TheRPGSite

So, after the foreseeable backlash on the OGL, Wizards released this:

https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1423-an-update-on-the-open-game-license-ogl

My head hurts too much for me to read it thoroughly plus English isn't my native language, but this is what I take out of it:

"First, we wanted the ability to prevent the use of D&D content from being included in hateful and discriminatory products." "The next OGL will contain the provisions that allow us to protect and cultivate the inclusive environment we are trying to build..."

-> Does this mean that, if we were to release products under this license, they *theoretically* can forcefeed our product that bio-essentialism nonsense (no fixed ability increases, no "races", ...)?

"And third, we wanted to ensure that the OGL is for the content creator, the homebrewer, the aspiring designer, our players, and the community—not major corporations to use for their own commercial and promotional purpose."

-> Can we interpret this as an attack on Paizo, Kobold Press, Green Ronin, ... ?

so more censorious bullshit from wotc. not surprising.

That last bit is some quality gaslighting, gotta say.

To hell with WotC.

Quote from: Kerstmanneke82 on January 13, 2023, 12:22:41 PM
So, after the foreseeable backlash on the OGL, Wizards released this:

https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1423-an-update-on-the-open-game-license-ogl

My head hurts too much for me to read it thoroughly plus English isn't my native language, but this is what I take out of it:

"First, we wanted the ability to prevent the use of D&D content from being included in hateful and discriminatory products." "The next OGL will contain the provisions that allow us to protect and cultivate the inclusive environment we are trying to build..."

-> Does this mean that, if we were to release products under this license, they *theoretically* can forcefeed our product that bio-essentialism nonsense (no fixed ability increases, no "races", ...)?

"And third, we wanted to ensure that the OGL is for the content creator, the homebrewer, the aspiring designer, our players, and the community—not major corporations to use for their own commercial and promotional purpose."

-> Can we interpret this as an attack on Paizo, Kobold Press, Green Ronin, ... ?

I am sure Chris would be flattered and appalled at the same time to hear Green Ronin called a "major corporation."

Quote from: Kerstmanneke82 on January 13, 2023, 12:22:41 PM"First, we wanted the ability to prevent the use of D&D content from being included in hateful and discriminatory products." "The next OGL will contain the provisions that allow us to protect and cultivate the inclusive environment we are trying to build..."

This is like when Harvey Weinstein tried to save himself by saying he was going to use his wealth and influence to go after the NRA. "Look what a good little Leftist I am! I'm on your side!"

I hope it works for WotC as well as it worked for Harvey.

For those not wanting to give clicks:

Quote
An Update on the Open Game License (OGL)

When we initially conceived of revising the OGL, it was with three major goals in mind. First, we wanted the ability to prevent the use of D&D content from being included in hateful and discriminatory products. Second, we wanted to address those attempting to use D&D in web3, blockchain games, and NFTs by making clear that OGL content is limited to tabletop roleplaying content like campaigns, modules, and supplements. And third, we wanted to ensure that the OGL is for the content creator, the homebrewer, the aspiring designer, our players, and the community—not major corporations to use for their own commercial and promotional purpose.

Driving these goals were two simple principles: (1) Our job is to be good stewards of the game, and (2) the OGL exists for the benefit of the fans. Nothing about those principles has wavered for a second.

That was why our early drafts of the new OGL included the provisions they did. That draft language was provided to content creators and publishers so their feedback could be considered before anything was finalized. In addition to language allowing us to address discriminatory and hateful conduct and clarifying what types of products the OGL covers, our drafts included royalty language designed to apply to large corporations attempting to use OGL content. It was never our intent to impact the vast majority of the community.

However, it's clear from the reaction that we rolled a 1. It has become clear that it is no longer possible to fully achieve all three goals while still staying true to our principles. So, here is what we are doing.

The next OGL will contain the provisions that allow us to protect and cultivate the inclusive environment we are trying to build and specify that it covers only content for TTRPGs. That means that other expressions, such as educational and charitable campaigns, livestreams, cosplay, VTT-uses, etc., will remain unaffected by any OGL update. Content already released under 1.0a will also remain unaffected.

What it will not contain is any royalty structure. It also will not include the license back provision that some people were afraid was a means for us to steal work. That thought never crossed our minds. Under any new OGL, you will own the content you create. We won't. Any language we put down will be crystal clear and unequivocal on that point. The license back language was intended to protect us and our partners from creators who incorrectly allege that we steal their work simply because of coincidental similarities. As we continue to invest in the game that we love and move forward with partnerships in film, television, and digital games, that risk is simply too great to ignore. The new OGL will contain provisions to address that risk, but we will do it without a license back and without suggesting we have rights to the content you create. Your ideas and imagination are what makes this game special, and that belongs to you.

A couple of last thoughts. First, we won't be able to release the new OGL today, because we need to make sure we get it right, but it is coming. Second, you're going to hear people say that they won, and we lost because making your voices heard forced us to change our plans. Those people will only be half right. They won—and so did we.

Our plan was always to solicit the input of our community before any update to the OGL; the drafts you've seen were attempting to do just that. We want to always delight fans and create experiences together that everyone loves. We realize we did not do that this time and we are sorry for that. Our goal was to get exactly the type of feedback on which provisions worked and which did not–which we ultimately got from you. Any change this major could only have been done well if we were willing to take that feedback, no matter how it was provided–so we are. Thank you for caring enough to let us know what works and what doesn't, what you need and what scares you. Without knowing that, we can't do our part to make the new OGL match our principles. Finally, we'd appreciate the chance to make this right. We love D&D's devoted players and the creators who take them on so many incredible adventures. We won't let you down.

This is awesome.

WotC has yet to fail to disappoint.

Go WotC Suits, Go!!!

The Sparkle Troll Brigade is already saying that they are perfectly fine with "kicking out the bigots" but they want their OGL 1.0a to be modified to include such language.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 13, 2023, 01:07:36 PM
The Sparkle Troll Brigade is already saying that they are perfectly fine with "kicking out the bigots" but they want their OGL 1.0a to be modified to include such language.

That makes sense. If I wanted to put down a rebellion, I would start with the dum dums who also happen to be the easiest to placate. So good on WotC, I guess. I am no longer shocked by how stupid those people are.

And again, those people were just loud mouths. They already hate D&D, rarely game, are not D&D customers, and only care about their internet virtue points.

As for kicking out the bigots. The OGL has been out 20 years. I am sure they can provide 10 or 15 examples of hateful material created using the OGL. Right?

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 13, 2023, 01:07:36 PM
The Sparkle Troll Brigade is already saying that they are perfectly fine with "kicking out the bigots" but they want their OGL 1.0a to be modified to include such language.

Are they? Source?

Quote from: Kerstmanneke82 on January 13, 2023, 01:23:48 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 13, 2023, 01:07:36 PM
The Sparkle Troll Brigade is already saying that they are perfectly fine with "kicking out the bigots" but they want their OGL 1.0a to be modified to include such language.

Are they? Source?

Just peruse the comments, it won't take you long to find them saying:

"If you want to prevent hateful / discriminatory use of the OGL, update the existing with that language and don't change anything else about it at all. Any thing else is unacceptable."

Or

"Also the text leaves out the following questions:
- Can we still publish new content under 1.0a license?

- Have you abandoned the idea of royalty reports?

Because these two things that will make or break any deal with the creators."

The first one is perfectly fine with the exclusion of whatever WotC deems as "bigots", the second doesn't say so explicitly but it's not against it.

https://twitter.com/Wizards_DnD/status/1613931980717957125 (https://twitter.com/Wizards_DnD/status/1613931980717957125)

IMHO it's fine, shots were fired and many are already purging EVERYTHING SRD from their stuff, which will create a non WotC SRD under an open license. Fuck WotC and the Sparkle Troll Brigade too.

So basically, they want to be able to censor anyone they don't like and prevent anyone from producing products they consider competition. In other words, they want to kill the OSR and any other independent games using the OGL.

Good luck. I say that with as much sarcasm as I can muster.

Quote from: FingerRod on January 13, 2023, 01:18:53 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 13, 2023, 01:07:36 PM
The Sparkle Troll Brigade is already saying that they are perfectly fine with "kicking out the bigots" but they want their OGL 1.0a to be modified to include such language.

