| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Asharak
Learned Scribe
France
268 Posts |
|
|
Scots Dragon
Seeker
United Kingdom
86 Posts |
|
|
Gary Dallison
Great Reader
United Kingdom
6351 Posts |
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
 Posted - 27 Jan 2023 : 22:27:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by Scots Dragon
So uh...
We might have just won.
I'm not convinced that they won't try some future shenanigans, but I'm very glad to see them backing off.
I have to wonder, though, if it was about the survey results, as they say, or if it was more because of 40000 cancelled DNDBeyond subscriptions and the unification of 3rd party providers behind the ORC.
I obviously have no proof to back it up, but it is my opinion that they're hoping to undercut the ORC and Project Black Flag, and thus keep people from flocking to other companies with their gaming dollars.
It is quite clear that the Wizardly exodus and the ORC were going to severely impact their monetization plans, perhaps to the point that a new OGL would be pointless. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen!  |
 |
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jan 2023 : 22:32:17
|
| (and I'm renaming the topic again, since it appears the OGL 1.0a is going to be around for a while longer) |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3802 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jan 2023 : 22:47:30
|
| Wow, the whole 5e SRD document going into Creative Commons is huge, I think. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 27 Jan 2023 22:50:45 |
|
|
|
HighOne
Learned Scribe
214 Posts |
Posted - 27 Jan 2023 : 23:48:16
|
| A promising development, but it would be foolish for a 3PP to trust WotC ever again. If they want to keep developing products for 3E/5E, that's one thing, but following WotC down the "One D&D" path seems like a bad business decision. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jan 2023 : 03:57:52
|
quote:
Originally posted by HighOne
A promising development, but it would be foolish for a 3PP to trust WotC ever again. If they want to keep developing products for 3E/5E, that's one thing, but following WotC down the "One D&D" path seems like a bad business decision.
Yeah, it's going to be a long time before anyone trusts WotC again -- especially since the leadership that made these decisions is still in place, and that drive for monetization remains.
I'd be surprised if we don't see, at the least, notable price increases for DNDBeyond, and I think we'll likely see some more "classic" settings get "revisited." And by "revisited," I mean more of the "we're taking this already done thing and doing absolutely nothing more than updating the game elements to 5E" -- like the new Dragonlance book. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7966 Posts |
Posted - 28 Jan 2023 : 05:12:16
|
Sometimes damage control isn't able to fix things.
The competing publishers are already forging their own open gaming license. There's no reason - including WotC's most heartfelt assurances - for them to abandon the effort and return to WotC's open gaming license. Wizbro has already proven that their licenses are treacherous, that there's a non-zero risk of them attempting (again) to revoke or alter the details of the agreement in the future.
I honestly think it doesn't matter anymore if Wizbro pushes their evil, greedy, controlling license out once the flames have burned down. Because they already burned the riches they wanted to take, there's nothing left for them to take but ashes. D&D is still eponymous with the entire gaming genre, people will still publish for it, people will still buy it. But a bad rep is hard to shake of in today's online world - especially since RPG gamers tend to congegrate, communicate, and read a lot - it'll haunt WotC indefinitely (until they can put out something so awesomely popular that it'll shuffle yesteryear's news down the list). Maybe having to settle for leftovers will make them lean and hungry enough to focus on delivering quality products again. |
[/Ayrik] |
Edited by - Ayrik on 28 Jan 2023 07:20:38 |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 29 Jan 2023 : 17:10:42
|
It's been pointed out by folks on Twitter that Strahd von Zarovich, the Feywild, the Shadowfell, Tiamat, gelatinous cubes, owlbears, and mind flayers are all mentioned in this new SRD, which WotC stuck in Creative Commons. (And I've searched the file and confirmed this)
It doesn't say "Strahd is a 157th level vampire" or anything, or provide stats, but he is listed by name, along with those other things. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
Edited by - Wooly Rupert on 29 Jan 2023 18:03:51 |
|
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3240 Posts |
|
|
Asharak
Learned Scribe
France
268 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jan 2023 : 12:45:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
Which does mean that you can use those names. They still didn't mention beholders, though...
Beholder is mentioned in two occurrences (pgs 216 & 254) as well as yuan-ti.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/attachments/39j2li89/SRD5.1-CCBY4.0License.pdf |
"Soyez réalistes : demandez l'impossible"
Sorry for my English... it's not my native tongue. |
Edited by - Asharak on 30 Jan 2023 12:51:15 |
|
|
|
Ayrik
Great Reader
Canada
7966 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jan 2023 : 13:26:13
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ashe Ravenheart
Which does mean that you can use those names. They still didn't mention beholders, though...
Good question.
Can publishers using the (old) OGL use anything from the (new) SRD?
Can WotC still effectively control content by changing the contents of the SRD as they like without changing the license? Simply by "updating" from 5.1 to 5.1.1 or 5.1a or whatever?
