The Playtest Agreement

IANAL, but I take in interest in legal matters. This is not legal advice.

Kamikaze Midget said:

That appears to mean that if you print out copies of the rules and give them to your players, you just violated the agreement. Your players must have their own copies of the rules.

Click to expand...

Strictly speaking, I think you're correct based on the wording of the agreement. However, the FAQ specifically allows making copies for your group as long as they've all signed up.

FAQ said:

(This does not limit participants from making copies of playtest documents for the sole purpose of sharing them with their gaming group provided they have all signed up to playtest D&D Next.)

Click to expand...

Kamikaze Midget said:

Wizards is technically employing you."Work-for-hire"? Man, talk about not paying a living wage! Also, apparently you give Wizards some limited power of attorney and they own the copyright on anything you give them.

Click to expand...

They're not technically employing you. "Work-for-hire" is a standard legal term that basically just means they own the copyright outright. Under US law, works created by employees are "works-for-hire" and the copyright belongs to the company, whereas works created by freelancers are owned by the freelancer, unless there is an agreement to the contrary. This is a little redundant with the part that says they own the copyright on your submissions, but they're basically just making sure they cover all their bases here.

Kamikaze Midget said:

You can't modify or make new stuff. Want to make your own monster? Want to swap race and class? Want to invent a spear? NO. DO NOT. IT IS A VIOLATION, FOLKS. You can't create derivative materials.

Click to expand...

I don't think that's the meaning of derivative works here. Derivative work is a term in copyright law. Creating your own monster using the rules is not a derivative work, because the rules can't be copyrighted, only the expression of them. A derivative work would be copying parts of the playtest material and incorporating it into your own RPG. Theoretically, you could create your own RPG with the same rules as long as your careful not to explain them too similarly. (That wouldn't be ethical, but I think it would be both legal and not a violation of this agreement.)

Kamikaze Midget said:

I'm a little vague on what happens if you DO violate the agreement -- if WotC's Fun Police will come to your house on Saturday if you make copies and give them to your group and run the game with invented monsters, put you in handcuffs, and take you in front of Mearls to be beaten with a disenchanter's snout or what -- but it seems pretty clear that these things ARE a violation.

Click to expand...

They can kick you out of the playtest, but they can do that for any reason, including not liking your face.

They could also sue you for breach of contract. My understanding, which may be wrong, is that breach of contract in the absence of a penalty clause generally only recovers actual damages (including, e.g., damage to Wizards of the Coast's reputation), and punitive damages only kick in if you're deemed to have breached it maliciously. Maybe I'm wrong, but if I were a juror, you'd have a hard time convincing me that actual damage for you playing over the Internet amounts to much. I'm also not convinced the agreement prohibits playing over the Internet despite the FAQ's claims otherwise. But it wouldn't really be worth going to court to test it.

If you reproduce a portion of the materials that is too large to be fair use, they could sue you for copyright infringement, which can include substantial statutory damages.

Of course, most likely, if they found you've violated the agreement, they would first send you a letter demanding you take it down (or send a DMCA notice to the website demanding they take it down). They would probably only sue if you persisted.

A couple of things strike me.

1) I am not my brother's keeper. Under no circumstances would I even bother asking if the people in my local group signed up for the playtest and since the usual standard is for a couple of people to have read rules and a couple to just wing it even with games where we all have rules, I doubt I'd notice if some people hadn't signed up/downloaded the playtest. Busy lives and all that.

2) I think we as a group were predisposed to do things "right" - sign up, playtest, provide feed back, ???, profit. I know that I will now never provide feedback to Wizards for this as this is precisely the sort of thing that caused me to leave Wizards for the loving embrace of one of their competitors.

3) There is a difference between being in the right and doing the right thing. Case in point, recently there was an airline that contains a provision refusing ticket refunds unless a passenger purchases ticket insurance. A war veteran with terminal cancer was denied flight at the last minute by his doctor and asked that the ticket he purchased to travel to be with his daughter during a surgery she was undergoing was denied by the airline as per that ticket refund policy.

Now, the airline was in the right but didn't do the right thing IMO. Wizards appears to me as being in the same boat with how they're handling this playtest.

It's really stupid. Now, according to this FAQ, my friends cannot gather and do the playtest. Google Hangout was the only way it was going to happen, since we are all 1000 miles apart. Of course groups can SAY players were all in the same room. Maybe they should have required playtesters to don GPS devices and sign affidavits as to their whereabouts on the date of play!

Truly asinine.

IronWolf said:

I do not recall seeing the prohibition of playing online being prohibited in the actual agreement I agreed to in order to download the playtest. I can't see the FAQ as being "binding" as I do not recall agreeing to those terms or conditions prior to download.

Or did I just miss something in the agreement?

Not allowing online play via Skype, Google Hangouts, etc is pretty limiting for a playtest. It is the best show my group has of actually being able to provide feedback on the playtest. Getting us together in one physical location outside of our normal game night is near impossible.

Click to expand...

Nathal said:

It's really stupid. Now, according to this FAQ, my friends cannot gather and do the playtest. Google Hangout was the only way it was going to happen, since we are all 1000 miles apart. Of course groups can SAY players were all in the same room. Maybe they should have required playtesters to don GPS devices and sign affidavits as to their whereabouts on the date of play!

Truly asinine.

Click to expand...

I agree - asinine would describe the level of ill will WoTC's been receiving over playtest agreements that don't affect the way anyone in the thread would actually play these rules. Want to play with a closed group of friends online? No one from wotc will stop you. Want to print it up for your family and play? No one from wotc will stop you; if you wanted to be thorough, have all the adults sign ndas and take legal responsibilities for your children.