That makes sense. If I wanted to put down a rebellion, I would start with the dum dums who also happen to be the easiest to placate. So good on WotC, I guess. I am no longer shocked by how stupid those people are.

And again, those people were just loud mouths. They already hate D&D, rarely game, are not D&D customers, and only care about their internet virtue points.

As for kicking out the bigots. The OGL has been out 20 years. I am sure they can provide 10 or 15 examples of hateful material created using the OGL. Right?

They can, by the Sparkle Troll Brigade definition, let me give a few examples:

Using "Race"

Having totally Evil monsters

Having different modifiers for races

Need any more examples?

Let's look at their stated goals in the order they listed them.

QuoteWhen we initially conceived of revising the OGL, it was with three major goals in mind. First, we wanted the ability to prevent the use of D&D content from being included in hateful and discriminatory products.

That's listed first. FIRST. That's the primary thrust of the nu-OGL. I maintained it's about HASBRO's ESG score at the first. Chainsaw disagreed; I'm not going to downgrade his expertise in his field... but I still maintain I'm right in this case.

QuoteSecond, we wanted to address those attempting to use D&D in web3, blockchain games, and NFTs by making clear that OGL content is limited to tabletop roleplaying content like campaigns, modules, and supplements.

I think that's actually fair to a large extent. The inclusion of web3 is interesting because it essentially means "we don't want our shit out there in the wild where we can't keep an eye on it."

QuoteAnd third, we wanted to ensure that the OGL is for the content creator, the homebrewer, the aspiring designer, our players, and the community—not major corporations to use for their own commercial and promotional purpose.

"We're still smarting from having Paizo's cock up our ass after all these years."  And it's about revenue they aren't making because someone else smarter is making it.

Dear people that said "the enemy of my enemy is my friend, so we're allied with the Woke D&D crowd."

How's that working out for you?

Quote from: Grognard GM on January 13, 2023, 01:51:20 PM
Dear people that said "the enemy of my enemy is my friend, so we're allied with the Woke D&D crowd."

How's that working out for you?

Just fine honestly. Some are going to be informed and keep on hammering away at WOTC for being disengenous, others will bow out because the outrage is no longer there and the dopamine rush has stopped coming.   They will return when the next THING.TO.BE.OUTRAGED comes around again.

Sooo...

The very first reason they gave for updating the OGL was to kick out the bigots, eh? Was this ever an actual issue? What content can they point to and say, "See?! Look at that bigotry!" Naw, this is just gaslighting and an obvious attempt to appeal to the woke brigade.

Trying to pretend the leak wasn't accidental and that the backlash was a calculated ploy to get the community's feedback is the hardest fukken cope I've seen. They had no intention of ever fielding this to the general public until it dropped. Honestly, the leaked worked 100% in their favor, so they aren't wrong when they say they "won" too. Had the new OGL come out as planned, this shitshow would still have happened, only WotC would be stuck with an "authorized" version, not a draft they can say was only a means to test the waters. I can smell the bullshit wafting out of their Seattle office from my house.

Some idiots are buying it, but I'm just glad the ball got rolling first. 3PPs are walking away and aren't likely coming back for a while (the 6e allure, however, will eventually draw them, but it's going to be a rough start for WotC). The indy gaming sector is done with them though. No version of the OGL will entice them, especially with the ORC on the horrizon.

This response was pathetic, and WotC learned nothing. They just hope people will accept their shitty apology and come back. Sad truth is, many will.

Quote from: Grognard GM on January 13, 2023, 01:51:20 PM
Dear people that said "the enemy of my enemy is my friend, so we're allied with the Woke D&D crowd."

How's that working out for you?

Still OK, so far.

Though it was funny seeing Umbran on ENW just now say "Well, the OGL needed an update..." considering how much that's screwing over Morrus & his EN Publishing!

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 13, 2023, 01:34:46 PM

Quote from: Kerstmanneke82 on January 13, 2023, 01:23:48 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 13, 2023, 01:07:36 PM
The Sparkle Troll Brigade is already saying that they are perfectly fine with "kicking out the bigots" but they want their OGL 1.0a to be modified to include such language.

Are they? Source?

Just peruse the comments, it won't take you long to find them saying:

"If you want to prevent hateful / discriminatory use of the OGL, update the existing with that language and don't change anything else about it at all. Any thing else is unacceptable."

Or

"Also the text leaves out the following questions:
- Can we still publish new content under 1.0a license?

- Have you abandoned the idea of royalty reports?

Because these two things that will make or break any deal with the creators."

The first one is perfectly fine with the exclusion of whatever WotC deems as "bigots", the second doesn't say so explicitly but it's not against it.

https://twitter.com/Wizards_DnD/status/1613931980717957125 (https://twitter.com/Wizards_DnD/status/1613931980717957125)

I can't find the first comment you quoted in the link. Maybe the person who posted it deleted it - but if so, that goes to show that it isn't a popular view with any crowd - Sparkly Troll or not.

99% of all the Twitter comments that I see are all rejecting this as a non-apology and distrusting them.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 13, 2023, 01:07:36 PM
The Sparkle Troll Brigade is already saying that they are perfectly fine with "kicking out the bigots" but they want their OGL 1.0a to be modified to include such language.

How do you modify....you know what, nevermind. If they don't get how WOTC cannot unilaterally modify it, it's probably not worth arguing with them about it.

Quote from: S'mon on January 13, 2023, 02:12:01 PM

Quote from: Grognard GM on January 13, 2023, 01:51:20 PM
Dear people that said "the enemy of my enemy is my friend, so we're allied with the Woke D&D crowd."

How's that working out for you?

Still OK, so far.

Though it was funny seeing Umbran on ENW just now say "Well, the OGL needed an update..." considering how much that's screwing over Morrus & his EN Publishing!

Morrus will do anything to keep his gravy train running with as little work as possible.  WOTC taking 25% of his revenue is unacceptable.

Umbran is a shill and we all know that.

Quote from: Grognard GM on January 13, 2023, 01:51:20 PM
Dear people that said "the enemy of my enemy is my friend, so we're allied with the Woke D&D crowd."

How's that working out for you?

I mean, it did move things in the right direction. The alliance was never going to last beyond killing Sauron so it figures dealing with Saruman afterwards will come down to a smaller group.

Quote from: jhkim on January 13, 2023, 02:12:21 PM
99% of all the Twitter comments that I see are all rejecting this as a non-apology and distrusting them.

Yeah, this from DnDShorts looks typical (4366 likes):

Seriously, did it EVER cross anyone's minds at
@Wizards
to just tell the truth to their community?

I count FIVE, instantly provable lies in this statement. How can you ever earn the trust of your community if you just keep lying?

I actually can't find a single pro-WoTC Tweet - unlike the ENW thread.

Quote from: Effete on January 13, 2023, 02:06:45 PM
Sooo...

The very first reason they gave for updating the OGL was to kick out the bigots, eh? Was this ever an actual issue? What content can they point to and say, "See?! Look at that bigotry!" Naw, this is just gaslighting and an obvious attempt to appeal to the woke brigade.

I honestly think it was NuTSR. I think that's what a lot of this was about all along. They were dragged into an actual legal battle with them after being poked with a stick for a year, and the lawyers involved with that probably said "You know, we should make sure this never happens again."

Quote from: THE_Leopold on January 13, 2023, 01:57:12 PM

Quote from: Grognard GM on January 13, 2023, 01:51:20 PM
Dear people that said "the enemy of my enemy is my friend, so we're allied with the Woke D&D crowd."

How's that working out for you?

Just fine honestly. Some are going to be informed and keep on hammering away at WOTC for being disengenous, others will bow out because the outrage is no longer there and the dopamine rush has stopped coming.   They will return when the next THING.TO.BE.OUTRAGED comes around again.

To be fair, some PiB are still hamering them that the OGL doesn't need changing.

Quote from: Mistwell on January 13, 2023, 02:15:17 PM
I mean, it did move things in the right direction. The alliance was never going to last beyond killing Sauron so it figures dealing with Saruman afterwards will come down to a smaller group.

WoTC look to be making a pretty strong effort to break off dimwit corporate shills and progressive lefties. They are still trying to cancel OGL 1.0 and it's still important we stick together.