If, for example, you publish successful and popular products based on something in the SRD (beholders or whatever), can they subsequently change the SRD so that beholders or whatever are no longer "open property"? Can Wizbro still use the SRD as an instrument for restricting or legally confronting competitors who use it? Can Wizbro require that you use their "new" OGL license if you use the their "new" SRD? |
[/Ayrik] |
Edited by - Ayrik on 30 Jan 2023 13:30:00 |
|
|
|
Gary Dallison
Great Reader
United Kingdom
6351 Posts |
|
|
Ashe Ravenheart
Great Reader
USA
3240 Posts |
Posted - 30 Jan 2023 : 20:25:06
|
| From what I've been seeing going around, it means you can reference those things in your work, but you can't use stat blocks, images, etc. in the work. |
I actually DO know everything. I just have a very poor index of my knowledge.
Ashe's Character Sheet
Alphabetized Index of Realms NPCs |
|
|
|
TomCosta
Forgotten Realms Designer
USA
952 Posts |
Posted - 26 Feb 2023 : 18:40:02
|
So I finally realized the second thing that's irking me about 5.5E (aside from disliking the One D&D moniker). The first thing was the regression to 4E style mechanics without flavor text. Ugh, IMO, so afraid to offend anyone with flavor text it's avoided almost all together. This was the death of the ardling species. A fine concept, but with nothing to it. Honestly, most of the new races in 5E are the same, like harengons. They're rabbit people. OK, cool. But that's it, almost nothing about how they differ from humans aside from being able to jump better. I'm fine with giving lots of room for creativity, but this is a story telling game, and they are providing the framework for that storytelling. Each class and subclass is an archetype. It's okay to put some flavor on that meat. I think it's also okay to describe a standard culture for the individual species and at the same time note that culture is not monolithic and may not be the same in every campaign.
But the thing I realized today is that while I know there are things that don't work as well in 5E as they or gamers would like, they haven't articulated much of what those are, aside from high level things like noting that the PH ranger wasn't working for folks (balance wise I disagree, but flavor wise I get the changes to favored foe were unwelcome, and I think it's largely been fixed in Tasha's in any case) and people just don't play druids (but aren't necessarily complaining about them). OK, but the changes they are proposing are far more reaching than tinkering with the ranger and druid and adding a new condition or two. Some I can readily get. Spiritual weapon was too good for clerics to ever pass up, so needs tweaking, but why rebuild every class pretty much from scratch? That doesn't make sense to me. |
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36779 Posts |
Posted - 26 Feb 2023 : 19:44:23
|
quote:
Originally posted by TomCosta
So I finally realized the second thing that's irking me about 5.5E (aside from disliking the One D&D moniker). The first thing was the regression to 4E style mechanics without flavor text. Ugh, IMO, so afraid to offend anyone with flavor text it's avoided almost all together. This was the death of the ardling species. A fine concept, but with nothing to it. Honestly, most of the new races in 5E are the same, like harengons. They're rabbit people. OK, cool. But that's it, almost nothing about how they differ from humans aside from being able to jump better. I'm fine with giving lots of room for creativity, but this is a story telling game, and they are providing the framework for that storytelling. Each class and subclass is an archetype. It's okay to put some flavor on that meat. I think it's also okay to describe a standard culture for the individual species and at the same time note that culture is not monolithic and may not be the same in every campaign.
It's what I've been saying for a while: they don't create lore, anymore. I can't say whether it's because they're overly fearful of giving offense, or they simply don't have that particular brand of creative talent*, or a combination of the two. Though given the lore we have gotten in 5E, my money is on them simply not having that type of creative talent.
Also, I can't stand the name "Harengon" for the rabbit people. We have "hare," another name for rabbits right there, and the "here and gone" thing on top of that. If you go with the Latin classification for rabbits, you've got Lagomorpha and Leporidae to build on... So you could call them lagorans or lagoridae or something like that without it looking like the name was a bad joke that someone decided to run with.
*From what I've seen, creative talents go in a lot of directions. Some people are excellent at creating X but can't create Y. I recall one novel where an agent was discussing a book with a prospective author -- the agent said the guy was a bad writer of prose fiction, but one of the best authors of dialogue that he'd ever seen. I myself am weak on creating something new from scratch, but I can build on or modify someone else's ideas quite well. The current D&D design team may be very creative with creating game elements, but I don't see that they've any talent at all for working with lore. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
TomCosta
Forgotten Realms Designer
USA
952 Posts |
Posted - 26 Feb 2023 : 20:33:49
|
| You may be right Wooly. I generally like the 5E game mechanics (nice bridge between 1e/2e and 3e with a dash of what worked from 4e) and they generally create excellent adventures, but most of those are relatively lore light with one or two lore hooks that they work well, but not so much linkages to other bits of lore. |
|
|
|
Irennan
Great Reader
Italy
3802 Posts |
Posted - 27 Feb 2023 : 03:47:08
|
I wouldn't call it talent, but competence. You can (and should) study how to develop certain things, which includes lore. If they don't have anyone capable of that, then it means that no one in their group has ever touched any worldbuilding or storytelling course, and that's just weird, since they have many years of experience under their belt, and the game designer job often includes worldbuilding/story, or at very least interacting with those.
I honestly suspect they just don't see making lore as profitable/worth the hassle, and that's it. Granted, when they do make stories/lore, it's usually rehashed clichés, but still...
Personally, I do prefer systems that only give you mechanical representations of things, and then you decide how to use them in your setting of choice, or your own crafted setting. |
Mathematics is the art of giving the same name to different things. |
Edited by - Irennan on 27 Feb 2023 03:51:23 |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
"One D&D" is coming
