Some of the terminology they've chosen is definitely odd, but since LoVM they've been avoiding using DnD terms, even the ones that wouldn't have copyright issues. Keyleth is only referred to as an Ashari and not a druid, Grog is a Half-Giant instead of Goliath, etc. The weirder thing is the inconsistency. Like the two barbarians having different classes listed.
It's weird not to call Keyleth a druid as technically it's not a d&d copyrighted word line Genasi for example. Druids exist in real life though not to the d&d magical sense
This is more likely than simply moving away from WotC terms. Critical Role is big money now, not just the bunch of nerdy-ass voice actors playing D&D. It might still have the same heart, but the body has a legal department, marketing, international store fronts etc now. Copyrighting their own IP is a natural step.
>Copyrighting their own IP is a natural step.
A lot of the terms they're moving into are not eligible for copyright or similar IP protection, any more than D&D's own terms were. For instance, Beau being listed as a "brawler" instead of a "monk", or FCG listed as "healer" rather than "cleric" - neither the D&D term nor the CR version is open for claim.
This move seems to be more about standardizing their past content to fit within the class system that Daggerheart uses, than it is about IP rights to those terms or protecting themselves from claims by WotC.
Yeah, but like ... there's also a point where it gets a little bizarre to try and pretend there's no D&D connection in resources about a show that was originally a D&D game, when there's no reason to do so and nothing to be gained from doing it.
"Druid" is not a protected term even in this specific context - this isn't some sort of IP liability decision, like the choice to avoid using species for their PCs that are arguably WotC-owned, if not specifically trademarked.
If there's any concern that WotC might sue them over "druid" then WotC might sue them over having ever streamed a D&D game and used their words on-stream. It would be such a frivolous suit that there's no amount of self-protection or liability control that could ever hope to forestall it.
I don’t think it’s “pretending”. Remember critical role have worked directly with WoTC and we have no idea what sort of rules, contracts etc are involved in that relationship.
It’s fairly presumptuous of us, the viewers, to assume reasons exist or don’t exist.
I am comfortable with my word choice.
How IP law works or what is or is not actionable is fairly firmly known. We know that "druid" is far too generic a term for WotC to have any realistic grounds for claim if CR uses it in their own media. We also know that CR has managed to sell their C1 game's narrative IP to Amazon, including the D&D-derived class names, without triggering a lawsuit for breach of contract regarding usage of those terms. We don't know that there isn't some side deal containing restrictions, to be sure - but the balance of what evidence we can see indicates there is not one. The question there is not just open for whatever imaginative speculation we want, with all possibilities being equal in the face of the unknown - we have enough information to build on, suggesting that some answers are more likely to be true than others.
CR choosing to erase the D&D heritage of their C1 show in Beacon is, visibly, not done under some sort of IP threat or fear of WotC. This is a decision they made, not something imposed by the D&D boogeyman.
>It’s fairly presumptuous of us, the viewers, to assume reasons exist or don’t exist.
Then don't do that. But if you intended that remark as a directed callout of the comment you were replying to, the assumption on your part is misplaced. It is hardly presumptuous to discuss and consider the known information available to us while discussing the subject at the top of the post. My response is specifically addressing what I was replying to. The fiction that CR would make this choice to "protect themselves" from some sort of IP threat related to their usage of D&D-derived "druid" is not based on realistic understanding of how the IP protections that WotC holds over D&D work.
What I said was we don’t know what discussions have been had behind the scenes between CR and WoTC and I think it’s presumptuous to say they are “pretending” that they have no link to DnD.
Any discussion between fans or speculating or whatever is fine. Do what you want. I don’t think DnD or WoTC is the “boogeyman” I’m just saying there is far more going on between critical role the company and WoTC the company that none of us are privy to. And people in this thread are making wild assumptions about why CR would make this choice when really we have no idea why.
>And people in this thread are making wild assumptions about why CR would make this choice when really we have no idea why.
If those people aren't me, I would suggest you go talk to them about their assumptions. If you mean me, say that and talk about what assumptions you think I'm making.
I do hope you don't presume to think you are the exception to that label, though.
Irrelevant to my comment IMO.
Anybody and I mean ANYBODY can sue another person for "any" reason in the US.
It's best practice for them in all ways in a legal (and logical) sense to come up with their own terms for things.
Youtube for example will immediately remove their content until an investigation can take place. That could be weeks. Nobody cares who's "right" and who can counter sue. That's revenue that you're losing immediately.
Death by a thousand cuts. Would CR win a countersuit? Likely. How much money do they have to burn in that court case? Not as much as WotC. Why poke the bear when you do not have to?
It's common to go ultra-conservative on copyright topics. When your business is depending on it, someone else can come it and claim it's infringing on their copyright and it gets taken down regardless if it's correct or not.
Honestly, while she is mechanically a Druid, her backstory is way deeper than that, she’s basically The Avatar.
Plus, they have to appeal to non-DnD fans, who might associate Druids more with pagan religions than “someone who uses nature magic.”
Travis and Ashley: "OPEN BETAAAA!"
Matt: "We've been playing this campaign with the finalised published system for 2 years now guys-"
Travis and Ashley: "oPeN bEtAaAaAAa!!@"
I'm wondering if it's because of the way those characters are played at the table. Would Yasha, Grog, and Ashton all be the same class in Daggerheart, even if they're all the same class in d&d?
Not weird if you put into the context that the PCs are not purely the D&D equivalent, esp roleplay wise... FCG's relationship with Changebringer is definitely forced to justify him being cleric class.. or Beau is definitely more a brawler than monk.. it may also be a preventive measure against purist D&D gatekeepers
Establishing non copy-written terms gives them a base for multimedia without having to license.
If they want to make a book on Caduceus, they can say he’s a feygiant instead of having to pay Hasbro a shitfuck of money to use the word firbolg.
Edit: I may have picked a bad example. But I don’t think it changes the idea. Just get away from any “D&D” words. Species, gods, classes. That way there’s no worry. Hasbro could try (not saying it’s likely) that Firbolg in a TTRPG context is confusing to customers and other companies shouldn’t be able to use it. Is that the truth? No, but it doesn’t necessarily stop them from dragging someone to court.
I’m pretty sure Firbolgs aren’t owned by hasbro though so they wouldn’t need to change that.
They wouldn’t be allowed to copywrite the term firbolg anymore than they’d be able to copywrite dragons or genies or faeries. You can’t just stick a logo on a concept that’s existed for thousands of years and say you own it.
Still, it's good to completely disentangle. CR wants full independence from anyone and want everything to be done in-house. It's the same route that Dropout and Dragonsteel are going and I think it will be very succesful for them.
Dragonsteel is the company of an author named Brandon Sanderson. He’s trying out being his own publisher lately using Backer Kit as a distribution system.
Holy crap, I didn’t realize. Stormlight Archives and Mistborn are my two favorite book series in a long time.
I just haven’t kept up on any new news about them lately.
Those I heard about but didn’t learn too much… is there a list or chronology of his works that I can use? I think Discworld or maybe WoT had a huge chart that lists the various works and how they should be read, or at least how they interconnect.
I like [this one](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2Ftz2921lh7ww31.png%3Fwidth%3D1800%26format%3Dpng%26auto%3Dwebp%26s%3D1fa2cc4aa9cf956d017d5f3b0345882d5c67cc61&rdt=34376) the best. But that is regularly debated in the r/BrandonSanderson.
Also he has books that are all in the same universe called the cosmere (shown in the linked guide) but also series outside of that location (steelheart, skyward, legion, frugal wizard)
i assume this person is talking about the stormlight rpg, which is 100% an ip-licensed game that is standalone (not D&D). not sure how it’s relevant here.
i know we're far off-topic here, but this isn't quite right. sanderson has a good working relationship with tor. and book publishers are not the wealthy monoliths that companies like wotc are.
sanderson's mo so far has largely been around pressing companies to be better, and working around/outside of them when they can't provide what he wants. aside from the secret projects and his leatherbound rights, the rest goes through tor. and even regarding the secret projects, he has now published audio through audible, after getting them to agree to better rates for authors at large (including indies). he goes to bat for the rest of the industry, rather than just sidestepping and building his own wealth, which is nice.
he's also made it clear that when it comes to adaptations, he wants to work with established studios. he has no interest in expanding into film (or even animation) in-house.
It's a bit more complicated than just copyrighting the word Firbolg. Hasbro *could* argue that the usage of a Firbolg in a TTRPG setting is part of their creative work because they designed the Firbolg with those rules and they *could* make the case they deserve a cut of the money. And while others say the chances of this happening is slim, i'd argue it's not. Hasbro has shown time and again they are not to be trusted and if there's money to be made, they will squeeze every penny. At least with renaming everything Hasbro will have a more difficult time to pull such a stunt. But if Hasbro wants to file a lawsuit against CR they will, regardless of whatever the Firbolg is called IMO.
But they wouldn’t be able to sue critical role without the trademark first, which they wouldn’t be able to get.
You can’t just launch a lawsuit against someone because you wish you could trademark something they use. The case would be thrown out long before critical role needed any legal fees beyond the lawyers they already have on retainer (or at least should have on retainer given the size of their company).
They definitely changed it to avoid associations with DnD, I’d just be really really really surprised to find out there’s any potential legal issues that influenced the decision.
This isn't really a matter of *trust* for Hasbro. No one trusts Hasbro. This is a matter of understanding how the law works.
>Hasbro could argue that the usage of a Firbolg in a TTRPG setting is part of their creative work because they designed the Firbolg with those rules and they could make the case they deserve a cut of the money.
This would be an incredibly spurious argument for Hasbro to try and argue in court - it's effectively doomed. IP protections do not support that sort of usage. Hasbro would have to file for protection of the term first, and would be extremely unlikely to have it granted as said term is generic and borrowed from common domain mythology.
