Hey Horace (and other D&D folks)
-
This is wild. Not since Southwest Airlines of 2022 have I seen a company crash and burn so hard.
It seems WotC leaked it because they thought there would be initial controversy, and then when they actually rolled out the changes, there'd be nothing to complain about; the naysayers would get it out of their system.
WotC held a meeting with DDB basically telling them nothing, saying "we're going to roll this out on a delayed timetable, we'll tell you when that is."
Someone at DDB leaked more info, shared it with fans, and now everyone who hasn't done so is cancelling their subscription.
-
Oh my God they took down the unsub page. They're literally preventing people from unsubscribing now.
-
Lol
Pretty sure thatâs not legal.
Maybe they can say there are other ways to unsubscribe. They have that one person manning the unsubscribe phones, who takes upwards of one call per hour, for the lucky person able to navigate the automated phone system and then not get a busy signal after they find the âspeak to a real personâ at the end of the maze.
-
Lol
Pretty sure thatâs not legal.
Maybe they can say there are other ways to unsubscribe. They have that one person manning the unsubscribe phones, who takes upwards of one call per hour, for the lucky person able to navigate the automated phone system and then not get a busy signal after they find the âspeak to a real personâ at the end of the maze.
@Horace said in Hey Horace (and other D&D folks):
Lol
Pretty sure thatâs not legal.
Maybe they can say there are other ways to unsubscribe. They have that one person manning the unsubscribe phones, who takes upwards of one call per hour, for the lucky person able to navigate the automated phone system and then not get a busy signal after they find the âspeak to a real personâ at the end of the maze.
I'm calling Hasbro and WotC in and out of meetings and shit just for funsies.
They sound like they're trying not to sound tired.
-
How much did the original licenses cost? Were they a flat fee or were they revenue based? How much editorial control did WOTC maintain over content?
-
I mean, was there any other major content creators other than D&D Beyond other than the YouTubers?
The Brad
-
I mean, was there any other major content creators other than D&D Beyond other than the YouTubers?
@LuFins-Dad said in Hey Horace (and other D&D folks):
I mean, was there any other major content creators other than D&D Beyond other than the YouTubers?
There is a computer game called Solasta that I heard may have been one of WotCâs triggers.
Education is extremely important.
-
I mean, was there any other major content creators other than D&D Beyond other than the YouTubers?
@LuFins-Dad said in Hey Horace (and other D&D folks):
I mean, was there any other major content creators other than D&D Beyond other than the YouTubers?
Oh my God man where have you been.
Yes, there are kind of a fucking lot of them.Here's how it used to work:
OGL 1.0 allowed players and fans to use D&Dâs System Reference Document (SRD), which is a generalized and watered down version of their system and rules. If you make anything under this OGL, and you don't use anything outside the SRD, all rights are yours. You can sell it, promote it, do whatever you like to it, keep the rights to yourself.In addition to Critical Role, have you heard of Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic? Or Pathfinder? Those were built on the OGL 1.0 system. Not to mention countless Kickstarters and homebrews that middle-tier publishers sell. Live streams, graphic novels, commercialized fan art, podcasts, etc., etc. could all reference SRD material and be in keeping with the OGL.
If you think thatâs a stupid business idea, then you donât know nearly as much about D&D as you thought. Itâs literally what brought D&D from the brink in 2000 and turned it into the most popular TTRPG in the world.
The OGL 1.0 also mentioned explicitly that no update to future OGLs would ever affect 1.0 retroactively. So if D&D came up with an updated SRD for the new stuff theyâve created, but the rules were more stringent, you could still just use OGL 1.0 and its attached SRD to make content.
A leaked version of the OGL 1.1 has said that:
- Weâre reneging on literally all of that
- You have to submit an application to use anything we make, which includes regular updates that you must provide proving how much money you're making on your work
- We can say yes or no at any time without any reason given,
- We own all the rights to everything you make. So we can start selling it ourselves, then revoke your license.
- If this seems like a bad deal for you, well, you waive any rights to litigation, so, sorry. Oh and
- You can only make static text documents and sell those, provided we agree and we donât decide to steal it. No more video games, no live streams of people playing, no software platforms like Dungeon Fog to help you manage your campaigns, no podcasts of people playing, nothing like that.
What this really is, is a pre-emptive strike to promote their VTT. That's how they see their company moving forward. They dropped about a half dozen unnamed video game projects and pulled all their money over to developing the VTT.
