Quote from: Rob Necronomicon on January 13, 2023, 07:22:17 PM
Indeed... It's so transparently obvious that this is a complete red herring while trying to look like the 'good guys'. It's typical management speak and chicanery.

Definitely! And the vast majority see through it I think.

Quote from: S'mon on January 13, 2023, 07:26:10 PM

Quote from: Rob Necronomicon on January 13, 2023, 07:22:17 PM
Indeed... It's so transparently obvious that this is a complete red herring while trying to look like the 'good guys'. It's typical management speak and chicanery.

Definitely! And the vast majority see through it I think.

Yeah, I think so man, which is great to see!

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 13, 2023, 07:07:03 PMThat's some interesting history revisionism you got going there my dude.

I was there, running a 3x game at the time. People were already upset at 4e before they even announced that the OGL wasn't being continued. Nobody cared that 4e wasn't open because nobody wanted to play it. But, even if the lack of OGL support was a significant factor in players not transitioning to 4e, that still doesn't change the fact that Pathfinder wouldn't have been a thing if the OGL didn't exists in the first place.

Quote from: hedgehobbit on January 13, 2023, 08:01:38 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 13, 2023, 07:07:03 PMThat's some interesting history revisionism you got going there my dude.

I was there, running a 3x game at the time. People were already upset at 4e before they even announced that the OGL wasn't being continued. Nobody cared that 4e wasn't open because nobody wanted to play it. But, even if the lack of OGL support was a significant factor in players not transitioning to 4e, that still doesn't change the fact that Pathfinder wouldn't have been a thing if the OGL didn't exists in the first place.

More history revisionism.

Yes, Hitler wouldn't have murdered 6 million Jews if the Jews hadn't existed in the first place.

What I mean is this:

The OGL existed, and D&D was the #1, come 4e and the GSL then Paizo pivots from 3PP to publishing Pathfinder becoming the #1.

With 5e WotC returns to the OGL and becomes the #1 AGAIN.

So, how come the OGL is to blame for WotC losing to a game that wouldn't have existed had they not stoped Paizo from publishing for 4e? But it's not to it's credit that WotC recovered the first spot as soon as they pivoted back to the OGL with 5e?

Your logic is faulty.

Quote from: hedgehobbit on January 13, 2023, 06:51:58 PM

Quote from: jhkim on January 13, 2023, 06:28:42 PMI think it's reasonable to have vitriol over the broken promise that they would be open, especially given that the OGL v1.0a was inherently to WotC's advantage. It can and did shift the market to give them dominance, and now they were trying to break their own contract to dominate even more.

D&D was the dominant game before the OGL and the only time they lost the #1 spot was a result of the OGL. The OGL is clearly not to Wizards benefit or else they wouldn't be trying to cancel it. Paizo is a great example of this. Nothing Paizo does helps D&D achieve market dominance.

Currently, WotC execs think they can do better than the OGL v1.0a. However, in the past, they chose to use the OGL v1.0a for all of 3E, 3.5E,  and 5E. And it seems like their strategy for those systems was largely successful.

Back in the late 1990s when WotC acquired D&D, it was still #1 among tabletop RPGs, but that was #1 over a shrinking market for everyone that had driven TSR bankrupt. Tabletop RPGs had been declining for White Wolf, TSR and most everyone else. Particularly after the decline of Vampire: the Masquerade, I'm sure D&D managers weren't worried about other tabletop RPGs as competition. Their key competition was video games, collectible card games, and lots of other entertainment.

From what I have read, publishing modules and settings was often a net loss for TSR, but if they didn't keep publishing, then their fan base would keep decreasing. They could get an influx of cash with a new edition, but that can also turn off the fan base, so it's a move only to be used sparingly.

The OGL v1.0a generated the D20 glut, where tons of people publishing for D&D and D&D-compatible systems. That drove increased interest and sales in D&D. WotC made money off the core book sales, and other companies got the riskier sales of modules and settings - which drove more core book sales.

Quote from: jhkim on January 13, 2023, 08:33:52 PM

The OGL v1.0a generated the D20 glut, where tons of people publishing for D&D and D&D-compatible systems. That drove increased interest and sales in D&D. WotC made money off the core book sales, and other companies got the riskier sales of modules and settings - which drove more core book sales.

This was Ryan Dancey's plan all along and how he was able to pitch the OGL in the first place. 

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 13, 2023, 07:09:06 PM

Quote from: hedgehobbit on January 13, 2023, 07:02:54 PM

Quote from: Effete on January 13, 2023, 06:54:27 PMHere's the thing. All WotC had to do was stop declaring new material as Open Content. The entire OneDnD/6e ruleset could have put behind a wall, with an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT license (the one they want the OGL to be) governing it's use. Who would have complained?

Except this would have resulted in the exact thing that happened with Pathfinder. Hasbro needs people to transition to One D&D and to do that they need to shut the door on future 5e content.

You may not like Hasbro's goal here, but it isn't stupid.

Like I already said: Pathfinder wouldn't exist IF WotC hadn't tried this same shit with 4e putting it behind the GSL and cutting off ALL the 3pp that had given it the definitive edge.

You need to learn your facts before forming an opinion.

According to Paizo, who you're free to disbelieve, they were already going to do their own 3e-offshoot the moment they read an early copy of 4e, before the OGL was shut down for 4e. They say it was the rules themselves, not the GSL, which caused them to make their own off-shoot game. And then when the GSL came out they patted themselves on the back and said see we would have been screwed anyway aren't we smart for making this decision earlier.

