Are these products remastered or are they dependent upon old rules?
Search Posts
I've been calling it Pathfinder 2.5 since the announcement and will probably call it that forever. It's not a slam against it, just an easy way to remember what it is.
I just bought this bundle. Found out I had a code for every level of the bundle in my HB account. I got the $25 level but at first only claimed the $5 level. If you're having troubles, might want to be sure you don't have multiple codes.
I've gotten to the point where as long as the core stat block doesn't change, I'm fine with whatever they do because I am not planning on a completely new campaign world that I only use he Player's Core rule book and the Game Mastery Core Rule book. Everything else will come from my brain.
I was against moving to Remaster at first. Still am with anything I have in OGL based content playing on my table right now, but I think when the core books are out, I'll be doing an entirely new campaign setting that will use absolutely no OGL content at all. In fact, the remaster of dragons has me thinking about completely remastering nearly anything considered a monster in my campaign setting and not using even a single published monster, though they may look and feel a bit familiar. So long as the Game Master Core manual has guidelines for monster stat blocks and encounter difficulty, that and the Pathfinder Player core may be all I need for a VERY unique campaign completely under ORC.
Yeah, already not into it. Removal of Alignment is a red line for me. Time to look around for something different.
I think there are way too many contractual entanglements for them to move to Pathfinder currently.
All I can say at this point is the D&D brand is ruined for me forever. I was with PF1E all the way until they released 5E under the OGL. I'm back now to Pathfinder 2E and will never stray again. Pathfinder is what D&D always should have been. I am speaking as somebody who started playing the game 45 years ago with the White Box and has played every edition. I can never go back to D&D because WotC cannot be trusted with it.
As a sidenote, I do cautiously hope that the ORC adopts language similar to the new OGL's about prohibiting blatantly abusive content. We don't need "Myfarog, ORC edition". I see absolutely no way for a open license held by a third prty would be able to legally enforce such a use of the license. It would be market forces that would prohibit such content, i.e nobody buys it. They KNEW it was possible to do Nazi content under the original OGL. The idea was, "fine, they cannot get the D20 logo" and it worked.
I think 6E will crash hard given this BS. Maybe by the time they do 7E they'll decide to use the only real Open Roleplaying Game Creative License still operating (ORC). <eg>
The FAQ are not legally binding. There is little difference when you really read the FAQ. 1.0a is still being deauthorized for anything new. To get the 6 month grace period on 1.0a, you have to agree to 2.0. Did these guys forget their audience is a bunch of people who regularly spend several hours BSing with each other, and they expect us to buy their BS?????
To get the gracious grace period granted by WotC, you have to agree to OGL 2.0. IT'S A TRAP!
The age of OGL is over. The time of the ORC has come!
WHOOP! THERE IT IS!!! https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo6si7v That's it, in the coming weeks I will be purchasing EVERYTHING Pathfinder 2E I can lay my hands on!!!!!
They've done it before, and demanded the items be removed from people's libraries.
Note that the EFF statement got updated today, with a suggestion that the OGL 1.0a is NOT revocable. That's not how it works, really. Anything released under OGL 1.0a is still covered under OGL 1.0a. The 5E SRD is still open even with OGL 1.1. I still have a copy of SRD 5.1. It was released under OGL 1.0a and I will use it under that license according to the terms of that license.
Linus Media Group has picked up the story https://youtu.be/FvcMjWo7QjQ
For you, based on your single interaction. I've played campaigns of comparable length and complexity to Paizo APs using Fate and Apocalypse World and Monsterhearts andandand. Don't confuse market dominance for depth of play. Fine to not like it personally but you don't need to diminish its value. An open license that is irrevocable in the language for me to use Pathfinder SRD content? Yeah, no need for anything else. Your mileage may vary.
If Paizo is going the route of its own Open license, I will be a Pathfinder player forever and never again go back to ANY Wizards product.