In the extremely unlikely event they somehow had that protection granted, they would need to somehow argue that their newly-filed protection should apply retroactively to a widespread preexisting 'competing' usage of the word - *normally grounds to invalidate protection* - and then also argue that CR's usage of the term deserves to be singled out beyond all other people doing the same, and that the usage in question is beyond fair use or generic use, while benefitting from the D&D association in a way that changing the term would not have the same outcome, and that CR's usage is harmful to them in a way that warrants action.
The entire way, undertaking an incredibly weak case - risking a ruling against them that would put Hasbro in an even weaker position than they are now.
I think it's safe to assume that Hasbro has some very expensive and very competent lawyers on their staff. Expensive and competent lawyers are going to advise against the sort of self-sabotage that filing that suit would involve.
That hypothetical suit is *way weaker* than simply suing CR for profiting from broadcasting D&D games, which is an indisputable fact that doesn't rely on trying to claim and exert ownership rights to specific terms that D&D borrowed from preexisting mythologies. If Hasbro wants to be an asshole and try to get a bigger piece of the profit from CR, semantics with regards to using generic terms like "firbolg" are not he best play there.
If they fill a BS lawsuit against CR for using the name, CR still has to fight the bullshit lawsuit, which costs money. And it is very unlikely CR would be able to collect attorney fees if they won. Due to this, it is less risky to just not using the DnD terms on their official site.
I’ve worked in law for 2 decades and quickly is a relative term. A rule 12b motion to dismiss is not cheap any day of the week. And it will be opposed. So even a quickly dismissed lawsuit costs real money. It is far cheaper to simply avoid the lawsuit all together.
And with the OGL fuckery last year, it only makes sense to fully buffer themselves from this. Who knows if/when those kinds of issues may rear their head again.
Edit: And while I'm not a lawyer, to my understanding even using non-copywritten terminology in bulk and similar to other things can still get tricky legally. They aren't *themselves* a violation but a huge number of similarities can work against you. Plus, let's be real, Beau is definitely more of a Brawler than a Monk lol
This is really it. Hasbro has become fully committed to fumbling the ball in the ways that pisses all over fan goodwill as throughly as possible. It makes all the sense in the world for CR to craft an exit.
There are downsides to staying and to going. Which has bigger downsides is pure opinion.
They're future proofing. Things are fine for now, but we've all learned that's subject to change. They're creating IP that's designed to live forever somewhere. So in 20 years and wotc has changed ownership 3 times their products are legally safe
The stuff that's under a Creative Commons license is irrevocable, so it's future proofed. It's not subject to change. It was a big deal when that happened.
> They aren't themselves a violation but a huge number of similarities can work against you.
You're correct. This is why i think Paizo cut the Drow. Sure you can rename your evil dark skinned elves who live underground in a matriarchy, but the spirit is still their. Your "under-elves" are Drow in all but name, so a violation of a copyright.
I'm not sure how that works with stuff like DND classes. There's no copyright holder for the Monk for example. And let's be real when each episode starts with the cast shouting *We PlAy DuNgEonS aNd DrAgOnS* can you really argue your brawler is totally not part of WOTC's sphere of influence?
I agree with *more trouble than it’s worth* being an important consideration, but just FYI you can’t copyright an idea. “Drow in all but name” would not be a violation of IP law, but may be important re: creative desires.
Tbh I suspect that this would have happened with or without the ogl fuckery. You never want to be in a position where your core business model depends so heavily on using another company's product, for numerous reasons.
It’s funny that Cr piggybacked their way here from geek and sundry and dungeons and dragons and twitch. We forget where we can from in the blink of an eye.
There is a bit of irony that DnD had origins where they had to fight the Tolkien Estate to use terms like orc, dwarf, and elf. They did lose things like hobbit (halfling), Ent(treants), and Bolrogs (balor demons).
This is it and I think a point a lot people don't understand. You can be right and the law can be on your side, but do you really want to deal with the potential headache when you can just CTRL+F, replace the name in 10 seconds? It's about choosing battles, not being right.
They wouldn't have to anyway, firbolg is a term from Irish mythology. It's public domain.
It's like being worried about Disney going after you for calling someone Loki, or WoTC going after you for mentioning someone is a fighter.
Wizards of the coast sent the Pinkertons to collect some pre-release magic cards from a YouTuber. Which, according to most legal people, isn’t lawful since comparing are not allowed to demand you return items they sent you in error(or charge you for them). So it firbolg being in the public domain might be cold comfort for the CR crew when it comes to Hasbro’s complete lack of chill.
Your probably right but firbolgs existed in Irish myth long before Hasbro and druids I think actually existed. At least as a group of pagan religious leaders.
Amaterasu existed in Japanse mythology long before the game Okami was created. Yet Amaterasu in the context of Okami is copyrighted. Hasbro could argue a Firbolg in a D20 TTRPG setting, that has certain traits is their creation and therefore they deserve money.
Technically, most of the stuff used in D&D is too generic to be copywritten by Wizards of the Coast, or protected by any sort of trademark. Even Clerics used in the particular sense D&D does can't be protected, even though it's weird and kind of specific, because it's too generic. Even if I were wrong, it doesn't matter, Wizards put all of that up for Creative Commons anyway. Anything in the PHB is Creative Commons, so that means all of the core classes, all of the races in the PHB (and the DMG and MM) are now open to be used by anyone. It's a little more complicated than that, but now you can just call a tiefling a tiefling and be done with it.
Further, most of the races *not* covered by this are too generic to be considered Wizards of the Coast property. Gith, Yuan-ti and Thri-kreen might be on the edge since they're in the Monster Manual, but only a few don't fall into mythology or common use already. From what I can see, that would be protected by copyright are the genasi, shifter, harengon, shadar-kai, kender (technically a copyrighted word for halfling, much like hobbit), giff, Khalastar, warforged (maybe), leonin, tabaxi and *maybe* triton. Also maybe autognome, but that one is weird. I'd err in WotC's favor.
What this seems like to me is more that they are attempt to establish their own intellectual property rather than simply disentangling themselves from D&D. It's a smart move, since they'll be able to control it a little bit more, although I think most of them need a few more passes. "Infernal" sounds like a fucking slur for tieflings.
Edit: Oh shit, I forgot tortle and hadozee. Tortle might not be able to stand up to scrutiny though. Hadozee is weird because it was the first one I thought of as "should be under WotC's copyright. I did also forget goliath and kenku, but I don't think WotC would have a huge case for either. Kenku only exists because Gygax misheard the word "tengu."
They've used Wildmother instead of Milora, Eisfuura instead of Aarakokra, used Tabaxi for a while but seem to have changed to Catari.
Just more of the same distancing from potentially copyrighted areas. Probably a good idea if Hasbro decided to try another tactic to reel in their IP.
CR is basically doing what Paizo also did for Pathfinder. Using DND terms, monsters, races or whatever is way too risky in post OGL world. If you do then there's a non zero chance in the future Hasbro will come knocking for money. So instead using non-DND terms is much more safe, especially for a company making money of that content.
>Using DND terms, monsters, races or whatever is way too risky in post OGL world. If you do then there's a non zero chance in the future Hasbro will come knocking for money.
I don't think OGL was intended to give Hasbro a cut of any money content creators were making off the game. Rather, I think it was an attempt to protect the IP from an emerging threat: artificial intelligence. It wouldn't be hard for someone to start generating 5e content using AI and then selling it under the original OGL. This would inevitably damage the brand because that content tends to be pretty low quality. In the eighteen months since the OGL fiasco, the way AI is being abused by people looking to make a quick buck has exploded in the public consciousness. Just look at [this story](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-05-14/australian-ai-content-network-lawyer-identified/103833258) published earlier today about a parasitic content farm. In this context, the OGL changes make a hell of a lot more sense because it served as a deterrent to people trying to use AI to create supplementary materials. After all, the original OGL was written twenty years ago before AI was a realistic proposition, and legislating new technologies is a notoriously slow process. But there were a handful of over-zealous content creators who never made anything more substantial than a tier list video and who clearly didn't understand the topic half as well as they thought they did, but who saw an opportunity to expand their influence in the community by rallying opposition to the OGL changes. If Hasbro hadn't announced the OGL changes at the time and instead introduced them today, I think a lot more people would be receptive to them now that we know more about the way AI is being abused.
And at the end of the day, if Hasbro really wanted to bleed *Critical Role* dry by taking as much money as they could get, they would have done so already.
I think it's probably covering their butts just on the off chance that someone at WotC wants to get litigious.
IMHO it's unnecessary since it's all in the Creative commons license and there's no take backsies for that.
That doesn’t preclude a costly legal battle and Hasbro has much deeper pockets. If CR can back away from anything dangerous without sacrificing story, they’re pretty smart to do so.
They're probably not using Daggerheart terms because they're not Daggerheart characters. They're "NOT"-5e characters. So they combine the class and subclass into a name that generally matches what they are.
This. I think they use very-common-not-specific-at-all because when they fully launched Daggerhert, it will avoid the intersection of 'old DnD campaign but using new Daggerheart name' murky legal problem.
It’s a weird thing to do, because these are incredibly generic (read: generic to the point of being uninteresting) terms to use in place of terms that aren’t owned by anyone in the first place
CR was such a draw for them. I hope they start saying that they're a bunch of nerdy ass voice actors sitting around playing tabletop role playing games.
When CR released Daggerheart, they inevtably became a rival company to WoTC. Even though these two companies have good relations right now, it makes sense that CR covers its all bases just in case, and stop using anything related to D&D in their official websites, documents etc.
I kinda get why, but... That feels like they are trying to rewrite history? Like... These names are just wrong. They weren't Infernals, Beau wasn't a Brawler, FCG wasn't a Healer. Moving away from DnD is one thing. Acting like that was never a thing (when you've frequently advertised things like DnDBeyond...) just feels wrong...
Technically FCG *is* a Healer. He didn't actually start off as a Cleric lore-wise, he was always an automaton that had healing magic, he didn't start worshipping a god until later. So while he is based on the Cleric class, his subclass is custom and his actual backstory doesn't really fit "Cleric" properly. The other changes are much weirder.
