• acockworkorange@mander.xyz
    ·
    3 months ago

    Just finish dying already. I’m sick and tired of this drama. Everybody and their grandma has a better product and their shit keeps getting free exposure.

  • Glytch@ttrpg.network
    ·
    3 months ago

    Yeah, but if you make homebrew they don't like, they'll send the Pinkertons after you.

    (I know that was about an MTG set. I'm just making a joke about how little faith I have in WOTC.)

  • Neato@ttrpg.network
    ·
    3 months ago

    This includes all class features, monsters, rules expressions and anything that isn’t trademarked as intellectual property. Essentially, you get mechanics for cover but not Beholders, martial archetypes but not the city and denizens of Baldur’s Gate.

    Is this even necessary? Isn't all of that stuff already non-copyrightable?

    • DAMunzy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      ·
      3 months ago

      You are correct. They do this because corporations in the past have sued over even though rules, etc. are fair use. When they first started the OGL they gained a lot of goodwill from the community.

    • Flushmaster@ttrpg.network
      ·
      3 months ago

      Short answer, no. There is a lot of nitpicky fine print and "nuance" involved but while you cannot copyright rolling a twenty sided die you can copyright a bunch of distinct and organized thoughts and specific groups thereof, such as the collection of rules that make up a class or subclass. If that class, subclass, spell, made up monster with a specific name and abilities, etc is published in some work that is sold for profit then legal action can occur.

      Anything under creative commons effectively becomes public domain. If it appears in a WotC book, digital content, etc and is not specifically under CC, like say spells and subclasses from any supplement not included in that (such as Xanathar or Tasha), it is copyrighted and WotC can and will sue you if you republish it.