Quote from: Mistwell on January 13, 2023, 08:46:50 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 13, 2023, 07:09:06 PM

Quote from: hedgehobbit on January 13, 2023, 07:02:54 PM

Quote from: Effete on January 13, 2023, 06:54:27 PMHere's the thing. All WotC had to do was stop declaring new material as Open Content. The entire OneDnD/6e ruleset could have put behind a wall, with an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT license (the one they want the OGL to be) governing it's use. Who would have complained?

Except this would have resulted in the exact thing that happened with Pathfinder. Hasbro needs people to transition to One D&D and to do that they need to shut the door on future 5e content.

You may not like Hasbro's goal here, but it isn't stupid.

Like I already said: Pathfinder wouldn't exist IF WotC hadn't tried this same shit with 4e putting it behind the GSL and cutting off ALL the 3pp that had given it the definitive edge.

You need to learn your facts before forming an opinion.

According to Paizo, who you're free to disbelieve, they were already going to do their own 3e-offshoot the moment they read an early copy of 4e, before the OGL was shut down for 4e. They say it was the rules themselves, not the GSL, which caused them to make their own off-shoot game. And then when the GSL came out they patted themselves on the back and said see we would have been screwed anyway aren't we smart for making this decision earlier.

They said this when?

Quote from: THE_Leopold on January 13, 2023, 08:39:53 PM

Quote from: jhkim on January 13, 2023, 08:33:52 PM
The OGL v1.0a generated the D20 glut, where tons of people publishing for D&D and D&D-compatible systems. That drove increased interest and sales in D&D. WotC made money off the core book sales, and other companies got the riskier sales of modules and settings - which drove more core book sales.

This was Ryan Dancey's plan all along and how he was able to pitch the OGL in the first place.

Agreed. And from what I can tell, this plan has been highly successful. D&D has made a ton of money under the OGL v1.0a, the tabletop RPG market has grown overall, and D&D became even more dominant over other RPGs than ever.

Quote from: hedgehobbit on January 13, 2023, 07:02:54 PM

Quote from: Effete on January 13, 2023, 06:54:27 PMHere's the thing. All WotC had to do was stop declaring new material as Open Content. The entire OneDnD/6e ruleset could have put behind a wall, with an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT license (the one they want the OGL to be) governing it's use. Who would have complained?

Except this would have resulted in the exact thing that happened with Pathfinder. Hasbro needs people to transition to One D&D and to do that they need to shut the door on future 5e content.

I'm not sure the backlash would have been as severe, though. A 5e clone might have popped up and gained the spotlight for a while, but WotC wouldn't have the stigma that they do now. Eventually, 3PPs would sign onto the 6e project.

Instead, they tried to screw everyone over, pushed them away from their brand, and instigated the creatation of 5e rival anyway. Except this time no one trusts them.

QuoteYou may not like Hasbro's goal here, but it isn't stupid.

I'm certain all their internal data and spreadsheets told them their plan was a big money-maker. That in itself is not a stupid goal. But the way they went about definitely was.

DandD Shorts take:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeWaq6pQQW4

Forbes is talking about the backlash. This MIGHT raise an eyebrow or two among WotC/Hasbro stock holders.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/robwieland/2023/01/10/whats-happening-with-the-dungeons--dragons-open-gaming-license/?sh=57d1d592bde3

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 13, 2023, 09:55:15 PM
Forbes is talking about the backlash. This MIGHT raise an eyebrow or two among WotC/Hasbro stock holders.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/robwieland/2023/01/10/whats-happening-with-the-dungeons--dragons-open-gaming-license/?sh=57d1d592bde3

Forbes is a leftist rag and a joke of a magazine in the investment industry. The stock has done nothing but go up since all of this started. It is up 10% since the last time you retards misread their earnings report.

If any of this seems like it will hurt their long-term outlook THEN you will see their stock price move against them. Except for meme stock wanks, institutional investors move markets. And they don't read Forbes. They meet with companies directly. Strike that...companies go to meet THEM.

So yes, it might. But only if this has a sustained impact to their earnings, which won't be reported on for this period for another five months. Our first tip off will be if they modify their guidance in a few weeks. Given how small of a nut D&D is to them, and compared to the downward pressure already created by inflation and the economy, it won't.

Quote from: FingerRod on January 13, 2023, 10:34:34 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 13, 2023, 09:55:15 PM
Forbes is talking about the backlash. This MIGHT raise an eyebrow or two among WotC/Hasbro stock holders.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/robwieland/2023/01/10/whats-happening-with-the-dungeons--dragons-open-gaming-license/?sh=57d1d592bde3

Forbes is a leftist rag and a joke of a magazine in the investment industry. The stock has done nothing but go up since all of this started. It is up 10% since the last time you retards misread their earnings report.

If any of this seems like it will hurt their long-term outlook THEN you will see their stock price move against them. Except for meme stock wanks, institutional investors move markets. And they don't read Forbes. They meet with companies directly. Strike that...companies go to meet THEM.

So yes, it might. But only if this has a sustained impact to their earnings, which won't be reported on for this period for another five months. Our first tip off will be if they modify their guidance in a few weeks. Given how small of a nut D&D is to them, and compared to the downward pressure already created by inflation and the economy, it won't.

Please retarded cunt, quote me saying ANYTHING about their earnings report, it doesn't have to be the last one either, you can go back farther than that, I dare you.

This is what distinguishes a shitlord (me) from a retarded cunt (you), I don't go around making assertions of other people I can't prove.

Eat a bag of digs you cunt.

QuoteFirst, we wanted the ability to prevent the use of D&D content from being included in hateful and discriminatory products.

So they're going to ban WOTC from making any more D&D product? That's gonna be awkward.