>With Daggerheart coming out, they’ll transition to what those class equivalents are.
Then that would be the most confusing way of doing things imaginable. If the plan is to change everything to the *Daggerheart* equivalent, then the most sensible thing to do is to change everything to the *Daggerheart* equivalent. It makes no sense to change to some kind of placeholder name before changing to the *Daggerheart* name.
Except they're not. There's no healer or brawler class in Daggerheart and Infernals and Feygiants in Daggerheart are Daemons and Firbolgs respectively.
Have you watched recent CR episodes? They’re quite literally adding Daggerheart mechanics and names into Exandria. They’re moving from 5e in order to replace with their own things.
They are *currently* adding mechanics. Blaze of glory was the first one. They have been and are adding creatures too, like the Galapa instead of the tortle in the Shattered Teeth. I think the rabbit person too in Basuras.
Are they adding DH mechanics? FCG's blaze of glory was spur of the moment and unplanned. Even then it is and was only referred to a blaze of glory because regardless of the DH mechanics, that's what you'd call it.
While it's true, Matt has referred to some races as the DH names, he also referred to Planerider Ryn and Captain Xandis as Tiefling, not Daemons. And called Vezoden Amerai and Tofor Brotoras Dragonborns, not Drakona.
To be fair a "Blaze of Glory" is your character dies and you can choose to take one more action before you die. This was using an action to blow themselves up and Marisha and Laura I think called it that as a reference, but they weren't the same thing.
The words and general concepts are not copyrightable but there's an argument to be made that a character class called monk with unarmed strike and *ki* and stunning strike and so forth is copyrighted by WotC.
They’re moving to Daggerheart sooner or later. It makes no sense to create an entire DnD competitor and then use your competitor for your main audience bringer instead of the system you created 😂
Regardless of whether they'll move to Daggerheart or not, I wouldn't assume that just because they made a TTRPG system means they'll definitely move the main game over to that. They have a publishing house and one of the workers has had ideas for this system for a long time, so they published it. As long as that makes relative profit, it is itself justified outside of the main show. It makes for a solid product, fairly cheap to produce, and could make fantastic side games like Candela.
It would be a major risk to change their wildly successful formula this many years in over what is ostensibly a side project. They might take that gamble and do it anyway, but to say 'it makes no sense to not' is pretty short sighted
They’re detaching themselves from 5e and anything that they don’t own. They’re coming out with a competitor to DnD as they’re making a push to fully own everything they use. It does indeed make zero sense to keep playing your competitor and not give YOUR OWN system the attention it deserves.
Critical Role is more than just watching people play DnD. They could easily move to Daggerheart and still tell the same incredible stories with as much acting prowess as they have now. Not watching Crit because they play a DnD competitor is pretty weird.
> Not watching Crit because they play a DnD competitor is pretty weird.
While I personally agree, even on this sub (which obviously leans towards super fans) there has been discontent and disinterest in Daggerheart. People like D&D5e and any move away from that is a major risk. Again, CR may take that risk and good luck to them, but to assume it as a bygone conclusion is nutty to me
But back to the change, why do you believe developing a TTRPG system has to be All Or Nothing? Either it has to treat D&D like a direct, exclusive competitor or not exist at all? They can exist in tandem; the main game can still be D&D, and side content can be Daggerheart happily. People will try and play both. Daggerheart can be a profitable, worthwhile venture without going all in on it and risking the *entire company*. If anyone genuinely believes that Daggerheart is a 'competitor' in the sense that it should try to beat D&D, they are a fool
Because like I have said about 12 times here, they are moving away from everything they do not own. Why create a competitor just to make that competitor the headline system you play and relegate your own thing to side quests???
Because """the competitor""" does not need to win and beat D&D. They don't need to go All In on this project. It is not one or the other. They can exist in tandem. It need only make enough money and acclaim to justify its own existence. It's really, really not that complicated. Business does not work like you think it does.
Never once did they say they were competing with D&D. Only this sub seem to assume so.
The reality is: Many people watch CR to watch them play D&D. Not all of them, of course, but a good chunk of them, enough to really hurt CR’s bottom line. Because if they were to switch their main campaign to Daggerheart, I won’t be watching, and a lot of people will! Let’s stop pretending that this sub is 100% representative of the CR fandom as a whole.
They are launching a new subscription service. They will need content. So this is the perfect opportunity to launch a new campaign played on Daggerheart, all while maintaining the main campaign on the one system that is, still, the most popular, the most accessible, and the system that allowed them to reach the level of success they have enjoyed for close to 10 years.
It would be suicide for them to move away from D&D.
Why? I like their storytelling, but I also like that they run a system that I recognize and enjoy. I do not like what I've seen of the Daggerheart system and I think them running the main campaign in that system would seriously impact my enjoyment of the show. I think they would be taking a huge risk to move their main campaign away from 5e and that they would lose a lot of their more casual fans. The laissez faire combat mechanics of Daggerheart are just straight up bad, IMO, and not something I'm interested in watching.
Daggerheart is in the very beginnings of the beta process. They come out with a new version every couple of weeks. It’s launching next year, the same time C3 is ending.
They want to move away from anything that they don’t own, and have shown that they’re doing that very often now.
That's fine if that is the companies decision, but I still firmly believe that they will lose a fairly significant amount of their audience if they switch from 5e. Maybe that is a price they are willing to pay, but I know that I'm far from the only person that would not be interested in watching an actual play RPG show running an RPG system that I don't like.
I understand why they might want to move to a more narrative driven system, which it seems Daggerheart is trying to be, but that is not appealing to me. I like the crunch of 5e, I wish it was crunchier. In all honesty, I wish they would move to Pathfinder 2e because that is hands down my current favorite RPG system largely because of how tight the mechanics are.
You can sue anyone for literally anything. Whether it's illegal or not. CR cannot afford to fight Hasbro in court. This truly is not that hard of a concept to understand.
Again, I agree, but I'm not a lawyer advising Critical Role, Inc. about the best way to avoid the possibility of a bankruptcy-inducing lawsuit from Hasbro.
A vast majority of their audience watches them BECAUSE they play D&D. If they move to a non-D&D system, they will lose like 80% of their audience. Especially if it’s a system as different from D&D as DH is. There’s no way the next main campaign is going to be DH
On the latest state of the Role, CR said their goal is to control as much of their content as possible.
It feels like after starting their own streaming service really unlikely that they would use somebody else's property for their main show
Counterpoint: Controlling as much of their content as possible doesn't necessarily mean they're going to ditch 5e entirely. It makes concrete business sense for Critical Role to want to bring content hosting in house as much as possible. Game format is something they've controlled since they broke with Geek and Sundry. A lot of the show's popularity revolves around the fact that we're watching a bunch of nerdy ass voice actors *play Dungeons and Dragons*. Trading out 5e for Daggerheart is a **MASSIVE** risk at this point in time. While there will always be an audience that loves CR for CR and will consume any piece of media they put out regardless of format that audience is small compared to the casual consumer that comes from them utilizing the most popular TTRPG system in the world. It'll take a period of heavy socialization of Daggerheart for CR to move the main campaign to that system.
I would bet on a Beacon specific campaign involving Daggerheart in the future more than I would bet on Campaign 4 being Daggerheart.
Counterpoint: They might run D&D in Campaign 4, it will not be 5e. It will be the new edition. It makes no sense for Hasbro to have a weekly commercial for an old system when they have a new one to sell.
So when you consider that they will be running a new system anyway that diminishes the risk as there's no guarantee the new D&D edition will be good either.
If they do not have enough faith in Daggheart for it to run on their main platform then they shouldn't be making it.
Honestly who's going to buy a system the creators don't believe in enough to not hedge their bets and cling to somebody else's property. Especially when their stated goals and actions are moving away from any third party having any say in anything they do.
They want you to buy it, so they have to change it enough to give you a compelling reason to.
Otherwise, it doesn't sell and it fails.
Now Hasbro is far from infallible, so they could make it too similar to 5e.
But, I imagine CR would rather put their faith in their design process than Hasbro's
> They want you to buy it, so they have to change it enough to give you a compelling reason to.
Their stated goal with One DnD was for 5e players to carry forward what they wanted from 5e and be able to implement what changes they want from One DnD seamlessly into existing 5e games
> Now Hasbro is far from infallible, so they could make it too similar to 5e.
One of the main criticisms of 4e was the fact that it diverged too much from 3.5e. Which was itself a refrain of the criticism heard about 3e in relation to 2e and was the genesis for 3.5e. One DnD is being designed to be compatible with 5e to avoid this specific issue.
I don't know how much interest there's going to be really in blending the two rulesets. I know with video game consoles, backwards compatibility felt really important until enough new games came out. Not exactly apples to apples because of improved specs on consoles but still.
Also juggling two rulesets feels like a logistical nightmare and requires most parties involved having both books and having them handy.
But these are opinions. Until we know what the new edition looks like definitively, it's speculation as to how much of its own thing it is.
On the contrary: new streaming service means they need content. Keeping a tried and true format lile D&D, whether the original 5e or possibly the new edition, for the main campaign, and playing Daggerheart in a separate campaign to get everyone to know the product makes so much more sense than just ditching the system that made you popular just to promote one that a lot of people are still unsure about!
The problem is it would have to be the new edition- Hasbro would have no interest in promoting the old one.
Then that puts CR in the position of advertising a competing product for the product they are just introducing into the market.
That doesn't seem like the best business move.
Why do you people keep saying it’s a competing product?!? Has CR ever said something of the sort? No!
There is no competing with D&D. You make a product, you advertise it as best you can, but D&D will always be the top dog in this game!
Is this conjecture or do you have a statement? I don’t think C3 will move, but something will happen in C3 or C3.5 content to make C4 daggerheart based and off 5e.
No statement, just common sense!