Quote from: S'mon on January 13, 2023, 02:12:01 PM

Quote from: Grognard GM on January 13, 2023, 01:51:20 PM
Dear people that said "the enemy of my enemy is my friend, so we're allied with the Woke D&D crowd."

How's that working out for you?

Still OK, so far.

Though it was funny seeing Umbran on ENW just now say "Well, the OGL needed an update..." considering how much that's screwing over Morrus & his EN Publishing!

Death, taxes, and Umbran being a cunt...

Quote from: Mistwell on January 13, 2023, 02:15:17 PM

Quote from: Grognard GM on January 13, 2023, 01:51:20 PM
Dear people that said "the enemy of my enemy is my friend, so we're allied with the Woke D&D crowd."

How's that working out for you?

I mean, it did move things in the right direction. The alliance was never going to last beyond killing Sauron so it figures dealing with Saruman afterwards will come down to a smaller group.

Careful... you're not licensed to make those references.

Quote from: Mistwell on January 13, 2023, 02:16:38 PM

Quote from: Effete on January 13, 2023, 02:06:45 PM
Sooo...

The very first reason they gave for updating the OGL was to kick out the bigots, eh? Was this ever an actual issue? What content can they point to and say, "See?! Look at that bigotry!" Naw, this is just gaslighting and an obvious attempt to appeal to the woke brigade.

I honestly think it was NuTSR. I think that's what a lot of this was about all along. They were dragged into an actual legal battle with them after being poked with a stick for a year, and the lawyers involved with that probably said "You know, we should make sure this never happens again."

All other things being equal - if the nuTSR claims to languishing IP had any merit (such as trying to publish a new version of Star Frontiers), then so be it. They're free to live and die like any other business.  Let every individual dispute between parties be litigated separately.

Quote from: S'mon on January 13, 2023, 02:19:31 PM

Quote from: Mistwell on January 13, 2023, 02:15:17 PM
I mean, it did move things in the right direction. The alliance was never going to last beyond killing Sauron so it figures dealing with Saruman afterwards will come down to a smaller group.

WoTC look to be making a pretty strong effort to break off dimwit corporate shills and progressive lefties. They are still trying to cancel OGL 1.0 and it's still important we stick together.

I always want to see the actual text of what we're talking about before I fight it. Let's see. I am pissed at them though, so my eye is even more critical than normal.

Quote from: Effete on January 13, 2023, 02:21:50 PM

Quote from: Mistwell on January 13, 2023, 02:15:17 PM

Quote from: Grognard GM on January 13, 2023, 01:51:20 PM
Dear people that said "the enemy of my enemy is my friend, so we're allied with the Woke D&D crowd."

How's that working out for you?

I mean, it did move things in the right direction. The alliance was never going to last beyond killing Sauron so it figures dealing with Saruman afterwards will come down to a smaller group.

Careful... you're not licensed to make those references.

Maybe I am Christopher Tolkien and this is what I do when I'm not repackaging my dads stuff?

Quote from: 3catcircus on January 13, 2023, 02:23:56 PM

Quote from: Mistwell on January 13, 2023, 02:16:38 PM

Quote from: Effete on January 13, 2023, 02:06:45 PM
Sooo...

The very first reason they gave for updating the OGL was to kick out the bigots, eh? Was this ever an actual issue? What content can they point to and say, "See?! Look at that bigotry!" Naw, this is just gaslighting and an obvious attempt to appeal to the woke brigade.

I honestly think it was NuTSR. I think that's what a lot of this was about all along. They were dragged into an actual legal battle with them after being poked with a stick for a year, and the lawyers involved with that probably said "You know, we should make sure this never happens again."

All other things being equal - if the nuTSR claims to languishing IP had any merit (such as trying to publish a new version of Star Frontiers), then so be it. They're free to live and die like any other business.  Let every individual dispute between parties be litigated separately.

Sure I am just speculating on what I think were the series of events which may have led to this point. Someone said "But it's never been an issue before" but I think it was NuTSR which kicked up this bees nest to begin with.

Quote from: Mistwell on January 13, 2023, 02:16:38 PM

Quote from: Effete on January 13, 2023, 02:06:45 PM
Sooo...

The very first reason they gave for updating the OGL was to kick out the bigots, eh? Was this ever an actual issue? What content can they point to and say, "See?! Look at that bigotry!" Naw, this is just gaslighting and an obvious attempt to appeal to the woke brigade.

I honestly think it was NuTSR. I think that's what a lot of this was about all along. They were dragged into an actual legal battle with them after being poked with a stick for a year, and the lawyers involved with that probably said "You know, we should make sure this never happens again."

I know someone from nuTSR was scolded for making a few based comments on the interwebs, but I thought the case was purely over trademark issues. NuTSR (afaicr) never even released anything.

Quote from: Mistwell on January 13, 2023, 02:27:36 PM

Maybe I am Christopher Tolkien and this is what I do when I'm not repackaging my dads stuff?

If you're Christopher Tolkien then I'm Joe Biden... because I'm talking to ghosts.

Quote from: Kerstmanneke82 on January 13, 2023, 01:23:48 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 13, 2023, 01:07:36 PM
The Sparkle Troll Brigade is already saying that they are perfectly fine with "kicking out the bigots" but they want their OGL 1.0a to be modified to include such language.

Are they? Source?

They aren't.

The wokest of the woke over on rpg.net are livid at this announcement, are calling WotC liars, and are specifically calling the anti-biogtry clause a bullshit smokescreen. An rpg.net mod is specifically telling people to "stay angry."

Quote from: Daztur on January 13, 2023, 03:22:59 PMThe wokest of the woke over on rpg.net are livid at this announcement, are calling WotC liars, and are specifically calling the anti-biogtry clause a bullshit smokescreen. An rpg.net mod is specifically telling people to "stay angry."

As we've seen from the hit pieces by NPR and PBS, Hasbro is going over the heads of rpg.net.

Quote from: Daztur on January 13, 2023, 03:22:59 PM

Quote from: Kerstmanneke82 on January 13, 2023, 01:23:48 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 13, 2023, 01:07:36 PM
The Sparkle Troll Brigade is already saying that they are perfectly fine with "kicking out the bigots" but they want their OGL 1.0a to be modified to include such language.

Are they? Source?

They aren't.

The wokest of the woke over on rpg.net are livid at this announcement, are calling WotC liars, and are specifically calling the anti-biogtry clause a bullshit smokescreen. An rpg.net mod is specifically telling people to "stay angry."

Uh, oh!
Is antifa going to burn down Seattle over this?

On second thought...

Quote from: Daztur on January 13, 2023, 03:22:59 PM

Quote from: Kerstmanneke82 on January 13, 2023, 01:23:48 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 13, 2023, 01:07:36 PM
The Sparkle Troll Brigade is already saying that they are perfectly fine with "kicking out the bigots" but they want their OGL 1.0a to be modified to include such language.

Are they? Source?

They aren't.

The wokest of the woke over on rpg.net are livid at this announcement, are calling WotC liars, and are specifically calling the anti-biogtry clause a bullshit smokescreen. An rpg.net mod is specifically telling people to "stay angry."

Because on rpgnet they aren't therefore ALL sparkle trolls aren't... Hasty generalization.

Quote from: S'mon on January 13, 2023, 02:16:12 PM

Quote from: jhkim on January 13, 2023, 02:12:21 PM
99% of all the Twitter comments that I see are all rejecting this as a non-apology and distrusting them.

Yeah, this from DnDShorts looks typical (4366 likes):

Seriously, did it EVER cross anyone's minds at
@Wizards
to just tell the truth to their community?

I count FIVE, instantly provable lies in this statement. How can you ever earn the trust of your community if you just keep lying?

I actually can't find a single pro-WoTC Tweet - unlike the ENW thread.

Yeah. GeekyBugle quoted a tweet in favor of controlling hateful speech, but it was apparently deleted (presumably by its owner).

I haven't checked ENWorld, but several of my Facebook friends have said they're cancelling their D&DBeyond subscriptions.

Quote from: jhkim on January 13, 2023, 03:47:02 PM

Quote from: S'mon on January 13, 2023, 02:16:12 PM

Quote from: jhkim on January 13, 2023, 02:12:21 PM
99% of all the Twitter comments that I see are all rejecting this as a non-apology and distrusting them.

