2 ms·

I played D&D for about 27 years, but I never thought it was particularly good. It was just the lingua franca, the kernel a relatively small community could come

I played D&D for about 27 years, but I never thought it was particularly good. It was just the lingua franca, the kernel a relatively small community could come together around. I don't think D&D has to be the default tabletop RPG anymore, nor should it be. Partly due to the OGL and its knock-on effects, lots more people entered the community. Maybe they want different things than just a miniatures combat-oriented pastiche of Tolkien, Howard, and Vance. You can publish books more easily, distribute them more easily, market them more easily. I think the tabletop industry could sustain a community without D&D if it had to, and maybe it has to. I wonder if maybe that's a good thing. WoTC's decision was selfish, tone-deaf, destructive; all that stuff. It will hurt people with existing businesses built around OGL content. That sucks. But, I don't think it will (as this open letter states) dismantle the tabletop industry. On the contrary, I hope it frees it from its dependence on a capricious IP owner with a brittle license. For the players, maybe it frees them from a mediocre system and the most generic, uninteresting fantasy setting ever. There's a lot more out there, maybe this is a good opportunity to explore some of it.

vintermann 4y ago
I agree that D&D doesn't need to be the default tabletop RPG anymore. But you bet I want the freedom to borrow everything I liked from every version of it I played (which doesn't include anything recent, by the way). I want to be able to talk about it online too, hell, even PLAY it online. And if Hasbro are so desperate to prevent that from happening that they'll call in the shit-flinging lawyers - the kind who don't even try to have a solid argument, they just try to make engaging with them maximally unpleasant to everyone involved - then I will be most pissed with Hasbro. You too, will have to live in fear of attracting their attention. The whole point of this sort of litigation is that they're signaling, they're not going to be reasonable. Are you SURE you're not infringing in the shit-flinging lawyers' eyes? That doesn't sound like a good opportunity to explore to me.
Karawebnetwork 4y ago
My understanding is that this also puts the more robust "forks" like Pathfinder at risk.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
shuntress 4y ago
I think they actually did a really good job with the 5e rules. I started in 3.5e 15+ years ago. I very strongly dislike 4e. I haven't yet been convinced by any alternatives that the d20 system isn't optimal. D&D 5th edition obviously has problems but, like other comments say, it is the current "lingua franca" of the space and it's difficult to conceive of any realistic open replacement that isn't essentially just "D&D 5e with some relatively minor tweaks".
- bigger_cheese 4y ago
  I agree. Similarly to you I started about 15 years ago with 3.5 and I am pretty satisfied with 5e. I think the issue is for better or worse D&D is more or less synonymous with Tabletop roleplaying games, especially when you are talking to people outside of the space. So many of the concepts from D&D from the attribute system (Strength, dexterity Constitution etc.) To the classes (Fighter, Ranger, Paladin and so on) show up all over the place in things like video games etc. At this point I think it's very hard to come up with a fantasy setting and not have it look like somewhat of a D&D clone. Outside the D&D D20 system I really like the World of Darkness system which is D10 based. I don't think it especially popular though.

vintermann 4y ago

I agree that D&D doesn't need to be the default tabletop RPG anymore. But you bet I want the freedom to borrow everything I liked from every version of it I played (which doesn't include anything recent, by the way). I want to be able to talk about it online too, hell, even PLAY it online. And if Hasbro are so desperate to prevent that from happening that they'll call in the shit-flinging lawyers - the kind who don't even try to have a solid argument, they just try to make engaging with them maximally unpleasant to everyone involved - then I will be most pissed with Hasbro. You too, will have to live in fear of attracting their attention. The whole point of this sort of litigation is that they're signaling, they're not going to be reasonable. Are you SURE you're not infringing in the shit-flinging lawyers' eyes? That doesn't sound like a good opportunity to explore to me.

Karawebnetwork 4y ago

My understanding is that this also puts the more robust "forks" like Pathfinder at risk.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

shuntress 4y ago

I think they actually did a really good job with the 5e rules. I started in 3.5e 15+ years ago. I very strongly dislike 4e. I haven't yet been convinced by any alternatives that the d20 system isn't optimal. D&D 5th edition obviously has problems but, like other comments say, it is the current "lingua franca" of the space and it's difficult to conceive of any realistic open replacement that isn't essentially just "D&D 5e with some relatively minor tweaks".

bigger_cheese 4y ago
I agree. Similarly to you I started about 15 years ago with 3.5 and I am pretty satisfied with 5e. I think the issue is for better or worse D&D is more or less synonymous with Tabletop roleplaying games, especially when you are talking to people outside of the space. So many of the concepts from D&D from the attribute system (Strength, dexterity Constitution etc.) To the classes (Fighter, Ranger, Paladin and so on) show up all over the place in things like video games etc. At this point I think it's very hard to come up with a fantasy setting and not have it look like somewhat of a D&D clone. Outside the D&D D20 system I really like the World of Darkness system which is D10 based. I don't think it especially popular though.