"Where do you think their orders come from? Cynthia Williams
Penguinzo also covered it on his YouTube channel, which has over 11 million subscribers. I made sure to post the https://www.opendnd.games/ link every few hours in their replies to the video
The EFF has waded into it:
I've used Roll20, but it isn't always convenient for scheduling. I've taken to forum and Discord lately. I was actually all set to reactivate my Paramount+ subscription for content other than the D&D series until I heard the announcement. I let them know, too.
Nope, but my guess is if it's 1.0a, Kickstarter will pull it. This is why I will never back another Kickstarter should it happen.
Ick, so "we get your stuff" is in full effect as of the 13th. Only if you agree to it.
There was a long stream early this morning that the YouTuber has the entire thing and goes through it: https://youtu.be/L5st8RI4ads
Do HTTrack hyperlinks point out to the original pages or to the internal pages within the mirror?I used HTTrack to mirror Archives of Nethys locally. The internal pages within the mirror unless they point to a different domain and I used a choice that questions what to do with those links so I could download in such a way as to get complete SRDs for Pathfinder 1E, Pathfinder 2E and Starfinder. I then told it not t mirror other external links.
I used HTTrack to mirror Archives of Nethys locally.
D&Done
lol, have you actually read my other comments in this therad? Or are you basing it off of that one comment. There's a lot of people terrified here, particularly of "nuclear lawfare" but that's not how the court system works. Hasbro is a "big" company but they are barely fortune 500 (they were 494 in 2021 and I don't think they got on it at all last year). Burying Paizo & Others in legal fees isn't going to work in this sort of case. There's no need for discovery and the only expert Paizo would need to testify is Ryan Dancey and I doubt he'll charge for his testimony considering he'll probably be a co-complainant. This is such a slam dunk in Paizo's favor that it can only have been a mistake on Hasbro's lawyer's part or pure incompetence. I think there is a small chance WotC/Hasbro will actually go Nuclear Lawfare. Nuclear Lawfare carries a risk of mutually assured destruction. There is still a chance this is what they intend. We only got a small portion of the alleged 9000 words in OGL 1.1. To me, assuming the simplest answer is most likely the correct answer, WotC/Hasbro's intention is to use OGL 1.1 as the licensing mechanism for every product moving forward and that one line is to make clear that OGL 1.0a is NOT an authorized license with regards to anything released under OGL 1.1. Furthermore it allows WotC to re-release everything in 5E under OGL 1.1 because OGL 1.1 will be an authorized license with regards to OGL 1.0a. This will create a grey area of further releasing anything new that uses the 5E material under OGL 1.0a, and that may be where they intend litigation if it happens. Calling it "Open" is a red herring, too. They want to convince people to use it because it heavily favors WotC/Hasbro. They know it is nowhere near meeting the term "Open". What it does is put a stake into the OGL's heart insuring that you will NEVER see a more open version than OGL 1.0a to cover WotC/Hasbro intellectual property since they own the copyright on that license and the gamble is that people will prefer the new rules over the old rules. That said, we have no clue what WotC/Hasbro actually has in mind at this point and the current drama and fear may actually work to WotC/Hasbro's advantage. We've already seen Kickstarters canceled and products that were set to release being put on hold indefinitely. Perhaps destroying confidence in OGL 1.0a will accomplish what WotC/Hasbro would like to have happen without a single Cease and Desist being issued in an actual Nuclear Lawfare scenario.
And yes, Xyxox, we are aware that getting a ruling in court is not the game plan. That isn't the point of this discussion. We are just theorycrafting here. This is why I keep pushing the financial side. The community raised over $11 million for Critical Role to produce cartoons about their first campaign on YouTube for goodness sake. That much money could put this to rest forever and insure the OGL 1.0a lives forever! Crowdfunding it could take down any attempt of WotC/Hasbro to kill it FOREVER! The thing is, the funding has to start NOW! Somebody needs to get with Ryan Dancey and the Open Games Foundation and get the ball rolling. I don't have such connections, but all I know is the money has to start being collected NOW!