Yeah, this from DnDShorts looks typical (4366 likes):

Seriously, did it EVER cross anyone's minds at
@Wizards
to just tell the truth to their community?

I count FIVE, instantly provable lies in this statement. How can you ever earn the trust of your community if you just keep lying?

I actually can't find a single pro-WoTC Tweet - unlike the ENW thread.

Yeah. GeekyBugle quoted a tweet in favor of controlling hateful speech, but it was apparently deleted (presumably by its owner).

I haven't checked ENWorld, but several of my Facebook friends have said they're cancelling their D&DBeyond subscriptions.

You didn't search very well then:

https://twitter.com/PauljGarth/status/1613932982984740867 (https://twitter.com/PauljGarth/status/1613932982984740867)

https://twitter.com/onlinetabletop/status/1613939172250632195 (https://twitter.com/onlinetabletop/status/1613939172250632195)

Literally look at the Twitter feed of the annoucement:
https://twitter.com/Wizards_DnD/status/1613931980717957125

The vitrole is real.

The new relaunch of Talislanta just got updated - they've cancelled the 5e version of the game. So only the traditional rules.

Good. We need more of this.

Quote from: Grognard GM on January 13, 2023, 01:51:20 PM
Dear people that said "the enemy of my enemy is my friend, so we're allied with the Woke D&D crowd."

How's that working out for you?

I didn't say.  All the ones I did see say it, used it in a temporary means, such as allying with the Soviets to take out the Nazis.  Doesn't mean you stay friends after the fight is over, or even that you trust your "friends" while the fight is going on. 

In any case, I'm quite happy for A and B to be shooting at each other, when I don't like either one of them.  I'm not allied.  I'm over in the bleachers eating my popcorn.  If in the process of the shooting, some individuals show themselves to have some positive traits, I'll keep that in mind in the future.*

* Translation:  If they put out a product that sounds like something I'd like, I'll consider it.  Unlike the other ones, where it doesn't matter what the product is, I'm not even going to look at it.

Quote from: jhkim on January 13, 2023, 02:12:21 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 13, 2023, 01:34:46 PM
Just peruse the comments, it won't take you long to find them saying:

"If you want to prevent hateful / discriminatory use of the OGL, update the existing with that language and don't change anything else about it at all. Any thing else is unacceptable."

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 13, 2023, 01:34:46 PM
https://twitter.com/Wizards_DnD/status/1613931980717957125 (https://twitter.com/Wizards_DnD/status/1613931980717957125)

I can't find the first comment you quoted in the link. Maybe the person who posted it deleted it - but if so, that goes to show that it isn't a popular view with any crowd - Sparkly Troll or not.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 13, 2023, 04:12:10 PM
You didn't search very well then:

https://twitter.com/PauljGarth/status/1613932982984740867 (https://twitter.com/PauljGarth/status/1613932982984740867)

https://twitter.com/onlinetabletop/status/1613939172250632195 (https://twitter.com/onlinetabletop/status/1613939172250632195)

Thanks, GeekyBugle, and sorry. I opened the thread you linked, scrolled to the bottom and text searched, but it didn't turn up. It seems to be a limit in text search in the 900+ replies.

So WoTC say:

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

They also have this disclaimer on products for most versions of D&D they sell on DriveThru:

  "We (Wizards) recognize that some of the legacy content available on this website does not reflect the values of the Dungeons & Dragons franchise today. Some older content may reflect ethnic, racial, and gender prejudice that were commonplace in American society at that time."

Apparently, it's OK for WoTC to make money from hateful and discriminatory products. It's only a problem when other people do that.

Quote from: Effete on January 13, 2023, 02:29:10 PM

Quote from: Mistwell on January 13, 2023, 02:16:38 PM

Quote from: Effete on January 13, 2023, 02:06:45 PM
Sooo...

The very first reason they gave for updating the OGL was to kick out the bigots, eh? Was this ever an actual issue? What content can they point to and say, "See?! Look at that bigotry!" Naw, this is just gaslighting and an obvious attempt to appeal to the woke brigade.

I honestly think it was NuTSR. I think that's what a lot of this was about all along. They were dragged into an actual legal battle with them after being poked with a stick for a year, and the lawyers involved with that probably said "You know, we should make sure this never happens again."

I know someone from nuTSR was scolded for making a few based comments on the interwebs, but I thought the case was purely over trademark issues. NuTSR (afaicr) never even released anything.

There were lawsuits of some sort exchanged I believe

Quote from: Effete on January 13, 2023, 02:33:49 PM

Quote from: Mistwell on January 13, 2023, 02:27:36 PM

Maybe I am Christopher Tolkien and this is what I do when I'm not repackaging my dads stuff?

If you're Christopher Tolkien then I'm Joe Biden... because I'm talking to ghosts.

Simon or Adam then :)

Quote from: THE_Leopold on January 13, 2023, 04:14:55 PM
Literally look at the Twitter feed of the annoucement:
https://twitter.com/Wizards_DnD/status/1613931980717957125

The vitrole is real.

It really is. Holy cow.

Still working through my thoughts on all of this. On one hand, it is their product they should be able to do what they want. On the other hand, people have been working with a good faith understanding that the original OGL would not change. On one hand, cancel culture and all of the posting of screenshot canceling their subs is the exact type of crap that I hate. On the other, it is happening to WotC.

Working through lots of stuff.

I will say this though. If I were a creator I would operate in one of two spaces. Either negotiate a license with a company to create content or make original content. I wouldn't hitch my work to any of these open licenses.

Quote from: tenbones on January 13, 2023, 04:17:16 PM
The new relaunch of Talislanta just got updated - they've cancelled the 5e version of the game. So only the traditional rules.

Good. We need more of this.

Yup. And I agree with everyone else. WotC's response wasn't a response. It was a my dad can beat up your dad bit.

Quote from: tenbones on January 13, 2023, 04:17:16 PM
The new relaunch of Talislanta just got updated - they've cancelled the 5e version of the game. So only the traditional rules.

Good. We need more of this.

Link?  :)

Quote from: FingerRod on January 13, 2023, 05:08:06 PM

Quote from: THE_Leopold on January 13, 2023, 04:14:55 PM
Literally look at the Twitter feed of the annoucement:
https://twitter.com/Wizards_DnD/status/1613931980717957125

The vitrole is real.

Still working through my thoughts on all of this. On one hand, it is their product they should be able to do what they want. On the other hand, people have been working with a good faith understanding that the original OGL would not change. On one hand, cancel culture and all of the posting of screenshot canceling their subs is the exact type of crap that I hate. On the other, it is happening to WotC.

I hate Twitter because of its low-attention-span rumor mongering. I hate when individuals have vitriol poured on them for relatively minor statements.

However, boycotting a company based on its own clearly announced policy and non-apology isn't the same.

I 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.

Right... So where are all these 'hatemongering and discriminatory' titles then within the OSR?

I'll wait. lol

Quote from: rhialto on January 13, 2023, 06:21:57 PM

Quote from: tenbones on January 13, 2023, 04:17:16 PM
The new relaunch of Talislanta just got updated - they've cancelled the 5e version of the game. So only the traditional rules.

Good. We need more of this.

Link?  :)

(https://i.imgur.com/p45aeNV.png)

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.

However, their response today shows their thinking. The OGL is just for the little guys who aren't a threat to them (i.e. fan content). They expect all the big players to sign a normal license deal that results in Wizards getting a royalty payment. It is also clear that they still intend to try and deauthorize 1.0a. And from Paizo's reaction, it looks like even Paizo thinks that WotC will succeed in this.

Quote from: FingerRod on January 13, 2023, 05:08:06 PM
On one hand, it is their product they should be able to do what they want. On the other hand, people have been working with a good faith understanding that the original OGL would not change.

Here'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?

The only reason Paizo and the other big 3PPs balked is because they perceived a threat to their brand. If the OGL was left alone and new license agreement invented, I don't think any of this would be as big as it is now. Whoever is in charge at WotC is really fukken stupid.

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.

Quote from: Rob Necronomicon on January 13, 2023, 06:47:29 PM
Right... So where are all these 'hatemongering and discriminatory' titles then within the OSR?

