More information: The de-ownering separation contract I was given was pretty strict (which again is good business, especially if you’re pretty sure the person is going to have to sign).
Among the first elements I objected to was that the contract had a “you must sign this in 10 days or else you get nothing.”
For the record for any other employees in this situation (at least in California), this is something you can absolutely fight back on, so do check with your lawyer.
To be fair, they were pushing for a swift resolution along with the NDA, which again is good business - and according to discussions after the departure, that clause seemed to have worked with other employees who didn’t check (they were in similar financial situations, though).
What was troublesome was the fact the NDA wasn’t mutual despite the mutual separation agreement (they could say whatever they wanted, but I would have no legal recourse – not only about that, but anything), which understandably, made me uncomfortable.
Again, that’s good business if you can get someone to sign that. I did argue that a mutual separation agreement should, in fact, be mutual.
As I said, the 10 days or else did turn out not to be legally binding when confronted on and may have been dropped, but that was the specs of the contract I was hit with, and another reason I didn’t sign it. (The medical insurance time limits I couldn’t do anything about.)
I don’t recall much about the Tyranny contract offer because I didn’t want to work on it based on what was going on, and arguably, I was too focused on the primary contract.
If I had signed the first de-ownering contract, however, with the non-competes, the problem would be that Tyranny would actually be the only RPG option I would have to work on (and any other Obsidian-sponsored RPGs they chose to exclude from the de-ownering agreement), so rather than being an olive branch, it was more, “here’s how we own you twice, still get you to write as always, but at a fraction of the cost.”
