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

[haakon1]

As I said, we had PF because we had 4E.

Yup. That’s how I remember it.

 

[haakon1]

For sure, the biggest two being the biggest problems - that they're trying to deauthorize OGL 1.0a and trying to destroy the concept of OGC.

My understanding is OGL 2 is only for OneD&D SRD, so canceling OGL 1.0a means no more:

• 5e materials
• 3e or 3.5e compatible materials
• PF1 and I guess PF2
• OSR & DCC, which apparently use SRD elements
• System Neutral, to the extent they reference any of the above.

My favorite 3rd party publisher is Raging Swan Press, which makes materials that cross systems - they put out things in PF1 (3x), 5e, and System Neutral versions. This morning they posted that they may to accelerate and release early the 3 publications they have in the works, because they don’t know when new releases under OGL 1.0a will be banned.

It’s not a good situation. Not good at all.

 

[gamerprinter]

The OGL doesn't affect your ability to make a Spelljammer supplement. You can only reference Spelljammer if you publish though the DM's Guild and accept that license. There is no Spelljammer SRD.

After all this unnecessary worry I've been having. I looked again at what is allowed and disallowed to be published under One D&D at the DM's Guild, and my stuff seems to fall between the cracks. So I contacted DM's Guild support last night and got a response this morning...

"For what you've described I don't believe you should have any issues publishing on DMsGuild, your product sounds like it should fall within our guidelines."

So it seems I'm good to go.

 

[Faolyn]

There have been literally thousand of posts. Believe it or not, I haven't read every one. The only thing I've seen stated repeatedly is that WOTC wants to destroy 3PP and that they've shown that they're basically the second coming of Hitler. Yet nobody explains why, they just jump to the conclusion that WOTC will give a **** and shut you down if you publish a mod.

Yes, they can change the contract with 30 days notice. If they can get revoke the 1.0a version (that's up to the courts to decide) they can revoke any version. They can, in theory, shut anyone down. It would not be in their best interest to do so outside of extreme examples like a NuTSR. Old content is not going to be removed, people would still have a grace period of 6 months to wrap things up and publish under 1.0a, they just won't be able to use the 1.0a in the future. They've always been able to copy the majority of things published and they have not so there's no reason to believe they will in the future.

See? That wasn't hard. An entire paragraph. Phew. My fingers are about ready to fall off! I'm not saying I support the decision, I think it was a mistake. I also don't think WOTC is putting the bootheel of the corporation on the throats of every individual who publishes material either.

If you're just going to respond "You're wrong!" don't bother.

OK, here goes.

I have published a single book using 1.0a, a supplement for Level Up. Nothing special, just new heritages, since at that point Level Up only had the same heritages that were in the 5e PHB. I've made a couple of hundred bucks off of it, just enough to ensure that I can buy new gaming products without feeling guilty about spending the money. WotC is never going to even notice that I exist, let alone want to shut me down or take my stuff for themselves.

But... the fact that they could single people out, that they could change the contract at any moment, that they want to have this extreme power and are only giving us a vague not-promise that they're only going to use it for the bad guys... it turns WotC from the people who made stuff I want to support to a group who... I don't trust enough to want to support.

 

[haakon1]

How is it in WOTC's best interest to shut down peripheral materials that fill holes they themselves would not find profitable?

Those of us opposed to this agree WotC is being foolish. It’s not like they don’t have a history of foolish business decisions. Buying computer RPG studios and shutting them down is a recent example of “oh my that doesn’t look smart”. Dark Alliance‘s failure is another.

But I don't assume the absolute worst when there's no logical reason to do so.

Disclaimer: as always I think trying to revoke OGL 1.0a is a stupid move.

Isn’t trying to revoke OGL 1.0a a clear indication we should be alarmed?

 

[Oofta]

OK, here goes.

I have published a single book using 1.0a, a supplement for Level Up. Nothing special, just new heritages, since at that point Level Up only had the same heritages that were in the 5e PHB. I've made a couple of hundred bucks off of it, just enough to ensure that I can buy new gaming products without feeling guilty about spending the money. WotC is never going to even notice that I exist, let alone want to shut me down or take my stuff for themselves.

But... the fact that they could single people out, that they could change the contract at any moment, that they want to have this extreme power and are only giving us a vague not-promise that they're only going to use it for the bad guys... it turns WotC from the people who made stuff I want to support to a group who... I don't trust enough to want to support.

I don't mean to indicate that you have no reason for concern. You do what's right for you. I just don't think that WOTC would ever even notice a product that has so little impact. It's great that you came up with this, and I've been quite happy with several purchases I've made on DmsGuild.

I would just encourage you to continue producing. Shutting down services like the one you've provided buys WOTC nothing.

 

[Oofta]

Those of us opposed to this agree WotC is being foolish. It’s like they don’t have a history of foolish business decisions. Buying computer RPG studios an$ shutting them down is a recent example of “oh my that doesn’t look smart”. Dark Alliance‘s failure is another.