From what I've seen, they (the Woke) think Pundit & Venger are hateful and discriminatory just by existing, and anything that comes from them is thus fruit of the tainted tree. It must be banned. They also think Milo is a Nazi, which makes Macris a Nazi by association. Which means his stuff shouldn't be allowed either.

(I have to say, spending the last 2 weeks on ENW fighting the good fight to Save Open Gaming is getting to me a bit) 
  :/

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.

However, their response today shows their thinking. The OGL is just for the little guys who aren't a threat to them (i.e. fan content). They expect all the big players to sign a normal license deal that results in Wizards getting a royalty payment. It is also clear that they still intend to try and deauthorize 1.0a. And from Paizo's reaction, it looks like even Paizo thinks that WotC will succeed in this.

That's some interesting history revisionism you got going there my dude.

No, WotC lost dominance because they pivoted from the OGL to the GSL for 4e, which is when Paizo pivoted from making 3pp for D&D to making Pathfinder.

D&D has market dominance to the extent it has THANKS to the OGL which made it easier to produce 3pp content for their game.

But they got greedy, they don't want 90% of the market/money, they want it all. The last time they tried this was in 4e, it backfired making Pathfinder the dominant game in the market, the same tactic decades later has backfired AGAIN in the same way but who knows WHO will be the dominant game this time.

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.

Quote from: hedgehobbit on January 13, 2023, 06:51:58 PM
D&D was the dominant game before the OGL and the only time they lost the #1 spot was a result of the OGL.

I'd say that's only part of the story. D&D was dominant before the OGL. D&D was also dominant after the OGL. When they lost that #1 spot was when they first tried to move away from the OGL with 4e and its "GSL." The attempted move away from the OGL to a new (and more restrictive, less open) license was one of the things that caused them to lose the #1 spot. Then they abandoned their GSL, returned to the OGL, and regained the #1 position.

This is their second attempt to move away from the OGL 1.0a to something more restrictive and less open, and this time they're also trying to kill or neuter the 1.0a version at the same time.

I think they way they've handled this entire thing makes them look like clueless buffoons. If I were a shareholder I would want corporate officer and management heads to roll.

Quote from: S'mon on January 13, 2023, 07:04:15 PM

Quote from: Rob Necronomicon on January 13, 2023, 06:47:29 PM
Right... So where are all these 'hatemongering and discriminatory' titles then within the OSR?

From what I've seen, they (the Woke) think Pundit & Venger are hateful and discriminatory just by existing, and anything that comes from them is thus fruit of the tainted tree. It must be banned. They also think Milo is a Nazi, which makes Macris a Nazi by association. Which means his stuff shouldn't be allowed either.

(I have to say, spending the last 2 weeks on ENW fighting the good fight to Save Open Gaming is getting to me a bit)  :-\

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.

Basically, they wanted several pounds of flesh from everyone even the smallest content creators. $$$$$$$$$$$ But on the flip side, they have really damaged their rep and this is going to spawn a bit of a revolution in the gaming community. :)

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 (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 (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 (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.

I'm just glad that WOTC has their ear turned toward the fans, and their nose to the ol' grindstone; doing their very best to provide their customers with the best RPG experience in the history of RPGs.  I'm sure that Dave and Gary wish WOTC the very best.

Quote from: Ratman_tf on January 13, 2023, 11:37:18 PM

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.

Well they did hire a whore to promote D&D.

Quote from: jhkim on January 13, 2023, 08:53:14 PM

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.

Yeah, but the  new WOTC doesn't care about the game, they care about the IP and how to monetize it. This is about squishing competition that might try to monetize the D&D IP that was released through the SRDs. WOTC's Vegan Owlbear NFTs will lose value if Paizo puts out Vegan Owlbear NFTs. And other licensing things.

WOTC used to think that the IP part of D&D was the settings and the characters. But it's more than that, it's all the rules and tropes that go with it. Hell, owlbear is even in my browser's spellcheck

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 13, 2023, 08:48:41 PM

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?

Lisa Stevens wrote a blog post on the topic once (https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5ldv5?Paizo-Publishings-10th-Anniversary):

"When Jason returned from D&D Experience, he laid out all the information that he had gleaned. From the moment that 4th Edition had been announced, we had trepidations about many of the changes we were hearing about. Jason's report confirmed our fears—4th Edition didn't look like the system we wanted to make products for. Whether a license for 4E was forthcoming or not, we were going to create our own game system based on the 3.5 SRD: The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game. And we were already WAY behind schedule."

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

Forbes is a leftist rag and a joke of a magazine in the investment industry.

LOL anyone can write for Forbes. YOU can write for Forbes if you really want to. It's not an "anything" rag. It shifted to a submission format years ago.

I think what really helped 5e rise, is now biting WoTC in the ass:

The youtube influencers. Videos on the topic reach into the hundred thousands, because its just a juicy topic for clicks. And they are also replying to the follow-up and dissecting its lies for more clicks. So yeah, thats a plus at least.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 13, 2023, 08:48:41 PM
They said this when?

Lisa Stevens gave an extensive recount of Paizo's version of the history in her 10 year anniversary blogs in 2012 - https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo5ld43?Paizo-Publishings-10th-Anniversary

edit: oops, Mistwell already answered.

Quote from: tenbones on January 13, 2023, 06:49:29 PM

Quote from: rhialto on January 13, 2023, 06:21:57 PM

Quote from: tenbones on January 13, 2023, 04:17:16 PM
The new relaunch of Talislanta just got updated - they've cancelled the 5e version of the game. So only the traditional rules.

Good. We need more of this.

Link?  :)

(https://i.imgur.com/p45aeNV.png)

You don't say...I didn't even know Tal Epic Edition was planned. Thanks!

Quote from: DocJones on January 14, 2023, 01:04:23 AM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on January 13, 2023, 11:37:18 PM

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.

Well they did hire a whore to promote D&D.

Who then?

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 13, 2023, 10:46:44 PM

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 (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.

A bag of dicks oh good one! So original and funny. I don't know how to recover from that!

The 'you retards' was the royal you, as in when people around here talk about stock price and the markets. It was also tongue in cheek. The last paragraph was saying you might be right but it would be a while before the impact is known.

Get laid or do some drugs, you need to loosen up. (Also tongue in cheek)

Replying directly to the OP, the answers are probably "yes and yes." Censoring D&D-related content and trying to head off another Pathfinder debacle were obvious motivations in the leaked document.

Some people seem to think they're lying about the purposes of the OGL 1.1. I don't think so, though I do think they're lying about the underlying motivations behind those purposes. The goals they laid out in this statement, as I see them, are:

1. Censor D&D content: Yeah, they definitely want to do that, probably for a number of reasons. I would guess that ESG scores, PR, and pure ideology of the publisher are all factors there.
2. Restrict the OGL to paper and pdf rpg products: They don't actually offer a reason for this, but as I posted elsewhere, I think this reveals a desire to monopolize on digital content in order to protect the microtransaction economy they're intending for OneD&D. Personally I think this was a major motivation behind all of the OGL 1.1.
3. Prevent other companies from using the OGL to make competing games. There's an obvious market motivation there, especially with the likely shitshow that the OneD&D rollout was going to be even without this scandal. However, this also folds back into the ESG and ideological motivations of point one. Censoring D&D is going to be meaningless if the consumers can just move on to less woke games. For the record, I think they've misunderstood the RPG hobby here, and no matter what they do with the OGL, this is a goal they're going to fail on.

The most noticeable thing in the statement here is that they have said they're walking back on the royalties, but conveniently omitted to mention the clauses in the leaked OGL 1.1 which gave them automatic control of others' intellectual property. This suggests to me that the IP control was the thing they cared more about. Again, I suspect the primary motivations were censorius, but there are market reasons as well. (If something gets published by a third party, and happens to break through into major popularity, they want the ability to republish it for their own profit.) Royalties were regarded as "icing on the cake". As others have said, Hasbro doesn't need the money. Either they were just being extra greedy, or they genuinely intended to kill the 3rd party publishing industry, but either way, that was the thing they thought they could most afford to give away in order to appease their audience.

Will it work? I suspect not. The royalties were a big sticking point, but the IP issues were a pretty big part of the controversy as well. Plus there's still the trust issue for publishers, who are going to be scrutinizing any revised version of the OGL much more closely after this.

