What's All This About The OGL Going Away?

This last week I've seen videos, tweets, and articles all repeating an unsourced rumour that the OGL (Open Gaming License) will be going away with the advent of OneD&D, and that third party publishers would have no way of legally creating compatible material. I wanted to write an article clarifying some of these terms.

audit-3929140_960_720.jpg

I've seen articles claiming (and I quote) that "players would be unable to legally publish homebrew content" and that WotC may be "outlawing third-party homebrew content". These claims need clarification.

What's the Open Gaming License? It was created by WotC about 20 years ago; it's analagous to various 'open source' licenses. There isn't a '5E OGL' or a '3E OGL' and there won't be a 'OneD&D OGL' -- there's just the OGL (technically there are two versions, but that's by-the-by). The OGL is non-rescindable -- it can't be cancelled or revoked. Any content released as Open Gaming Content (OGC) under that license -- which includes the D&D 3E SRD, the 5E SRD, Pathfinder's SRD, Level Up's SRD, and thousands and thousands of third party books -- remains OGC forever, available for use under the license. Genie, bottle, and all that.

So, the OGL can't 'go away'. It's been here for 20 years and it's here to stay. This was WotC's (and OGL architect Ryan Dancey's) intention when they created it 20 years ago, to ensure that D&D would forever be available no matter what happened to its parent company.


What's an SRD? A System Reference Document (SRD) contains Open Gaming Content (OGC). Anything in the 3E SRD, the 3.5 SRD, or the 5E SRD, etc., is designated forever as OGC (Open Gaming Content). Each of those SRDs contains large quantities of material, including the core rules of the respective games, and encompasses all the core terminology of the ruleset(s).

When people say 'the OGL is going away' what they probably mean to say is that there won't be a new OneD&D System Reference Document.


Does That Matter? OneD&D will be -- allegedly -- fully compatible with 5E. That means it uses all the same terminology. Armor Class, Hit Points, Warlock, Pit Fiend, and so on. All this terminology has been OGC for 20 years, and anybody can use it under the terms of the OGL. The only way it could be difficult for third parties to make compatible material for OneD&D is if OneD&D substantially changed the core terminology of the game, but at that point OneD&D would no longer be compatible with 5E (or, arguably, would even be recognizable as D&D). So the ability to create compatible third party material won't be going away.

However! There is one exception -- if your use of OneD&D material needs you to replicate OneD&D content, as opposed to simply be compatible with it (say you're making an app which has all the spell descriptions in it) and if there is no new SRD, then you won't be able to do that. You can make compatible stuff ("The evil necromancer can cast magic missile" -- the term magic missile has been OGL for two decades) but you wouldn't be able to replicate the full descriptive text of the OneD&D version of the spell. That's a big if -- if there's no new SRD.

So you'd still be able to make compatible adventures and settings and new spells and new monsters and new magic items and new feats and new rules and stuff. All the stuff 3PPs commonly do. You just wouldn't be able to reproduce the core rules content itself. However, I've been publishing material for 3E, 3.5, 4E, 5E, and Pathfinder 1E for 20 years, and the need to reproduce core rules content hasn't often come up for us -- we produce new compatible content. But if you're making an app, or spell cards, or something which needs to reproduce content from the rulebooks, you'd need an SRD to do that.

So yep. If no SRD, compatible = yes, directly reproduce = no (of course, you can indirectly reproduce stuff by rewriting it in your own words).

Branding! Using the OGL you can't use the term "Dungeons & Dragons" (you never could). Most third parties say something like "compatible with the world's most popular roleplaying game" and have some sort of '5E' logo of their own making on the cover. Something similar will no doubt happen with OneD&D -- the third party market will create terminology to indicate compatibility. (Back in the 3E days, WotC provided a logo for this use called the 'd20 System Trademark Logo' but they don't do that any more).

What if WotC didn't 'support' third party material? As discussed, nobody can take the OGL or any existing OGC away. However, WotC does have control over DMs Guild and integration with D&D Beyond or the virtual tabletop app they're making. So while they can't stop folks from making and publishing compatible stuff, they could make it harder to distribute simply by not allowing it on those three platforms. If OneD&D becomes heavily reliant on a specific platform we might find ourselves in the same situation we had in 4E, where it was harder to sell player options simply because they weren't on the official character builder app. It's not that you couldn't publish 4E player options, it's just that many players weren't interested in them if they couldn't use them in the app.

But copyright! Yes, yes, you can't copyright rules, you can't do this, you can't do that. The OGL is not relevant to copyright law -- it is a license, an agreement, a contract. By using it you agree to its terms. Sure WotC might not be able to copyright X, but you can certainly contractually agree not to use X (which is a selection of material designated as 'Product Identity') by using the license. There are arguments on the validity of this from actual real lawyers which I won't get into, but I just wanted to note that this is about a license, not copyright law.

If you don't use the Open Gaming License, of course, it doesn't apply to you. You are only bound by a license you use. So then, sure, knock yourself out with copyright law!

So, bullet point summary:
  • The OGL can't go away, and any existing OGC can't go away
  • If (that's an if) there is no new SRD, you will be able to still make compatible material but not reproduce the OneD&D content
  • Most of the D&D terminology (save a few terms like 'beholder' etc.) has been OGC for 20 years and is freely available for use
  • To render that existing OGC unusable for OneD&D the basic terminology of the entire game would have to be changed, at which point it would no longer be compatible with 5E.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Well, yes that is the reason this thread was created. A claim that there would be no open content for One D&D. This claim got legs and lead to speculation that third party content would be shut down and even that the OGL would be rescinded. This lead Morrus to post clarifying the situation.
Well, I only poked my nose in to say Wizards could elect not to update the SRD to 5.5. If they do, I agree 100% that anyone could publish any or all of its content.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Quite a few really. But, importantly, they're all too small to bother with. WotC and 5E are what, ~95% of the tabletop RPG market. When that changes we might see some push back.
It's such a strange thing to be concerned about. This whole subject is.

