Feedback they will appreciate from any publisher, but for Cepheus itself that would have to be Mongoose Matt or possibly Marc Miller since Cepheus is a license use of of a product which is itself a a licensed product. Like a Russian Doll. LOL
The Upcoming New OGL 1.1 vs. OGL 1.0a and Cepheus
- Thread starter Nathan Brazil
- Start date
The text of the license itself is a WotC IP. Which means there's a chance they could ban further use of 1.0a under copyright law.
Given the Copyright Recovery Act, they can zip-yank it in 13 more years, as that allows cancelation of license or sale of IP.
These outlier possibilities are why Paizo's ORC will not remain Paizo's - they're looking for a suitable non-profit to hold the IP to the ORC.
False equivalence fallacy.
An item can be published but not authorized (EG: the 1971 English Sacramentary), Authorized but not published (many licensed games during beta), both , or neither.
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
BOOM.
WotC's press release as quoth by Gizmodo confirms it was a draft for comment to a number of publishing partners... even used the phrase "rolled a 1" in describing the reactions.
The problem is that WotC may be forced by HasBro (who already owned them at the time of 1.0a authorization) to try to claw back the 1,0a, ending its future use; the industry has already reacted. The declared intent alone is enough to cause animus.
HasBro's board noted that D&D and magic are "...[seriously] under monetized." (I can't recall if it was "seriously" or "woefully"). And we're talking about a corporate division doing $1,300,000,000 per year on MTG alone¹ being "under monetized" on their two flagship products, MTG and D&D...
Now, keeping in mind that the goal of a corporate entity is to make its shareholders money by any legal means in the scope of the charter/corpora and the bylaws, it's in HasBro's best interests to make WotC increase monetization of both. Hence the forthcoming TV series, the new edition with just enough changes to force a new round of corebook purchases, etc.
¹: https://sea.ign.com/magic-the-gathe...eport announced that,US$1 billion dollar mark.
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
Yeah ... good luck with that one ...
This sounds like a lot of foaming at the mouth over a high level game of rules lawyering.
If you really want to make ones displeasure known to WotC, cancel your D&D One account, don't buy their products and do not go see the movie (no matter how good it may look).
Individually we don't have much clout, collectively we are an army of Kender with fists full of cash. Hit them in the coin pouch. The only lingo they understand is the jingle of gold.
As far as the businesses affected by all this, support them. Buy their stuff...and enjoy them.
The gaming industry will band together and deal with the blight that threatens them.
Feed the ORC, starve the dragon!
If you really want to make ones displeasure known to WotC, cancel your D&D One account, don't buy their products and do not go see the movie (no matter how good it may look).
Individually we don't have much clout, collectively we are an army of Kender with fists full of cash. Hit them in the coin pouch. The only lingo they understand is the jingle of gold.
As far as the businesses affected by all this, support them. Buy their stuff...and enjoy them.
The gaming industry will band together and deal with the blight that threatens them.
Feed the ORC, starve the dragon!
I'd been following the playtest... the changes are fundamental, but not severe. Now? Been looking for an excuse to walk away. This is probably a good time to stop keeping up.Yeah ... good luck with that one ...
Disabling 1.0a might be doable. And HasBro may not care that it's murdering Wizards' D&D RPG... because it's been said that the TTRPG isn't actually the lion's share of D&D's better than a quarter billion dollar a year income.
Condottiere
SOC-14 5K
There's stuff like intangibles, such as goodwill.
Monetizing the intellectual property would be like making films and video games, where I believe the potential profits are greater, as well as exposure.
I think that for fan fiction, if you want to use the material based on your intellectual property from independent sources, offer them a profit sharing scheme from official publications, rather than a cut from gross income.
Monetizing the intellectual property would be like making films and video games, where I believe the potential profits are greater, as well as exposure.
I think that for fan fiction, if you want to use the material based on your intellectual property from independent sources, offer them a profit sharing scheme from official publications, rather than a cut from gross income.
daryen
SOC-14 1K
No. It was not a draft. It was given to companies with a contract that they had to sign within a week. You do not send a "draft" with a contract to sign. The idea that 1.1 was a draft is known as, to use a technical term, a lie. This has been reinforced by multiple sources, including Kickstarter who said they had reduced to royalties from 25% to 20%.