-
@LuFins-Dad said in Hey Horace (and other D&D folks):
I mean, was there any other major content creators other than D&D Beyond other than the YouTubers?
There is a computer game called Solasta that I heard may have been one of WotCâs triggers.
@Horace said in Hey Horace (and other D&D folks):
@LuFins-Dad said in Hey Horace (and other D&D folks):
I mean, was there any other major content creators other than D&D Beyond other than the YouTubers?
There is a computer game called Solasta that I heard may have been one of WotCâs triggers.
I've played it. It's fun.
-
If you're not doing anything in the next five minutes or so...
My guess is they'll totally balk now that word's gotten out. I'll be very surprised if they release anything.
EDIT: lol and now it's at 3pm. So far. I bet they do nothing.
-
If you think thatâs a stupid business idea,
Not at all. To me it sounds like the Android business model. It reduces their responsibility to just producing the basic core product. Let all of the content creators go nuts. The more people consuming that content, the more that are acquiring our basic tool kitâŚ
However, was the original license free? Or was there a license fee and was it a set fee?
-
If you think thatâs a stupid business idea,
Not at all. To me it sounds like the Android business model. It reduces their responsibility to just producing the basic core product. Let all of the content creators go nuts. The more people consuming that content, the more that are acquiring our basic tool kitâŚ
However, was the original license free? Or was there a license fee and was it a set fee?
@LuFins-Dad said in Hey Horace (and other D&D folks):
If you think thatâs a stupid business idea,
Not at all. To me it sounds like the Android business model. It reduces their responsibility to just producing the basic core product. Let all of the content creators go nuts. The more people consuming that content, the more that are acquiring our basic tool kitâŚ
However, was the original license free? Or was there a license fee and was it a set fee?
There was no fee. The tradeoff was, they still kept a shitload of their own IP that wasn't part of the SRD, so you were also forced to build up some things yourself. You can't create much using only the SRD, you can only use it as a basic skeleton.
Multiple words on the street over at WotC say that they had an all-hands meeting yesterday with their creative team to try to do damage control. (By "creative team," I mean the D&D folks, not PR or Marketing, so that's very strange. Probably to put them on camera and have them be the face of this. Which, you motherfucking cowards, thatâs so shitty. It wasnât their decision, they hate this just as much as everyone else, but you put them on camera and theyâre the ones who are going to get the hate mail and the threats.)
-
I called it. They cancelled it.
Oh, and it was a recording. They cancelled the release of a recording.
Yeah these guys have their shit together.
-
They were probably going to go forward with it until it got to TNCR. They realized they had no chance after thatâŚ
-
Did OGL 1.0 just cover game mechanics or did it also cover Trademarks?
-
@LuFins-Dad said in Hey Horace (and other D&D folks):
Did OGL 1.0 just cover game mechanics or did it also cover Trademarks?
No, what they did was they generalized some of the content. So for example, the spell "Tasha's Mind Whip" references Tasha, which is a protected IP and outside of the SRD. So for the SRD, they changed content like that to something more generic, like "Arcane Mind Whip" but kept the mechanics.
-
@LuFins-Dad said in Hey Horace (and other D&D folks):
Did OGL 1.0 just cover game mechanics or did it also cover Trademarks?
No, what they did was they generalized some of the content. So for example, the spell "Tasha's Mind Whip" references Tasha, which is a protected IP and outside of the SRD. So for the SRD, they changed content like that to something more generic, like "Arcane Mind Whip" but kept the mechanics.
@Aqua-Letifer said in Hey Horace (and other D&D folks):
@LuFins-Dad said in Hey Horace (and other D&D folks):
Did OGL 1.0 just cover game mechanics or did it also cover Trademarks?
No, what they did was they generalized some of the content. So for example, the spell "Tasha's Mind Whip" references Tasha, which is a protected IP and outside of the SRD. So for the SRD, they changed content like that to something more generic, like "Arcane Mind Whip" but kept the mechanics.
Then I assume that they did have other licenses available? It seemed like D&D Beyond content contained WOTC Campaign Specific contentâŚ
-
-
I mean before they were bought by TSR.
@LuFins-Dad said in Hey Horace (and other D&D folks):
I mean before they were bought by TSR.
No idea; the OGL goes back only to 2000.
