Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
Publishing Business & Licensing
Monte Cook makes a statement about the OGL and MCG license
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Leejna" data-source="post: 8884159" data-attributes="member: 7039867"><p>I am fairly new to DnD, when en the OGL 1.0 was made I was about 8, I do not make my living from DnD, though I have definitely enjoyed the system and resulting games greatly the past few years, and I have even begun DMing to become a better storyteller and to bring fun to other people's experiences. I also do not know who Monte Cook is (though I probably should), however I do read a lot into how people word things, and this does come off as slightly gaslighting, along the lines of "I can't believe you would question our intentions when I was there for the first OGL", no one is questioning the intent of the individuals who are writing this draft, what we are questioning is the intent of the gigantic greedy corporation behind the new OGL that is most certainly going to be exploiting it for their own gain/greed. If I created content for DnD I would definitely be considering either changing up the system I was presenting, if creating it at all, I can understand it is a business, however there is a fine line between "Hey we would like some credit" and "Hey if your stuff is good enough then legally it belongs to us and thanks for doing all our legwork for us, now go away while we reap the rewards of your hard work until the end of time". It's not right.</p><p></p><p>It can also be stated that the original OGL is the main reason the DnD market boomed as big as it did the past 2+ decades. And without it they would never be in the position to make this big of a change to try for money. So to take their hands off for 20+ years, let it explode and flourish as a community, then to turn around and say "Hey this belongs to us" is ridiculous, it's ingenious in a sense, but by no means is it right. In fact the quote "DnD is under monetized" speaks a lot to their intent and mindset. In fact they really should be fine with the old OGL because that allowed people creative freedom, to make their own supplements, three of which I backed just last year, people who based their work on the 5E system, and by that sense, DnD and WoTC. Hence boosting sales.</p><p></p><p>Long take away, I can understand the decision, however that does not mean I have to accept nor approve of it, in fact I think it's much too far, and even though I don't make a living or income on it, I am definitely considering switching to a different system, such as PF2E, to avoid supporting those decisions/mindsets.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Leejna, post: 8884159, member: 7039867"] I am fairly new to DnD, when en the OGL 1.0 was made I was about 8, I do not make my living from DnD, though I have definitely enjoyed the system and resulting games greatly the past few years, and I have even begun DMing to become a better storyteller and to bring fun to other people's experiences. I also do not know who Monte Cook is (though I probably should), however I do read a lot into how people word things, and this does come off as slightly gaslighting, along the lines of "I can't believe you would question our intentions when I was there for the first OGL", no one is questioning the intent of the individuals who are writing this draft, what we are questioning is the intent of the gigantic greedy corporation behind the new OGL that is most certainly going to be exploiting it for their own gain/greed. If I created content for DnD I would definitely be considering either changing up the system I was presenting, if creating it at all, I can understand it is a business, however there is a fine line between "Hey we would like some credit" and "Hey if your stuff is good enough then legally it belongs to us and thanks for doing all our legwork for us, now go away while we reap the rewards of your hard work until the end of time". It's not right. It can also be stated that the original OGL is the main reason the DnD market boomed as big as it did the past 2+ decades. And without it they would never be in the position to make this big of a change to try for money. So to take their hands off for 20+ years, let it explode and flourish as a community, then to turn around and say "Hey this belongs to us" is ridiculous, it's ingenious in a sense, but by no means is it right. In fact the quote "DnD is under monetized" speaks a lot to their intent and mindset. In fact they really should be fine with the old OGL because that allowed people creative freedom, to make their own supplements, three of which I backed just last year, people who based their work on the 5E system, and by that sense, DnD and WoTC. Hence boosting sales. Long take away, I can understand the decision, however that does not mean I have to accept nor approve of it, in fact I think it's much too far, and even though I don't make a living or income on it, I am definitely considering switching to a different system, such as PF2E, to avoid supporting those decisions/mindsets. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
Publishing Business & Licensing
Monte Cook makes a statement about the OGL and MCG license
Top