#in a popular mainstream rpg

[perilegs]

i still dont think im playing datv until way after it's released IF i play it at all, but oh my god top surgery scars being a cc option. even if the game is complete dogshit at least it gave us this. and i knoww it's a very small and a simple thing that some may see as performative but this is big!!! even if it's in a game i may not play it's great to know someone did have us in mind

[imsobadatnicknames2]

ur tabletop takes are fucking insufferable i can't stand the constant 5e hate coming from u and ur clique what does it matter if i want to use 5e to play everying, do u want me to learn a new game for every setting? let people play what they want, u have no right to tell me what to play

Lemme screenshot something real quick.

Like. If you find my opinions so insufferable then good news! you aren't forced to look at my blog or the blog of any of the handful of intense weirdos who agree with me. Blogs that post nothing but 5e content outnumber us dozens to one, go follow those instead.

WotC has largely succeeded in getting every mainstream space within this hobby to cater to people who think exactly like you. The idea that it's okay to never branch out from d&d and you can hack d&d for any setting you wanna play doesn't need to be defended, it's the default opinion in this hobby.

Go to any popular tabletop space and the most common response you'll find to "i want to play a game set in ______" is "here's how to reskin d&d for it". Many publishers are releasing 5e conversions of their non-d&d games, or straight up ditching their own in-house systems in favor of 5e because they know they won't sell enough to stay afloat otherwise. Go to the RPG section of a bookstore and non-5e material will take up at best a tiny fraction of the shelf space if there is any at all.

You won. Your opinion is the dominant one and still you can't resist the urge to butt in on the little spaces that people who don't agree with it have carved for ourselves just to rile yourself up about the fact that people who don't share the dominant opinion exist at all.

[animenostalgia]

Some sad news to share this morning - Prolific animator, character designer, and illustrator Mutsumi Inomata has passed away. She worked on many beloved anime titles throughout the 80s, including animation work on Urusei Yatsura, Space Warrior Baldios, City Hunter, and Goshogun. Her striking and unique style added unique flare to her character designs for beloved cult titles like Birth, Windaria, and Leda: The Fantastic Adventures of Yohko right alongside more mainstream titles like Plawres Sanshiro and the Future GPX Cyber Formula franchise. She was also a part of the video game world, doing illustrations for Dragon Quest novels in Japan, and being the main character designer for the popular "Tales Of" series of RPG games. Truly, her artwork touched many beloved pieces of media over the years. And for all her unique and beautiful work, she will be greatly missed.

[anim-ttrpgs]

The skill point allocation system in Eureka is very elegant.

Is the principle of evening out to 0 something that has often been used in ttrpg design? If so, can you name other games that inspired Eureka in that regard? Or did you come up with it for Eureka?

"All skills can be -n to +n with a cumulative total of 0" seems too usefull, too elegant, as to never been utilized before the year 2024.

I came up with it independently and have literally never seen it anywhere else. I have thought the same way about the Eureka! Point mechanic, though similar things have been done before in other RPGs, just never applied to mystery investigation gameplay. Why hasn't anyone done this yet?

I feel like it must have been used somewhere else at some point in the 50 years of TTRPGs that have been made, I've just never seen it. i agree it feels like too good of an idea to not, like, practically be industry standard, but then again, TTRPGs are not a very innovative industry. It's very stagnant. Most TTRPGs that have come out in the past 50 years have just been D&D clones to some degree or another, and most "innovation" I see has just been "what if we unknowingly reinvented the wheel except this time we made it hexagonal instead of octagonal," total Tesla cybertruck style innovation.

The industry is kind of uniquely set up for that. It's one of the most monopoly-dominated industries/artforms in existence, with one game (of greatly varying quality and thoughtful design between editions) completely dominating it for all 50 years of its existence and being allowed to basically fully define what a "TTRPG" is. The biggest alternative to D&D for the past 20 years has been Pathfinder, which is just like D&D but a little better designed, and before that its biggest competitor was World of Darkness, which, if you actually read their rulebooks, are also designed pretty much like D&D except for some text at the beginning which basically says "you can ignore these extremely dungeon-crawl-y rules to focus more on narrative, don't be like those dumb dungeon crawl players," which if you have been following this blog you know is a load of crap.

Call of Cthuhlu, another big veteran contender for the industry that is still going pretty strong, has been the standard for "investigation" gameplay for nearly 50 years, but it's just a Lovecraft hack of RuneQuest, which was designed for, you guessed it, fantasy dungeon crawling. That's why even though CoC adventure modules do tend to play pretty well with Eureka, most of them are still structured as a short line of like 1 or 2 clues to follow to get the PCs into a spooky scary enclosed dungeon-like monster-filled location as quickly as possible, and you have advice like (uncharitable hyperbole) "if the PCs get stuck, make evidence fall from the sky and land at their feet."

Plus, you have big "actual play" podcasts who really really champion the whole "ignore the rules when they get in the way of your pre-planned three-act-structure plot" and the mega-monopolgy with marketing money making it a selling point that if you ignore the rules enough "D&D5e can do anything."

TTRPGs are also a relatively young artform without a ton of mainstream attention until pretty recently (which, as I mentioned, has been eaten up by D&D5e, Pathfinder, and big "actual plays"), and they are a hard one to participate in because playing a single TTRPG requires a ton of time investment compared to most other popular art forms like books, video games, music, and movies.

All this results in many, many people who play and even design TTRPGs literally never having played anything that wasn't WotC-era D&D, barely one or two degrees of separation from WotC-era D&D, or "it's not important if it's WotC-era D&D or not if you just ignore the rules!" Oh and PbtA and BitD players and designers, you're not immune to this! Those are just the "D&D5e can do anything!" of the indie scene and no they really really are not the best framework/engine for every single game ever!

For all the talent, study, effort, and respect for the artform across the A.N.I.M. team, not even we are immune to this. I haven't played nearly as many TTRPGs as I would like to have before calling myself a "learned" TTRPG designer. There might be some obscure game from 2004 I've never heard of that does some of Eureka's stuff already, that if I had read, I could have made Eureka even better by improving upon and learning from the mistakes of others rather than working in uncharted territory.

So, in conclusion, to use the film industry as an analogy, it's like if, during the past 10 years of every fucking mainstream movie being about superheroes, aspiring film makers, who have watched between 0 and 1 movies that weren't about superheroes, are having the "novel" idea of "what if.. a movie wasn't about superheroes!" and then trying to make a movie not about superheroes with no non-superhero experience or study. And Eureka: The Movie is good and innovative because A.N.I.M. Studios watched a measly 10 different non-superhero movies and studied film theory before making it.

[fereldanwench]

apropos of nothing and certainly not my tag rant from a few posts back

did you know that out of 150 popular video games released between 1985 and 2022, only 6% of them feature sole female protagonists?

did you know that prior to mass effect 3, female shepard was never used in any promotional material for the series?

(and there's no hard data available on this, but i very distinctly recall a lot of gamerbro outrage when me3 had an optional reversible cover so you could pick between male and fem shep on your personal game)

did you know that only 18% of players chose femshep in any shape or form (default or customized) during the original release?

(anecdotally, i know a few people who didn't even realize you could play a female at all in me1 bc of how the cc is setup)

did you know with the release of the legendary edition in 2021 the percentage of femshep players didn't even double (despite jennifer hale's seemingly enormous popularity amongst the broader playerbase over the past decade) and is reported at 32%?

did you know that dragon age inquisition has the same breakdown between male and female inquisitors (68% to 32% respectively)?

did you know during the playtests for assassin's creed odyssey, it was a 50/50 split between kassandra and alexios, and ubisoft suits actually thought when the game was released, kassandra would be more popular? and yet once again, about 70% of players chose the male protag

did you know evie and aya were both supposed to have a much larger roles in assassin's creed syndicate and origins but were forced into a smaller role bc the ubisoft marketing team didn't think the games would sell well with a female lead?

cdpr hasn't released data on male vs female v, probably because the game handles gender a little differently than just two strict options like many other rpgs, but it was revealed that panam was the most popular romance, sitting at about 68%, which means at least 68% of players chose the male v body. I'm sure some players did not make that choice as a cis male v, but i would also guess that those who didn't are a small minority of this demographic, and if you factor in kerry romancers, this split is probably very similar to other games in the genre

now i realize that a lot of the male v players who are in more transformative fandom spaces (like tumblr) are not the str8 gamer dudebros of reddit angry about pores on a female character's face and whatnot. i realize that a lot of you are also on the outskirts of the perceived norm and also feel under-represented by mainstream male protags and that's incredibly frustrating and alienating and i genuinely feel for you

but female protagonists and female gamers who want to play as female protagonists and who have a few niche spaces to celebrate female protags are not the reason for your lack of representation

and frankly you don't sound a whole lot different from the angry incel gamer boys when you say shit like "fem v gets too much attention"

so maybe try advocating for male protags who don't fit the generic boring gruff white guy mold without throwing women under the bus. we're should be allies in this fight, not rivals

[whereserpentswalk]

Ttrpg safety tools and the dog test

A quick rundown of what safety tools are: tools for setting boundaries in ttrpgs. Can be useful to some people, but often used really wrongly, and often seem overly gamey to me personally. It's like therapy speak for rpgs. And is similary used by the people it was meant to be used against.

One of the most common examples of these is the X card. The X card is a card with the letter X written on it. It sounds like a good idea if you've never interacted with people before. The X card is a boundary where one of the rules is you can't talk about the boundary. It's very useful for anyone who want to weaponize it, and not very useful for asserting actual boundaries.

There is also a type of chud who dislikes the the idea of safety tools because they think they're "woke". The only way to have a productive conversation around safety tools is to ignore them. Bad faith questions don't deserve good faith answers.

Now, a lot of people would think that its easier for a player to step out then deleate a scene. But a lot the culture around safety tools is based on this toxic highschool mindset around ttrpgs where someone feels like they both have a right, and a duty to be at every single momment of every session, and everyone else does to. So every single safety tool you'll see will assume the of lack the option of leaving the table at all. Being able to leave at any time is the ultimate boundary in ttrpgs and many other safety tools are attempting the impossible task of establishing boundaries without it. People compare them to safe words in bdsm. But it's like trying to create a safe word system but you have to cum and can't take breaks.

See part of the problem is 4chan and reddit have cultures of rpg horror stories. Which are useally lies. I'm not going to say fiction because that implies a relationship with the audience that they don't have. And these lies almost always have queer people, ND people, leftists, and anyone you'd see called a degenerate or weirdo as villains. While the type of nerd that Scott Pilgrim was the first book makes himself out to be a hero. And reddit also happens to be where the concept of safety tools was popularized.

It's this problem where people aren't trying to deal with actual triggers, they're trying to police content they morally condemn. R/rpg horror stories is the home of people who consider themselves outcasts for liking star wars and then have a deep fear of a marginalized person or someone from a slightly less mainstream subculture showing up at their table. And when they're the ones defining what a boundary conflict in rpg space looks like it's useally pretty bad. When a lot of safety tools go bad it's the case of weapons made to catch monsters being bad at dealing with humans.

And beyond all that. Beyond the specifics of rpg horror stories and it's influence. The way people talk about safety tools is mostly about removing content they deem objectionable from ttrpgs. When people talk about the X card and things like it, they're useally afraid someone will talk about something taboo and the table, and want a way to stop them, with the assumption that the rest of the party agrees. The extreme nature of how much someone has the power to censor, is brought with the assumption that what will be censored won't just violate their personal boundaries, but a community sense of morals.

They don't just want their triggers removed, they want things they deem immoral to be removed (not everyone who uses safety tools of course, but the hoard of bearded cishet white men who play 5e who dominate the conversation on them). That's just what a lot of the conversation around safety tools always comes down to. When somebody says they want safety tools to remove torture scenes or sex scenes from their table, it's not their personal triggers, its that they don't believe these things belong in the medium at all. They don't imagine what it would be like to be the only person in the room with their trigger, because the narrative they've created with problem players and safety tools, has made it so they assume the majority of the room shares their boundaries. Safety tools as they exist and are talked about are not built for a minority of players to be able to assert boundaries agaisnt the majority of players.

The dog test: so basically, while safety tools in ttrpgs have good reasons to exist, a lot of the time they're weapons players use to remove content they deem immoral. So often every discussion around things like the X card comes with a lot of moral condemnation, and assumptions about what content can ever be triggering vs what is ok. And this culture of moral condemnations can make safety tools especially dangerous for queer people and ND people, or just members of certain subcultures.

So I've developed the dog test. The dog test, is an example used to test if a safety tool (or more commonly someone talking about them) wants boundaries or wants moral policing. The dog test is simply to see how the safety tool is viewed if it's used to remove dogs from a game. Basically taking the commonly used examples like blood, or sex, and replacing them with the existence of dogs. Perhaps to add to it let's say the only case this hypothetical person will be ok with dogs is if they're killable enemies. This isn't unrealistic, a lot of people have trauma from dog bites, it's probably more likely to be a good faith trauma than a lot of the examples.

If they person is as willing to work with the needs of a player who has trauma around dogs as they are more sympathetic triggers than they've passed the dog test.

Disclaimer. A lot of these thoughts were developed in a discord conversation with @dragonpurrs and a lot of these words were originally things I said to it.

[canmom]

what's the book for? part 2

[here's an intro where I talk about the three hour video essay that inspired me to do this]

[here's the first part where I argue that there's a big difference between the actual thing you do in an RPG and the book that tells you how you're allegedly supposed to be doing it]

So if the actual TTRPG games are mostly learned by observation and practice, what is the something that RPG books claim to give you in order to enable that?

Here's three things I can think of.

This isn't intended as a Forge-like categorisation of games, most RPG books offer (or claim to offer) all of these to some degree, ideally in complementary ways...

A ruling reference - RPG book as legal system

In the intro to a typical mainstream RPG book, this is typically the explanation that is given.

Over the course of a telling a story together, all sorts of weird edge cases come up where you might not want to simply make a call on how it should resolve. Moreover, consistency is valued, for both challenge and narrative reasons.

In this case, the RPG book is a big collection of rulings for specific situations. 'What happens when a character falls off a cliff?' You can look it up. It's like legal precedents. This is how a lot of the stuff in the early D&D books started - stuff that someone had done, and a referee had made a ruling, and it got written down. Then it would get systematised, unified, and streamlined so that it's easier to remember and extend to new situations.

A lighter game avoids special cases and just suggests a general procedure for resolving situations of uncertainty, conflicts etc.

This angle doesn't tend to cover procedures for how the game is physically run - how to go about setting up the scenario, who should get priority when speaking, etc. etc. - beyond perhaps offering prebuilt modules to inspire you. In older games, most of that is stuff you pick up by watching. In newer games... well, hold on.

A grab bag of interesting prompts - RPG book as inspiration in the moment

Most RPG books have flavour text; many also have tables of weird shit you can roll on or select when building a character, character sheets full of interesting abilities, descriptions of NPCs and so on. A select few RPGs like Unknown Armies and Chuubo's Marvellous Wish-Granting Engine have really distinctive prose too.

The aim of all these tools is to give you something to latch onto when you're in the moment and you need to think of the next thing to say. It's also to get people onto some shared understanding of what this game is all about.

This is where the bulk of many RPG books lies. It's explicitly the aim of Apocalypse World's MC moves. Many one-page RPGs are nothing but lists of evocative names and description elements, and a short snatch of prose.

Prompt tables and lists of names are popular in just about every tradition of RPG design - trad, storygames, OSR, all use them. Sometimes they're the most memorable thing about an RPG, like Dark Heresy's crit tables.

Sometimes pages of tables is the RPG - in recent years, card-based games have become popular, using a regular deck of cards which indexes into a big table of events, each of which is like 'here's a short description. how do you respond?'. This type of game has a great deal in common with storylet-based interactive fiction like Fallen London.

Prompts don't have to be short, though. Arguably an adventure module can be pretty much this - something you consult when players arrive in a new place to get an idea of who they should meet for example.

In D&D, the Monster Manual is straight up a book of real freaky guys you can put in your game. It also has stat blocks for them, of course, but the descriptions and pictures do a lot of work here to make them concrete.

This is why I describe the pictures in Lancer as load-bearing. The pictures help - or are supposed to help - grease the wheels of imagination when you're trying to imagine mechs.

This function of RPGs is a large part of the angle you're playing if you tie the game to a particular genre, setting or IP.

A machine to guide you to a specific experience - RPG book as auteur blueprint

So here's the newer flavour.

RPGs can be one of the most feelings-dense forms of art that humans create - it's your story, with your characters. This is something that tends to arise organically after you spend a long time with a character and 'get into their head'.

However, there is often a desire on the designer's side to structure the game to bring about a particular kind of emotional experience more directly. From horror games to games self-consciously 'about' colonialism, abuse, romance, etc., these games try to give you a particular experience, similar to what a film or book gives you - or indeed, a computer game.

Here are some examples:

My Life With Master is an older Forge game. It's about the 'Igor' servant characters in a classic horror movie, billing itself as 'a roleplaying game of villainy, self-loathing, and unrequited love'. It presents you with an emotionally charged scenario and mechanics that try to push you towards specific drama - if you want to be critical, a firm instance of the incentives and buttons oriented design that Huntsman was talking about, sometimes quite explicitly saying 'this mechanic was designed to...'

Dog Eat Dog is a game 'a game of imperialism and assimilation on the Pacific islands', with the DM reimagined as a colonial power adding more and more restrictions and the players as native people who will inevitably break its rules, until they are eventually pushed to 'run amok' (fatally), or assimilate. It's a game whose entire argument is more or less spelled out in the book itself.

But games don't have to be this narrowly scoped to have this kind of aspiration. Something like Apocalypse World still wants to bring about certain kinds of interaction, laid out quite explicitly as 'agendas' for the MC and players. It is strongly 'opinionated', in programmer terms.

Even a very flexible game can take on this model. Fiasco is a very abstract structure, designed to set up a chaotic situation like in a Coen Brothers movie. Microscope is designed to give you a fractal zoom in and out of a fictional history. These games are almost all procedure; Fiasco has some fantastic prompt tables, and a clear way to cook up your own, but the bulk of it is the stuff it tells you to do with scenes and dice.

These could be seen as games on an auteur model, with many of the emotional beats of the scenario already rigged up in advance. You get this type of book to experience a good/meaningful story - with a certain amount of flexibility in the details that gets you more attached. If there is a GM/MC/etc. they have instructions to facilitate the expression of that story.

...well, I refer to it as an auteur model. Thankfully not everyone is Ron Edwards! Apocalypse World has a whole chapter about how to modify the game to your taste, or build new games on its framework, and that - plus its conceptual simplicity - probably played a role in its hundreds of derivatives. 'Hacking' games was well established as a practice in the storygames milieu right from the early days. Probably the vast majority of games put out on itch.io are simply hacks of an established framework, very few offer real innovation.

Despite this, the offer of these products is still that they'll tell you how create a kind of verbal machine to realise some very specific thing.

Secret fourth thing...?

I can't think of others right now, but I hate presenting a list as exhaustive unless I can prove it's exhaustive. It's very likely there's some other function a book can claim to perform.

However, to summarise, you look at an RPG book to get:

a consistent set of rulings to handle situations of uncertainty

a set of prompts to help inspire your imagination when you need inspiration

a carefully designed procedure to lead you to a specific experience

The third thing is kind of a different beast to the other two, huh? You might be thinking that the first two are trad games and the third one is post-Forge 'story games', but it's really much older than that. Paranoia is a great early example; there are shades of it in many games published in the 80s and 90s. Not all these games are affiliated with the Forge and its diaspora either - take for example Jenna Moran's games and Bliss Stage.

Story games are not books either

The Forge and its diaspora led to a lot of games being printed, and launched the careers of many an 'indie TTRPG designer', which was not really a thing you could be in the same way before. It would be easy therefore to think this was the main contribution: we should assess it on the basis of the printed games that resulted.

However, nothing says you have to use a book to pilfer from their idea pool.

The really interesting contribution of the whole movement, to my eye, is that it calls our attention to a facet of TTRPGs that had often been left implicit. Who speaks, when? Who gets the 'narrative authority' to make the final call on what becomes 'true'? How do you organise time - do you frame scenes, use flashbacks, cut between different characters? What makes a dice roll exciting? How do you work out what would engage the other players, and communicate your own interests? Are you trying to help your character win, or are you more like a writer who might choose to make them suffer? How do you make a compelling character arc? What can be changed around behind the scenes to make a better story?

These are all aspects of 'play', the thing that you do at the table. Any given TTRPG group will settle on its own implicit or explicit approach to this kind of thing.

Different RPG books will tell you to do this or that. Some games will tell you to set stakes, or make failure interesting, or make choices that act as 'flags' to show what you're looking for.

But these tools are not tied to any specific game. You don't need the 'permission' of a book, nor can a book stop you doing it. A book may lay out a procedure that makes it easier, may introduce you to an idea that you haven't heard before, but once you have the idea, you can play with it however you like.

