|
Tism the Dragon Tickler posted:iirc the video game uses a whole bunch of Modern d20 stuff. Yea, but they got their own separate license from WotC. Bill Slavicsek apparently confirmed this.
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 04:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 15:13 |
|
|
It was a special license, confirmed by Ryan Dancey.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 04:13
|
|
|
Tism the Dragon Tickler posted:Looking forward to the eventual legal battle between Hasbro and Disney due to the use of OGL 1.0 in Knights of the Old Republic Oh, that was clickbait. Ryan Dancey and Bill Slavicsek debunked it pretty quick.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 04:35
|
|
|
there's still going to be an epic legal battle between WOTC and... uhhhh... *shuffles papers, flips through rolodex* ... Activision/Blizzard over the Warcraft RPG!!!
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 04:38
|
|
|
Dawgstar posted:Oh, that was clickbait. Ryan Dancey and Bill Slavicsek debunked it pretty quick. https://twitter.com/slavicsek/status/1611697482542583808 LMBO
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 04:43
|
|
|
I would say that that "worked" because I had no idea that KOTOR was based on Star Wars d20 until much later in life, even if I'd played through the whole thing. I wasn't at all familiar with the TRPG hobby, and though I knew that something like Baldur's Gate and Icewind Dale were based on AD&D, I never made the connection with KOTOR and simply assumed it was some kind of bespoke game system just for that game.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 04:51
|
|
|
Lemniscate Blue posted:Jaysus there's some people on Twitter who are really fuckin' dumb. Are you confident that they won't?
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 05:00
|
|
|
Warthur posted:Are you confident that they won't? Hasbro lawyers aren't quite as deranged as Disney lawyers, I don't think
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 05:05
|
|
|
This is the company that sent a letter saying "We are going to breach this contract. What are you going to do, sue us?"
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 05:13
|
|
|
Tism the Dragon Tickler posted:Hasbro lawyers aren't quite as deranged as Disney lawyers, I don't think I mean, they think they can alter a 22 year old IP license and add a ton of negative clauses to it without giving the users the chance to back out, even when that license was used without any of their intellectual property.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 05:29
|
|
|
The thing is STar Wars D20 is pretty bad, and I wish they'd remake the KotOR games with better rules.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 06:08
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:Fair enough, I am just more of a wait and see guy. Not to sound like I'm coming for you specifically, but unless you're plugged into the creator part of the equation then you being a wait and see guy doesn't really affect you one way or the other. It honestly doesn't likely affect a bunch of the people who are pissed or concerned about this (not that their concerns are any less valid), but there are people who do stand to have tentative livelihoods seriously impacted by this stuff, the same as when Kickstarter was openly flirting with blockchain poo poo. Troll Lord sucks poo poo so gently caress'em, whatever, but in the abstract I can't really blame the people who stand to be materially impacted by WotC upending things in the endless quest for more money for taking proactive measures to get ahead of the mess.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 07:19
|
|
|
Considering loving around with the license was one of the (many) things that lead to the 4e pissing match, I have no idea why WotC/Hasbro is going back to this well once again
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 08:34
|
|
|
Same reason they thought MTG30 was a good idea?