Quote from: Kerstmanneke82 on January 14, 2023, 07:50:36 AM

Quote from: DocJones on January 14, 2023, 01:04:23 AM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on January 13, 2023, 11:37:18 PM

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.

Well they did hire a whore to promote D&D.

Who then?

Satine Phoenix.  Look her and her hubby Jamison stone up for wonderful scammery on KS RPGs.

They are overjoyed they can push their delayed KS' back another year and blame it on the OGL.

Quote from: Mistwell on January 14, 2023, 01:16:10 AM

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

Forbes is a leftist rag and a joke of a magazine in the investment industry.

LOL anyone can write for Forbes. YOU can write for Forbes if you really want to. It's not an "anything" rag. It shifted to a submission format years ago.

That... doesn't mean they don't curate the articles they publish.

Quote from: Bruwulf on January 14, 2023, 10:32:34 AM

Quote from: Mistwell on January 14, 2023, 01:16:10 AM

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

Forbes is a leftist rag and a joke of a magazine in the investment industry.

LOL anyone can write for Forbes. YOU can write for Forbes if you really want to. It's not an "anything" rag. It shifted to a submission format years ago.

That... doesn't mean they don't curate the articles they publish.

Curation is minimal as i personally know someone who writes for forbes and its a "300
Word content blurb" at most

Quote from: Mistwell on January 14, 2023, 01:16:10 AM

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

Forbes is a leftist rag and a joke of a magazine in the investment industry.

LOL anyone can write for Forbes. YOU can write for Forbes if you really want to. It's not an "anything" rag. It shifted to a submission format years ago.

Bro, I thought you were a high-powered, cocaine off hookers' asses, attorney!  :P  ;D  Nothing you said invalidated what I said. Are you suggesting nobody is filtering or selecting what is published?

I will take the compliment that I could write for a magazine, tho. My mother always told me I had an elegant nature to my prose.

Quote from: FingerRod on January 14, 2023, 11:14:03 AM

Quote from: Mistwell on January 14, 2023, 01:16:10 AM

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

Forbes is a leftist rag and a joke of a magazine in the investment industry.

LOL anyone can write for Forbes. YOU can write for Forbes if you really want to. It's not an "anything" rag. It shifted to a submission format years ago.

Bro, I thought you were a high-powered, cocaine off hookers' asses, attorney!  :P  ;D  Nothing you said invalidated what I said. Are you suggesting nobody is filtering or selecting what is published?

I will take the compliment that I could write for a magazine, tho. My mother always told me I had an elegant nature to my prose.

They don't appear to filter for partisanship. Plenty of right-leaning articles get published there. It's one of the more open sources for people to publish to. Not quite as open as Medium I imagine, but it's pretty darn open compared to mainstream press.

And just to be clear, I don't practice law a lot these days, and was never "high powered" nor have I ever worked for a large or even medium sized law firm. That life is kinda repulsive to me.

Quote from: FingerRod on January 14, 2023, 11:14:03 AM

Quote from: Mistwell on January 14, 2023, 01:16:10 AM

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

Forbes is a leftist rag and a joke of a magazine in the investment industry.

LOL anyone can write for Forbes. YOU can write for Forbes if you really want to. It's not an "anything" rag. It shifted to a submission format years ago.

Bro, I thought you were a high-powered, cocaine off hookers' asses, attorney!  :P  ;D  Nothing you said invalidated what I said. Are you suggesting nobody is filtering or selecting what is published?

I will take the compliment that I could write for a magazine, tho. My mother always told me I had an elegant nature to my prose.

Yes even you can write for Forbes. There is minimal curation

Quote from: THE_Leopold on January 14, 2023, 10:19:44 AM

Quote from: Kerstmanneke82 on January 14, 2023, 07:50:36 AM

Quote from: DocJones on January 14, 2023, 01:04:23 AM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on January 13, 2023, 11:37:18 PM

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.

Well they did hire a whore to promote D&D.

Who then?

Satine Phoenix.  Look her and her hubby Jamison stone up for wonderful scammery on KS RPGs.

They are overjoyed they can push their delayed KS' back another year and blame it on the OGL.

I was thinking about somebody else, but now you mention it, Satine Phoenix. WOTC seemed cool with her a long time and suddenly they had a falling out or somesuch... I think it would take us too far astray from the topic.

Lots more info today at https://gizmodo.com/dungeons-dragons-wizards-hasbro-ogl-open-game-license-1849981136

Quote from: ForgottenF on January 14, 2023, 10:06:29 AM
1. Censor D&D content: Yeah, they definitely want to do that, probably for a number of reasons. I would guess that ESG scores, PR, and pure ideology of the publisher are all factors there.
2. Restrict the OGL to paper and pdf rpg products: They don't actually offer a reason for this, but as I posted elsewhere, I think this reveals a desire to monopolize on digital content in order to protect the microtransaction economy they're intending for OneD&D. Personally I think this was a major motivation behind all of the OGL 1.1.
3. Prevent other companies from using the OGL to make competing games. There's an obvious market motivation there, especially with the likely shitshow that the OneD&D rollout was going to be even without this scandal. However, this also folds back into the ESG and ideological motivations of point one. Censoring D&D is going to be meaningless if the consumers can just move on to less woke games. For the record, I think they've misunderstood the RPG hobby here, and no matter what they do with the OGL, this is a goal they're going to fail on.

#2 and 3 make perfect sense from a business perspective, but are completely antithetical to the OGL. #1 is just virtue signaling nonsense, and also completely wrong. The SRD is Open Content, which by definition means it's not truly "their content" anymore. Anybody can use it for whatever purpose they want, provided they do so through the OGL (meaning proper attribution through clause 15). WotC trying to stomp out how stuff is used would be like Coke Cola trying to sue someone for doing the Mentos experiment because they "used the product wrong."
It's the thought patterns of authoritarians.

I've said it before but it bears repeating: whoever is behind this either fundamentally does not understand the principles of the OGL, or they think their leverage as "the gayest roleplaying game ever" would allow them to brute-force these unlawful changes through. I think it's a mix of both.

Quote from: S'mon on January 14, 2023, 03:14:12 PM
Lots more info today at https://gizmodo.com/dungeons-dragons-wizards-hasbro-ogl-open-game-license-1849981136

I'm expecting and hoping they will triple down on stupid. It's fine by me, lots of sheeple will continue to play D&D and will become paypigs in their walled garden.

But this will create a revolution on the hobby that will be good for it.

"Monte Cook Games released their own open, perpetual license for their acclaimed Cypher System last year." Which is just a license agreement to become a 3PP for Monte Cook and has a morality clause.

Quote from: Mistwell on January 14, 2023, 11:34:14 AM

Quote from: FingerRod on January 14, 2023, 11:14:03 AM

Bro, I thought you were a high-powered, cocaine off hookers' asses, attorney!  :P  ;D  Nothing you said invalidated what I said. Are you suggesting nobody is filtering or selecting what is published?

I will take the compliment that I could write for a magazine, tho. My mother always told me I had an elegant nature to my prose.

They don't appear to filter for partisanship. Plenty of right-leaning articles get published there. It's one of the more open sources for people to publish to. Not quite as open as Medium I imagine, but it's pretty darn open compared to mainstream press.

And just to be clear, I don't practice law a lot these days, and was never "high powered" nor have I ever worked for a large or even medium sized law firm. That life is kinda repulsive to me.

I noticed you didn't deny snorting blow off a hooker's ass.
My man!!

Quote from: Kerstmanneke82 on January 13, 2023, 01:23:48 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 13, 2023, 01:07:36 PM
The Sparkle Troll Brigade is already saying that they are perfectly fine with "kicking out the bigots" but they want their OGL 1.0a to be modified to include such language.

Are they? Source?

Yeah I can confirm its on Reddit, BGG, and even saw it on a video review of the new OGL and they were gloating in the video about how that would make the Right wing upset. Because apparently all the Right are wacists or god knows what.

Quote from: FingerRod on January 13, 2023, 01:18:53 PMI am sure they can provide 10 or 15 examples of hateful material created using the OGL. Right?

On one fora they were using Star Frontiers as an example when someone challeneged it and comments like "all the Gygax's are racist!"
Someone else trotted out Spelljammer and the Hadozee and then they got distracted patting eachother on the back about what a good thing WotC did in changing this because Ape is WACIST!

