• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

WotC Announces OGL 1.1 -- Revised Terms, Royalties, and Annual Revenue Reporting

There has been a lot of speculation recently about WotC's plans regarding the Open Gaming License and the upcoming One D&D. Today, WotC shared some information. In short, they will be producing a new Open Gaming License (note that the previous OGL 1.0a will still exist, and can still be used). However, for those who use the new OGL 1.1, which will be released in early 2023, there will be some...

There has been a lot of speculation recently about WotC's plans regarding the Open Gaming License and the upcoming One D&D. Today, WotC shared some information.

In short, they will be producing a new Open Gaming License (note that the previous OGL 1.0a will still exist, and can still be used). However, for those who use the new OGL 1.1, which will be released in early 2023, there will be some limitations added with regards the type of product which can use it, and -- possibly controversially -- reporting to WotC your annual OGL-related revenue.

They are also adding a royalty for those third party publishers who make more than $750K per year.

Interestingly, only books and 'static electronic files' like ebooks and PDFs will be compatible with the new OGL, meaning that apps, web pages, and the like will need to stick to the old OGL 1.0a.

There will, of course, be a lot of debate and speculation over what this actually means for third party creators, and how it will affect them. Some publishers like Paizo (for Pathfinder) and others will likely simply continue to use the old OGL. The OGL 1.0a allows WotC to update the license, but allows licensees to continue to use previous versions "to copy, modify and distribute any Open Game Content originally distributed under any version of this License".


wotc-new-logo-3531303324.jpg



1. Will One D&D include an SRD/be covered by an OGL?

Yes. First, we’re designing One D&D with fifth edition backwards compatibility, so all existing creator content that is compatible with fifth edition will also be compatible with One D&D. Second, we will update the SRD for One D&D as we complete its development—development that is informed by the results of playtests that we’re conducting with hundreds of thousands of D&D players now.

2. Will the OGL terms change?

Yes. We will release version 1.1 of the OGL in early 2023.

The OGL needs an update to ensure that it keeps doing what it was intended to do—allow the D&D community’s independent creators to build and play and grow the game we all love—without allowing things like third-parties to mint D&D NFTs and large businesses to exploit our intellectual property.

So, what’s changing?

First, we’re making sure that OGL 1.1 is clear about what it covers and what it doesn’t. OGL 1.1 makes clear it only covers material created for use in or as TTRPGs, and those materials are only ever permitted as printed media or static electronic files (like epubs and PDFs). Other types of content, like videos and video games, are only possible through the Wizards of the Coast Fan Content Policy or a custom agreement with us. To clarify: Outside of printed media and static electronic files, the OGL doesn’t cover it.

Will this affect the D&D content and services players use today? It shouldn’t. The top VTT platforms already have custom agreements with Wizards to do what they do. D&D merchandise, like minis and novels, were never intended to be part of the OGL and OGL 1.1 won’t change that. Creators wishing to leverage D&D for those forms of expression will need, as they always have needed, custom agreements between us.

Second, we’re updating the OGL to offer different terms to creators who choose to make free, share-alike content and creators who want to sell their products.

What does this mean for you as a creator? If you’re making share-alike content, very little is going to change from what you’re already used to.

If you’re making commercial content, relatively little is going to change for most creators. For most of you who are selling custom content, here are the new things you’ll need to do:
  1. Accept the license terms and let us know what you’re offering for sale
  2. Report OGL-related revenue annually (if you make more than $50,000 in a year)
  3. Include a Creator Product badge on your work
When we roll out OGL 1.1, we will also provide explanatory videos, FAQs, and a web portal for registration to make navigating these requirements as easy and intuitive as possible. We’ll also have help available to creators to navigate the new process.

For the fewer than 20 creators worldwide who make more than $750,000 in income in a year, we will add a royalty starting in 2024. So, even for the creators making significant money selling D&D supplements and games, no royalties will be due for 2023 and all revenue below $750,000 in future years will be royalty-free.

Bottom line: The OGL is not going away. You will still be able to create new D&D content, publish it anywhere, and game with your friends and followers in all the ways that make this game and community so great. The thousands of creators publishing across Kickstarter, DMsGuild, and more are a critical part of the D&D experience, and we will continue to support and encourage them to do that through One D&D and beyond.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

MNblockhead

A Title Much Cooler Than Anything on the Old Site
The license has no language pertaining to ‘de-authorization’. We can post our armchair legal opinions here on the forum, and people can make videos and post tweets, but if that angle was attempted? It would be decided in a courtroom, by lawyers and judges, not by random bystanders on the internet.

The lengthy ensuing legal battles would certainly keep my news business running for years! Not just Paizo, but other companies which have used the OGL to share non D&D stuff, such as Evil Hat. It’ll be a firework show, for sure.
It would at least finally give me some TTRPG legal drama that is an alternative to the NuTSR thread. :)
 

log in or register to remove this ad

darjr

I crit!
@Frylock

I wonder if he'd care to make a comment here.

For the folks that do not remember. There was a bloke putting things on a web site. An IP Lawyer. I think it was monster stat blocks. WotC sent a cease and desist and he came here to post on the thread about it. Said WotC would back down, and they did. If I remember correctly it was all based on the "rules can't be copyrighted" argument. I'll see if I can find that thread.