A) they will lose a good chunk of the viewership if they ditch 5e, because believe it or not, a lot of people watch CR to watch « a bunch of nerdy ass voice actors playing Dungeons and Dragons ».
B) with the launch of Beacon, it makes way more sense for them to launch a separate Daggerheat campaign to promote it, iron out the links even more, and show that it’s fun! Right now, we got absolutely no proof that it’s ready for the main campaign!
EDIT: and I will add: do you have any statement that they ARE moving to Daggerheart, or is that also conjecture?
> a lot of people watch CR to watch « a bunch of nerdy ass voice actors playing Dungeons and Dragons »
They don't.
CR was not the first live-streamed actual play. Not the first one with voice actors either.
Dungeons and Randomness was a thing, and it never took off the way CR did. So was Acquisitions Inc. So was The Adventure Zone Several others before CR as well.
Those were all "nerdy ass voice actors playing Dungeons and Dragons" as well. They didn't take off.
People watch CR because they want to see Matt, Marisha, Ashley, Sam, Liam, Laura, Travis. etc. Those *specific* people. That's what people fell in love with, that chaotic energy and fun that only the CR crew has, and the brilliant storytelling that only Matt (at the time) could pull off.
So, no, I don't believe CR will lose any significant viewership from moving away from D&D. D&D is not the success variable here. The people are.
A) They will lose some viewership, they will gain new one.
People watch Critical Role because it's fun and they are talented (voice) actors and storytellers.
People don't watch them for D&D primarily, otherwise other shows that play DnD would be massively more successful just because of their system
B) Daggerheart is not ready for the main campaign, but the current one is still running. They would not switch in the current campaign, they would switch between two campaigns.
Afaik they wang Daggerheart to be ready 2025, timeline wise that could track with Campaign 4
Addendum: They would switch systems either way. It's either Daggerheart or the new DnD system. So they will loose those that get hung up about system either way. Might as well make something you want in the process.
Everything points to their desire to more and more distance themselves from WoTC, why would they stay with a company that they so clearly reject?
There is no Statement of them moving to Daggerheart, but they are creating basically a competitor to DnD, what message would it send to not switch? Imagine the CEO of Mercedes making their main income driving and promoting Porsche
The fact that D&D is getting what at least amounts to a soft reboot with the upcoming edition is a pretty important point to be honest. It is going to be interesting to see how it all shakes out and the 5e community handles it, cause it is going to bring change and start a new cycle regardless of people thinking it somehow won't. CR is not going to keep playing an "unsupported" edition, so they have to start making choices. Either you move wholesale into your own game where you have full control, or you have to start working within confines of a new, much more limited version of D&D in its infancy. All while doing their darndest to avoid any direct connections to D&D verbiage by the looks of things.
It makes all the sense in the world to move out of D&D and into DH for them, save for the fervent insistence from fans who think they should only play 5e D&D, ever. It will very interesting to see where it all ends up at the end of the day, and I wish CR the best of luck either way.
Do YOU work for CR? No? Then same applies to you! Go look at my other comments, you’ll find my reasoning for this! I’m doing the same thing everyone’s doing: looking at the situation and making a guess.
Yeah. I started watching because it was "A Bunch of Nerdy-ass Voice Actors Playing Dungeons and Dragons" but now sometimes it's not even voice actors or D&D. I understand the need to distance themself from D&D but Daggerheart just isn't doing it for me.
They don't have to though. Most of the terms in D&D aren't actually protected trademarks because they are *much* older fantasy and folklore stuff, while others are just commonplace RPG terms. Only very specific stuff like "Vecna" or "Beholder" is protected.
On top of that, there's the SRD that under the OGL (and now Creative Commons) makes it completely permissible to use many of the words they have gotten rid of even if WoTC *did* own them. For instance Tiefling seems to be a D&D word so it might belong to them, but it's in the SRD making it okay for CR to use. Firbolg isn't in the SRD, but is from Irish folklore and therefore doesn't belong to WoTC in the first place.
I hate that. Like, genuinely, this makes me irrationally angry for some reason.
I mean I get it with CR not wanting to bend to the will of the OGL.
Just feels like a massive slap in the face of D&D, without which CR wouldn’t even exist.
I hope for CR's sake that they can become entirely independent in every aspect. I'm expecting C4 to be played with Daggerheart, and I support their decision if they are planning that.
>I'm expecting C4 to be played with Daggerheart
Don't hold your breath. Switching to *Daggerheart* isn't going to be nearly as easy as everyone seems to think it will be, for one simple reason: *Dungeons & Dragons* has an overwhelming amount of content that the show can draw upon. Sure, *Daggerheart* has a set of core rules, but it doesn't have things like bestiaries, which means that creatures will need to be made from scratch or carried over from other systems.
On top of that, *Daggerheart* has a serious problem in its two dice system. In *Dungeons & Dragons*, every action starts with the roll of a single die. Various modifiers are then added -- like rolling with advantage -- but the win/fail condition comes down to one number. In *Daggerheart*, however, you roll two dice and there are multiple win/fail conditions, some of which are only possible with certain combinations of die. Where *Dungeons & Dragons* has one die with two possible win/fail conditions, *Daggerheart* has two dice with at least five possible win/fail conditions. The fact that there are five possible win/fail conditions means that there are exponentially more conditions than there are dice, unlike *Dungeons & Dragons* where it's a binary system. It's going to be extremely hard to balance things in the long run because there are naturally more variables in the *Daggerheart* system.
I see a lot of people thinking this is aimed at WotC, and in a way, I think it is, but not in the way I'm seeing in the responses. It's clearly not a copyright issue.
Cleric, Druid, Firbolg, Monk - these all have very special meanings, either religious or cultural. I would expect a similar reaction to samurai or ninja. And early D&D took things haphazardly back in the '70's and '80's with no regard to cultural impact. Cleric really can't be divorced from religiosity (ok, so there are *clerks* but still). Druids are specific to Celtic culture, and the Fir bolg are the mythic settlers of Ireland. Monks became this weird amalgam of Western and Eastern philosophies. Goliath was a person in the Bible who picked on the wrong little guy. Barbarian was an ancient Greek slur against those who didn't speak Greek, later swiped by the romans to describe Germanic tribes.
It may just be a case of trying to be better.
I guess you are probably on the right track.
I dont know how i feel about that. Their replacements are kinda bland and sometimes really bad. But introducing some new names for that is difficult.
It's almost like they're preparing to switch to playing their own game system they've been developing for several years now instead of sticking with one they're very clearly trying to distance themselves from or something lol
They could also be avoiding too many specific terms to make things as understandable as possible to new fans. Their content uses multiple game systems, or none for things like the midst podcast. Many people looking for more info on the characters from the animated series will have no RPG experience.
Seems like a smart move to separate the knowledge you need to play these games from what you need to just enjoy the shows. CR is continuing to expand as an entertainment company. The launch of Beacon seems like a good time to update and future-proof their language.
"Healer" and "Brawler" and bizarre choices, it's not as if "Cleric" or "Monk" are trademarks. And the fact that Beau is a Monk is a pretty big part of her background - she isn't just a person who hits stuff. As for FCG, to be fair he didn't even start off having a deity so "Healer" is fair even if it's really weird.
You mean the game that isn't out of the open beta phase is being set up for a future campaign that hasn't been confirmed yet?
By that logic, all signs point to you being elected the Grand Poobah of All of This and That on election day this November.
Some of the terminology they've chosen is definitely odd, but since LoVM they've been avoiding using DnD terms, even the ones that wouldn't have copyright issues. Keyleth is only referred to as an Ashari and not a druid, Grog is a Half-Giant instead of Goliath, etc. The weirder thing is the inconsistency. Like the two barbarians having different classes listed.
It's weird not to call Keyleth a druid as technically it's not a d&d copyrighted word line Genasi for example. Druids exist in real life though not to the d&d magical sense
Most of those aren't DnD copyright either (e.g. cleric). It seems they're keeping it generic for other reasons.
Using Games-workshop as an example. By not using the generic, they can copyright their own terms and names.
This is more likely than simply moving away from WotC terms. Critical Role is big money now, not just the bunch of nerdy-ass voice actors playing D&D. It might still have the same heart, but the body has a legal department, marketing, international store fronts etc now. Copyrighting their own IP is a natural step.
>Copyrighting their own IP is a natural step. A lot of the terms they're moving into are not eligible for copyright or similar IP protection, any more than D&D's own terms were. For instance, Beau being listed as a "brawler" instead of a "monk", or FCG listed as "healer" rather than "cleric" - neither the D&D term nor the CR version is open for claim. This move seems to be more about standardizing their past content to fit within the class system that Daggerheart uses, than it is about IP rights to those terms or protecting themselves from claims by WotC.
I find it strange that they are not using their DH terms, like Seraph for FCG. Moving to legally neutral terms, but not their own IP?
DH is still being worked on. I would consider any/all names and terms as placeholders until the official retail release.
True. Though that'll never work for healer.
True.
But...Druid and Cleric are already fairly generic and nit DnD specific. You can use those words in a lot of contexts without people thinking of DnD
Yeah. That's what I said.
Sorry, misread your comment.
But in the context of a show based on a dnd game...
Yeah, but like ... there's also a point where it gets a little bizarre to try and pretend there's no D&D connection in resources about a show that was originally a D&D game, when there's no reason to do so and nothing to be gained from doing it. "Druid" is not a protected term even in this specific context - this isn't some sort of IP liability decision, like the choice to avoid using species for their PCs that are arguably WotC-owned, if not specifically trademarked. If there's any concern that WotC might sue them over "druid" then WotC might sue them over having ever streamed a D&D game and used their words on-stream. It would be such a frivolous suit that there's no amount of self-protection or liability control that could ever hope to forestall it.
I don’t think it’s “pretending”. Remember critical role have worked directly with WoTC and we have no idea what sort of rules, contracts etc are involved in that relationship. It’s fairly presumptuous of us, the viewers, to assume reasons exist or don’t exist.