The fault in your position is assuming it will ever be argued in any court of law. Nuclear Lawfare is conducted by companies that know they stand little chance of winning a case decided in a court by a judge, but use their financial position to wear down the opposition so much they either go bankrupt or must walk away from litigation due to the extreme cost of legal services before the case is EVER argued in a court.
To my understanding, the only 'safe' option is to move completely away from anything D&D derived, such as Savage Worlds. But that is a lot of work, and my guess is that Hasbro/WotC management are banking on players being too lazy/complacent to do so, and publishers not having the cash to fund the change. Savage Worlds does not operate under an open license, which is why, after looking at their material and thinking it was really very good, I chose to discount them as a possibility. I will only go open. If Paizo decides to fight it, I'll go Paizo.
If they go nuclear it will be because they are certain that there will never be a single argument given in any court ever due to the fact that any litigant that goes against them will go bankrupt or walk away under the weight of exorbitant legal costs long before even half of the motions are ruled on.
AFAIK regardless if WotC manages to revoke the OGL1.0, everything already made under the OGL1.0 license is safe but you can't use it for future products. The issue is in how they seem to be revoking it. From what I have seen they do not use the term "revoked" The term is "unauthorized" As such it is no longer a valid license for anything under section 9 of the OGL and thus can only be compliant under OGL 1.1. It's a bully move to be sure and likely would not hold up is a court of law if that is, in fact, what they are doing. As many have said, WotC/Hasbro has the funds to BURY any opponent in pre-trial motions after a painstakingly long and expensive discovery process at such a high cost that any opponent going down the litigation road would be bankrupted long before a single argument as to facts is heard in a court. It's not that WotC/Hasbro would believe they have a legal leg to stand on, it's that they believe they can insure it never makes it before a court to be heard.
The best outcome if they do release OGL1.1 that says OGL1.0a is no longer authorized would be an immediate C&D from the Disney legal department. I think that would shut this $%@# down right away! Disney has the single best IP litigation team in the industry.
I know there's this idea that big companies can throw lots of money and win a case, and in certain situations that's true, but this isn't really one of those situations. They don't throw money at a case to win the case. They throw money at a case to drive their opponent into bankruptcy before the case can even get close to a decision being made. This could definitely be one of those situations if WotC/Hasbro has decided to declare Lawfare to get all aspects of the D&D IP back.
Even if WotC isn't touching the OGL, and all the leaks are somehow wrong, it's never a bad thing to keep them afraid to touch it in the future. I say, keep the torches and pitchforks coming. But Hasbro has many times more money to throw at the case than all of the combined third party producers could come up with together and could bankrupt them all long before a judgement is ever achieved should they decide to go the Lawfare route unless others join in to help fund such a lawsuit.
It may be too late once something official comes out. already downloaded the DriveThruRPG app and downloaded everything, placing it on a local backup and into a cloud storage space I have. Working on getting all of my stuff from Paizo downloaded and saved in both spaces as well. I ahve a lot more there and no app to do it nice and clean. I'm also looking at purchasing anything I want under OGL 1.0a as soon as possible because once OGL 1.1 goes live, it may no longer be available. I've mirrored the Archives of Nethys site as well. Made sure I got copies of as many different SRDs as possible, too.
I think they underestimate the fan base, especially where the loyalties really lie. Do you really think their legal team anticipates the possibility of a multi-million dollar crowdsourced legal fund to fight them on this? The people involved in sales definitely know that Kickstarters resulted in millions being raised. Critical Role raised over $11 million for a cartoon series. Certainly the legal funding can be crowdsourced if WotC/Hasbro is hell bent on lawfare and the base is very large.
I went back to WotC for 5th edition. Stupid me, once the One D&D garbage started to come out, (now referred to as D&Done by me), came back to give Pathfinder 2E a look. Stupid me. Will have to buy up what I want quick it seems.
Ender's Game the movie was affected by being a pretty bad movie and adaptation way more than it was by the boycott. Given the history of D&D movies, this one is more likely to bomb than not, anyway.