Frylock. Also, Americans saying ‘bloke’ makes me happy.
 


MNblockhead

A Title Much Cooler Than Anything on the Old Site
I've never seen DMsGuild as more visible than DrivethruRPG. Is that a common feeling?
I go to DTRPG frequently. I rarely go to DMs Guild. The only time I've found DMs Guild the better shop is when I am running an official WotC adventure and want to some well-designed aids, improved VTT maps, etc. But I've only run one official WotC adventure since 2014. So other than a few things I bought for helping run Curse of Strahd, I've only gone to DMs Guild to by some Adventurer's League adventures for some quick one-shots with my kids and to get legal PDFs of some old 1e adventures and the original Grey Hawk. But I've bought a LOT of stuff on DTRPG. Also, a number of Kickstarters I've backed use DTRPG for fulfillment.

If WotC better integrates DMs Guild with DDB, however, it would GREATLY increase the visability of DMs Guild over DTRPG. Actually, with all the developers they are hiring, I wouldn't be surprised if they ditch One Bookshelf and find a way to distribute PDFs through DDB.
 

Dire Bare

Legend
I've never seen DMsGuild as more visible than DrivethruRPG. Is that a common feeling?
The DM's Guild IS more visible to consumers, but that wasn't what I was talking about. Both websites are just as easy to visit, shop, and purchase games . . . but the DM's Guild is the place to go for official D&D community content. That's not important to everybody, but it is important to a lot of folks.

But what I was talking about was visibility from the perspective of a publisher. You'll get more eyeballs on your product, and ideally more purchases, if it is on the DM's Guild rather than DriveThruRPG. Can I back that up with stats? No, but it is a common belief, and makes sense.

That's part of the reason why you find a lot of product on the DM's Guild that doesn't use WotC IP, and could have just as easily have been published under the OGL on DriveThruRPG.
 

Dire Bare

Legend
To give an example of the kind of #opendnd discourse I'm talking about, I'll screenshot rather than link:

View attachment 270264

This account goes on to talk about how they love the game and are just trying to grow it for the sake of the "community" etc etc. What are they selling that they can't sell with the new OGL? They are selling NFTs. There have been whole threads about this and we don't need to get into it, but IMO this is grift, not creativity. Which is bad enough, but the fact they using the language of "openness" and "community" makes it really hollow sounding, to me.

In terms of 5e vs indie game products in general, certainly there's a lot of variance in quality, and it's all a matter of taste. But I'll take the top 20 indie/osr games vs the top 20 5e products any day (in terms of game design, art production, layout and usability, writing, or just sheer creativity).

edit: now Alexander Macris, the fascist game designer (sorry, "far right libertarian"), is standing up against wotc on behalf of the "community." What a time to be alive.
I think we're talking past one another.

I was pushing back against your idea that designers in the OSR space were more creative and innovative than designers working in the D&D 5E space. That's pretty much it.

Are there game designers being hypocritical in their criticism of the OGL 1.1 already? Sure, I'll believe that! The folks selling NFTs are definitely being hypocritical, but I don't much care about what's going on there, as NFTs are a waste of energy and digital space, IMO.
 

Reynard

Legend
Supporter
It occurs to me that wrapped up in a lot of the "analysis" of this is an undercurrent of desire to see WotC fail and collapse. There's a certain expectation of poetic justice for the Goliath to fall and D&D to be "freed."
 

BovineofWar

Explorer
I'm really curious where this goes. My gut feel is that a lot of this is just posturing. "Here is the 1.1 OGL that specifically says video games, VTTs, and electronic tooling were never supported under the OGL, so we at WoTC reserve the right to sue any competitors to D&D Beyond or the official D&D VTT or the next gen official D&D video games that don't line up for a license and behave."

I doubt they would try to enforce things on the 3PP for written works with that big gaping 1.0a OGL loop hole? But hey, weirder things have happened in D&D (specifically TSR) history...
 

darjr

I crit!
So I gotta say. I think this is a non-starter.

Not because I think it's terrible, really, but because I think there isn't anybody who would want to use it instead of just staying with OGL 1.0a.

I can't think of anyone really.

The thing is the OGL 1.0a is valuable most importantly because it's a safe harbor. OGL 1.1 is not. Not if your anywhere close to making 50K a year. Or just selling things with that license.

First, I think the DNDBeyond thing is speculation and if it was going to be an important component I think WotC would have highlighted it. Maybe.

Kobold Press? Why? Are they even using significant parts of the current SRD now?

MCDM? Well absolutely not. I mean I just can't see them doing this license at all. On basic principles really.

Paizo? Do not make me laugh.

Goodman Games? I bet they could de OGLize their new kickstarter and everything else they do going forward. Sure they have or had a special license with WotC for the OAR books but really I've been suspecting that's been dead for a while now.

ENWorld publishing? Maybe? Waiting to hear from Russ, but really I'd bet that they'd go forward as being the vanguard of the OGL 1.0a and A5E before they went with WotC on an OGL 1.1.

Monte Cook? no.
Green Ronin? I actually feel bad about suggesting that one.

Free League? Again why? Especially since their games are very different than 5e anyway.

So who?
 


Remove ads

Remove ads

Top