WotC has no power to rescind the OGL or SRD, and they have no motivation to go after publishers that actively support their games. They have no reason to try and create a OGL proof version of D&D -- because they tried it and failed, creating their main competitor in the process. Near as anyone has been able to show, there has been no indication from WotC that any of this is in the works, and click-bait "D&D influencers" are using fearmongering and conspiracy to drive traffic and gin up a nonexistent controversy. And despite all of that being true, people are still going "well it COULD happen" and spinning wild theories of their own. It would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

But there, that's me saying my peace about it. I'll do everyone -- myself most of all -- a favor and bow out.
 

It's such a strange thing to be concerned about. This whole subject is.
I don't think it is. The concern is that WotC will move ahead without updating the OGL/SRD. They've done that before with 4E. And it took them some time to update the OGL/SRD to 5E. So it's not some wild conspiracy theory like some are trying to make it out to be.
WotC has no power to rescind the OGL or SRD, and they have no motivation to go after publishers that actively support their games. They have no reason to try and create a OGL proof version of D&D -- because they tried it and failed, creating their main competitor in the process.
The important thing in that situation to remember is 3X OGL/SRD with a wild shift in game to 4E, that itself wasn't very well received, so Pathfinder was basically guaranteed to happen. Fast forward to now, with 5E, the single most popular edition of D&D ever and WotC's plan for "backwards compatibility" and then have them not update the OGL/SRD. That's going to be problematic for a lot of people.
Near as anyone has been able to show, there has been no indication from WotC that any of this is in the works, and click-bait "D&D influencers" are using fearmongering and conspiracy to drive traffic and gin up a nonexistent controversy.
That's the worst framing possible, yes. A slightly less biased framing would be they're raising real concerns, putting their livelihoods at risk, and are reminding people we've been through something quite similar before.
And despite all of that being true...
It's not true, it's your opinion.
people are still going "well it COULD happen"
Because it could.
It would be funny if it wasn't so sad.
If people didn't care they wouldn't be worried.
But there, that's me saying my peace about it. I'll do everyone -- myself most of all -- a favor and bow out.
Cheers.
 

The concern is that WotC will move ahead without updating the OGL/SRD. They've done that before with 4E. And it took them some time to update the OGL/SRD to 5E.
I will say this, though: Even if Wizards doesn't release a 5.5 SRD, from what we've seen so far, you'd be able to publish a lot of really-quite-compatible material for 1D&D using the 5.1 SRD. We just haven't seen anything like the jump from 3.5 to 4. And the OGL and 5.1 SRD can't go away. Coupled with the complete lack of sourcing for the rumors (from what I can tell), I agree with the others that there's not much reason for concern right now.

If they start making big changes to frame and chassis in the playtest, then we can freak out. ;)
 

I will say this, though: Even if Wizards doesn't release a 5.5 SRD, from what we've seen so far, you'd be able to publish a lot of really-quite-compatible material for 1D&D using the 5.1 SRD. We just haven't seen anything like the jump from 3.5 to 4. And the OGL and 5.1 SRD can't go away. Coupled with the complete lack of sourcing for the rumors (from what I can tell), I agree with the others that there's not much reason for concern right now.

If they start making big changes to frame and chassis in the playtest, then we can freak out. ;)
Some people are just way overreacting and some of them becasue they wat clicks, some of them because they inherently hate wotc or even 5e and want everything to fail. Probably some of them were accusing wotc for being lazy because they never bothered to errata the PHB sorcerer and so on. Some people can´t be made happy.
This is the most important lesson, wotc learned from 4e. Don´t listen to all the loud voices but instead do "fake" surveys "for marketing" to gather feedback of more people than just 5 youtubers and 50 forum users (which they of course send directly to the trash bin).

So the only thing I hope is wotc to just keep calm, let people enjoy the movie and prepare for the 24 edition without haste or too much worry.
And maybe also offer some digital goodies they are maybe finally able to properly fund.
 


I will say this, though: Even if Wizards doesn't release a 5.5 SRD, from what we've seen so far, you'd be able to publish a lot of really-quite-compatible material for 1D&D using the 5.1 SRD. We just haven't seen anything like the jump from 3.5 to 4. And the OGL and 5.1 SRD can't go away. Coupled with the complete lack of sourcing for the rumors (from what I can tell), I agree with the others that there's not much reason for concern right now.

If they start making big changes to frame and chassis in the playtest, then we can freak out. ;)
I went back to my 4e book case, and I have multi books, the 1st was published by a guy who (used to?) posts here named Ari Marmell. He had his book out useing the 3.5 srd. We even were still useing that book when 5e came out.
 



Whenever you see an online discussion of copywrite or trademark related issues, the amount of confusion and conflicting opinions on how even the most basic issues related to trademark and copywrite work, really shows how useful the OGL is.

It is one of the issues that seems simple on the surface but is actually a lot more complicated. There is a reason lawyers don't actually learn how to be a lawyer in law school. They spend 3 years learning the basics like contract law and intellectual property.

The OGL is incredibly useful for game designers, who are probably not experts in contract and intellectual property law, or can't afford a lawyer. It really removes a lot of the uncertainty and risk of publishing a game, when there is a contract where WotC promises not to sue you, as long as you follow a specific list of game elements that can and can not be included in your game.

It isn't a 100% guarantee the WotC won't sue you, nothing is. Someone can sue literally anyone else for literally any reason. If WotC does sue you, as long as you follow the restrictions, the OGL is about as iron-clad of a defense as you are ever going to get.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top