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 08:36
|
|
|
we might say that "well, the GSL didn't hurt them too badly considering 4e was still the most successful edition of D&D up to that point, and by a country mile"... ... but that runs into the problem of the 4e not being perceived as being successful, hence 5e being designed the way it was (and Essentials already trying to roll it back mid-edition)
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 08:37
|
|
|
Also Pathfinder.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 09:05
|
|
|
Nissin Cup Nudist posted:Considering loving around with the license was one of the (many) things that lead to the 4e pissing match, I have no idea why WotC/Hasbro is going back to this well once again Links were posted earlier in the thread, but the current WotC executive staff overseeing D&D are people who weren't around for that period, and in fact don't seem to have any experience with the TRPG publishing industry (or RPG design, or even seem to know what an RPG is) whatsoever. quote:I promise you that this isn't true. The people at the Hasbro level aren't involved in this. This is being driven at the WotC level, by the new president and senior VP for D&D. quote:Most of what I've said comes from reviewing the LinkedIn profiles of the folks in charge, along with press releases. If you pay modest attention to WotC's goings-on, you can start to discern the organizational structure.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 09:11
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:Links were posted earlier in the thread, but the current WotC executive staff overseeing D&D are people who weren't around for that period, and in fact don't seem to have any experience with the TRPG publishing industry (or RPG design, or even seem to know what an RPG is) whatsoever. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4VBqTViEx4
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 09:41
|
|
|
I would not be shocked to hear that Winniger left cause of stuff right now. His leaving was very random.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 10:05
|
|
|
I can imagine some people looked at the 4e/Pathfinder situation and saw that the problem was people could continue publishing stuff for a clone of the old edition, and decided "Well if we get rid of the old license that won't happen!" Which is kinda wishful thinking but there you go. (D&DOne will probably still sell well mind you even if they go full scorched earth, but probably NOT with as much acclaim as 5th Edition.) I dunno what's gonna happen, I think it is worth making noise though. It's possible they'll get spooked.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 10:38
|
|
|
I'm really kind of undecided on what the actual fallout would be if, for example, WotC decided to just go full on slash-and-burn. There's a whole ecosystem of designers out there who stand to get hosed over, but by and large the things that have really buoyed D&D over this past edition are things that don't really have much to do with small indie D&D designers but more stuff like Critical Role, and I'm unconvinced that Critical Role will ever drop D&D for another system because they know what side their bread is buttered on. The average D&D player probably doesn't really know much about this stuff and I don't know how much they care either. Nothing lasts forever and nothing is unassailable, but people predicted the decline of World of Warcraft zillions of times before it actually kinda started happening, and it took FF14, a series of poorly received releases, and a cluster bomb of sexual harassment/abuse scandals to make it stick. I think this could be a case where WotC's decisions are meaningfully impactful and lovely for a segment of creators that will have to either deal with worse, more exploitative terms or move on to other venues, but in the broader picture it doesn't really have much impact for the majority of people who play D&D because it's D&D and D&D is the only RPG in their world.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 12:05
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:I'm really kind of undecided on what the actual fallout would be if, for example, WotC decided to just go full on slash-and-burn. There's a whole ecosystem of designers out there who stand to get hosed over, but by and large the things that have really buoyed D&D over this past edition are things that don't really have much to do with small indie D&D designers but more stuff like Critical Role, and I'm unconvinced that Critical Role will ever drop D&D for another system because they know what side their bread is buttered on. And that's the fanbase. The topic is currently banned on /r/criticalrole, but based on the adjacent discussion the more engaged portion of their fanbase does seem to slowly turning against WOTC at the moment. The WOTC money must be quite nice, but if CR has to choose between the whole community thinking continuing to associate with WOTC is unethical and WOTC money, I think they'll go with appeasing the fanbase.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 12:16
|
|
|
With creators trying to make as much noise as possible right now, they might also be trying to halt it before it happens - once they formally release the new OGL, it's presumably going to be much harder to get them to take it down. It kind of revolves around the idea of "It's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission" you get in politics - once something is done, it is much easier for the person doing it to wring their hands and say "sorry but it's in place now and it'd be too much work to amend it." I can see them getting pressured into dropping the 'we can retroactively change the agreement you sign up for' clause with 'we reserve the right to release a new version in future if we discover loopholes,' simply from the perspective of their legal department wanting to cover their bases. But I don't see the demand for some royalties from bigger creators ever going away ever sadly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 12:24
|
|
|
quote:So that's who we're talking about : tech and ecommerce executives with MBAs and video game producers. Those are the people that come to mind when I read about what WotC's doing with D&D. They have no meaningful experience in the TRPG market, TRPG game design, or book publishing in general. I can't find a single D&D design credit - or even a game design credit, TRPG or otherwise - among any of them. According to Brink's LinkedIn profile, he participates in some sort of annual, game-design think tank that writes white papers. Maybe he's published a small indie game through that program? Regardless, he's leading the entire D&D design team. Make of that what you will. How often do an entire management team who have no experience in the industry succeed? Ever? I feel like we're watching the start of an episode of Seconds from Disaster...
