(Do we have enough threads speculating about the OGL? No, no we do not.)
Thesis/hot take: a restricted and less open license from wotc for the forthcoming "onednd" would inadvertently benefit the ttrpg hobby more broadly. While wotc will remain dominant, a restricted license and "walled garden" infrastructure will push some players, streamers, and independent creators toward non-wotc-dnd games. Many third party projects will still be possible under the existing open game license, and thus onednd will be but one "branch" off the root of 5e-derived games--others, like levelup, mcdm products, or rules lite hacks like 5 torches deep, would exist alongside it. Further, being cut off from the onednd market may encourage third parties to develop content for other systems.
• "The third party ecosystem is what made 5e thrive." Has it? There have been innumerable debates as to the various factors that led to dnd's popularity in the past decade or so (5e's ease of use and classic feel, stranger things, critical role, pandemic), but I wonder to what degree third party products find their way to casual fans. Certainly for enthusiasts, there have been no shortage of options, but this is not proof that onednd needs third parties.
• "The success of wotc is a success for the hobby as a whole. A rising tide lifts all boats." Does it? While dnd is a likely entry point into ttrpgs, it's also a sticking point, in the sense that players stick within the 5e ecosystem. It has allowed for those making 5e-compatible products to thrive, but its "trickle-down" effect is questionable. One can argue that at a certain point it prevents growth of non-5e games because it makes it seem risky for streamers and creators to switch to other systems. In this sense, I would draw a distinction between 5e creators and indie creators more generally. Similarly, I see many people talking as if wotc-dnd="the hobby," hence why a restricted license would be bad for the hobby more generally. But if the wotc-centric part of the hobby contracts (without collapsing), there is perhaps room for other parts of the hobby to grow.
• The 5e boom is also a 5e bubble. I don't know what it's like to be a game developer that turns to 5e compatibility to find a larger audience. A license that took all that away would be harmful to them, it seems. That is, it would be bad for boom to turn to bust, as always. On the other hand, developers like Free League and Magpie have used non-5e systems with their own or licensed IP and have been successful.
Further watching:
Thesis/hot take: a restricted and less open license from wotc for the forthcoming "onednd" would inadvertently benefit the ttrpg hobby more broadly. While wotc will remain dominant, a restricted license and "walled garden" infrastructure will push some players, streamers, and independent creators toward non-wotc-dnd games. Many third party projects will still be possible under the existing open game license, and thus onednd will be but one "branch" off the root of 5e-derived games--others, like levelup, mcdm products, or rules lite hacks like 5 torches deep, would exist alongside it. Further, being cut off from the onednd market may encourage third parties to develop content for other systems.
• "The third party ecosystem is what made 5e thrive." Has it? There have been innumerable debates as to the various factors that led to dnd's popularity in the past decade or so (5e's ease of use and classic feel, stranger things, critical role, pandemic), but I wonder to what degree third party products find their way to casual fans. Certainly for enthusiasts, there have been no shortage of options, but this is not proof that onednd needs third parties.
• "The success of wotc is a success for the hobby as a whole. A rising tide lifts all boats." Does it? While dnd is a likely entry point into ttrpgs, it's also a sticking point, in the sense that players stick within the 5e ecosystem. It has allowed for those making 5e-compatible products to thrive, but its "trickle-down" effect is questionable. One can argue that at a certain point it prevents growth of non-5e games because it makes it seem risky for streamers and creators to switch to other systems. In this sense, I would draw a distinction between 5e creators and indie creators more generally. Similarly, I see many people talking as if wotc-dnd="the hobby," hence why a restricted license would be bad for the hobby more generally. But if the wotc-centric part of the hobby contracts (without collapsing), there is perhaps room for other parts of the hobby to grow.
• The 5e boom is also a 5e bubble. I don't know what it's like to be a game developer that turns to 5e compatibility to find a larger audience. A license that took all that away would be harmful to them, it seems. That is, it would be bad for boom to turn to bust, as always. On the other hand, developers like Free League and Magpie have used non-5e systems with their own or licensed IP and have been successful.
Further watching:
