#6e

[daarka]

Actually fucking nuts. Capitalism ruins everything.

Push back against this. Be loud. Use #OpenDnD liberally.

Staying in 5e and ignoring 6e/"OneDnD" is not an option. I'll try to summarize below the cut, but I'm not an expert, so please seek out resources that aren't me for full info. This link is a good start. This is the full deep-dive I read up on a few days ago. Listening to the community is also worthwhile to understand from the voices of those affected most. To be more involved in the discussion yourself, a lawyer has set up a Discord server for the community to gather and converse in regarding this issue.

Again, for full context and information from more knowledgeable sources than me (including actual professionals), please go to the links I included above. If you don't have the time/patience/spoons to read those articles, scroll a twitter feed, or poke around a Discord server though, here are the things that made the most potent impression on me and why you should care about this issue.

As mentioned, staying in 5e and ignoring 6e/"OneDnD" is not an option. While OGL1.1 was made for 6e, the extensive parts of the document that have been leaked make it clear that with OGL1.1 going into effect, OGL1.0a (which has been the OGL for the past decade) will no longer be functional. 3rd party creators must choose to either sign the OGL1.1 and comply with it's insanely restrictive and predatory terms, or face legal repercussions for publishing the content they have made their livelihoods off of the past decade.

Per the leaked document, all 3rd party creators must register themselves and their creations with WotC. - 3rd party creators making over $50,000 USD per year must also report their earnings to WotC. - 3rd party creators making over $750,000 USD gross per year must also pay WotC a 25% royalty. This means it is not 750k in profits, it is 750k before any expenses that they are taking the royalties from. Anyone whose profit margin was 25% or less would be financially invalidated by this royalty, and can even end up losing money. Furthermore, the nature of Kickstarters for example is that there is no upper ceiling on earnings, so a KS for a 3rd party sourcebook will suddenly be facing a massive expense they may not have planned for if their campaign exceeds the 750k mark, potentially destroying their ability to deliver on the rewards when they otherwise could have. While currently only a small number of creators are known to make over 750k/year (gross, not net), that does not mean this will not affect you. It creates a very dire argument for why 3rd party creators should not even make the effort in the first place, especially with crowdfunding where too much success can suddenly ruin them.

Remember how those who make over 50k have to report their earnings? Well, the 750k threshold is one WotC says they have the right to change at any time in OGL1.1. This means they can see what people are making when creators are forced to report their earnings over 50k, and use that data to lower the threshold of income for their royalty fee, and they can do this at any time, however much they want. Per OGL1.1, they are telling you that they can decide on a whim that actually, anyone making over $5,000 USD gross a year has to pay the 25% royalty.

D&DBeyond / OneDnD are working towards creating a VTT to host OneDnD/6e. While Roll20 is licensed by WotC if I'm not mistaken, virtually no other VTT is. Platforms like Foundry VTT (my personal favorite and most beloved VTT) will not be able to host the D&D system on them under OGL1.1. What does that mean? Hard to say. But it will objectively become much harder to play D&D outside of WotC-approved spaces in the near future, and that is by design. They want to monopolize how this game is played, and that means making it difficult, inconvenient, or even illegal to play the game outside of their personal playground.

Under OGL1.1, WotC claims full and complete ownership over any and all 3rd party content created for D&D, and the rights to use it however, whenever, and wherever they want without paying you royalties. You made this? Hasbro made this.

I've only ever played 5e. But this link I put up above was very informative about prior editions and the drama surrounding them. 3e had an OGL, and the community began to flourish with 3rd party content. WotC didn't like that people who weren't them were making money off a passion for D&D, and they regretted the OGL--but that OGL was irrevocable, and could not be cancelled, removed, or in any way undone. So they put together 3.5e. They promised 3.5e would be backwards compatible, and all your resources for 3e would still work for it. So people jumped to 3.5e, only to find all their 3e content was now worthless, because that hadn't been true. And 3.5e, of course, did away with that open and welcoming OGL from 3e. Sound familiar? "OneDnD" is touted to be backwards compatible. And yet also comes with crushing restrictions in their OGL1.1 that make it impossible for the D&D community to exist as it has been. It is transparently clear that for WotC/Hasbro, an ideal world would be one where all the money people have spent on flourishing this community over the last decade would have gone exclusively into their pockets. D&D makes hundreds of millions every year, but it's "under monetized" according to their new CEO. It doesn't matter if "Honor Among Thieves" flops at the box office, WotC has already green-lit the production of multiple D&D movies. It's not about fanservice, it's about fan exploitation. Because they can't fucking stand that the game they made can be played obsessively and passionately for decades with only the one-time purchases of the DMG and PHB. And instead of fixing the apparent "under-monetization" problem by publishing more official content, they choose to poach 3rd party creators. The very lifeblood that has caused D&D's success. Because capitalist greed is a soulless poison to whatever it fixes its attention on.

The only way the community has any shot in hell to fight this is if the pushback is intense and loud. WotC has released statements mentioning an openness to listening to the community and revising their choices based on feedback; whether that proves to be lip service or not remains to be seen, but either way: the only thing they seem to care about is money. Fine, let your money do the talking, then. Wholeheartedly support the boycott. Proclaim your support of it loudly. Let Hasbro know that their attempts to milk more profits out of this franchise will be the very thing that kills it if they don't ease the fuck back and allow OGL1.0a to persist. They apparently didn't learn shit when this happened in 3e/3.5e. They can either wise up now before they fuck up beyond repair, or they can be fully destroyed by their own greed. Time will tell.

Edit:

Good catch, thanks! You're right, I must have had some wires crossed when writing that bit. They couldn't revoke it, but they did publish new content for 3.5e that made 3.0e content feel worthless; this is not something I personally lived through, but is based on the reporting from this second article I linked. Likewise, that article explains how 4e did not have an OGL and was consequentially a bit of a wasteland, presumably prompting WotC to bring the OGL back for 5e. Which flourished. And now we're here.

Edit II:

I'm Super not the best source of information for this because I'm absolutely all over the place, but 2 things.

Please check out OpenDnD.games for full, proper info and a place to give your signature in support of the community's pushback.

Something else I failed to mention above: OGL1.1 has a "poison pill" clause. Anyone who signs it permanently forfeits their right to publish under prior versions of the OGL, even if they are unable to take down those prior versions. DO NOT SIGN ANYTHING FOR OGL1.1. Even if the community pushback yields results, you may have trapped yourself. "Predatory" does not even begin to cover it.

[digital-meat]

summary of 5.5e / 6e / dndone

[toutplacid]

Balzac par Rodin, boulevard Raspail, Paris 6e – mine de graphite, carnet n° 125, 13 mai 2019

[starkwillendurestone]

i'm shaking they aired her whole pussy out like that!

[trans-rites]

WOTC filing off the cultural serial numbers for 5.5e (changing monk archetypes from 'Way of' to 'Warrior of,' Totem Warrior to Wild Heart, etc) falls flat to me, mostly because they aren't actually changing the core of it all.

Like, whether or not you think it was racist in the first place, can we agree that rephrasing a couple things but ultimately using exactly the same tropes doesn't change whether it's racist or not?

[fightingchancestudio]

What class is cracked and what class needs buffed in the next edition of D&D?

[i-am-venomancer]

Getting something off my chest

Don't trust Wotc cause you enjoy the produce.

Wotc is motivated by money, and now they look to be eyeing the 3rd party market as a money pig.

They have already shown that they want major brand control. They already talked about brand monetization

Your fav writers and creators in Wotc? They have no say

This is the faceless heartless money worshipping side that lose their jobs if they don't make money ticker go Up

They will fuck you over in an instant if they imagine it will make money go up

They are a company motivated by number up, and no number of good honest folks in the company will change that (no realistic one at least).

Rumors and leaks tell some sort of truth: and that truth is that they are testing the water to see how much money they can poach from the third party. Motivation money up.

It's going to hurt the hobby as a whole if this comes true.

But there is something we can do

We can be outraged at the very mention of such a thing

We can fight bite and make them enforce their unenforceable rules

We can drain their coffers and go bandit

Make the money grubbers hurt and lose their jobs for threatening us

Companies aren't your friendly Uncle's. They are dragons, and what do we do as adventurers when faced with evil dragons?

We slay them

[clericofsune]

What I Want From DnD 6e

Wizards of the Cost has now put out two surveys for both the Races and Classes/Subclasses in the Players Handbook, which suggests they’re either gearing up for a Remastered Edition with updated rules and features, or they’re preparing for 6th Edition. Or perhaps like with 3rd Edition we’re about to get a 5.5 Edition. So, whether we get a 6th Edition, a 5.5 Edition, or just a remastered edition of the PHB, I wanted to air my larger scope desires moving forward. These are in no particular order, just my personal opinions, and I don’t need all of these fulfilled to be happy. These are just ideas I’m spit-balling.

A larger Spells Known List for Sorcerers: Sorcerers only get 15 spells total, while Wizards get 44. If Sorcerer and Wizard are supposed to be the quintesential pair of arcane mastery, it doesn’t look good when the Sorcerer has literally 1/4 the spells of the Wizard. Clerics, Druids, and even Paladins get more spells than the Sorcerer, and if you count Mystic Arcanums, then even the Warlock gets more spells than the Sorcerer. Whether they get Origin Spells or just larger spells known in general, these masters of the arcane need more spells. 

More Spell Slots for Warlocks: This is more of a personal grievance. The warlock is so limited that you are pretty much backed into a corner to rely on Eldritch Blast and discouraged from taking any spells that don’t deal damage. The only out is to play a blade pact warlock where your weapon attacks are a valid second option to casting spells or relying on Eldritch Blast. I think giving the Warlock spell slots equal to half their level rounded down or otherwise limiting the maximum amount to about 8-10 would at least relax the crushing grip that restrains the class as casters.