The way I approach a trad game like D&D, from either side of the DM screen, has become very different after my sojourn into the world of story games. A lot of what I liked there, I kept doing. Other inspiration comes from outside of the 'hobby' entirely, in related milieu like improv comedy.

This is something the OSR milieu seems to understand quite well. Everything is expected to be mixed, matched, and interpreted by the needs of your group. Posts will be framed as mere advice, which can be picked up and applied regardless of context.

But that all depends on a certain amount of common ground as to 'what the game is'. There is an authoritative DM who runs the scenario. The emphasis of the game is probably on exploring some kind of ruin and surviving in a dark, decaying fantasy world populated by various factions at odds with each other. Players control flimsy characters whose survival is not guaranteed, but if they live long enough, they can become major powers. There is a heavy strategic aspect: you are trying to use your resources to survive and get something. This is the general shape of a 'prototypical OSR game'.

the shared context of storygames

Story games form their own subsubculture, but they do not have this level of shared context. Instead, a different kind of shared context is kind of implicit in the milieu.

Here's how things go at the London Indie RPG Meetup Group, which I've attended a couple of times: a group of nerds gather in a pub. People will pitch games with a couple of sentences; then people will form groups and play that game as a one-shot session. Someone will have a book, or printouts. Most players will not have heard of the game before.

In this kind of context, a lot of the quirks of story games make sense. 'Read this out' paragraphs, rapid character creation based on selecting prompts, simple mechanics designed to push you into drama as quickly as possible: all of this stuff is perfect for a one-shot game you play once or a few times. This type of game is not really trying to 'take on' trad games.

But then there's the 'middle ground' kind of game, which are closer to a 'trad' game - a game master, persistent characters each controlled by one player, multiple sessions, progression - but also instruct you to do something more experimental by trad-game standards. This includes Apocalypse World and its derivatives, Blades in the Dark and its derivatives, the Burning Wheel/Mouse Guard lineage, Jenna Moran's games... and so on.

It's this point of overlap where things get sticky and it all becomes a bit tense. Since, well, story game fans can be quite evangelistic - and part of that evangelism depends on a dismissively book-determinist view of trad TTRPGs. But conversely, trad players can be quite reluctant to imagine there is any other way of approaching this whole activity, and dismissive of any other approach. I do not like it, Sam-I-am.

So you end up with a situation of camps, with both groups bristling at the sense that they should be compelled to give up the thing they like to do it the way they consider inferior.

And if you want to criticise the other camp, what do you do? Pick up their book and criticise it as a product, according to your sense of what a TTRPG book is for. Which seems hopelessly besides the point when a book is such a small part of the story.

I've played trad games, story games, OSR games, 'freeform' forum games, LARP, MMO roleplaying, improv comedy... Not as much as I'd like of anything, but enough to get a sense of the many ways we can do this 'roleplaying' thing, whether by explicit rule or implicit convention.

So the puzzle I now have is, if there is to be a book involved, what is that book there to do? What really makes for a good RPG book? Are there other ways to get that thing? How do you game design honestly?

We'll try to address that in part 3 of this series, coming... sometime soon, hopefully!

[stephensmithuk]

The Hound of the Baskervilles: The Curse of the Baskervilles

CW for discussion of crimes against humanity.

Devonshire is a historical alternative name for the county of Devon, these days not seeing that much use. Devon and next-door Cornwall have a friendly rivalry going over various things, including the order in which you put cream and jam on a scone. Cornwall does jam first, Devon cream. Getting it the wrong round in the relevant county can attract disapproving looks.

Mainstream Christianity believes that the only sin that cannot be forgiven by God is "blaspheming against the Holy Spirit", which is a continuous and arrogant rejection of it. It is generally deemed impossible for a Christian to actually do because if you worried that you've done it, you're not rejecting the Holy Spirit.

The Great Rebellion is the then standard name for what is commonly called the English Civil War or less commonly, but more correctly the War of the Three Kingdoms - England, Scotland and Ireland all being their own kingdoms under a single monarch, Wales is a principality. Lasting from 1639 to 1653 and including a whole bunch of conflicts, including two English Civil Wars. Various videos explaining the whole rather complex affair with varying degrees of comedy can be found on YouTube, but the popular version is that a bunch of republicans (Roundheads) with short hair fought a bunch of monarchists with long hair (Cavaliers). To quote Arnold Rimmer, it ended "1-0 to the pudding-basins" and King Charles I ended up losing his head in public.

Edward Hyde, 1st Earl of Clarendon, a key member of the governments of Charles I and Charles II wrote some memoirs of the whole period. Initially written between 1646 and 1648 as a defence of the former, his fall from power and exile in 1667 (he was made to carry the can for the English defeat against the Netherlands in the Second Anglo-Dutch War despite having little involvement) resulted in a massive expansion and re-write of The History of the Rebellion, which generally runs to no less than six volumes. One can compare it to Winston Churchill's The Second World War it seems - interesting, but watch for bias.

A yeoman in this context was a commoner who owned the land that he farmed, as opposed to being merely a tenant. Indeed a third of all farmland remains run by tenanted farmers; including much of Dartmoor, which is owned by the Duchy of Cornwall, the land holdings of a (male only) heir to the throne.

A maiden is traditionally an unmarried girl or young woman, with a strong implication of virginity to boot.

Michaelmas is a Christian festival held on 29 September in honour Saint Michael and all the other angels. It was traditionally associated with the end of harvest and a bunch of other stuff, including the legal calendar. The Lord Mayor of London (not to be confused with the Mayor of London) is elected on this. Traditionally the meal eaten here included goose, but it has very much fallen out of fashion in modern Britain.

A carouse (also a verb) is basically a long drinking and dancing event; "Carouse" turns up as a skill in some RPG systems i.e. the ability to do this effectively without ending up on the floor next to your vomit.

"Terrible oaths" here mean foul language.

A league is three statute miles, so she's got to get nine miles or 14.9 kilometres. That's a rather long way to go, especially in the dark.

A flagon is a large vessel for containing drink, about 2 imperial pints or 1.1 litres in capacity. You can either use it for pouring (in which case it will have a spout) or drinking from directly.

Trenchers were flat wood or metal plates used for serving food. In medieval times, they would be made of stale bread. After the meal, these and the juices, leftovers etc. would be generally given to the poor. Eating the trencher yourself was considered rather vulgar.

"Wench" has had various meanings over the years. In Shakespeare's time, it was a neutral or even endearing term for a young woman. It then evolved into a female server, particularly at a tavern (with the associated sexy costume, although I am not sure when that became a thing) and from there to being a term for a prostitute, with "wenching" becoming a verb to mean using the services of them. With an associated meaning of a promiscuous woman. It is not clear whether the writer is using the term or Hugo is here. I can see the latter using it in a rather venomous way.

A kerchief is another name for a bandana.

The pistols of the period were single-shot weapons requiring reloading with powder, wadding and shot. Even with regular practice like in an army (where this was a major part of drill), you'd be looking at a 15 to 20 second reloading time. It was commonplace to carry two pistols (a brace) as a result, at which point the fight was either over, or it was time to get your sword out. Some went still further - Blackbeard, who was going progressively crazy with syphilis, is recorded as carrying six loaded pistols on him.

There were 16 fatal dog on human attacks in the UK from January to September 2023; a sharp rise blamed on the American XL Bully breed, which was promptly banned in England and Wales as a result.

Providence means God's intervention in the universe.

"Which would not forever punish the innocent beyond that third or fourth generation which is threatened in Holy Writ" is a reference to the Commandment about not creating graven images or idols, either the Second Commandment or part of the First depending on your denomination; Anglicans put it as the Second.

"The probable Liberal candidate for Mid-Devon" is going to form part of a post discussing late Victorian elections, because I could go on all days about those. Central Devon was a narrow Conservative hold in 2024, by the way.

Nouveaux riches is French for "new rich", commonly rendered as "new money". The "aristocracy" on both sides of the Atlantic (see The Gilded Age) looked down on the new millionaires who were being created by the Industrial Revolution, such as railway tycoon Cornelius Vanderbilt.

The discovery of diamonds at Kimberley in 1867, followed by gold at Witwatersrand in 1886, led to a vast boom that turned what would become South Africa from an agricultural economy to a wealthy industrial one... most of that wealth ending in the hands of white people, of course. Indeed, it led to the actual creation of South Africa in the first place.

Inquests are held in England and Wales after any death that is violent, unnatural, a possible suicide or in custody. These were at the time conducted with a jury, but this has become much rarer since 1927, when a coroner can do it on their own in many cases. In the case of a murder, an inquest will be opened and adjourned to allow the police to investigate. This process can take quite a while; after the Manchester Arena bombing of 2017, a full public inquiry into the event was held and following the end of that in 2003, the same judge then conducted an inquest into the death of the bomber himself, as was legally required. No public hearings were held in this case to avoid attention and save public money. The conclusion was officially logged as "suicide while undertaking a terror attack that murdered 22 innocent victims and injured many others", Sir John Saunders clearly that merely putting "suicide" was insufficient.

The Gypsy and Traveller community have long been associated with horses, with the Appleby Horse Fair being held every June in Cumbria. The RSPCA have a large presence at the event to deal with any animal welfare issues, issuing warnings and will take animals away or prosecute people if required. The 2024 event saw two horses worked to death, the official website posting the RSPCA's request for information on those responsible.

I've discussed Bushmen/San in one of my posts on The Sign of Four.

"Hottentot" is a now-offensive term for the Khoekhoe nomadic pastoralists of Southern Africa, often grouped with the San. Its use in the 1964 Mary Poppins film has seen that movie reclassified in the UK from a U (universal) to a PG.

They are split into the Northern Khoekhoe or Nama, located in Namibia and Botswana, and the Southern Khoekhoe or Cape Khoe found in the SW coastal regions of South Africa. At the time this book was set, these were, respectively:

German South West Africa

Bechaunaland Protectorate (de facto independent until 1891 when the British took active control)

The Cape Colony

Two years after publication, separate Nama and Herero rebellions in the former against colonial rule (the German aim being ethnic cleansing) were brutally defeated, with the peoples either shot dead, driven into the desert or placed into concentration camps. They were subjected to medical experiments, skulls being taken to Germany for use as demonstration of "racial inferiority". The similarities between this genocide and the Holocaust are clear, although the precise connections are debated by historians.

It is estimated that up to 80% of the indigenous population died as a result.

Germany has in the last decade offically recognised this as a genocide, agreed to pay €1.1 billion to the affected communities and has returned the human remains held in German universities or teaching hospitals.

On a final note, Mortimer failing to mention the footprints around the body might be considered perjury.

[emblemxeno]

The people who want supports removed from FE don't quite seem to understand that bloating the main story or plot significant script to make every single character relevant is terrible for pacing in a video game, especially for RPGs.

Actually, now that I think about it, lots of criticism from certain sects of the community towards FE writing quality and supports and the subsequent suggestions towards 'fixing' the alleged issues always seem to misunderstand how video games as a storytelling medium should be constructed so to not exhaust the player. Limiting player interactivity and agency (e.g. no supports or potential character building and the gameplay benefits as rewards for that) to such a degree is just as bad as bloating a game with too many mechanics, gameplay styles, or resources to manage (i.e. the common criticisms for 3H and Engage).

Not to mention that if you don't have some kind of material to flesh out characters, you get a Radiant Dawn scenario where most of the new cast are flat as boards, or an Echoes scenario where it's very easy to miss extra backstory if you don't visit villages at specific points in the campaign.

The video in question that's floating around regarding this topic mentions that Path of Radiance's base conversations would be an appropriate replacement, but... Path of Radiance had both base convos and supports. New Mystery and Echoes did this as well! 3H did it too, with its only issue being an extension of the problem that silent/dialogue choice centered avatars can create. It never had to be one or the other, and it's strange that it's presented as such.

Now, supports as a system can definitely be revamped or trimmed, I agree with that. But removing them entirely? When those are a major factor for why the series has now achieved mainstream popularity? Nah, lmao.

[electricea]

also maybe this is the persona bias in me speaking but i feel like persona is hardly this underrated series that flies under the radar anymore - i feel like especially around the time of persona 5 was when it really blew up and became 'mainstream (ie you saw it everywhere on youtube and twitch, etc) i can't speak for the time before persona 5 since i got into it around the tail end of persona 4 golden's original release, but regardless as to when persona actually took off and became popular as a franchise, i love to see it! atlus usually does a great job with balancing the life sim and the RPG aspects.

[prokopetz]

Hey why DO all those old tabletop RPGS and adventure games have such weird obtuse "act in this one scene or softlock forever" moments? Like, these weren't designed like arcade games that munch quarters... Why was this sort of thing so commonplace?

(With reference to this post here.)

Funnily enough, for tabletop RPGs there's actually a good answer.

If you're familiar with the popular history of tabletop roleplaying games, you've probably heard the idea that they developed out of fantasy wargaming. That's not actually terribly accurate; tabletop RPGs and fantasy wargames are more like two parallel branches that split off from the recreating-historical-battles kind of wargaming at about the same time, and for the first couple of decades there wasn't a bright line drawn between them like there is today. Many are genuinely hard to classify by contemporary standards – there are a lot of early fantasy wargames that look more like modern tabletop RPGs, and vice versa.

One of the consequences of that lack of sharp distinctions between tabletop RPGs and fantasy wargames is that early tabletop RPGs were often played in a sort of "competitive co-op" format at wargaming tournaments. Multiple groups would run their parties through the same adventure in parallel, and be ranked on their performance; sometimes this would involve scoring points for completing specific objectives, or speedrunning the adventure and aiming for the fastest time, but the most popular tournament format was the survival module: adventures which were deliberately designed to be unreasonably difficult, with whichever group's last surviving character's corpse hit the ground furthest from the dungeon entrance being judged the winner.

The upshot of that popularity is that many published adventures early on – and certainly the greater part of the more infamous ones! – were originally written as survival modules, created to be run competitively at a particular tournament, and later repackaged and sold as commercial products. Of course, practically none of them actually explained that; like nearly all tabletop RPG material of their day, they were written under the assumption that all tabletop roleplayers had come up through organised play at university gaming clubs, and thus already had all the context I've just outlined. This ended up causing no end of confusion when the hobby's mainstream visibility exploded in the early 1980s, and suddenly there were folks who'd picked up the rulebooks at their local bookstores trying to teach themselves how to play from first principles with no prior contact with gaming club culture.

As for why adventure games were also like that... well, this is going to sound bizarre by contemporary standards, and I don't blame you if you don't believe me, but once upon a time, point-and-click adventure games were considered the gold standard for Serious Gaming. Unforgiving routing, bizarre moon-logic puzzles, and a bewildering variety of unique ways to get yourself killed off were held up as the mark of the serious gamer in much the same way that janky soulslike combat systems are today, and a large chunk of the genre was made to cater to that ethos. Gamer culture is a hell of a drug!

(If you're about to ask the obvious follow-up question, "what changed?", the point-and-click adventure game's fall from grace and subsequent dismissal as casual fluff tracks more or less directly with a large demographic shift in the late 1990s that saw the genre's player base skewing predominantly female – and, well, you can probably connect the dots from there.)

[cadinmingming]

Has Super Smash Bros EVER actually gotten people into new series? Because I get the feeling people either only care about the series they already like from the original games, OR they only care about the Smash Bros “version” of the characters as they are experienced in the game.

Everybody loves Captain Falcon the charismatic tokusatsu hero ham, but how many wanted to play his racing F-Zero games were you only see his vehicle and what little you get of his personality is more along the lines of Batman (wich are awesome don’t get me wrong)? Lots of people like to joke that he’s a “Smash Bros original”.

Everybody knows the Fire Emblem characters are cool fantasy anime warriors but how many people were like “I want to play the chess-like RPG they are from!”. In fact it seems a lot of Smash Bros players only got a negative impression about the series because they felt Fire Emblem “got too much atention” or “they all look the same”.

And how many people in general played Kid Icarus: Uprising? Because the Smash series sure tried to promote that game.

I’ve been thinking about this because it seems a lot of Yo-kai Watch fans wanted Jibanyan to make it into the roster in the hopes that it would introduce more people to Yo-kai Watch. Chances are people would have either liked or disliked Jibanyan as “that cat from Smash Bros that plays like this or that”.

There are other, far better ways to make Yo-kai Watch more mainstream, even after the series has seemingly become dormant for the time being. The Mother/Earthbound series is popular despite only having three games released a long time ago and very separate from each other. Animal Crossing is a fine example of a series that was always there but suddendly exploded with popularity one day. I don’t think these things happened because of SSB.

For now, I think there should be a re-release of the original Yo-kai Watch trilogy on a new console. The games on their own are perfectly capable of earning new fans, they just need more people to play them.

#rereleaseYokaiWatch

[thepleasuregoblin]

By the time I was aware of the sort of larger ttrpg milleu, 4e had already come out, so a lot of what I heard was just "4e sucks," but asking anyone who was into RPGs at the time of 3.5's height, or even earlier: has D&D always had this sort of stranglehold on the general idea of ttrpgs, even among enthusiasts? Or is the current culture kind of unique since 5e has become Actually Mainstream Popular?

Like I can definitely see people going "oh you can do anything with 3.5/OGL man, why would I play something else when I can just homebrew?" But I can't remember any specific instances of it happening

[minsarasarahair]

A quick guide to Holotempus HQ, the Holostars EN Brotubers of Hololive Production

Take note that I wrote this before Vanguard’s debut so its only about HQ

What can they offer as a group? 

Guild Lore - They are the strongest and more enticing to the viewers when they are complete together. In the lore, their adventure guild reside in a digital world called “Utopia”. Most of their viewers like their concept because of “Nostalgia” they give off similar to playing online RPG with friends during school days or typical adventure shounen anime consist of 4 male main characters back then. (Saiyuki, Hunter x Hunter) Its hard to tell if they are a hero guild or villain guild but Yagoo the CEO mentioned he want a group of bad boys concept for Holostars before Holotempus debut. This 4 belonged in Headquarters (HQ) while the new guys is called Vanguard (VG). HQ is is located in Elysium, Utopia and VG is in Xenokuni.

Comedy Skits - They are great actors for comedy skits and skilled in improvisation. Ideas for skits is usually Magni’s strength but Vesper, Axel and Altare can bounce well with others too. (Judge Magni, Psychic Therapy, Wheel of Fortune, TTRPG DND, Rock)

4 Players Gameplay - They love playing adventure games to explore together while having a chat about most random things and competitive FPS games that test their teamwork. They used to play together daily or weekly during their earlier days after debut but now they are busy for their solo content. (Raft, Zomboid, Left 4 Dead, Apex, Deep Rock Galactic)

Great conversationalists - Their conversation was natural and flow so well that gives the vibe as if you’re listening to a real group of friends. Vesper has interview series where he ask questions to get to know them, Magni’s unarchived off-collab Karaoke and Axel’s izakaya stream(with Vesper & Magni) are the best example of that. 

Camaraderie - They are surprisingly really close as a group. They support each other and love hanging out together. They are probably the first batch of Holopro vtubers where its a must to do “Raid”(Raiding is a new Youtube function where you can send your viewers to other streamers before you end your stream.) each other and if they can, its very rare for them to overlap each other solo stream. In Pre-Debut, they actually divided each other stream schedule based on Dayparting like Magni covers the Prime Time and Vesper covers the Morning time so their fans can catch up at least one of them depend on what time they are available. If you check their Tier Membership, they also have same prices. They confirmed they discussed it together. Another story is they all want a heart pose for Holopro fest poster but got rejected by the management. 