I think Brad Walker on his blog wrote an interesting alternate take on the situation:

https://bradfordcwalker.blogspot.com/2023/01/the-business-wankers-leadership-got.html

Quote
The Business: Wankers' Leadership Got What They Wanted

As I said yesterday, the drama over the Open Game License is--for all intents and purposes--already over.

What will come over the following weeks and months are what, in real terms, is a series of finalization manuevers to attempt to achieve secondary and teritiary objectives.

What will shock a lot of people thinking that Wankers By The Beach has taken a loss is that Wankers' leadership just won their biggest fight: the internal one, the one against the insiders leaking material out in the first place.

The new Wankers head is a non-gamer MBA from Microsoft, and she's a microtransaction expert. She's trying to pivot WOTC's D&D away from its current form into something far more profitable, which means switching to a different customer demographic - and given who this woman is, that means turning D&D into a gatcha-style business with aggressive microtransactions focused around a Walled Garden with in-app purchases.

This entire drama is WOTC signaling that they're dissolving the legacy group and pivoting to someone more profitable. They don't care about the existing players getting mad; they care about the sub losses, but that is--as the leaks showed--considered a short-term hassle.

They want to get atomized friendless losers with money to buy into the Garden, which they can do on mobile, and play exclusively via VTT. The players will be gimped if they don't pay, encouraging transactions, and using the VTT exclusively means that DM autonomy is gutted- and, once a DM bot is good enough, replaced.

Wankers DELIBERATELY antagonized the existing D&D customers with their response.

They want all of you--us--to GO AWAY.

By provoking this reponse, and being confident that someone like Paizo would step up, said MBA Boss Lady can turn to the naysayers sandbagging her and say "See? I AM RIGHT! Fall in line or get fired."

They will. Expect to see some people leave the company--be yeeted from it, really--soon and the rest to quietly get in line behind the bossy bitch.

Expect Wankers to proceed with turning Current Game into a proprietary digital service.

Expect Wankers to expound on the new edition "liberating the player from the need to maintain a regular group" by ensuring that the new service has a matchmaking system that works, which means that all of the problems of Organized Play will be normalized for the new edition and then solved in the most technocratic manner possible.

Expect the gameplay experience to drop from a standard play session length measured in hours to one measured in minutes, likely 10 minutes or less--the length of a single encounter--so that those Gatcha players can get in a game or two as they commute to and from work in their Bugmen hives.

Expect Wankers to proclaim that the service is Free To Play, but in practice you will be gimped without paying real money; due to the amount of SJW Death Cult convergence going on--and the failed attempt at making this a Culture War issue--expect all of the overpowered character options to also demonstrate Death Cult morality while Cult enemies are left at the Free (Shit) Tier, meaning that paying those microtransactions to not be gimped is also a subconscious buy into the Death Cult narrative frame of morality.

Expect Wankers to gut the autonomy of the Dungeon Master by making him little more than a bot to handle interactions that cannot yet be scripted, and then be eliminated as soon as all interactions that fit into the business model's paradigm of play are scripted.

Expect Wankers to then expand this service internationally, looking to break into heretofore hard marketplaces via a new angle that renders them soft: phone-based applications.

Expect Wankers to not only claim that this edition of Current Game met expectations, but that independent audits thereafter to confirm it as fact. Wankers wants what Blizzard got with Diablo: Immortal AND THEY WILL GET IT.

Expect Wankers hereafter to refocus the rest of their business into completing the pivot away from being a tabletop RPG publisher to being a Lifestyle Brand company that extracts value from the brand alone and cares about what its attached to only insofar as it aids or hinders that brand's ability to magic-up massive profits out of nothing.

Expect Wankers to begin explicit disavowal of the tabletop RPG hobby within a year or so, especially if they can pin the failure of the upcoming movie on them.

Where one Williams failed, another is now set up to succeed.

Yes, tabletop RPGs will persist after this. All of you will still be able to make, publish, and play elfgames just fine. However, you can expect any popular sentiment to once more turn against you over time as Wankers now has incentive to smear you--us--as low-status and perfidious villains who should not be accepted in polite company. Old timers remember those days; get used to it, youngin's.

I'm not sure I agree on all points, but the general drift by WotC to eventually move D&D almost 100% digital does make a lot of wotc suits current actions make sense...

Quote from: Jaeger on January 14, 2023, 09:59:37 PMI'm not sure I agree on all points, but the general drift by WotC to eventually move D&D almost 100% digital does make a lot of wotc suits current actions make sense...

I disagree on the idea that this will work. Hasbro has to jump into the hypercompetitive micro-transaction game market with something much more unproven with less internal experience with that.

Just because they had a big wig that hired a bunch of people to do all the work for her, doesn't mean she magically carried all those people from Microsoft into Hasbro. MTG arena plays a far second Banana to Hearthstone. And I would say the crossover between the sort of people that would pay for D&D microtransactions and MTG arena is...80% at least. You're competing with yourself.

I absolutely believe that D&DONE wants the mobile game audience. I just don't think they can expect to garner a good audience with that. Or an audience any bigger then any other mobile game with a D&D skin attached.

If the goal is to make more money, step 1 is to get out of the TTRPG business. [/joke]

We all wants to get paid, but golden geese and all that.

So they basically want to make money while producing nothing tangible.

Sounds like a bunch of fucking bankers.

At least the current obese, non-gamer woman with the surname "Williams" isn't trying to shove Buck fucking Rogers down everyone's throat this time around!

Quote from: Jaeger on January 14, 2023, 09:59:37 PM
I think Brad Walker on his blog wrote an interesting alternate take on the situation:

https://bradfordcwalker.blogspot.com/2023/01/the-business-wankers-leadership-got.html

I'm not sure I agree on all points, but the general drift by WotC to eventually move D&D almost 100% digital does make a lot of wotc suits current actions make sense...

If Brad is correct (And I think he is in regards to Wankers on the Beach {Love the nickname} wanting to turn D&D into a phone videogame with microtransactions up the wazoo, then I wish them the best of lucks, the sooner they get out of the ACTUAL TTRPG market the better for the hoby.

Quote from: Semaj Khan on January 14, 2023, 11:56:47 PM
So they basically want to make money while producing nothing tangible.

Sounds like a bunch of fucking bankers.

And THAT sounds like code. Bankers? Really, the bankers trope? Like, loaning people your money in exchange for value hasn't been proven out over 3000 years to be producing something?

Quote from: Omega on January 14, 2023, 06:19:12 PM

Quote from: Kerstmanneke82 on January 13, 2023, 01:23:48 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 13, 2023, 01:07:36 PM
The Sparkle Troll Brigade is already saying that they are perfectly fine with "kicking out the bigots" but they want their OGL 1.0a to be modified to include such language.

Are they? Source?

Yeah I can confirm its on Reddit, BGG, and even saw it on a video review of the new OGL and they were gloating in the video about how that would make the Right wing upset. Because apparently all the Right are wacists or god knows what.

I suspect it will be the usual double standard. The left say explicitly racist things, but it doesn't count as racism because they choose a new definition of racism. Someone on the right says something innocuous, and then the left interprets it in a bizarre way to "show" that it's racist, and then the right gets booted out.

Quote from: rhialto on January 14, 2023, 07:10:59 AM
You don't say...I didn't even know Tal Epic Edition was planned. Thanks!

they just got me to work on their project (Savage Worlds Talislanta!)

Quote from: Mistwell on January 15, 2023, 12:16:40 PM

Quote from: Semaj Khan on January 14, 2023, 11:56:47 PM
So they basically want to make money while producing nothing tangible.

Sounds like a bunch of fucking bankers.

And THAT sounds like code. Bankers? Really, the bankers trope? Like, loaning people your money in exchange for value hasn't been proven out over 3000 years to be producing something?

When what they were lending was actual money in the form of precious metals, sure. But nowadays they are lending that which they do not possess to begin with and making money off of the transfer of that which they do not possess.  No bank is taking your $100 in rolled pennies that you put in your passbook savings account and handing it to someone who applied for a car loan or a mortgage.

What they're doing is moving a number from one column to another in a ledger and then charging each other interest when they ask other banks to make their own ledgers match.  *None* of it is real until the point at which someone walks away from a transaction with physical items.