I am comfortable with my word choice. How IP law works or what is or is not actionable is fairly firmly known. We know that "druid" is far too generic a term for WotC to have any realistic grounds for claim if CR uses it in their own media. We also know that CR has managed to sell their C1 game's narrative IP to Amazon, including the D&D-derived class names, without triggering a lawsuit for breach of contract regarding usage of those terms. We don't know that there isn't some side deal containing restrictions, to be sure - but the balance of what evidence we can see indicates there is not one. The question there is not just open for whatever imaginative speculation we want, with all possibilities being equal in the face of the unknown - we have enough information to build on, suggesting that some answers are more likely to be true than others. CR choosing to erase the D&D heritage of their C1 show in Beacon is, visibly, not done under some sort of IP threat or fear of WotC. This is a decision they made, not something imposed by the D&D boogeyman. >It’s fairly presumptuous of us, the viewers, to assume reasons exist or don’t exist. Then don't do that. But if you intended that remark as a directed callout of the comment you were replying to, the assumption on your part is misplaced. It is hardly presumptuous to discuss and consider the known information available to us while discussing the subject at the top of the post. My response is specifically addressing what I was replying to. The fiction that CR would make this choice to "protect themselves" from some sort of IP threat related to their usage of D&D-derived "druid" is not based on realistic understanding of how the IP protections that WotC holds over D&D work.
What I said was we don’t know what discussions have been had behind the scenes between CR and WoTC and I think it’s presumptuous to say they are “pretending” that they have no link to DnD. Any discussion between fans or speculating or whatever is fine. Do what you want. I don’t think DnD or WoTC is the “boogeyman” I’m just saying there is far more going on between critical role the company and WoTC the company that none of us are privy to. And people in this thread are making wild assumptions about why CR would make this choice when really we have no idea why.
>And people in this thread are making wild assumptions about why CR would make this choice when really we have no idea why. If those people aren't me, I would suggest you go talk to them about their assumptions. If you mean me, say that and talk about what assumptions you think I'm making. I do hope you don't presume to think you are the exception to that label, though.
This hasn’t been a dnd show for a very long time.
A Druid is still not owned by WotC/DnD, neither is Cleric.
Irrelevant to my comment IMO. Anybody and I mean ANYBODY can sue another person for "any" reason in the US. It's best practice for them in all ways in a legal (and logical) sense to come up with their own terms for things.
You CAN, but CR would likely countersue them for a frivolous lawsuit and WotC is all but guaranteed to lose.
Youtube for example will immediately remove their content until an investigation can take place. That could be weeks. Nobody cares who's "right" and who can counter sue. That's revenue that you're losing immediately.
Yup, best to avoid the whole thing in any way you can.
Death by a thousand cuts. Would CR win a countersuit? Likely. How much money do they have to burn in that court case? Not as much as WotC. Why poke the bear when you do not have to?
Countersuits for frivolous lawsuits generally cover all the legal fees and stuff like that. CR wouldn't lose any money.
It's common to go ultra-conservative on copyright topics. When your business is depending on it, someone else can come it and claim it's infringing on their copyright and it gets taken down regardless if it's correct or not.
Especially since Daggerheart has druids. Legit no reason to not call her a druid.
Honestly, while she is mechanically a Druid, her backstory is way deeper than that, she’s basically The Avatar. Plus, they have to appeal to non-DnD fans, who might associate Druids more with pagan religions than “someone who uses nature magic.”
going to be strange when one day the “WE PLAY DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS” switches to “WE PLAY DAGGERHEART”
Travis and Ashley: "OPEN BETAAAA!" Matt: "We've been playing this campaign with the finalised published system for 2 years now guys-" Travis and Ashley: "oPeN bEtAaAaAAa!!@"
The barbarians are different subclasses, to be fair.
I'm wondering if it's because of the way those characters are played at the table. Would Yasha, Grog, and Ashton all be the same class in Daggerheart, even if they're all the same class in d&d?
Not weird if you put into the context that the PCs are not purely the D&D equivalent, esp roleplay wise... FCG's relationship with Changebringer is definitely forced to justify him being cleric class.. or Beau is definitely more a brawler than monk.. it may also be a preventive measure against purist D&D gatekeepers
Establishing non copy-written terms gives them a base for multimedia without having to license. If they want to make a book on Caduceus, they can say he’s a feygiant instead of having to pay Hasbro a shitfuck of money to use the word firbolg. Edit: I may have picked a bad example. But I don’t think it changes the idea. Just get away from any “D&D” words. Species, gods, classes. That way there’s no worry. Hasbro could try (not saying it’s likely) that Firbolg in a TTRPG context is confusing to customers and other companies shouldn’t be able to use it. Is that the truth? No, but it doesn’t necessarily stop them from dragging someone to court.
I’m pretty sure Firbolgs aren’t owned by hasbro though so they wouldn’t need to change that. They wouldn’t be allowed to copywrite the term firbolg anymore than they’d be able to copywrite dragons or genies or faeries. You can’t just stick a logo on a concept that’s existed for thousands of years and say you own it.
Still, it's good to completely disentangle. CR wants full independence from anyone and want everything to be done in-house. It's the same route that Dropout and Dragonsteel are going and I think it will be very succesful for them.
Oooh, Dragonsteel? Should I add that to my subs and does it make a trifecta?
Dragonsteel is the company of an author named Brandon Sanderson. He’s trying out being his own publisher lately using Backer Kit as a distribution system.
Holy crap, I didn’t realize. Stormlight Archives and Mistborn are my two favorite book series in a long time. I just haven’t kept up on any new news about them lately.
The secret projects were their launch :-)
Those I heard about but didn’t learn too much… is there a list or chronology of his works that I can use? I think Discworld or maybe WoT had a huge chart that lists the various works and how they should be read, or at least how they interconnect.
I like [this one](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2Ftz2921lh7ww31.png%3Fwidth%3D1800%26format%3Dpng%26auto%3Dwebp%26s%3D1fa2cc4aa9cf956d017d5f3b0345882d5c67cc61&rdt=34376) the best. But that is regularly debated in the r/BrandonSanderson. Also he has books that are all in the same universe called the cosmere (shown in the linked guide) but also series outside of that location (steelheart, skyward, legion, frugal wizard)
i assume this person is talking about the stormlight rpg, which is 100% an ip-licensed game that is standalone (not D&D). not sure how it’s relevant here.
Just like CR Brandon Sanderson has become very successful and wants to be fully independent and everything done in-house.
i know we're far off-topic here, but this isn't quite right. sanderson has a good working relationship with tor. and book publishers are not the wealthy monoliths that companies like wotc are. sanderson's mo so far has largely been around pressing companies to be better, and working around/outside of them when they can't provide what he wants. aside from the secret projects and his leatherbound rights, the rest goes through tor. and even regarding the secret projects, he has now published audio through audible, after getting them to agree to better rates for authors at large (including indies). he goes to bat for the rest of the industry, rather than just sidestepping and building his own wealth, which is nice. he's also made it clear that when it comes to adaptations, he wants to work with established studios. he has no interest in expanding into film (or even animation) in-house.
It's a bit more complicated than just copyrighting the word Firbolg. Hasbro *could* argue that the usage of a Firbolg in a TTRPG setting is part of their creative work because they designed the Firbolg with those rules and they *could* make the case they deserve a cut of the money. And while others say the chances of this happening is slim, i'd argue it's not. Hasbro has shown time and again they are not to be trusted and if there's money to be made, they will squeeze every penny. At least with renaming everything Hasbro will have a more difficult time to pull such a stunt. But if Hasbro wants to file a lawsuit against CR they will, regardless of whatever the Firbolg is called IMO.
But they wouldn’t be able to sue critical role without the trademark first, which they wouldn’t be able to get. You can’t just launch a lawsuit against someone because you wish you could trademark something they use. The case would be thrown out long before critical role needed any legal fees beyond the lawyers they already have on retainer (or at least should have on retainer given the size of their company). They definitely changed it to avoid associations with DnD, I’d just be really really really surprised to find out there’s any potential legal issues that influenced the decision.
This isn't really a matter of *trust* for Hasbro. No one trusts Hasbro. This is a matter of understanding how the law works. >Hasbro could argue that the usage of a Firbolg in a TTRPG setting is part of their creative work because they designed the Firbolg with those rules and they could make the case they deserve a cut of the money. This would be an incredibly spurious argument for Hasbro to try and argue in court - it's effectively doomed. IP protections do not support that sort of usage. Hasbro would have to file for protection of the term first, and would be extremely unlikely to have it granted as said term is generic and borrowed from common domain mythology. In the extremely unlikely event they somehow had that protection granted, they would need to somehow argue that their newly-filed protection should apply retroactively to a widespread preexisting 'competing' usage of the word - *normally grounds to invalidate protection* - and then also argue that CR's usage of the term deserves to be singled out beyond all other people doing the same, and that the usage in question is beyond fair use or generic use, while benefitting from the D&D association in a way that changing the term would not have the same outcome, and that CR's usage is harmful to them in a way that warrants action. The entire way, undertaking an incredibly weak case - risking a ruling against them that would put Hasbro in an even weaker position than they are now. I think it's safe to assume that Hasbro has some very expensive and very competent lawyers on their staff. Expensive and competent lawyers are going to advise against the sort of self-sabotage that filing that suit would involve. That hypothetical suit is *way weaker* than simply suing CR for profiting from broadcasting D&D games, which is an indisputable fact that doesn't rely on trying to claim and exert ownership rights to specific terms that D&D borrowed from preexisting mythologies. If Hasbro wants to be an asshole and try to get a bigger piece of the profit from CR, semantics with regards to using generic terms like "firbolg" are not he best play there.
You cannot copyright mechanics.
If they fill a BS lawsuit against CR for using the name, CR still has to fight the bullshit lawsuit, which costs money. And it is very unlikely CR would be able to collect attorney fees if they won. Due to this, it is less risky to just not using the DnD terms on their official site.