1. Regis Altare (Blue)  “The masses chose not to act. So I’ll take a stand in their stead.” Lore: The founder of adventurer Guild Tempus. The first hero adventurer in Elysium. He’s straightforward and popular among peers.  Guild Position: Leader, the mediator and representative of the group. Fighting Style: DPS swordsman/warrior/shooter/mage, All rounder As Streamer: The most strict when it comes to his chat rules and a reformed toxic gamer. He’s their best gamer so its easy for him to familiarize himself with new games he consume. He’s usually a chill streamer but he also has demon king persona where he unleash his toxic side and can be scary when he’s angry. He’s still young but he’s trying his best as Tempus leader. As Gamer: Mainstream games, FPS (Apex, Valorant), MMORPG (FF14, Monster Hunter), Horror games (Phasmophobia, Mortuary Assistant), Action games(Cyberpunk 2077), VR games(Cooking simulator, Fishing) - His strength is FPS but he want to try different type of games too like Roguelike games.  Specialty: Plays Guitar & Cello (Trying to learn Songwriting), ASMR (Comfy/Light Romantic Boyfriend Experience), EN Karaoke (Sad boy songs), Love Challenging himself by putting punishment as consequence in his stream (Home Sweet Home, CSGO with Vesper)

2. Magni Dezmond (Purple) “Alchemists have the wonderful ability to grant people’s wishes!” Lore: The self-proclaimed alchemist with a business mindset who sells potion (Copium). He has a darkness within him and willing to do anything to uncover truths. Guild Position: Public Relations, the collab focus guy Fighting Style: DPS and support mage As Streamer: Their explicitly unhinged overconfident competitive toxic gamer but very good at executing his creative ideas. He’s good at multitasking and producing creative output quickly. He’s talented but also very skilled from working hard. Notorious for his cursed stream where he make abomination creatures like Magmo. He might be blunt and sharp with his words but he has a soft side and actually a textbook tsundere. He’s also good at socializing and interacting with different types of people. He’s Altare’s right hand man and genuinely love supporting each Tempus members as long as he can.  As Gamer: Childhood chill games with Iconic characters (Sonic, Super Mario, Spongebob Squarepants), Competitive shooter games (Overwatch, Apex, Fortnite), Open world adventure games (Subnautica, Minecraft, Animal Crossing) - He refuse to play MMORPG because he might destroy his life for it and he’s not good with Horror games like Axel. Specialty: DJ with Loop station (Can play guitar, electronic keyboard), Art Stream (Commission Open), Comedy skit stream (Weremag, Judge Magni), Collab stream (Off-Collab Karaoke with Holotempus members), Roleplay and Creative Storytelling (Alchemist Prologue Lore in his membership)

3. Axel Syrios (Orange) “Doctors resolve the root cause of a problem, right? Well, I destroy it. So I am a doctor.” Lore: The gladiator and owns a combat arena. He’s a blockhead who joined the guild out of whim. He love eating. Guild Position: Former Treasurer, Human Resources  Fighting Style: Tank, DPS Brawler, Bard As Streamer: The luckiest member with spicy mouth and has street smart wisdom who appreciate Ecchi na Neesan from a distance. Notorious for killing his vods so I suggest to watch him live instead. Probably the most normal among the 4 of them. A very hilarious optimistic guy that must be protected at all cost. He’s unfiltered and usually curse a lot but he actually means well and very friendly. His fans find his head empty moment funny and cute. His strength is producing Cover songs and organizing Collab songs.  As Gamer: Visual Novel (DDLC, Your Turn to Die), JRPG (Zelda, Nier Replicant, Final Fantasy), Shooting games (Hitman, Apex) - He’s a big fan of Final Fantasy but sadly he can’t play it on stream bc he can’t get the perms. He don’t like Horror games. Specialty: Bilingual (JP & EN), Cover songs, Collab songs project (Bad End Night, Yatta), JP Karaoke, ASMR (The funny Kusogaki type ASMR), Sharp at figuring out things based on his observation/Perceptive (Weremag, DDLC), Love giving life advises (Love Consultation, Just Chatting)

4. Vesper Noir (Black) “It’s his childish nature that allows him to speak so freely about his dreams. He might even actually let everyone around him dream.” Lore: The resident scholar of grand library. Rational most of the time but can be harsh in his criticism. Don’t like sunlight because of spending too much time in his research. He can’t neither confirm nor deny the vampire allegations. Guild Position: Academic Advisor, Support  Fighting Style: Swordsman (Rapier), Control Effects and Healer-type Mage, All rounder? (Spear user, Berserker?)  As Streamer: The crazy grandpa/uncle-like comfy storyteller with strong viewers engagement. An average guy who’s full of contradictions. Flawed and can be toxic gamer when he’s excited. He will say the most unhinged surprising things you will not expected. Extremely introverted with social anxiety so he’s more comfortable in doing solo stream. He's trying to be an endurance streamer but usually busy because of his off-stream workload.  As Gamer: Turn-based strategy roguelike games (Hitman, FTL, Dicey Dungeon, Solasta), Click-based MMORPG (Diablo II, World of Warcraft), Exploration (Outer Wilds, Zomboid), Building games (Minecraft, Factorio) - Bad at multiplayer competitive games (Pummel & Mario Party) and hand-eye coordination games like FPS.  Specialty: Just Chatting streams (Holotempus King of Zatsudan), Learning (JP Study stream & Membership art stream), Experienced TTRPG Dungeon Master (DND), ASMR (Comfy Soft Speaking Storytelling and Sound focus without whispering or romantic sexual content), Review stream (Bike, PC build, Tea, Dad Jokes, Art), Finishing a game in one sitting (Soma, River City Girls, Fall Out New Vegas)

If you’re a fan of classic anime(weeb): Vesper, Axel If you’re a normie and familiar with mainstream anime: Altare, Magni  If you like ASMR: Altare(most experienced), Axel, Vesper(still learning) If you like music: Altare(EN sad boy songs), Axel(JP songs), Magni(DJ) If you want a chill stream as background: Vesper, Altare If you want to be entertain and laugh: Axel, Magni If you’re into FPS gameplay: Altare, Magni, Axel If you’re young(early 20s and down): Altare, Axel If you’re older(late 20s and up): Magni, Vesper If you’re fine with dark humor and flawed individuals: Magni, Vesper If you only want positive vibe: Altare, Axel If you want to be ignored or be scolded(but they actually like you): Magni, Vesper, Axel? If you want affectionate treatment: Axel, Altare If you want wise average guys vibe: Axel, Vesper If you want smarter chill vibe: Magni, Altare

DUO DYNAMIC

Shiny & Spicy (Altare & Axel) - the youngest pair, chuunibyou duo, the responsible child and the kusogaki. Among the members, Axel is the only member that can’t be control by Altare(Minecraft). Maybe bc Axel is the type who do whatever he want but Axel respect Altare as their leader. In return, Altare see Axel as his rival in singing. They might be kusogaki at times but they can also be the responsible independent children. They are very close friends and both entered a competitive Apex tourney together.

Kintama Bros (Axel & Magni) - hilariously chaotic combined, both of them have spicy mouth. The smart and dumb. The positive guy and the negative guy? Basically Naruto and Sasuke. Older and younger brother? bc Magni mentioned Axel felt like a younger brother to him.

Father & Son (Axel & Vesper) - just cute platonic relationship between Nowa Oji and his kusogaki son Axel. Vesper wish Axel will not experience the bad things he experienced as adult and be happy. Axel’s anime taste is heavily influenced by his parents so he can relate strongly with Vesper despite their age gap. As for Axel, he like trying out Vesper’s style in streaming such as doing frequent Just Chatting stream and playing the same games bc “Like father, like son”.(Hitman, Needy Girl Overdose)

Amugni/DezPerados/MagNoir? (Vesper & Magni) - they don’t really have official name yet. The flawed and oldest pair. Hubris and dumb together. They are the Max Intelligence duo they said. Nerd?? Meme lords and love media references. The villain/betrayer and his accomplice dynamic? Despite how careful Magni is interacting with Vesper in public, they are actually very close and Vesper appreciate how considerate Magni is as friend. They really like each other as friends. 

Prison Break/Almond/Amodo? (Altare & Magni) - started with Way Out stream. Lately, they look like a shipping pair and not a duo. Fans said Almond is their ship name but Altare used that a lot to refer to their duo so I’m not sure if he’s only selling their pair as ship or duo. Openly flirts with each other. Altare usually played the bad guy in their dynamic. In their off-collab, Magni was asking for help and implied he’s Altare’s hostage. Altare also love teasing Magni while Magni played the tsundere role in the dynamic. Magni viewed Altare like a younger brother that he found stupid and someone he should look after.

Short & Tall? (Altare & Vesper) - don’t have official name again. They are oshi of each other. In the lore, they studied in the same mage academy together with Magni but reunited when Altare is looking for guild members(Debut Manga). Their names are inspired from Star-crossed Lovers of Tanabata Festival (Altair & Vega). Their dynamic during stream is more like the responsible child and flawed father or the leader and his henchman something like that?? They like praising each other.

[mayamidnightmelody]

The 1990s was a pivotal decade for geek culture, solidifying many of the trends and franchises that continue to influence pop culture today. Here's an exploration of the various facets of geekdom in the 90s:

Video Games

The 1990s were a golden era for video games, seeing the rise of iconic franchises and gaming consoles.

Consoles and Games:

Super Nintendo Entertainment System (SNES) and Sega Genesis were at the forefront of the early 90s gaming scene. Classics like "The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past," "Super Mario World," and "Sonic the Hedgehog" became household names.

The mid-90s introduced the Sony PlayStation and the Nintendo 64. Games like "Final Fantasy VII," "Metal Gear Solid," "Super Mario 64," and "The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time" revolutionized the industry with their storytelling and 3D graphics.

PC Gaming:

The rise of PC gaming brought titles like "Doom," "Quake," "Warcraft," and "Starcraft," which laid the groundwork for modern first-person shooters and real-time strategy games.

The introduction of the CD-ROM allowed for more complex and graphically intense games, expanding the possibilities of game design.

Comic Books and Graphic Novels

The 90s was a transformative period for comics, marked by a combination of innovation and market upheavals.

Marvel and DC Comics:

Marvel experienced a surge in popularity with the introduction of new characters like Deadpool and the significant events like the "X-Men's Age of Apocalypse" and "Spider-Man's Clone Saga."

DC Comics shook the world with storylines such as "The Death of Superman" and "Batman: Knightfall."

Independent Publishers:

The formation of Image Comics by former Marvel artists brought a wave of creator-owned series like "Spawn," "The Savage Dragon," and "WildC.A.T.s."

Vertigo, an imprint of DC, produced critically acclaimed titles such as "Sandman" by Neil Gaiman and "Preacher" by Garth Ennis, pushing the boundaries of mature storytelling in comics.

Science Fiction and Fantasy

The 90s were a golden age for science fiction and fantasy, both in literature and on screen.

Television:

"Star Trek" had a strong presence with "The Next Generation" continuing its success, followed by "Deep Space Nine" and "Voyager."

"The X-Files" became a cultural phenomenon, blending science fiction with horror and conspiracy theories.

"Buffy the Vampire Slayer" redefined the fantasy genre on television, combining teenage drama with supernatural elements.

Movies:

Blockbuster franchises like "Jurassic Park," "The Matrix," and "Men in Black" showcased cutting-edge special effects and imaginative storytelling.

The re-release of the original "Star Wars" trilogy in special editions prepared the groundwork for the much-anticipated prequel trilogy.

Anime and Manga

The 90s saw the global explosion of anime and manga, making Japanese pop culture a mainstream phenomenon.

Anime:

Series like "Dragon Ball Z," "Sailor Moon," and "Pokémon" became immensely popular worldwide, introducing many to the world of anime.