More Domains for Clerics: Clerics have one of the biggest subclass lists in the game, but look at the domains of 3.5e, and you’ll actually start to feel jealous over how few options we have in 5e. So many great options aren’t available, or are “covered” by an inadequate substitute. There’s no Ocean domain, but those gods are lumped into Tempest. A domain that has nothing to do with controlling water. Because flying and farting lightning bolts sounds like a power I would get from worshipping Umberlee. Likewise, every Love deity is crammed into either Life or Light, instead of just giving us a Charm Domain for them to rule over.

Additions to Cleric Domains: So, one thing that 3.5e has that 5e doesn’t is Evil, Good, Lawful, and Chaotic Domains, as well as Racial Domains. I don’t know how this could be implemented exactly, but finding a way to implement alignment or race into a cleric build when building your character would help each god feel different, even if it was in small ways. It should be different worshipping a Chaotic Evil god of the Sea vs a Neutral Good God of the Sea, or perhaps to see the difference between worshipping the Dwarvish god of Crafting vs the Elvish god of crafting. Doing this can make worshipping Sune different from worshipping Aphrodite, Veranestra, Luthic, or Iallanis, while also making the process of choosing your deity a more laborious choice, rather than slapping any random god into the slot. It’s a way to make who you choose as important as the character you’re building itself.

A Comprehensive Guide of Deities and Patrons: Similar to the Paladin,  I think Clerics and Warlocks would benefit from having a guide to different deities or patron options on an individual level with things like Tenants, unique features for following them, other kinds of boons or bonuses, what they ask of you or how to worship them, and what kinds of things they might want their Cleric or Warlock to do. By having this sort of thing, each individual patron or deity becomes more unique, and there’s a difference between worshipping Asmodeus, being his Warlock, both, or whatever. Even if you like playing as a Life Domain Cleric, serving Demeter would be different than worshipping Apollo. Same Domain, but different figure. Likewise, you could play three different Archfey Warlocks and each time serve a different master with an entirely different objective, boon, or pre-written story hook. Thus, adding more variety while also improving the roleplaying aspect that comes with playing a Cleric, Paladin, or Warlock. Sune might ask her followers to pay craftsmen to create instruments or artwork, while Freya might ask her followers to protect mankind from evil creatures, and Veranestra might delight in her clerics toying with the emotions of mortals. By making each patron or deity unique, it adds a layer to the roleplaying, and even gives non-clerics or warlocks an excuse to actually care about their setting’s pantheon.

Eliminating a Set Casting Stat: So this is likely to be an unpopular opinion, but set casting stats are a crutch when it comes to multiclassing. It’s very limiting, and you’re unlikely to see a Sorcerer/Monk because it requires too many stats and doesn’t leave enough room for other stats to matter. By eliminating a set casting stat, you open the door for a Bard/Cleric who worships the god of music, or a Druid/Paladin who swears an oath to the ancient guardians of the forest. It opens the door for more variety and customization.

Adding a Science Skill: There really should be a skill for knowing things like chemistry, physics, aliens, etc. and a broad-specs Science skill like Arcana for magical things seems about right. Obviously, it would be an Intelligence check.

Giving Player Characters a Trade: Another thing I found in 3.5e that we don’t have in 5e is an ability to invest time into improving on a skill or trade that can be monetized. Sewing, crafting, building, inventing, there’s a lot of room for player characters to have a trade from their backstory, but this seems to have been completely discarded for 5e, as there’s no real mechanics in place for owning your own business or crafting your own goods to sell, which leaves a lot of it to DMs having to make up rules if their players want to do this sort of stuff. Letting characters pick up a trade similar to a feat or gaining a trade from their background would benefit player customization, even on a smaller scale.

Making Players less reliant on the CON stat: This is a personal grievance. I hate that I can’t build a character without needing to invest in this stat. Any other stat can be a dump stat, but CON pretty much is not allowed to be. It wouldn’t matter if it mattered for skills, but it doesn’t. You just have to invest in it, or you’ll get very familiar with your settings’ version of the grim reaper very quickly. A high CON should just make you MORE tanky, but shouldn’t be mandatory to avoid dying. I’ve had many builds undermined by a need to focus on the HP stat that they couldn’t really do anything else.

More Elemental Spells: If you want to build a Fire or Cold damage character, you’ll be fine. Radiant and Necrotic have some variety. And Psychic has gotten more spells lately. But try to build a character with just Lightning spells or just Thunder or Force, and you’ll quickly realize that some elements get way more love than others. The WoTC team needs to really expand on elemental damaging spells to give players more variety with their options. Particularly with Lightning, Thunder, Force, Acid, and Poison damage spells, but even Psychic, Radiant, and Necrotic could still use more variety.

More Thematic Spells: Have you ever wanted to play as Poison Ivy only to realize there’s like 3 spells that actually attack people with plants? Or maybe you wanted to build a character that uses shadow powers, but the number of spells that use darkness or shadows are few and far between? I think DnD would benefit from adding more spells that fit into thematic groups, such as plant-based spells, shadow spells, telekinetic abilities, using fey, celestial, or fiend magic, elemental magic of water, earth, and air, etc. We recently got a lot of new spells for summoners, and that was great. So while it sucks they can only be summoned once at a time, it’s still an improvement over not having any summoning spells at all.