That's them declining to comment until A - Wizards actually announces what they intend to do (remember this is just a leak) and B - They have (several) meetings with their attorneys to discuss the situation. That's a statement of nothing at the moment.I absolutely believe they will try to fight it, and the first step would be an injunction against WotC to keep the 1.0 in place while the legal battle ensues. Precedent is entirely on their side. I would point out, Paizo benefits from third party creators who use OGL 1.0a licensing to create products compatible with Pathfinder 2E, so they have more skin in the game than simply cutting a deal with Hasbro. Abandoning OGL 1.0a could have an impact on Paizo's bottom line regardless of what sort of a deal they can cut with Hasbro.
As a wise man once said: "you couldn't even boycott Chik-fil-a". Hasbro can expect a month of whining from their community at most, and after that if the court case goes well for them it'll be business as usual with more taken off the top. Boycotting Ender's Game as a movie DESTROYED it as a cinematic universe. It bombed at the box office and ended any hope of additional movies, because of a boycott. The same could eb done with a certain movie that is close to release...
Their lawyer will tell them to pick one of the lanes above and then either seek a TRO/Pre Inj against the new license or a dec relief action to find that their product in non-infringing.Or, their lawyer may help them negotiate a separate, individual licensing agreement with WOTC that only applies to Paizo. And this may also be WotC's strategy. Cut agreements with the big companies that basically leave them alone (Paizo, Kobold Press, Critical Role, Green Ronin, etc.) then go after everything medium to small level and cut their monetary throats with endless lawsuits.
I'd say that is highly likely.
I'm amused by the timing of that PBS hit-piece on the OSR community that just so happened to drop right in the middle of this growing OGL situation. WotC doing a little media battlefield prep, if I'm not mistaken. Wizards really must be worried about the optics of this whole thing if they're already thinking along those lines.... What they want is for everything to be handled by a license that is more draconian than the GSL was and may try to accomplish it, but their own words about the OGL would rise to the level of contract in a court and their attempts would be thrown out. The FAQ was used to make business decisions more than 20 years ago and they clearly state that every version of the OGL would always be permanent. I wonder if Hasbro even knows that FAQ exists as it has subsequently been removed from the WotC web site, but as we all know the internet is forever.
If it goes to court it will be thrown out quickly as WotC themselves stated clearly that EVERY OGL would be PERMANENT in the original OGL FAQ: https://web.archive.org/web/20010429033432/http://www.wizards.com/D20/artic le.asp?x=dt20010417e Third parties relied upon that information to make decisions. They cannot revoke it now.
True, but there is no language within the perpetual license on how specifically to revoke it, thus certain conditions must be met. That is a tough road to hoe for WotC as there is a two way quid pro quo in the license and all they can do is throw money at lawyers to drag it out and wear down the opponents before a decision is ever made. Again, the EFF is the best bet here because any decision on this will have HUGE ramifications for open source software licensing and they have won against bigger entities than WotC/Hasbro. Another thing about contractual agreements, which accepting a lciense essentially is, courts turn to original intent and to get to the original intent one must look at the original FAQ regarding WotC's ability to revoke a version of the OGL, hence let's fire up the Wayback Machine and take a look... https://web.archive.org/web/20010429033432/http://www.wizards.com/D20/artic le.asp?x=dt20010417e If you go read that, WotC admits EVERY version of the OGL is PERMANENT. Now, agreeing to OGL 1.1 could force you to do everything under OGL 1.1, which is why no creator should accept the terms and conditions of OGL 1.1. It's a trap.
True, but there is no language within the perpetual license on how specifically to revoke it, thus certain conditions must be met. That is a tough road to hoe for WotC as there is a two way quid pro quo in the license and all they can do is throw money at lawyers to drag it out and wear down the opponents before a decision is ever made. Again, the EFF is the best bet here because any decision on this will have HUGE ramifications for open source software licensing and they have won against bigger entities than WotC/Hasbro. |