet. Everytime anyone tried to suggest the OGL was going away, they'd get stampeded by nerds trying to link them WotC's statement.That's just how the internet works. [USER=177]@Umbran[/USER] just mentioned it even - internet arguments aren't about finding the truth, for the most part, they're about being "right".Of course that won't happen, but probably not because of EVIL PLANS FOR THE OGL (TM) lol, more likely because WotC's leadership just profoundly don't get that this is at all an issue with any consequences for them, if they're even aware of the issue, which they may well not be. The trouble is not doing anything for that reason looks exactly the same as not doing anything for EVIL PLAN (TM) reasons./shrugIf that were true, WotC would be in big trouble, because the main screw-up in 2008 was WotC's communications (of a variety of kinds). Maybe 4E was always going to lose some people, but it didn't have to lose as many as it did.That's just more reason for WotC to think about their communications strategy.Because the changes are larger than the 3E to 3.5E changes, and looking to be about as big as 1E to 2E? Hell one of the changes is even essentially the same as a "major" 1E to 2E change lol! (The grouping of classes)I mean, the problem here is that for half the people discussing it, "edition change" is limited to a huge change like 3.5E to 4E, and for the other half, it includes 1E to 2E. Neither is right or wrong, and acting like it can only possibly mean one or the other is a silly dance which no-one needs.I'm reminded of the d20 boom and how that basically wiped out a huge proportion of the industry, both from people abandoning their existing stuff to focus on d20, and because people only wanted (or claimed to only want) d20-based games, and the it all came tumbling down (and not even because of WotC).I don't think I've seen any evidence to support your claim of "misunderstanding the licensing agreement" though. What I'm seeing is being who are freaking out because they do understand it, and they know WotC doesn't have to put out any 1D&D stuff under the OGL, nor a 1D&D SRD.However I suspect people are correct that if 1D&D keeps the current level of changes, you could use the current OGL and 5E SRD to keep putting out material for it, just slightly more awkwardly - but nowhere near as awkwardly as the GSL made putting out stuff for 4E.</blockquote>

Verification