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 13:02
|
|
|
Bobby Deluxe posted:With creators trying to make as much noise as possible right now, they might also be trying to halt it before it happens - once they formally release the new OGL, it's presumably going to be much harder to get them to take it down. I broadly agree, this is the best time to make a stink about it because if WotC pushes this thing through then there isn't gonna be a rollback, they stomached the GSL for an edition without ever reconsidering it, and I have a pretty dim view of the sorts of tech MBA types that are apparently helming the ship now to actually be able to change course on something even if it sucks. Hopefully the pressure results in something, because I could easily see WotC simply deciding "gently caress'em, what are they gonna do, play other games?" and pushing it through regardless. I also agree that the royalty stipulations are the thing I would least expect to change, especially if they soften it by rolling back some of the other stuff and it's perceived as a victory.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 13:16
|
|
|
Even with their reduced 20% rate, that the 20% only applies after a certain amount of revenue could see a return to the "too successful" kickstarter. If you're charging $100 for something and get 10,000 orders those last 2,500 orders are going to drag your average down from $100 to $95. 15,000 orders and you're down to $90.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 13:35
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:I broadly agree, this is the best time to make a stink about it because if WotC pushes this thing through then there isn't gonna be a rollback, they stomached the GSL for an edition without ever reconsidering it, and I have a pretty dim view of the sorts of tech MBA types that are apparently helming the ship now to actually be able to change course on something even if it sucks. Hopefully the pressure results in something, because I could easily see WotC simply deciding "gently caress'em, what are they gonna do, play other games?" and pushing it through regardless. I also agree that the royalty stipulations are the thing I would least expect to change, especially if they soften it by rolling back some of the other stuff and it's perceived as a victory. WotC did actually make changes to the GSL about a year after 4E released (for example, taking out the "you can't publish things under both the OGL and the GSL" clause), it was just too late to have much of an effect.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 13:56
|
|
|
Zandar posted:WotC did actually make changes to the GSL about a year after 4E released (for example, taking out the "you can't publish things under both the OGL and the GSL" clause), it was just too late to have much of an effect. I stand corrected, I didn't even remember that. It probably would have been more effective if they'd just dropped it entirely, but I guess some effort was made.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 14:06
|
|
|
MonsterEnvy posted:Shouldn’t they wait until it’s actually released to make that decision? If the leak is accurate, the turnaround time on reacting to it is planned to be pretty short, and most of the companies relying on the OGL aren't deriving that much benefit from it in the first place. It's a wake up call to do something they should've probably started doing years ago.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 15:22
|
|
|
Megazver posted:And that's the fanbase. The topic is currently banned on /r/criticalrole, but based on the adjacent discussion the more engaged portion of their fanbase does seem to slowly turning against WOTC at the moment. The WOTC money must be quite nice, but if CR has to choose between the whole community thinking continuing to associate with WOTC is unethical and WOTC money, I think they'll go with appeasing the fanbase. quote:As many of you are likely already aware, earlier today a new report was released regarding the content of the new Open Gaming License (OGL) for D&D. In brief, the OGL is what allows third-party content creators to legally publish homebrew content for D&D, including material such as the Tal'Dorei Campaign Setting Reborn. There is a significant amount of controversy regarding the content of the new OGL and apparent efforts from Hasbro/Wizards of the Coast to de-authorize/override the existing OGL with this new version. This may be problematic for future CR D&D content, but it is unclear what immediate impacts it would have on existing content like the Tal'Dorei Campaign Setting Reborn (if any). That seems pretty measured and it directs people who care toward other discussions of the topic. The really big problem for WotC is that all their efforts seem directed towards grabbing ahold of the VTT market and monetizing it as much as they can. There’s going to be considerable overlap between that playerbase and the current online ecosphere that’s the focus of the current controversy over the license. Maybe they turn that around by packaging the VTT into the One rules, but my guess is they’re going to be forced to back off license revisions. The concern remains that the execs who pushed this idea through decide to ride this all out instead of backing down. If it was indeed just the WotC execs, Hasbro execs might be noticing all the buzz and asking some pointed questions. If there’s someone ITT who likes doing this sort of thing, check the WotC executive staff in six to eight months and see if anyone has “left” and we’ll be able to guess at the fallout. My guess is we’ll see their fallback position as a “One will work more like 4E” position (so revised OGL for One content) while stating that 3E and 5E will remain as they were. If they’re smart, they’ll strip out most of the restrictive language but keep the stuff about software/online platforms, but IANAL and I don’t know if “screw competing VTTs” can be worded properly without impinging on “selling OGL content online”, much less whether restricting VTT usage of One has any real effect if One is mostly a reskinned 5E.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 16:30