Isn’t trying to revoke OGL 1.0a a clear indication we should be alarmed?

The world is a different place than it was when 1.0a was released and D&D, the TTRPG market as a whole, is in a different place. Something a little more successful than NuTSR associated with D&D (people won't care or notice that it's not labeled D&D) could do damage to the brand. Ironically probably not as much as the OGL 1.1.

The 1.1 version was a huge blunder. That doesn't mean that the 2.0 version when, and if, it's released won't just clarify some usage that will affect virtually no one unless the 3PP chooses to change direction. Is there cause for concern? Obviously. Is it a fait accompli that all 3PPs will be shut down because of it? I see no reason to believe that is the case.

 

[akr71]

I canceled my BnBDeyond sub, but honestly, I haven't bought many books lately. Fizban's was the last one I bought, though I did buy the Dragonlance one for my wife for xmas.

I have spent more on third party content in the last few years. I have enough 5E material to keep me going for years if needed, however our group likes to switch it up and play different games.

I'm not saying I'll never give them money again - just not any time soon. If the top brass are removed and/or it really looks like there is a sea change at the company, I may give them another chance.

 

[haakon1]

The 1.1 version was a huge blunder. That doesn't mean that the 2.0 version when, and if, it's released won't just clarify some usage that will affect virtually no one unless the 3PP chooses to change direction. Is there cause for concern? Obviously. Is it a fait accompli that all 3PPs will be shut down because of it? I see no reason to believe that is the case.

I think WotC will try to do what they said in OGL 1.1, which is effectively shut down their “competition“. If so, I think it will be settled in court, probably King County, WA court as that’s where WotC and Paizo are both based, though I bet Hasbro tries to change venue to Rhode Island, so there are fewer people aware of RPG’s in the jury pool.

Anyhow, the protest is actually trying to save D&D and by extension WotC, from a boneheaded miscalculation. Don’t blame the protestors. WotC should be thanking us for caring so much about their business. And in the case of most people here, I suspect like me they’re DMs who’ve bought thousands worth of their stuff and brought dozens or scores of people into the game. But fat chance of that.

The best we can hope for is them is walking it back and being snarky about it. “We both win” only if they truly walk it back.

 

[Velderan]

OK, here goes.

I have published a single book using 1.0a, a supplement for Level Up. Nothing special, just new heritages, since at that point Level Up only had the same heritages that were in the 5e PHB. I've made a couple of hundred bucks off of it, just enough to ensure that I can buy new gaming products without feeling guilty about spending the money. WotC is never going to even notice that I exist, let alone want to shut me down or take my stuff for themselves.

But... the fact that they could single people out, that they could change the contract at any moment, that they want to have this extreme power and are only giving us a vague not-promise that they're only going to use it for the bad guys... it turns WotC from the people who made stuff I want to support to a group who... I don't trust enough to want to support.

Is your book for sale still? Link please!

 

[Faolyn]

Is your book for sale still? Link please!

Yeah, I haven't taken it down or anything. You can find it here. And thanks, even if you don't buy it!

 

[Maxperson]

So for example, I make a setting book which has some monsters, feats, and classes in it. Let's call the setting Ruinaria.

That's actually not a bad name for a post-apocalyptic campaign setting.

 

[Oofta]

I think WotC will try to do what they said in OGL 1.1, which is effectively shut down their “competition“. If so, I think it will be settled in court, probably King County, WA court as that’s where WotC and Paizo are both based, though I bet Hasbro tries to change venue to Rhode Island, so there are fewer people aware of RPG’s in the jury pool.

Meanwhile I see no indication that they are trying to shut down competition with the 2.0. They've stated that anything previously released will not be affected. Unless they open the door to another PF because they radically change the nature game, the stuff being published now isn't really competition.

Anyhow, the protest is actually trying to save D&D and by extension WotC, from a boneheaded miscalculation. Don’t blame the protestors. WotC should be thanking us for caring so much about their business. And in the case of most people here, I suspect like me they’re DMs who’ve bought thousands worth of their stuff and brought dozens or scores of people into the game. But fat chance of that.


The best we can hope for is them is walking it back and being snarky about it. “We both win” only if they truly walk it back.

When have I blamed the protesters? I agree that OGL 1.1 was a boneheaded move but it's water under the bridge now. We don't know yet what 2.0 will look like and can only base speculation on what they've said.

All just my personal perspective on why I don't have any current plans to change my purchasing decisions a the moment, of course.

 

[Parmandur]

Ahhh that takes me back.

This is the sort of ludicrous hyperbolic partisan sneering that was such a feature of the early '90s discussion of RPGs. You could literally just replace Free League with, say White Wolf, R. Talsorian, even FASA, and just drop this into a forum from 1994 and it'd have fit right in.

People who post this stuff never seem to consider for even one second the optics of doing so.

I agree with you about that nonsense, actually, but I will say that Free League is doing some cool stuff that is very different from what's coming out of the American scene right now.