Quite simply, WOTC attempted a "shock and awe" assault to bully everyone into accepting the 1.1 terms. After it blew up in their face, they are attempting revisionism to dig out. It wasn't a draft.
You're the first I've heard claim it anything other than a draft.
I've seen a dozen different comentators (including 5 lawyers) call it a draft, and Wizards call it a draft...
And in a spirit of charity, and unless credible sources are shown to the contrary, will treat further claims it wasn't a draft as essentially violating the personal attacks rule, since the release was done by the CEO of WotC.
That said, a draft is a pretty clear enough statement of desired effect.
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
Didn't the Kickstarter folks confirm the leaked version as the one they were approached with? As well as Kobold Press and MCDM saying they were approached, and the license they saw definitely was not for them. When they went public with statements that they were not going to agree (and in fact both orgs said they'd start their own game systems) they did -not- say the version they were approached with was any different than the one (leaked) version the public knew about... that seems likely it would have been mentioned by those parties (or others, also approached), if it was different.
Weeeeeelllll..... The actual situation is the amalgam of your three statements.The leaked doc was nothing more than a draft at the time. It was not at moment the official OGL 1.1 . I have not made the rounds yet this morning to see if this has changed. I just woke up and have come here first. Their intent is clear.
BECAUSE
Several companies had in fact been contacted and rejected distinct licenses that are very similar to the 1.1 leak but not exactly, but have not given us PROOF similarities begin and end (like revealing a copy of the license or contract proposal THEY received and rejected).
The one revealing the most was Kickstarter. The person who is in charge of Kickstarter "gaming" projects confirmed one element. 25% royalties was standard in 1.1. In exchange for being designated "the official crowdfunding source" for WotC, they negotiated they would enforce new projects to sign an "OGL 1.1" (whatever the final form was/is) in exchange for a royalty reduction down to 20%. If not, Kickstarter rejects your project. So Kickstarter LIKELY has a copy 1.1 or examined a penultimate draft of the final 1.1 so as not to get burned for being WotC's watchdog...
Last edited:
daryen
SOC-14 1K
Well, from literally every YouTube commenter I have seen (which is surprisingly several at this point), the conclusion is that it was either the real deal, or close enough that any differences were only there to trap leakers.
Add in Kickstarter's comments and the insider's comments (that has itself been validated by multiple commenters), I think we can be pretty safe on the conclusion.
Plus, it would be one thing if that was the only problematic part of their response, but it isn't. I'd expand but won't because there are at least a half-dozen detailed takedowns of the statement, and I'd just be repeating them. Fundamentally, that statement is an excellent example of textbook gaslighting.
Add in Kickstarter's comments and the insider's comments (that has itself been validated by multiple commenters), I think we can be pretty safe on the conclusion.
Plus, it would be one thing if that was the only problematic part of their response, but it isn't. I'd expand but won't because there are at least a half-dozen detailed takedowns of the statement, and I'd just be repeating them. Fundamentally, that statement is an excellent example of textbook gaslighting.
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
daryen
SOC-14 1K
But, again, I want to circle back to my first post. The one inarguable point reinforced by this statement is that OGL 1.0a is dead. Whether it lingers for six months (which only applies by accepting the new one), or someone actually goes to court to "save" it, it's dead. We need to accept that now.
To keep Cepheus alive and growing, it is absolutely required for Mongoose to rerelease the Traveller SRD with a new license. I understand that it takes time to pick or make such a license. But there is nothing preventing Mongoose from making a statement and commitment of intent that they are working on it now. Cepheus really needs this.
To keep Cepheus alive and growing, it is absolutely required for Mongoose to rerelease the Traveller SRD with a new license. I understand that it takes time to pick or make such a license. But there is nothing preventing Mongoose from making a statement and commitment of intent that they are working on it now. Cepheus really needs this.
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
The (Paizo) ORCs are coming ...
kilemall
SOC-14 5K
The latest Star Wars films provide an example of what the loss of core principles and fandom can cost.