Films by Studio Ghibli, such as "Princess Mononoke" and "My Neighbor Totoro," received critical acclaim and international recognition.

Manga:

Manga series like "Naruto," "One Piece," and "Berserk" began their runs, setting the stage for long-lasting popularity.

The publication of "Shonen Jump" in English brought many of these series to Western audiences.

Role-Playing Games (RPGs)

The 90s were a significant decade for tabletop RPGs, with many classic games being developed and popularized.

Dungeons & Dragons:

The release of the second edition of Advanced Dungeons & Dragons (AD&D) in 1989 carried through the 90s, with campaigns like "Planescape" and "Dark Sun" becoming fan favorites.

Other RPGs:

"Vampire: The Masquerade" by White Wolf Publishing introduced the World of Darkness, a setting that offered a dark, gothic-punk alternative to traditional fantasy RPGs.

The cyberpunk genre was well represented by games like "Shadowrun" and "Cyberpunk 2020," capturing the gritty, high-tech, low-life aesthetic.

Collectibles and Trading Card Games

The 90s witnessed the birth and explosion of collectible card games (CCGs), with "Magic: The Gathering" leading the charge.

Magic: The Gathering:

Created by Richard Garfield and released by Wizards of the Coast in 1993, "Magic: The Gathering" became a groundbreaking and immensely popular game, sparking a new industry of collectible card games.

Pokémon:

The Pokémon Trading Card Game, released in 1996, quickly became a massive hit alongside the video games and TV series, contributing to the global Pokémon craze.

Internet and Technology

The rise of the internet in the 90s played a crucial role in shaping geek culture.

Early Internet Communities:

Bulletin board systems (BBS), forums, and newsgroups like Usenet allowed geeks to connect and share their interests in ways that were never before possible.

The creation of fan sites and the use of IRC (Internet Relay Chat) facilitated the growth of online communities dedicated to various fandoms.

Technology:

The proliferation of personal computers and the advent of the World Wide Web democratized access to information and entertainment, allowing geek culture to flourish and expand globally.

In conclusion, the 1990s were a transformative decade for geek culture, characterized by the rise of influential media, the advent of groundbreaking technology, and the growth of vibrant communities. The era laid the foundation for many of the trends and franchises that continue to shape geekdom today.

[theabstruseone]

Wizards of the Coast, Dungeons & Dragons, and the Open Gaming License (OGL)

So this story has broken out of the tabletop roleplaying community and gotten into the mainstream and, due to outlets covering the story who aren't well-versed in the RPG industry, there's a LOT of misinformation going around. So I'm going to try to clear up what's going on. Short version: The new OGL is a shitshow, but people are treating speculation and rumor as fact and a lot of people are focusing on the wrong problems.

Oh, and if anyone wants to know why they should listen to me about this: I've been covering the tabletop roleplaying game industry for almost a decade and it's been my primary job for over six years. I've also done extensive research on the history of tabletop roleplaying and made several videos about small aspects of it.

First a bit of history.

Side note: Pretty much every sentence in this part is an entire whole-ass Story on its own, so I'm glossing over a lot of stuff to stay focused on the Open Gaming License.

In 1974, Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson wrote a new game based on the Chainmail miniature wargame called Dungeons & Dragons. This is widely considered the start of the tabletop roleplaying game genre. The game was published by a company called TSR Inc., which was taken over by the heir to the Buck Rogers publishing fortune, Lorraine Williams. By the 1990s, TSR dug itself into a deep financial hole. It was on the verge of bankruptcy before being purchased by Wizards of the Coast, the makers of Magic: The Gathering.

Wizards of the Coast launched a new Third Edition of Dungeons & Dragons in 2000 and, as part of the launch, released the Open Gaming License (OGL). This license allowed third-party publishers to create their own products based off of D&D 3rd Edition with some restrictions (they couldn't use specific intellectual property of Wizards of the Coast like the Forgotten Realms setting or some monsters created specifically for Dungeons & Dragons rather than based on myth or folklore). This launched a boom of third-party publishers creating their own products under the "D20 System" label.

The primary reason for creating the Open Gaming License was that we almost lost Dungeons & Dragons altogether. If TSR had fallen into bankruptcy, the assets of the company would be divvied up by creditors and likely auctioned off. Meaning the rights could be scattered to the wind or picked up by a company with no intention of developing a new game or keeping old material in print. Or worse, the rights could have been chopped up so that it became a confusing quagmire to figure out who owns what precisely. This actually has happened in many cases in tabletop roleplaying over the decades with several games currently (and likely permanently) out of print because nobody knows who owns the rights to them.

With the OGL, it was ensured that, at least in some capacity, Dungeons & Dragons would survive.

When Wizards of the Coast decided to update the game to the 4th Edition, they decided not to release 4th Edition rules under the OGL, but offered publishers an alternate but more restrictive license called the Game System License (GSL). This license was so unpopular it's difficult to even find a copy of the license online anymore.

As part of this move to 4th Edition, Wizards of the Coast canceled their contract with a company called Paizo to create the official D&D magazines Dragon and Dungeon. Paizo, who were also publishing campaign collections called Adventure Paths under the OGL, decided they wanted to keep making material for D&D 3rd Edition. So they created their own version of D&D called Pathfinder. Pathfinder became very popular in the gaming community as an alternative to D&D 4e. For modern fans, the home campaign that eventually became Critical Role started out as a Pathfinder campaign.

Due to a combination of factors, Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition was not as successful as Wizards of the Coast's new owner, Hasbro, hoped it would be. It was not a "failure" in terms of a tabletop roleplaying game as it sold very well for a TTRPG and maintained its spot as the highest-selling RPG in the industry through mass-market channels throughout its lifetime (even if Pathfinder did spend a year out-selling it in hobby channels like comic book and game stores). But Hasbro is a multibillion-dollar corporation and they expected D&D to perform as well as their other large brands and it underperformed to that expectation.

So when Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition was in development in 2014 under the name "D&D Next", expectations from Hasbro were lowered and far more realistic. They were more hands-off and less focused on aggressive monetization of the brand. This meant that D&D 5e was released under the OGL. A new boom of third-party content resulted. Several companies ran Kickstarter campaigns for D&D 5e-compatible material, some raising hundreds of thousands and even millions of dollars.

Then, thanks to huge gains in the audience from live streaming, YouTube, and podcasting, Dungeons & Dragons became a major hit again under 5e. The game experienced a revitalization and managed to meet the high expectations that Hasbro had for 4e.

The New Open Gaming License

In 2022, Wizards of the Coast announced they were "refreshing" D&D 5e with a new product codenamed "OneD&D". This would not be a new edition, just an update to the previous edition. All 5e material would still be compatible with the new "OneD&D".

In December of 2022, rumors started floating around that Wizards of the Coast was going to "abolish" the Open Gaming License. These rumors were based on pure speculation and "insider information" which turned out to be only partially accurate. Just before Christmas, Wizards of the Coast made a blog post on D&D Beyond (their online portal for D&D) explaining that OneD&D would still use the Open Gaming License, but an updated version of the license.

This new version of the license would function less like the GNU Public License for open-source software on which the OGL was based on, but more like the license that Epic uses for its Unreal Engine for video games. Companies could still use the OGL, but would have to register their sales if they make more than $50,000. If a company makes more than $750,000 a year in gross sales, it will have to pay a royalty to Wizards of the Coast.

In January, "leaks" of this new OGL appeared online via YouTube channels reading select pieces of it. Speculation and rumors ran rampant once again that Wizards of the Coast is "revoking" the OGL.

After almost a week of this, the actual Open Gaming License v1.1 document was also leaked. This was sent to some third-party publishers to get feedback and make them aware of the changes in advance of a public announcement under NDA. The document was split into two sections, the actual License itself which was written as a legal document and a commentary section that is not-legally-binding explanations of the intent of the legalese in that section.

Much of the speculation was based on early leaks, which focused on the not-legally-binding commentary section rather than the actual legal terms of the license. The one that caused the most concern was a statement "de-authorizing" all prior versions of the Open Gaming License.

This story broke out of the tabletop roleplaying news outlets and online community, who began to cover the story as well including outlets like Gizmodo, iO9, Polygon, and Forbes. In many cases, these outlets do not normally cover TTRPGs and Wizards of the Coast had yet to comment, so they ran the story with the version full of speculation and rumor framed by people who had a long history of criticizing Wizards of the Coast (for reasons justified and less so) because it was the only story they had.

Legal experts began to weigh in as well, with a decided split between those who believe that Wizards of the Coast COULD revoke the OGL and those who believe that Wizards of the Coast could only do so for those who agree to the new OGL v1.1 but NOT for people who did not agree to this license.

In the fallout of these events, several tabletop roleplaying companies began making announcements to stop producing third-party material for Dungeons & Dragons. Some announced a new focus on their own original systems, and others stated they planned to develop a version of D&D that they could legally publish without using the OGL.

And, as of January 11, 2023, this is where we're at. Wizards of the Coast only released a "We're working on a statement, please be patient" style statement only posted as a tweet, but no other comment since December.

So...CAN They Revoke the OGL? AKA I, Someone Who Is Not a Lawyer, Explains Legal Issues

When the rumors started in December, I spoke with a couple of lawyers I know, one of whom works in the TTRPG industry as a side-gig and one who works often with open software licenses. Other legal experts have weighed in as well. And the answer to that question is "...maybe?"

The entire case for revoking the OGL is based on a single clause in the original Open Gaming License that allows for the updating of the license. This cause states that, if the license is updated, creators may use any "authorized version" of the license.

However, the license itself does not state who authorizes the license or a process for making a different version of the license no longer authorized. Also, the OGL v1.0a (the older version) only has a process for revoking the license if one party violates the license. There are no other conditions for revoking the license listed in the OGL v1.0a. Also, case law exists for companies attempting to revoke rights under the GPL and other open-source software licenses where they were not legally allowed to.

However (again), the OGL states that the license is "perpetual", meaning it does not have an expiration date. It does NOT state that it is "irrevocable". Meaning that some legal experts believe that it CAN be revoked.

However (again again), when dealing with lawsuits over licenses and contracts, there are two things to keep in mind. In general (and varying on jurisdiction), ambiguity in a contract is generally interpreted as the fault of the side who drafted the contract and so, if the terms of a contract are unclear, the courts will generally side in favor of the one who did NOT write the contract. Yes, I said "generally" a lot because it all comes down to details and we won't know for sure how this will play out unless it goes to court.