The only Free League book I own is all about fairy tales and is full of twee and dark stuff intertwined, I don't think I'd peg it above PG-13, so I wouldn't say it is "for adults who are TOTALLY GROWN UP."

 

[Malmuria]

They've stated that anything previously released will not be affected.

That was a very vague part of their statement (and at odds with the leaked 1.1). If they revoke OGL 1.0, then everyone currently publishing under it will have to switch licenses going forward, either to OGL 2.0 or something else. And all the major publishers have said the terms offered by wotc for the next OGL are unpalatable, hence why they are creating and moving to other licenses. Perhaps wotc's intention was not to force all these publishers away from dnd, but that seems to be the effect. It's a huge disruption to the ttrpg industry and quite the rug pull for people who built their business, however small, around the OGL.

 

[Oofta]

That was a very vague part of their statement (and at odds with the leaked 1.1). If they revoke OGL 1.0, then everyone currently publishing under it will have to switch licenses going forward, either to OGL 2.0 or something else. And all the major publishers have said the terms offered by wotc for the next OGL are unpalatable, hence why they are creating and moving to other licenses. Perhaps wotc's intention was not to force all these publishers away from dnd, but that seems to be the effect. It's a huge disruption to the ttrpg industry and quite the rug pull for people who built their business, however small, around the OGL.

My assumption based on what they have said is that anything published under 1.0a will be unaffected. Anything published after a grace period would in theory have to follow OGL 2.0, if of course that revoking 1.0a is not thrown out in court.

Which leaves us with: what would the impact of 2.0 be on newly produced content actually be? We don't know for certain, but to me it seems incredibly minimal. I see no reason to believe it's a "rug pull" of any sort and I have yet to see concrete reasons why it would be so other than vague assertions of evil corporate types.

As far as I can tell it only has a negative if you assume worst case scenario blundering by WOTC that would actively harm it's business interests by shutting down 3PP across the board. I don't assume that which is why I have no plans to change my purchasing decisions until my assumption is proven otherwise. I would make the same recommendation to anyone publishing or planning to publish. You have every right to be concerned but I don't see a reason to overreact or panic because it would make no sense for WOTC to shut down all 3PP.

 

[Malmuria]

My assumption based on what they have said is that anything published under 1.0a will be unaffected. Anything published after a grace period would in theory have to follow OGL 2.0, if of course that revoking 1.0a is not thrown out in court.

Which leaves us with: what would the impact of 2.0 be on newly produced content actually be? We don't know for certain, but to me it seems incredibly minimal. I see no reason to believe it's a "rug pull" of any sort and I have yet to see concrete reasons why it would be so other than vague assertions of evil corporate types.

As far as I can tell it only has a negative if you assume worst case scenario blundering by WOTC that would actively harm it's business interests by shutting down 3PP across the board. I don't assume that which is why I have no plans to change my purchasing decisions until my assumption is proven otherwise. I would make the same recommendation to anyone publishing or planning to publish. You have every right to be concerned but I don't see a reason to overreact or panic because it would make no sense for WOTC to shut down all 3PP.

It's already a rug pull in the sense that 3pp (enworld included) are scrambling to scrub their content of SRD material, create or sign onto new licenses where appropriate, and figure out how to proceed with currently fulfilling and planned kickstarters for 2023. And they still don't know for sure what the terms of the OGL 2.0 are. All of this confusion was directly caused by wotc trying to shift licenses very quickly and without much transparency. Evil is hyperbole, but it is a dick move to treat one's business partners that way.

Regardless of their intent, the effect so far is that 3pp are less trusting of wotc as a business partner and are moving their products away from the OGL and the SRD. Even if their intent was very innocent (and not bullying, which I personally think is more likely), they've made it so it makes sense for 3pp to have little confidence in the OGL moving forward.

 

[Oofta]

It's already a rug pull in the sense that 3pp (enworld included) are scrambling to scrub their content of SRD material, create or sign onto new licenses where appropriate, and figure out how to proceed with currently fulfilling and planned kickstarters for 2023. And they still don't know for sure what the terms of the OGL 2.0 are. All of this confusion was directly caused by wotc trying to shift licenses very quickly and without much transparency. Evil is hyperbole, but it is a dick move to treat one's business partners that way.

Regardless of their intent, the effect so far is that 3pp are less trusting of wotc as a business partner and are moving their products away from the OGL and the SRD. Even if their intent was very innocent (and not bullying, which I personally think is more likely), they've made it so it makes sense for 3pp to have little confidence in the OGL moving forward.

WOTC has made no official changes yet. If people want to stop supporting D&D, that's up to them. Just like it's up to me to choose to continue to buy products I find interesting.

 

[Ayeffkay]

No. The OGL is the final straw, but the last year of garbage releases (naval setting with no ship to ship rules, mass combat setting with no mass combat rules, etc) had already soured me on D&D products.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Winter blahs.

Hey at least it's getting lighter every day not darker! Well get there. Bloody cold though!