D&D 5E Will you continue to give WotC D&D your $$$

[Micah Sweet]

What does Free League do that's so good? I haven't read their stuff--or, honestly, any Pathfinder stuff, so I don't know the differences between them.

Well, they made The One Ring 2e, which is a pretty good game.

 

[Velderan]

I'm just relaying an unsupported rumor that the WOTC was not informed of details. Isn't that half of what this is all about?

More seriously, it would make sense to me if it was someone in HASBRO above WOTC that pushed this but we don't know for certain who exactly was involved or what their thinking was. Whoever did it, it was certainly a mistake. Even people with the best of intentions f*** up sometimes.

I think what you're referring to is WotC rank and file being in the dark about any of this. That's what the email saying they were closely monitoring DDB subs as a way to tell how serious the pushback was had stated.

 

[JAMUMU]

I have nothing against those who continue to support WotC and D&D in whatever walled-garden they end up building. I get it, I've had an iPhone; walled gardens can be lovely, relaxing places compared to the open wilds.

But I stand with those comrades who refuse to accept or support the corporate boot-heel stamping on our faces forever.

 

[Mistwell]

This entirely depends on what they end up doing. Which means I cannot answer the poll with just the two options.

 

[Burnside]

My answer, of course, lies somewhere between the two extremes offered as options.

Will I ever give them "one more penny" during my time remaining on this earth (considering that "the suits" are here to stay)? Yes, I'm sure I will buy a few things.

Will I buy less of their stuff because of this fiasco? Definitely. I was somebody who bought every book and many other accessories. From this point forward, I will definitely hesitate and consider, and it's by no means guaranteed that I'll buy in to OneD&D. Leaning "no" on that at present.

 

[Aldarc]

It's all too easy to say "no," especially as controversy still rages and people are emotionally heated. But to meaningfully walk away without back-sliding across the long-term? I'll believe it when I see it. I've seen all too many angry fans in other fandoms regress and jump back on the consumer train. I've even done it myself. That doesn't mean everyone will come back. There will be people who will never again play a game of WotC D&D or buy another product from them. But our psychological desire to consume products, espsecially those we have attached warm feelings of nostalgia to, has a nasty habit of overriding our "better principles." Will the people who swear to never buy another WotC D&D product feel that way when their favorite, e.g., Planescape, rolls around this year? What excuses will they find to forgive WotC? Or maybe they will say that they don't forgive WotC but that won't stop them from buying the Planescape book once it comes out. Who knows how you, me, or anyone will feel about this in a year's time?

I wish I could have a list of people on this forum who have declared they will never purchase WotC D&D again and then revisit that list in a year or two and see who was back to buying D&D products from WotC.

 

[schneeland]

I honestly wouldn't have a problem with the scrapped OGL 1.1 if they didn't try to mess with any existing OGL/SRD arrangements and let publishers decide for themselves if the new terms worked for their business or not. I thought they looked pretty bad, but if a publisher agreed with me and didn't like them they could have just said "nope" and followed the FAQ's advice of just using the license that worked for them. The leaked 2.0 FAQ doesn't seem to completely close the door on OGL1.0a being a questionable at best path forward and they really need to address that to have a chance at winning my business back.

That's more or less my position, too. It won't undo all the damage, but it's the strategy of trying to weasel out of the existing OGL 1.0(a) contract and invalidating the 3e and 5e SRDs as open content that bothers me profoundly. If they reverse their stance on that, I'll be willing to return to a neutral position regarding OneD&D.

 

[cbwjm]

I'll still be spending money on DnD, I'm looking forward to their planescape book. Someone mentioned a Phandelver book, that could be interesting as well.

I'm definitely checking out the movie, haven't heard anything about the series but might check that out as well. Basically, I'm still buying WotC content; not all of it, but then I never did anyway.

 

[overgeeked]

No is the closest to my actual response, but it has nothing to do with the suits or not destroying the OGL.

The OGL is dead. Long live the ORC.

D&D is dead. Long live RPGs.

 

[Malmuria]

I think, even if the revocation of 1.0a is enforceable, the OGL 2.0 would have effectively zero impact on anyone.

It is dubious whether OGL 1.0 is revokable, but then I’m not the one who has to try to prove my case in court against a large corporation. The threat to revoke OGL 1.0 has already caused a huge disruptions to anyone who had used it. If they insist on revoking it, then many companies will have to pivot very quickly in order to keep selling their products. This includes people who are in the middle of fulfilling kickstarters or planning products for the next year. It’s rather glib to say this state of affairs has zero impact on anyone.

In theory they could copy someone's work, but unless you mark your content as PI (which from my understanding is not simple and rarely done), they could have always copied it.

That’s open gaming content—with the idea being that everyone can share and use it. That’s very different from wotc saying that if you publish with their license, they own your content and you don’t. At the very least, OGL 2.0 will have “zero impact” because 3pp will refuse to sign on to such terms.

edit: oh and they also want to be able to change the terms with 30 days notice. Even better!