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Microfiber14/status/1612262821248598016 I don't know there's ever going to be any kind of steam around dethroning D&D (it's just one of those "it'll happen when it happens" phenomena) but it's very funny to me that people are champing at the bit to take their shot at the king
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 16:47
|
|
|
Why is that funny
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 16:52
|
|
|
One of the biggest barriers to dethroning D&D is the perception that it simply can't be done. We're seeing that erode in real time, which is a genuinely good thing for the hobby at large.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 16:54
|
|
|
The thing to remember about all of this is it has happened before. There was always going to be pushback against 4e because grogs gonna grog, but what really kicked things off was WotC loving over Paizo while introducing a less friendly OGL that required you to "deauthorise" yourself out of the old OGL. So instead of a bunch of nerds crying in a corner about there being a new version for babbies while everyone else just shrugged and ported over (it's us we're the 5e is for babbies grogs), instead you had pretty much every 3rd party creator yelling from prebuilt pulpits that actually the most regressive people in the hobby have the right of it and you should come play D&D 3.5.1 instead. How much this impacted actual sales of 4e is vastly overstated, and I don't expect the reaction to take the exact same form obviously, but wow did they learn the exact wrong lesson from the 4e grogpocalypse.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 16:56
|
|
|
gradenko_2000 posted:I don't know there's ever going to be any kind of steam around dethroning D&D (it's just one of those "it'll happen when it happens" phenomena) but it's very funny to me that people are champing at the bit to take their shot at the king Check out some RPGs you might not know about, such as this half-assed D&D clone by an idiot, a reprint of the busted old editions of Vampire, a game that literally does not have functional mechanics, or an actual good game by the worst person you know.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 17:00
|
|
|
Narsham posted:That seems pretty measured and it directs people who care toward other discussions of the topic. I'm not saying their statement is unreasonable, just saying they're staying out of it at the moment. That said, 
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 17:05
|
|
|
Lemon-Lime posted:Check out some RPGs you might not know about, such as this half-assed D&D clone by an idiot, a reprint of the busted old editions of Vampire, a game that literally does not have functional mechanics, or an actual good game by the worst person you know. Right? Monte Cook's Cypher System wouldn't be in my top... 20 games to look at over D&D, but here they are grinding away at it because Ozymandias is looking like maybe he's got some clay ankles
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 17:07
|
|
|
Lemon-Lime posted:Check out some RPGs you might not know about, such as this half-assed D&D clone by an idiot, a reprint of the busted old editions of Vampire, a game that literally does not have functional mechanics, or an actual good game by the worst person you know.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 17:08
|
|
|
There were third party products for 4e.. just none of them published under the GSL because with a decent understanding of IP, you can avoid trouble and still be compatible- in fact you can literally say you're compatible with 4e d&d, you just have to say it's not authorized. I suspect that will happen if one d&d ends up having a decent market share. People used the OGL because it was free and didn't really cost anything more than because they needed it in particular.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 17:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 15:13 |
|
|
I wonder about D&D being dethroned. On the one hand, I worry that without a well known figurehead as an easy 'in' it'll be tougher to get people into the hobby. Like if you tried to get new people to play and you said "Who wants to play ten candles" you're less likely to get "Oh hey I've heard of that, and that it can be fun." On the other hand, maybe dethroning it might be good? A lot of non-hobby people still have negative stereotypes of D&D, or have preconceptions that they have to do the RP. I can see a lot of people you'd have more luck with asking to do a board game night rather than D&D. For what it's worth I've always found Munchkin to be a much better in with new people who don't play anything.
|
|
#
?
Jan 9, 2023 17:15
|
|