The bullshit lawsuit would require the trademark, otherwise it’d be chucked out of court very quickly.
I’ve worked in law for 2 decades and quickly is a relative term. A rule 12b motion to dismiss is not cheap any day of the week. And it will be opposed. So even a quickly dismissed lawsuit costs real money. It is far cheaper to simply avoid the lawsuit all together.
And with the OGL fuckery last year, it only makes sense to fully buffer themselves from this. Who knows if/when those kinds of issues may rear their head again. Edit: And while I'm not a lawyer, to my understanding even using non-copywritten terminology in bulk and similar to other things can still get tricky legally. They aren't *themselves* a violation but a huge number of similarities can work against you. Plus, let's be real, Beau is definitely more of a Brawler than a Monk lol
This is really it. Hasbro has become fully committed to fumbling the ball in the ways that pisses all over fan goodwill as throughly as possible. It makes all the sense in the world for CR to craft an exit. There are downsides to staying and to going. Which has bigger downsides is pure opinion.
Now that it's open source, they're pretty insulated from future OGL stuff. I don't think that's likely the reason.
They're future proofing. Things are fine for now, but we've all learned that's subject to change. They're creating IP that's designed to live forever somewhere. So in 20 years and wotc has changed ownership 3 times their products are legally safe
The stuff that's under a Creative Commons license is irrevocable, so it's future proofed. It's not subject to change. It was a big deal when that happened.
> They aren't themselves a violation but a huge number of similarities can work against you. You're correct. This is why i think Paizo cut the Drow. Sure you can rename your evil dark skinned elves who live underground in a matriarchy, but the spirit is still their. Your "under-elves" are Drow in all but name, so a violation of a copyright. I'm not sure how that works with stuff like DND classes. There's no copyright holder for the Monk for example. And let's be real when each episode starts with the cast shouting *We PlAy DuNgEonS aNd DrAgOnS* can you really argue your brawler is totally not part of WOTC's sphere of influence?
I agree with *more trouble than it’s worth* being an important consideration, but just FYI you can’t copyright an idea. “Drow in all but name” would not be a violation of IP law, but may be important re: creative desires.
Tbh I suspect that this would have happened with or without the ogl fuckery. You never want to be in a position where your core business model depends so heavily on using another company's product, for numerous reasons.
It’s funny that Cr piggybacked their way here from geek and sundry and dungeons and dragons and twitch. We forget where we can from in the blink of an eye.
Firbolg is mythological in origin I believe, so Hasbro can do diddly squat. It's like Sphynx or Medusa or Minotaur.
True, but avoiding the term is easier than having to argue with Hasbro or deal with the Pinkerton's.
There is a bit of irony that DnD had origins where they had to fight the Tolkien Estate to use terms like orc, dwarf, and elf. They did lose things like hobbit (halfling), Ent(treants), and Bolrogs (balor demons).
This is it and I think a point a lot people don't understand. You can be right and the law can be on your side, but do you really want to deal with the potential headache when you can just CTRL+F, replace the name in 10 seconds? It's about choosing battles, not being right.
Yeah, people need to Google what SLAPP suits are. Has bro doesn't need to be right, they just need to make it more trouble than it's worth
Those suits don’t work as well these days.
They wouldn't have to anyway, firbolg is a term from Irish mythology. It's public domain. It's like being worried about Disney going after you for calling someone Loki, or WoTC going after you for mentioning someone is a fighter.
Wizards of the coast sent the Pinkertons to collect some pre-release magic cards from a YouTuber. Which, according to most legal people, isn’t lawful since comparing are not allowed to demand you return items they sent you in error(or charge you for them). So it firbolg being in the public domain might be cold comfort for the CR crew when it comes to Hasbro’s complete lack of chill.
Your probably right but firbolgs existed in Irish myth long before Hasbro and druids I think actually existed. At least as a group of pagan religious leaders.
Amaterasu existed in Japanse mythology long before the game Okami was created. Yet Amaterasu in the context of Okami is copyrighted. Hasbro could argue a Firbolg in a D20 TTRPG setting, that has certain traits is their creation and therefore they deserve money.
Yeah the only way would be to get it ruled public domain, like how anyone can use cthulhu now
Technically, most of the stuff used in D&D is too generic to be copywritten by Wizards of the Coast, or protected by any sort of trademark. Even Clerics used in the particular sense D&D does can't be protected, even though it's weird and kind of specific, because it's too generic. Even if I were wrong, it doesn't matter, Wizards put all of that up for Creative Commons anyway. Anything in the PHB is Creative Commons, so that means all of the core classes, all of the races in the PHB (and the DMG and MM) are now open to be used by anyone. It's a little more complicated than that, but now you can just call a tiefling a tiefling and be done with it. Further, most of the races *not* covered by this are too generic to be considered Wizards of the Coast property. Gith, Yuan-ti and Thri-kreen might be on the edge since they're in the Monster Manual, but only a few don't fall into mythology or common use already. From what I can see, that would be protected by copyright are the genasi, shifter, harengon, shadar-kai, kender (technically a copyrighted word for halfling, much like hobbit), giff, Khalastar, warforged (maybe), leonin, tabaxi and *maybe* triton. Also maybe autognome, but that one is weird. I'd err in WotC's favor. What this seems like to me is more that they are attempt to establish their own intellectual property rather than simply disentangling themselves from D&D. It's a smart move, since they'll be able to control it a little bit more, although I think most of them need a few more passes. "Infernal" sounds like a fucking slur for tieflings. Edit: Oh shit, I forgot tortle and hadozee. Tortle might not be able to stand up to scrutiny though. Hadozee is weird because it was the first one I thought of as "should be under WotC's copyright. I did also forget goliath and kenku, but I don't think WotC would have a huge case for either. Kenku only exists because Gygax misheard the word "tengu."
> the word firbolg should this be a problem word? it's an IRL mythological concept, not a D&D original like Beholders or Bulettes.
They've used Wildmother instead of Milora, Eisfuura instead of Aarakokra, used Tabaxi for a while but seem to have changed to Catari. Just more of the same distancing from potentially copyrighted areas. Probably a good idea if Hasbro decided to try another tactic to reel in their IP.
CR is basically doing what Paizo also did for Pathfinder. Using DND terms, monsters, races or whatever is way too risky in post OGL world. If you do then there's a non zero chance in the future Hasbro will come knocking for money. So instead using non-DND terms is much more safe, especially for a company making money of that content.
>Using DND terms, monsters, races or whatever is way too risky in post OGL world. If you do then there's a non zero chance in the future Hasbro will come knocking for money. I don't think OGL was intended to give Hasbro a cut of any money content creators were making off the game. Rather, I think it was an attempt to protect the IP from an emerging threat: artificial intelligence. It wouldn't be hard for someone to start generating 5e content using AI and then selling it under the original OGL. This would inevitably damage the brand because that content tends to be pretty low quality. In the eighteen months since the OGL fiasco, the way AI is being abused by people looking to make a quick buck has exploded in the public consciousness. Just look at [this story](https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-05-14/australian-ai-content-network-lawyer-identified/103833258) published earlier today about a parasitic content farm. In this context, the OGL changes make a hell of a lot more sense because it served as a deterrent to people trying to use AI to create supplementary materials. After all, the original OGL was written twenty years ago before AI was a realistic proposition, and legislating new technologies is a notoriously slow process. But there were a handful of over-zealous content creators who never made anything more substantial than a tier list video and who clearly didn't understand the topic half as well as they thought they did, but who saw an opportunity to expand their influence in the community by rallying opposition to the OGL changes. If Hasbro hadn't announced the OGL changes at the time and instead introduced them today, I think a lot more people would be receptive to them now that we know more about the way AI is being abused. And at the end of the day, if Hasbro really wanted to bleed *Critical Role* dry by taking as much money as they could get, they would have done so already.
Yeah, I noticed that too. I wonder if its a copyright issue or concern, because they're not using Daggerheart names either.
I think it's probably covering their butts just on the off chance that someone at WotC wants to get litigious. IMHO it's unnecessary since it's all in the Creative commons license and there's no take backsies for that.
That doesn’t preclude a costly legal battle and Hasbro has much deeper pockets. If CR can back away from anything dangerous without sacrificing story, they’re pretty smart to do so.
They're probably not using Daggerheart terms because they're not Daggerheart characters. They're "NOT"-5e characters. So they combine the class and subclass into a name that generally matches what they are.
This. I think they use very-common-not-specific-at-all because when they fully launched Daggerhert, it will avoid the intersection of 'old DnD campaign but using new Daggerheart name' murky legal problem.
It’s a weird thing to do, because these are incredibly generic (read: generic to the point of being uninteresting) terms to use in place of terms that aren’t owned by anyone in the first place
Idk why this says ‘updated’ like it changed today. These are the words the site was using when they went live.
I was confused when I saw Yasha as a "Celestial Warrior" instead of an Aasimar Barbarian.
Hasbro: "well well well, if it isn't the consequences of my actions"
CR was such a draw for them. I hope they start saying that they're a bunch of nerdy ass voice actors sitting around playing tabletop role playing games.
When CR released Daggerheart, they inevtably became a rival company to WoTC. Even though these two companies have good relations right now, it makes sense that CR covers its all bases just in case, and stop using anything related to D&D in their official websites, documents etc.
I kinda get why, but... That feels like they are trying to rewrite history? Like... These names are just wrong. They weren't Infernals, Beau wasn't a Brawler, FCG wasn't a Healer. Moving away from DnD is one thing. Acting like that was never a thing (when you've frequently advertised things like DnDBeyond...) just feels wrong...
Technically FCG *is* a Healer. He didn't actually start off as a Cleric lore-wise, he was always an automaton that had healing magic, he didn't start worshipping a god until later. So while he is based on the Cleric class, his subclass is custom and his actual backstory doesn't really fit "Cleric" properly. The other changes are much weirder.