Secondly, courts will examine things like industry standards when determining the validity of an interpretation of a contract, and the established industry standard within the TTRPG industry is that the OGL could not be revoked, a standard established by Wizards of the Coast themselves in 2006 when they stated so clearly in a FAQ about the license (formerly on their website, now only available via the Wayback machine...and this isn't because they're trying to hide it, but because they revamped their entire website several years ago and a whole lot of posts and documents from the 2000s were removed).

Finally, the Open Gaming License is used by companies beyond Wizards of the Coast. I don't even mean like Paizo (Pathfinder/Starfinder), Pelgrane Press (13th Age), and EN Publishing (Level Up) who made D&D derivative games, but systems like Basic Roleplay from Chaosium that powers Call of Cthulhu and RuneQuest, FATE which powers the licensed Dresden Files RPG, D6 System used by West End Games before that company collapsed for Ghostbusters and Star Wars, and several others. The systems released by these companies have NOTHING to do with Wizards of the Coast or Dungeons & Dragons, so "revoking" the OGL would directly affect them despite not interacting with Wizards of the Coast's IP in any way.

So CAN Wizards of the Coast revoke the Open Gaming License? Maybe, but probably not. But the bigger question is...do they actually WANT to do it? I mean, yeah, they probably WANT to, but what I mean is do I think it is their actual plan to revoke the OGL?

What I Think Wizards of the Coast is Actually Doing AKA It's Bad in a Different Way

Wizards of the Coast purchased D&D Beyond, a website that acted as a character builder and digital storefront for official Dungeons & Dragons material, last year for several million dollars. They also announced their own virtual tabletop (VTT) is in the works, a system that allows people to play RPGs remotely by simulating the tabletop experience on a computer or tablet. They also have a licensing deal with OneBookShelf (the company that owns the VTT Roll20 and the digital storefront DriveThruRPG) for Dungeonmasters Guild, a site that allows community content creators to make their own D&D products under a license more permissive than the OGL in content (you can set your adventures in Forgotten Realms or Ravenloft and use characters like Drizzt and Raistlin) but that requires payment of royalties to Wizards of the Coast.

I believe that Wizards of the Coast wants to encourage third-parties to sign the OGL v1.1 in order to gain access to their walled garden digital storefronts. Because D&D Beyond and the VTT are first-party products and Wizards of the Coast has a far larger marketing budget, they can easily create an environment where the vast majority of the tabletop gaming customer base uses their marketplaces. Meaning if you want access to millions of customers, you HAVE to go through Wizards of the Coast and agree to their royalty terms.

After a few years, this would give Wizards of the Coast the same dominance in the online tabletop gaming space as they have in the mass market space through Amazon, Barnes & Noble, Target, and other mainstream retail stores. And when the eventual Sixth Edition is released that is no longer compatible with 5e, they can release that document under the OGL v1.1 and cut off anyone from creating products without agreeing to the terms.

However, I don't think they want to eliminate the OGL v1.0a for ALL creations. It would be an iffy legal case and, as you've likely seen, would be a public relations nightmare. It would also be a bad move for Wizards of the Coast as the company (like all TTRPG companies) relies heavily on freelancers. Freelancers who typically get experience by writing and publishing on OGL material. I'd be utterly shocked if there was anyone working at Wizards of the Coast right now in a game design capacity who did NOT, if not getting their start in OGL material, at least published something under the OGL for D&D 3rd Ed, 3.5, Pathfinder, or 5e.

Not only would revoking the OGL v1.0a entirely be a costly endeavor, it would be a fruitless one. You may have seen in the various discussions the phrase, "You can't copyright game rules". This is true - game mechanics are covered in intellectual property law by patents, not copyright. You cannot copyright a set of game rules, you can only copyright the expression of those rules.

Side note: This is also the reason why every online recipe starts with an overly-long blog post about the recipe's role in the author's life - they can't copyright the actual recipe because it's just a list of ingredients and a description of the steps. They CAN copyright the story surrounding the recipe though, so if some bot steals their blog post and reposts it, they'll know because the story that IS protected under copyright was likely stolen as well.

While it isn't necessarily an easy process because it requires interpreting what is and is not a "creative expression" of describing the rules, it IS possible to recreate pretty much any game's core system in a way that is perfectly legal under copyright law. Kit Walsh wrote about this for the Electronic Frontier Foundation (though I disagree with some of her other conclusions here, that part is a pretty accurate explanation).

Side note: The EFF formed thanks to tabletop roleplaying games. The US Secret Service raided Steve Jackson Games, the publishers of GURPS who eventually went on to create the card game Munchkin. A group of lawyers represented SJG in their lawsuit against the government, and those lawyers decided to form the EFF as an organization to continue defending digital rights. I did a video about it a few years ago.

The OGL's primary value is that it addresses this hole in intellectual property law. While it's possible to publish compatible material for a game system without a license or even recreate the entire game system, it's not exactly easy. There are many ways that creators can accidentally violate copyright without realizing it.

For example, many Old School Rennaissance systems attempt to re-create the rules from older editions of Dungeons & Dragons which were NOT released under the OGL by using the material that IS in the OGL. However, they are limited in using some terms because they are too descriptive rather than functional, therefore falling under a creative expression. Like in previous editions, each level of a character class had its own title. Like Thieves in Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st Edition went from 1st level Rogue to 2nd level Footpad to 3rd level Cutpurse and so on. Those cannot be reproduced, but most other aspects of level advancement can.

The OGL solved the problem by giving clear guidance on what could and could not be used. Meaning Wizards of the Coast didn't have to worry about a dozen different versions of the 5th Edition of the D20 System popping up under different names -- completely bypassing their core rulebooks -- because it was unnecessary.

So I don't think Wizards of the Coast plans to announce a complete unilateral revoking of the OGL v1.0a nor never intended to do so. I think the plan was to introduce the royalty-based license first, using access to their walled garden as the benefit, then eventually switch entirely to the new license for Sixth Edition a few years down the line.

So What IS So Bad About the License?

The Unreal Engine license from Epic is a godsend for independent developers. The number of patents, copyrights, sublicenses, and so on involved in a video game engine make it necessary to obtain a license. A license with no up-front cost that only charges royalties after a certain level of gross sales is AMAZING for small developers because they can start working on a game and take risks because of lowered start-up costs of obtaining a license. It also means that, if the game isn't a big hit, the company isn't still on the hook for royalty payments off the paltry sum they make in sales.

None of that is the case in tabletop roleplaying games.

All this license does is allow Wizards of the Coast to start skimming profits off of other companies. If a creator's product makes more than $750,000 in gross sales, they have to start paying royalties on amounts over that. So say my Kickstarter takes off and funds for $800,000, I only owe royalties on $50,000 not the full $800,000.

However, part of the license makes clear that ALL FUNDS RAISED through a Kickstarter have the license applied. The thing is that most of the TTRPG Kickstarters that make over $750,000 do so through selling things other than the game product itself. Miniatures, sculptures, t-shirts, art books, personalized videos, creators running the game for backers, stuff like that which are products that ARE NOT licensed under the OGL. They don't include any material from the game so are not OGL material. BUT under this license, Wizards of the Coast gets to skim money off of those unrelated products.

On top of that, the license includes a sweetheart deal for Kickstarter. If you use Kickstarter to crowdfund your game, you only have to pay 20% royalties rather than the normal 25%. This comes on the heels of multiple competitors to Kickstarter gaining traction, such as BackerKit and GameFound. This is anti-competitive behavior.

Finally, if you don't pay royalties on time, you have to pay interest. Okay, sure...but the rate is 1.5% PER MONTH. That is a 19.56% per year interest rate which would be shitty for a credit card, let alone just for late fees on a royalty payment. If you screw up and underpay by 10% or more (easy to do when there's two royalty rates for different outlets between Kickstarter and all other sales), you're responsible for paying the costs of Wizards of the Coast auditing the account to determine the amount. How much these costs will be is not stated.

The OGL v1.1 also changes how material is used. While the OGL always had a share-a-like aspect to it so that, if you created an awesome class or feat or whatever, Wizards of the Coast could use it as well in their products...so could anyone else. For example, if I made a really cool Pirate class in my OGL book, you could use that Pirate class in your own book. Under the OGL v1.1, this is no longer the case. The flow of content is one-way ONLY to Wizards of the Coast. THEY can use any material created under the OGL, but no one else can.

This specific clause also causes problems for companies making licensed work. For example, Cubicle 7 released an OGL 5th Edition version of their Doctor Who roleplaying game, while Free League Publishing came out with a 5e Lord of the Rings RPG. Because of this clause in the license, those products would be impossible to make because Cubicle 7 doesn't own Doctor Who. The BBC does. Free League doesn't own Lord of the Rings, the Tolkien Estate does (technically, Embracer Group bought them, but that's a whole other mess). Cubicle 7 and Free League does not have the right to give Wizards of the Coast access to that intellectual property, but the OGL v1.1 REQUIRES that they do so.

OGL games using licensed properties have been a staple of the OGL since it came out. In the 3rd Ed era, there were D20 System RPGs for Babylon 5, Farscape, Warcraft, Stargate SG-1, Conan the Barbarian, and a lot more. It was a good way for smaller companies to grab licenses that weren't used and make a big splash as well as to allow customers access to games set in their favorite fictional settings without hoping Wizards of the Coast would show interest (as they did, making D20 versions of Wheel of Time, Star Wars, and a few other licensed properties during this era).

Further, there's a clause that allows Wizards of the Coast the right to revoke the OGL at their discretion. This is framed as allowing them to revoke the OGL from anyone publishing offensive material that's racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, etc. but that is NOT spelled out in the legally-binding section of the document. Meaning that if someone at Wizards of the Coast doesn't like something a creator has posted on social media, they can pull the license. This clause also eliminates all rights to challenge this: You cannot sue and there is no arbitration. Wizards of the Coast decides what material is and is not offensive.

And even if it WAS enforced as stated, there have been recent controversies with "ethics clauses" like this being enforced against women, BIPOC, LGBTQ+ people, disabled people, and other marginalized groups describing the bigotry, prejudice, and oppression they suffer under claims it violates the terms of the license. I'm not saying Wizards of the Coast WOULD do that, but at the same time, they don't have the best track record in these matters...

Then there's a new Indemnity clause. This means that if a creator publishes something under the OGL that gets them sued, Wizards of the Coast can decide the creator isn't defending the lawsuit well enough, take it over, and then bill the creator for all legal fees. It would be a rare situation (someone would have to work hard to get a claim that would involve the OGL itself in court), but the fact that Wizards reserves the right to take over a lawsuit and stick the creator with the bill isn't a good thing.

