Am I right to assume WotC's move is basically aimed at groups like Critical Role?
On one hand, I have no interest in defending corporate copyright rules. But on the other hand, I disagree that this would stifle creativity. If there are hundreds of companies out there that only exist to pump out content for the D&D ruleset, surely making them pay for the privilege would encourage some of them to build new rulesets?
I'm pretty sure the primary target is third party VTTs, and that Critical Role will probably get a royalty free side deal, precisely to prevent them jumping ship with their marketing power.
…the company may terminate the agreement if third-party creators publish material that is “blatantly racist, sexist, homophobic, trans-phobic, bigoted or otherwise discriminatory.
This makes me believe less that this is an organic push within WotC and more a push by a special interest group. Given that we know WotC didn’t write OGL 1.1, it would make sense that a special interest group funded it with the stipulation that they added the trans bit in.
On one hand, I have no interest in defending corporate copyright rules. But on the other hand, I disagree that this would stifle creativity. If there are hundreds of companies out there that only exist to pump out content for the D&D ruleset, surely making them pay for the privilege would encourage some of them to build new rulesets?