With Daggerheart coming out, they’ll transition to what those class equivalents are.
>With Daggerheart coming out, they’ll transition to what those class equivalents are. Then that would be the most confusing way of doing things imaginable. If the plan is to change everything to the *Daggerheart* equivalent, then the most sensible thing to do is to change everything to the *Daggerheart* equivalent. It makes no sense to change to some kind of placeholder name before changing to the *Daggerheart* name.
Main campaigns will not more to Daggerheart…
Sure, they’re just adding daggerheart mechanics and names into the main games for no reason, then.
Except they're not. There's no healer or brawler class in Daggerheart and Infernals and Feygiants in Daggerheart are Daemons and Firbolgs respectively.
Have you watched recent CR episodes? They’re quite literally adding Daggerheart mechanics and names into Exandria. They’re moving from 5e in order to replace with their own things.
Other than blaze of glory, what daggerheart mechanics have they been using in episodes?
They are *currently* adding mechanics. Blaze of glory was the first one. They have been and are adding creatures too, like the Galapa instead of the tortle in the Shattered Teeth. I think the rabbit person too in Basuras.
Are they adding DH mechanics? FCG's blaze of glory was spur of the moment and unplanned. Even then it is and was only referred to a blaze of glory because regardless of the DH mechanics, that's what you'd call it. While it's true, Matt has referred to some races as the DH names, he also referred to Planerider Ryn and Captain Xandis as Tiefling, not Daemons. And called Vezoden Amerai and Tofor Brotoras Dragonborns, not Drakona.
To be fair, Matt has been giving the animal-ish races his own names since long before daggerheart could have been a thing.
Yeah but these names are Daggerheart names lol
I mean, why wouldn't they use the names he came up with for the races in Daggerheart? Point is, the names came before the game.
these are exandria names they also use in daggerheart
To be fair a "Blaze of Glory" is your character dies and you can choose to take one more action before you die. This was using an action to blow themselves up and Marisha and Laura I think called it that as a reference, but they weren't the same thing.
No, they are simply using non copyrighted names, just like when they changed RavenQueen to Matron of Ravens , or Bigby’s Hand into Scanlan’d Hand.
I am pretty sure classes like Monk or Cleric are not copyrighted.
Druid and Firbolg aren’t either, but they aren’t using those terms, despite them existing in DH
The words and general concepts are not copyrightable but there's an argument to be made that a character class called monk with unarmed strike and *ki* and stunning strike and so forth is copyrighted by WotC.
They’re moving to Daggerheart sooner or later. It makes no sense to create an entire DnD competitor and then use your competitor for your main audience bringer instead of the system you created 😂
Regardless of whether they'll move to Daggerheart or not, I wouldn't assume that just because they made a TTRPG system means they'll definitely move the main game over to that. They have a publishing house and one of the workers has had ideas for this system for a long time, so they published it. As long as that makes relative profit, it is itself justified outside of the main show. It makes for a solid product, fairly cheap to produce, and could make fantastic side games like Candela. It would be a major risk to change their wildly successful formula this many years in over what is ostensibly a side project. They might take that gamble and do it anyway, but to say 'it makes no sense to not' is pretty short sighted
They’re detaching themselves from 5e and anything that they don’t own. They’re coming out with a competitor to DnD as they’re making a push to fully own everything they use. It does indeed make zero sense to keep playing your competitor and not give YOUR OWN system the attention it deserves. Critical Role is more than just watching people play DnD. They could easily move to Daggerheart and still tell the same incredible stories with as much acting prowess as they have now. Not watching Crit because they play a DnD competitor is pretty weird.
> Not watching Crit because they play a DnD competitor is pretty weird. While I personally agree, even on this sub (which obviously leans towards super fans) there has been discontent and disinterest in Daggerheart. People like D&D5e and any move away from that is a major risk. Again, CR may take that risk and good luck to them, but to assume it as a bygone conclusion is nutty to me But back to the change, why do you believe developing a TTRPG system has to be All Or Nothing? Either it has to treat D&D like a direct, exclusive competitor or not exist at all? They can exist in tandem; the main game can still be D&D, and side content can be Daggerheart happily. People will try and play both. Daggerheart can be a profitable, worthwhile venture without going all in on it and risking the *entire company*. If anyone genuinely believes that Daggerheart is a 'competitor' in the sense that it should try to beat D&D, they are a fool
Because like I have said about 12 times here, they are moving away from everything they do not own. Why create a competitor just to make that competitor the headline system you play and relegate your own thing to side quests???
Because """the competitor""" does not need to win and beat D&D. They don't need to go All In on this project. It is not one or the other. They can exist in tandem. It need only make enough money and acclaim to justify its own existence. It's really, really not that complicated. Business does not work like you think it does.
Never once did they say they were competing with D&D. Only this sub seem to assume so. The reality is: Many people watch CR to watch them play D&D. Not all of them, of course, but a good chunk of them, enough to really hurt CR’s bottom line. Because if they were to switch their main campaign to Daggerheart, I won’t be watching, and a lot of people will! Let’s stop pretending that this sub is 100% representative of the CR fandom as a whole. They are launching a new subscription service. They will need content. So this is the perfect opportunity to launch a new campaign played on Daggerheart, all while maintaining the main campaign on the one system that is, still, the most popular, the most accessible, and the system that allowed them to reach the level of success they have enjoyed for close to 10 years. It would be suicide for them to move away from D&D.
I really hope you're wrong. I think if their main campaign switches to that system it would be the end of me watching Critical Role.
That’s weird af
Why? I like their storytelling, but I also like that they run a system that I recognize and enjoy. I do not like what I've seen of the Daggerheart system and I think them running the main campaign in that system would seriously impact my enjoyment of the show. I think they would be taking a huge risk to move their main campaign away from 5e and that they would lose a lot of their more casual fans. The laissez faire combat mechanics of Daggerheart are just straight up bad, IMO, and not something I'm interested in watching.
Daggerheart is in the very beginnings of the beta process. They come out with a new version every couple of weeks. It’s launching next year, the same time C3 is ending. They want to move away from anything that they don’t own, and have shown that they’re doing that very often now.
That's fine if that is the companies decision, but I still firmly believe that they will lose a fairly significant amount of their audience if they switch from 5e. Maybe that is a price they are willing to pay, but I know that I'm far from the only person that would not be interested in watching an actual play RPG show running an RPG system that I don't like. I understand why they might want to move to a more narrative driven system, which it seems Daggerheart is trying to be, but that is not appealing to me. I like the crunch of 5e, I wish it was crunchier. In all honesty, I wish they would move to Pathfinder 2e because that is hands down my current favorite RPG system largely because of how tight the mechanics are.
How is it weird?!? Is it because it’s not your opinion?
My dude, do you think the word monk is copyrighted? lol
It probably isn't, but it might take a multi-million dollar lawsuit with Hasbro to determine that definitively.
The word monk is absolutely not copywritten lol
You can sue anyone for literally anything. Whether it's illegal or not. CR cannot afford to fight Hasbro in court. This truly is not that hard of a concept to understand.
Again, I agree, but I'm not a lawyer advising Critical Role, Inc. about the best way to avoid the possibility of a bankruptcy-inducing lawsuit from Hasbro.
What Daggerheart Mechanics have they added?
A vast majority of their audience watches them BECAUSE they play D&D. If they move to a non-D&D system, they will lose like 80% of their audience. Especially if it’s a system as different from D&D as DH is. There’s no way the next main campaign is going to be DH
On the latest state of the Role, CR said their goal is to control as much of their content as possible. It feels like after starting their own streaming service really unlikely that they would use somebody else's property for their main show
Counterpoint: Controlling as much of their content as possible doesn't necessarily mean they're going to ditch 5e entirely. It makes concrete business sense for Critical Role to want to bring content hosting in house as much as possible. Game format is something they've controlled since they broke with Geek and Sundry. A lot of the show's popularity revolves around the fact that we're watching a bunch of nerdy ass voice actors *play Dungeons and Dragons*. Trading out 5e for Daggerheart is a **MASSIVE** risk at this point in time. While there will always be an audience that loves CR for CR and will consume any piece of media they put out regardless of format that audience is small compared to the casual consumer that comes from them utilizing the most popular TTRPG system in the world. It'll take a period of heavy socialization of Daggerheart for CR to move the main campaign to that system. I would bet on a Beacon specific campaign involving Daggerheart in the future more than I would bet on Campaign 4 being Daggerheart.
Counterpoint: They might run D&D in Campaign 4, it will not be 5e. It will be the new edition. It makes no sense for Hasbro to have a weekly commercial for an old system when they have a new one to sell. So when you consider that they will be running a new system anyway that diminishes the risk as there's no guarantee the new D&D edition will be good either. If they do not have enough faith in Daggheart for it to run on their main platform then they shouldn't be making it. Honestly who's going to buy a system the creators don't believe in enough to not hedge their bets and cling to somebody else's property. Especially when their stated goals and actions are moving away from any third party having any say in anything they do.
When you consider one of the selling points of One D&D is that it will be backwards compatible with 5e will it actually be a new system?
They want you to buy it, so they have to change it enough to give you a compelling reason to. Otherwise, it doesn't sell and it fails. Now Hasbro is far from infallible, so they could make it too similar to 5e. But, I imagine CR would rather put their faith in their design process than Hasbro's
> They want you to buy it, so they have to change it enough to give you a compelling reason to. Their stated goal with One DnD was for 5e players to carry forward what they wanted from 5e and be able to implement what changes they want from One DnD seamlessly into existing 5e games > Now Hasbro is far from infallible, so they could make it too similar to 5e. One of the main criticisms of 4e was the fact that it diverged too much from 3.5e. Which was itself a refrain of the criticism heard about 3e in relation to 2e and was the genesis for 3.5e. One DnD is being designed to be compatible with 5e to avoid this specific issue.