Want to make new spells or equipment? Why DO that for a playtest? Especially for a ruleset in flux? All they want is for us to test and give feedback for what was given. The purpose of the NDA is to stop someone from making "NEKST", THE RPG and selling it. If someone wants to get these rules, play with their friends, and feedback, there's nothing wotc can do, nor in my layman's opinion WANTS to do to stop them.


Play or don't, participate or don't, but the amount of slightest offense people take to any attempt by wotc to change the corporate culture pisses me off about the whole gamer community in general and makes me ashamed of it sometimes.

My complaint was with one specific restriction that makes no sense. You are right that it is unenforceable, but I would like to know the rationale. Tone down your pretentious attitude, will ya?

Henry said:

I agree - asinine would describe the level of ill will WoTC's been receiving over playtest agreements that don't affect the way anyone in the thread would actually play these rules. Want to play with a closed group of friends online? No one from wotc will stop you. Want to print it up for your family and play? No one from wotc will stop you; if you wanted to be thorough, have all the adults sign ndas and take legal responsibilities for your children.

Want to make new spells or equipment? Why DO that for a playtest? Especially for a ruleset in flux? All they want is for us to test and give feedback for what was given. The purpose of the NDA is to stop someone from making "NEKST", THE RPG and selling it. If someone wants to get these rules, play with their friends, and feedback, there's nothing wotc can do, nor in my layman's opinion WANTS to do to stop them.


Play or don't, participate or don't, but the amount of slightest offense people take to any attempt by wotc to change the corporate culture pisses me off about the whole gamer community in general and makes me ashamed of it sometimes.

Click to expand...

Henry said:

Play or don't, participate or don't, but the amount of slightest offense people take to any attempt by wotc to change the corporate culture pisses me off about the whole gamer community in general and makes me ashamed of it sometimes.

Click to expand...

Your signature says you are an OGL warrior. Perhaps it's time to take up your sword again and start putting your effort into open gaming rather than trying to denigrate people who feel put off by just how closed and controlling Wizards is now being.

Be an OGL warrior again.

They could have just as easily created an OGL 2.0 stipulating dates when derivative materials built upon their playtest materials (and eventual release) might have been allowed to be released for sale. So, too, this would have given them a mechanism whereby they could have gathered derivative OGC generated by fans (this would have been concrete feedback) and incorporated it into future playtests and eventually a final product giving credit where credit was due for such OGC. As it is, they seem to want the community to do the work for them and for WotC to be able to claim ownership, and the credit for that work, without even the assurance that community generated fixes to their rough drafts will be eventually opened up and proper credit given to those who generate the innovations and fixes they are asking the community to proffer through their "feedback."

Henry said:

I agree - asinine would describe the level of ill will WoTC's been receiving over playtest agreements that don't affect the way anyone in the thread would actually play these rules. Want to play with a closed group of friends online? No one from wotc will stop you. Want to print it up for your family and play? No one from wotc will stop you; if you wanted to be thorough, have all the adults sign ndas and take legal responsibilities for your children.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry Henry, but this does affect my ability to playtest. I have been asked by WotC to honor their rules and regulations which now includes via the FAQ the prohibition of online play. This was the way my group was going to be able to test it due to geographical location and scheduling.

You are simply advocating "breaking the rules". While a possible solution, it is still going against WotC's intent for this playtest. I can either respect their wishes or not.

I mean if I am one of the people grumpy about the old PDFs, your point applied to that simply means stop complaining and download them from a torrent site.

I think several of us would rather respect WotC and follow their rules. In this case it effects many of us (just check the thread gathering numbers in this forum) and I think given the nature of modern gaming we are fine to complain a bit that this stipulation in the FAQ is quite limiting.

Henry said:

I agree - asinine would describe the level of ill will WoTC's been receiving over playtest agreements that don't affect the way anyone in the thread would actually play these rules. Want to play with a closed group of friends online? No one from wotc will stop you. Want to print it up for your family and play? No one from wotc will stop you; if you wanted to be thorough, have all the adults sign ndas and take legal responsibilities for your children.

Want to make new spells or equipment? Why DO that for a playtest? Especially for a ruleset in flux? All they want is for us to test and give feedback for what was given. The purpose of the NDA is to stop someone from making "NEKST", THE RPG and selling it. If someone wants to get these rules, play with their friends, and feedback, there's nothing wotc can do, nor in my layman's opinion WANTS to do to stop them.


Play or don't, participate or don't, but the amount of slightest offense people take to any attempt by wotc to change the corporate culture pisses me off about the whole gamer community in general and makes me ashamed of it sometimes.

Click to expand...

Henry, i think you are a bit out of line here, up until I saw Piratecat's post I did not even realise online play was prohibited and fully intended to run a game on the Wizards VTT with friends that had signed the agreement and report the outcome of the playtest.
Now, I cannot playtest, in that any run through of the material would have to be online for me and thus ineligable to report to Wizards.
Since this is early draft of the rules and subject to change, I sm not even sure it is worth the hassle of running playtest stuff that I cannot report on.
I have other things to be doing.

Two general points:

First, what exactly is the adverse consequence if someone shares the rules with a person who is not signed up, or modifies them for homebrew purposes, or plays a game online? How is their business harmed?

Second, how are they realistically planning on enforcing this nonsense?

Hopefully, the license for the actual game will be better conceived.