Quote from: tenbones on January 16, 2023, 10:58:09 PM

Quote from: rhialto on January 14, 2023, 07:10:59 AM
You don't say...I didn't even know Tal Epic Edition was planned. Thanks!

they just got me to work on their project (Savage Worlds Talislanta!)

Cool!

Still on the fence as to whether mistakes were made or it's all going according to plan, which just may be their plan.

Quote from: Krazz on January 13, 2023, 05:04:37 PM
So WoTC say:

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

They also have this disclaimer on products for most versions of D&D they sell on DriveThru:

  "We (Wizards) recognize that some of the legacy content available on this website does not reflect the values of the Dungeons & Dragons franchise today. Some older content may reflect ethnic, racial, and gender prejudice that were commonplace in American society at that time."

Apparently, it's OK for WoTC to make money from hateful and discriminatory products. It's only a problem when other people do that.

What's more they'll refuse to identify what they consider to be problematic in their own work if asked. It's whatever the customers who complain tell them it is.

Quote from: Effete on January 13, 2023, 06:54:27 PM

Quote from: FingerRod on January 13, 2023, 05:08:06 PM
On one hand, it is their product they should be able to do what they want. On the other hand, people have been working with a good faith understanding that the original OGL would not change.

Here'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?

The only reason Paizo and the other big 3PPs balked is because they perceived a threat to their brand. If the OGL was left alone and new license agreement invented, I don't think any of this would be as big as it is now. Whoever is in charge at WotC is really fukken stupid.

They don't understand why the OGL increased sales, only that it did, and therefore they need one, even if it isn't.

Quote from: Philotomy Jurament on January 13, 2023, 07:13:17 PM
If I were a shareholder I would want corporate officer and management heads to roll.

Imagine if folks bought shares of #Hasbro instead of doing... whatever else it is they're doing.

Quote from: Jaeger on January 14, 2023, 09:59:37 PM
I think Brad Walker on his blog wrote an interesting alternate take on the situation:

https://bradfordcwalker.blogspot.com/2023/01/the-business-wankers-leadership-got.html

Equal parts reasonable and unhinged.

When #WotC said 'we' both won, they weren't kidding. The fans got a community to rally behind, and #WotC got to identify all the problematic customers who were a threat to their brand, but I'm not sure this is going to turn out like anyone expects.

Quote from: Rod's Duo Narcotics on January 15, 2023, 07:48:23 AM
At least the current obese, non-gamer woman with the surname "Williams" isn't trying to shove Buck fucking Rogers down everyone's throat this time around!

That was because she was pocketing royalties for every sale. She also co-opted the printers to publish a BR book she got even more off of.

But her brother was an avid gamer and all around nice fellow. Loraine herself was an overall pleasant person too. She was just also a corporate wolf and valued writers over designers. She was a godsend for a while to novelists. Two of my former players got their starts in writing due to her. Very yin-yang gal.

Quote from: tenbones on January 16, 2023, 10:58:09 PM
they just got me to work on their project (Savage Worlds Talislanta!)

1) Congrats!!

2) Are you writing a specific section or the entire book?

3) Will you be able to discuss your playtests along the way?

Quote from: Omega on January 25, 2023, 03:01:39 PM

Quote from: Rod's Duo Narcotics on January 15, 2023, 07:48:23 AM
At least the current obese, non-gamer woman with the surname "Williams" isn't trying to shove Buck fucking Rogers down everyone's throat this time around!

That was because she was pocketing royalties for every sale. She also co-opted the printers to publish a BR book she got even more off of.

But her brother was an avid gamer and all around nice fellow. Loraine herself was an overall pleasant person too. She was just also a corporate wolf and valued writers over designers. She was a godsend for a while to novelists. Two of my former players got their starts in writing due to her. Very yin-yang gal.

Huh, that might explain why I liked the settings from her reign. What a weird mix life can leave you with.

Quote from: Omega on January 25, 2023, 03:01:39 PM

Quote from: Rod's Duo Narcotics on January 15, 2023, 07:48:23 AM
At least the current obese, non-gamer woman with the surname "Williams" isn't trying to shove Buck fucking Rogers down everyone's throat this time around!

That was because she was pocketing royalties for every sale. She also co-opted the printers to publish a BR book she got even more off of.

But her brother was an avid gamer and all around nice fellow. Loraine herself was an overall pleasant person too. She was just also a corporate wolf and valued writers over designers. She was a godsend for a while to novelists. Two of my former players got their starts in writing due to her. Very yin-yang gal.

That's the only positive text I've ever read, regarding L. Williams.  The legend of what a terrible person she was, has always drowned out any humanity she may have had.

Quote from: Jam The MF on January 26, 2023, 02:51:17 PM
That's the only positive text I've ever read, regarding L. Williams.  The legend of what a terrible person she was, has always drowned out any humanity she may have had.

   She was also very accommodating of William W. Connors when he had just started at TSR and faced a family emergency that made him think he was going to have to leave the job.

   Everything I've heard suggests Williams was far from perfect as a manager of TSR, but I think a lot of her legacy has been tarnished by partisans of Gygax on the one hand and WotC on the other.

I've heard that she didn't quite understand that playtesting is kind of necessary for a gaming company, and as a result didn't like the developers, y'know, playing the games.

Quote from: Ghostmaker on January 26, 2023, 03:31:40 PM
I've heard that she didn't quite understand that playtesting is kind of necessary for a gaming company, and as a result didn't like the developers, y'know, playing the games.

   Maybe, but I've also heard that that might be an urban legend rather than a well-sourced fact.

 Chris Cocks(ucker) and Cynthia Lorraine Williams can eat a bag of d*cks.

Quote from: thornad on January 26, 2023, 11:17:51 PM
Chris Cocks(ucker) and Cynthia Lorraine Williams can eat a bag of d*cks.

They might actually enjoy that.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer on January 26, 2023, 02:55:17 PM

Quote from: Jam The MF on January 26, 2023, 02:51:17 PM
That's the only positive text I've ever read, regarding L. Williams.  The legend of what a terrible person she was, has always drowned out any humanity she may have had.

   She was also very accommodating of William W. Connors when he had just started at TSR and faced a family emergency that made him think he was going to have to leave the job.

   Everything I've heard suggests Williams was far from perfect as a manager of TSR, but I think a lot of her legacy has been tarnished by partisans of Gygax on the one hand and WotC on the other.

They also helped Fritz Lieber to survive as they kept paying him royalties well on apparently.

Alot of Gary's ire was directed not so much at Loraine as it was at one particular of the brothers Blume. The one that kept making bad management decisions. Something about buying a loom or knitting factory? Weird stuff. His other major irk was the legal sniping from TSR that kept damaging his career and other companies.

Quote from: Omega on January 27, 2023, 02:21:40 AM
They also helped Fritz Lieber to survive as they kept paying him royalties well on apparently.

  TSR was trying to make a go of Lankhmar for years; one of the last products they released before they went under was a standalone Lankhmar RPG based on the AD&D rules, with design by Shane Hensley.

Quote from: Jam The MF on January 26, 2023, 02:51:17 PM
That's the only positive text I've ever read, regarding L. Williams.  The legend of what a terrible person she was, has always drowned out any humanity she may have had.

I heard the writers based The Lady of Pain from #Planescape on her.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer on January 26, 2023, 02:55:17 PM
She was also very accommodating of William W. Connors when he had just started at TSR and faced a family emergency that made him think he was going to have to leave the job.

Quote from: Omega on January 25, 2023, 03:01:39 PM
But her brother was an avid gamer and all around nice fellow. Loraine herself was an overall pleasant person too. She was just also a corporate wolf and valued writers over designers. She was a godsend for a while to novelists. Two of my former players got their starts in writing due to her. Very yin-yang gal.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer on January 27, 2023, 08:37:08 AM

Quote from: Omega on January 27, 2023, 02:21:40 AM
They also helped Fritz Lieber to survive as they kept paying him royalties well on apparently.

TSR was trying to make a go of Lankhmar for years; one of the last products they released before they went under was a standalone Lankhmar RPG based on the AD&D rules, with design by Shane Hensley.

Fact is people are complicated, and it's always better to address bad/good ideas and actions rather than vilify/idealize an individual.