Then there's the "Other Products" section that expressly forbids the use of the OGL in the creation of any product other than a tabletop roleplaying game product. The comments section (the "not legally binding" bit) clarifies a list of products this covers including "videos, virtual tabletops or VTT campaigns, computer games, novels, apps, graphics novels, music, songs, dances, and pantomimes."

Of all of these, the only ones in which the OGL would even remotely apply would be virtual tabletops, apps, and computer games. And even that would be very specific cases where they recreate game rules from D&D. A novel doesn't include game rules. A video doesn't include game rules. A song doesn't include game rules. NONE of this stuff requires using the OGL in the first place so I have no idea why any of this is included (or rather, excluded) unless there are some further legal shenanigans planned for the future that affects Twitch, YouTube, and TikTok.

So yeah, this license is a garbage fire that's not good for creators and not good for the long-term health of Dungeons & Dragons as a game. Even if I don't believe that Wizards of the Coast plans to eliminate the OGL v1.0a and destroy a large portion of the tabletop roleplaying industry in the process, I do think their plan is detrimental to the hobby and reflects long-term plans for further anti-competitive behavior.

What Happens Now?

As of right now (early afternoon in North America on January 11, 2023), we're still waiting on an official statement from Wizards of the Coast. Until they make some official move, everyone in the industry is in a bit of a holding pattern or making plans for the worst.

For the vast majority of Dungeons & Dragons players, none of this means anything. There are millions of people who just play their regular game, use material from the core books, and that's it. They don't follow the industry, they likely don't even know that dedicated tabletop game stores exist let alone ever been to their local store because they bought their books from Amazon or Barnes & Noble and their dice from Target or Dollar General. They've never been on DriveThruRPG, aren't aware Pathfinder exists, and have put exactly as much consideration into following Wizards of the Coast accounts on social media as they have in following Starbucks.

However, the online tabletop RPG community has made a LOT of noise about this. Like I said earlier, more mainstream outlets have picked up this story. Hashtags related to it have been trending off and on all week on Twitter. People like @wilwheaton and Gail Simone are talking about the controversy. Some of these players, who make up the vast majority of the customer base for Dungeons & Dragons, might get curious. They won't understand what the OGL is or why it matters, but they'll come away with the impression that Wizards of the Coast did something that hurt small publishers and people don't like it.

Whatever happens, keep your friendly game designers in mind. Even the ones working for Wizards of the Coast. Many publishers have serious questions about their ability to continue as a business, and many creators are facing stress and burnout seeking off-ramps out of tabletop RPGs. Some other independent creators and their fans are taking the opportunity to be assholes by gloating over the situation, something which helps nobody. Designers who work for Wizards are being harassed even though this is very obviously a corporate-level decision that the people writing the game have absolutely no control over.

In short, the future is uncertain and it costs nothing to be kind to the people suffering right now.

Edit for a Post-Script: I've seen a post floating around Tumblr about this situation that tries to play off this situation as Good Ackshually because the OGL always involved signing away rights to gain access to something you already had. I want to reiterate a point I made above: "You can't copyright game mechanics" is far more complicated than a simple statement. Even the post itself explains all the legal pitfalls with that assumption by pointing out issues of mingling and other ways rules can be protected under copyright law. What the OGL did was allow independent creators with no budget - which is every single tabletop roleplaying game company outside of WotC, Paizo, and maybe a handful of others owned by large companies like Edge Studios (Azmodee/Embracer Group), White Wolf (Paradox Interactive), and a few others and even THOSE are tiny subsidiaries in a larger corporate umbrella. Pretty much every other roleplaying game company on the planet is under 10 total employees (often just one or two) and a bunch of freelancers.

This industry does not have the capital to hire a lawyer every time they want to release a new product to ensure the IP doesn't violate the law. The OGL allows those companies a clear framework to publish compatible material with the game system used by at LEAST 80% of the customer base of the industry without fear of legal threats. This is the difference between theory and practice. In theory, publishing without a license is better but in practice, it's a money sink and legal minefield. And telling publishers and professionals who have been working under the license for two decades now they should be thankful the entire industry is under threat of being upended is condescending at best.

Edit Part 2: I knew I'd forget some things that are terrible about the OGL v1.1

First, there are now two licenses, a Commercial and a Non-Commercial one. I still haven't figured out the purpose since it's the same license only the Commercial one has all the bits about royalties. It seems redundant because if someone's not making money, they wouldn't meet the threshold for reporting gross sales anyway since they don't make money.

Anyway, to the actual issue I forgot: Information gathering!

You have to register every single product you release under the OGL v1.1 with Wizards of the Coast. You must describe the product, state where you will offer it for sale, what price you will charge, provide contact information, and "filling out a form" (they don't state what other information will be on this form). There are no restrictions whatsoever placed on how Wizards of the Coast can use this information. Even the most benign version of how this information can be used is anti-competitive as it would give Wizards of the Coast free market research - if all products have to be registered but only products that make $50,000 in gross sales must have their sales reported, then Wizards of the Coast knows what products are selling and which ones are not.

The RPG industry has horrible market research information. There are only a handful of places to track what people are actually buying or playing. Few companies release sales information. All you can do is check Kickstarter yourself for what products are crowdfunding well, use ICv2's reporting which is limited to physical sales only at participating hobby game stores in North America (leaving out any store that doesn't participate, mass market outlets like Amazon, direct sales through a publisher's website, digital or print-on-demand sales from DriveThruRPG, etc.), and quarterly user reports from virtal tabletops Roll20 and Fantasy Grounds. That's ALL we have to judge where the market is. Having access to that kind of information would give Wizards of the Coast an even larger edge in the RPG market, which they already dominate.

And that's the benign reading. For example, there are no restrictions in the OGL v1.1 against selling that information to third parties. Granted, the European Union would have some things to say about that. Also, remember that the OGL v1.1 flows one-way. Wizards of the Coast can republish anything they like with no compensation or even credit provided to the previous author. If they see a particular product is selling well, they can just republish it themselves.

Edit 3: Wizards of the Coast FINALLY released a statement and...fuck me, I did NOT expect them to give up on the royalties. I figured that was the primary motivation for the license update. They're also changing the terms to make clear that Wizards of the Coast does not have the ability to publish material from third-parties (that part of the license was meant to protect them in case of convergent design, where somebody's third-party published adventure or sourcebook coincidentally has the same elements as a new sourcebook or one of the new big-budget TV/film/video game projects and just overreached according to the statement).

They still don't address the actual "open" part of the open license that would allow third-party publishers to share their material with other third-party publishers. There have also stated that content already released under the OGL v1.0a will not be affected by the change to a new OGL license (rumors are they're changing it from "OGL v1.1" to "OGL v2.0" but that's not in the statement), but have NOT stated whether they believe they have the right to unilaterally prevent anyone from continuing to use the OGL v1.0a if they do not agree to the new OGL. Both of these are major concerns with the new license.

However, we DO have a good update: Paizo is spearheading a new open license called the Open RPG Creative License or the ORC License. You can read about it in the link, but the primary points are that Paizo will NOT own this license nor will anyone else who makes money publishing RPGs - it will be managed by a non-profit to ensure that no company in the future can exact unilateral changes that affect the entire industry. The license will be perpetual and irrevocable. So far, major TTRPG companies participating include Paizo (Pathfinder, Starfinder), Chaosium (Call of Cthulhu, RuneQuest), Kobold Press (prolific 5e OGL publisher), Green Ronin (Dragon Age, The Expanse, Modern AGE), Atlas Games (Ars Magica, Over the Edge), Legendary Games (third-party OGL publisher of 5e, Pathfinder, Starfinder, and Savage Worlds), Pinnacle Entertainment Group (Savage Worlds, Deadlands), Rogue Genius Games (Owen K.C. Stephens' company), and I don't know how many others since the announcement was made.

We won't know for sure how this will shake out for the industry until the terms of the new OGL and the terms of the ORC License are made public, but either way, a trust has been broken as a multibillion dollar corporation came after small publishers trying to scrape together enough to make any money at all off their games, and the industry won't forget that easily.

EDIT FINALE

It's now January 29, 2023, and there's been a huge update that should close out this entire saga.

A couple weeks ago, Wizards of the Coast released a draft of the OGL v1.2 along with a survey for public feedback. The new version dropped the royalties entirely along with any claims of ownership to content created under the license and the registration requirements. It did keep the "morality clause" that was vaguely worded and overly broad allowing them to revoke the license from any company producing a product they considered "harmful", "obscene", or "illegal" without defining those terms. Meaning they could revoke the license from a company if LGBTQ+ content is deemed as "obscene" (which has happened before with licensed D&D content), or "illegal" if it includes queer content in some countries or "Critical Race Theory" in some American states, or "harmful" as "this is harmful to our profits because it's selling too well". The new version of the OGL also maintained that the OGL v1.0a would be "de-authorized".

The other attempt to placate critics was releasing 58 pages of the SRD 5.1 (the document that outlines what parts of the rules for Dungeons & Dragons were considered Open Gaming Content under the OGL v1.0a) would be released under a Creative Commons license. The pages included rules for combat, ability checks, monster abilities, and a few other aspects of the game but would NOT include races/species, classes, backgrounds, spells, magic items, or monster stat blocks. Basically, these 58 pages were functionally useless on their own as they referenced rules that were not included in the CC-licensed content. It would be impossible to create adventures (no monsters or treasure) or sourcebooks (no classes, races/species, or spells) under this license, which makes up the vast majority of third-party OGL content for 5e. I should also note the SRD 5.1 is over 400 pages long, meaning they released just over 10% of the already-stripped-down rules.

The survey went out about a week ago and, on Thursday, D&D Beyond announced on Twitter the results were pretty obvious the OGL v1.2 wasn't helping matters. And on Friday, January 27, the company announced that the survey would be closed early (it was originally scheduled to run until February 7) because between 85% to over 90% of people participating responded negatively to the questions posed in the survey. In response, Wizards of the Coast stated:

The Open Gaming License v1.0a would be left in place completely untouched as it has been since 2000.

The SRD 5.1 would be released under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International.

This is not a "we will do it at some point in the future pinkie swear" thing. As of that posting, the SRD 5.1 is now available under the Creative Commons license.

So the situation is resolved. Not only did Wizards of the Coast back down from their plans, they released more of the game to the public than was originally released.

This won't stop Wizards of the Coast from trying something similar in the future, but they'll have to do it with an entirely new and incompatible edition of the game. Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition is now freed as the rules are permanently and irrevocably part of the Creative Commons with no legal method for Wizards of the Coast to take it back.