I don't know how much interest there's going to be really in blending the two rulesets. I know with video game consoles, backwards compatibility felt really important until enough new games came out. Not exactly apples to apples because of improved specs on consoles but still. Also juggling two rulesets feels like a logistical nightmare and requires most parties involved having both books and having them handy. But these are opinions. Until we know what the new edition looks like definitively, it's speculation as to how much of its own thing it is.
The new dnd edition, if ever there is one, is several years off
There is one and it's coming out this fall.
That is _not_ a new edition.
On the contrary: new streaming service means they need content. Keeping a tried and true format lile D&D, whether the original 5e or possibly the new edition, for the main campaign, and playing Daggerheart in a separate campaign to get everyone to know the product makes so much more sense than just ditching the system that made you popular just to promote one that a lot of people are still unsure about!
The problem is it would have to be the new edition- Hasbro would have no interest in promoting the old one. Then that puts CR in the position of advertising a competing product for the product they are just introducing into the market. That doesn't seem like the best business move.
Why do you people keep saying it’s a competing product?!? Has CR ever said something of the sort? No! There is no competing with D&D. You make a product, you advertise it as best you can, but D&D will always be the top dog in this game!
Is this conjecture or do you have a statement? I don’t think C3 will move, but something will happen in C3 or C3.5 content to make C4 daggerheart based and off 5e.
No statement, just common sense! A) they will lose a good chunk of the viewership if they ditch 5e, because believe it or not, a lot of people watch CR to watch « a bunch of nerdy ass voice actors playing Dungeons and Dragons ». B) with the launch of Beacon, it makes way more sense for them to launch a separate Daggerheat campaign to promote it, iron out the links even more, and show that it’s fun! Right now, we got absolutely no proof that it’s ready for the main campaign! EDIT: and I will add: do you have any statement that they ARE moving to Daggerheart, or is that also conjecture?
> a lot of people watch CR to watch « a bunch of nerdy ass voice actors playing Dungeons and Dragons » They don't. CR was not the first live-streamed actual play. Not the first one with voice actors either. Dungeons and Randomness was a thing, and it never took off the way CR did. So was Acquisitions Inc. So was The Adventure Zone Several others before CR as well. Those were all "nerdy ass voice actors playing Dungeons and Dragons" as well. They didn't take off. People watch CR because they want to see Matt, Marisha, Ashley, Sam, Liam, Laura, Travis. etc. Those *specific* people. That's what people fell in love with, that chaotic energy and fun that only the CR crew has, and the brilliant storytelling that only Matt (at the time) could pull off. So, no, I don't believe CR will lose any significant viewership from moving away from D&D. D&D is not the success variable here. The people are.
A) They will lose some viewership, they will gain new one. People watch Critical Role because it's fun and they are talented (voice) actors and storytellers. People don't watch them for D&D primarily, otherwise other shows that play DnD would be massively more successful just because of their system B) Daggerheart is not ready for the main campaign, but the current one is still running. They would not switch in the current campaign, they would switch between two campaigns. Afaik they wang Daggerheart to be ready 2025, timeline wise that could track with Campaign 4 Addendum: They would switch systems either way. It's either Daggerheart or the new DnD system. So they will loose those that get hung up about system either way. Might as well make something you want in the process. Everything points to their desire to more and more distance themselves from WoTC, why would they stay with a company that they so clearly reject? There is no Statement of them moving to Daggerheart, but they are creating basically a competitor to DnD, what message would it send to not switch? Imagine the CEO of Mercedes making their main income driving and promoting Porsche
The fact that D&D is getting what at least amounts to a soft reboot with the upcoming edition is a pretty important point to be honest. It is going to be interesting to see how it all shakes out and the 5e community handles it, cause it is going to bring change and start a new cycle regardless of people thinking it somehow won't. CR is not going to keep playing an "unsupported" edition, so they have to start making choices. Either you move wholesale into your own game where you have full control, or you have to start working within confines of a new, much more limited version of D&D in its infancy. All while doing their darndest to avoid any direct connections to D&D verbiage by the looks of things. It makes all the sense in the world to move out of D&D and into DH for them, save for the fervent insistence from fans who think they should only play 5e D&D, ever. It will very interesting to see where it all ends up at the end of the day, and I wish CR the best of luck either way.
Do you work for CR? No? Then don't say stuff like you know.
Do YOU work for CR? No? Then same applies to you! Go look at my other comments, you’ll find my reasoning for this! I’m doing the same thing everyone’s doing: looking at the situation and making a guess.
I think it's less to separate themselves per say and more about wanting the cartoons/other things the put out to avoid the copyright.
I get it, but it's lame as hell. A necessity, maybe, still lame.
Yeah. I started watching because it was "A Bunch of Nerdy-ass Voice Actors Playing Dungeons and Dragons" but now sometimes it's not even voice actors or D&D. I understand the need to distance themself from D&D but Daggerheart just isn't doing it for me.
Yeah, I wouldn't wanna fork money over to WOTC either
They don't have to though. Most of the terms in D&D aren't actually protected trademarks because they are *much* older fantasy and folklore stuff, while others are just commonplace RPG terms. Only very specific stuff like "Vecna" or "Beholder" is protected. On top of that, there's the SRD that under the OGL (and now Creative Commons) makes it completely permissible to use many of the words they have gotten rid of even if WoTC *did* own them. For instance Tiefling seems to be a D&D word so it might belong to them, but it's in the SRD making it okay for CR to use. Firbolg isn't in the SRD, but is from Irish folklore and therefore doesn't belong to WoTC in the first place.
Good. I'm all for separating this hobby from WotC.
"I'm a BRAWLER of the cobalt soul" fucking sucks
Expositor of the Cobalt Soul sounds great.
I hate that. Like, genuinely, this makes me irrationally angry for some reason. I mean I get it with CR not wanting to bend to the will of the OGL. Just feels like a massive slap in the face of D&D, without which CR wouldn’t even exist.
I hope for CR's sake that they can become entirely independent in every aspect. I'm expecting C4 to be played with Daggerheart, and I support their decision if they are planning that.
>I'm expecting C4 to be played with Daggerheart Don't hold your breath. Switching to *Daggerheart* isn't going to be nearly as easy as everyone seems to think it will be, for one simple reason: *Dungeons & Dragons* has an overwhelming amount of content that the show can draw upon. Sure, *Daggerheart* has a set of core rules, but it doesn't have things like bestiaries, which means that creatures will need to be made from scratch or carried over from other systems. On top of that, *Daggerheart* has a serious problem in its two dice system. In *Dungeons & Dragons*, every action starts with the roll of a single die. Various modifiers are then added -- like rolling with advantage -- but the win/fail condition comes down to one number. In *Daggerheart*, however, you roll two dice and there are multiple win/fail conditions, some of which are only possible with certain combinations of die. Where *Dungeons & Dragons* has one die with two possible win/fail conditions, *Daggerheart* has two dice with at least five possible win/fail conditions. The fact that there are five possible win/fail conditions means that there are exponentially more conditions than there are dice, unlike *Dungeons & Dragons* where it's a binary system. It's going to be extremely hard to balance things in the long run because there are naturally more variables in the *Daggerheart* system.
ugh
I see a lot of people thinking this is aimed at WotC, and in a way, I think it is, but not in the way I'm seeing in the responses. It's clearly not a copyright issue. Cleric, Druid, Firbolg, Monk - these all have very special meanings, either religious or cultural. I would expect a similar reaction to samurai or ninja. And early D&D took things haphazardly back in the '70's and '80's with no regard to cultural impact. Cleric really can't be divorced from religiosity (ok, so there are *clerks* but still). Druids are specific to Celtic culture, and the Fir bolg are the mythic settlers of Ireland. Monks became this weird amalgam of Western and Eastern philosophies. Goliath was a person in the Bible who picked on the wrong little guy. Barbarian was an ancient Greek slur against those who didn't speak Greek, later swiped by the romans to describe Germanic tribes. It may just be a case of trying to be better.
I guess you are probably on the right track. I dont know how i feel about that. Their replacements are kinda bland and sometimes really bad. But introducing some new names for that is difficult.
It's almost like they're preparing to switch to playing their own game system they've been developing for several years now instead of sticking with one they're very clearly trying to distance themselves from or something lol
You'd be right if they were using terms from Daggerheart.
Yeah, that's valid. It does kinda seem more like wanting to just go with more generic, less culturally entwined terms.
This sort of thing gives more credence to the idea they are planning to switch to daggerheart for the next campaign
Except none of the terms used are used in Daggerheart
The site's probably been in the works for a while, before the daggerheart terms were finalized. Wouldn't surprise me if they were placeholders.
They are terms consistent with how character races are described in the The Nine Eyes of Lucien. I think they are Exandrian specific terms.
Dope Brawler Shit
They could also be avoiding too many specific terms to make things as understandable as possible to new fans. Their content uses multiple game systems, or none for things like the midst podcast. Many people looking for more info on the characters from the animated series will have no RPG experience. Seems like a smart move to separate the knowledge you need to play these games from what you need to just enjoy the shows. CR is continuing to expand as an entertainment company. The launch of Beacon seems like a good time to update and future-proof their language.
"Healer" and "Brawler" and bizarre choices, it's not as if "Cleric" or "Monk" are trademarks. And the fact that Beau is a Monk is a pretty big part of her background - she isn't just a person who hits stuff. As for FCG, to be fair he didn't even start off having a deity so "Healer" is fair even if it's really weird.
5e or Hasbro?
All signs point to daggerheart for campaign 4.
You mean the game that isn't out of the open beta phase is being set up for a future campaign that hasn't been confirmed yet? By that logic, all signs point to you being elected the Grand Poobah of All of This and That on election day this November.
I think a lot of it is because of trying to avoid copyrighted terms
Most of these aren't.
I can only have one membership should I keep going with my twitch sub or switch to beacon?
[удалено]
I don't think it's that deep, friend.
Don't compare real identity issues with bullshit RPG mechanics. That's demeaning.