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 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

The statement quoted in the OP says, "To clarify: Outside of printed media and static electronic files, the OGL doesn’t cover it."

Full on video games, software based character builders, or click-to-roll character sheets are probably more the target there. And, the point isn't that you cannot build them - just that the OGL is not the license you'll need.

I'll also note that they are wildly misstating, and in my opinion attempting to retcon, the OGL. NOTHING in the OGL v1.0 or v1.0a attempted to exclude the items they are saying it didn't cover. The d20 STL did, and this needs to be made clear every time this is brought up so it doesn't fall by the wayside and become accepted as "common knowledge".
 

log in or register to remove this ad


I'm sorry, but, maybe I'm just thick. How does requiring disclosures make something less open? And, again, charging royalties doesn't prevent you from publishing. It does cost you something, sure. But, how does it make it less open.
It's because the word 'open' here is used in the context of 'open source' -- which is defined as something made freely available for modification and redistribution. The suggestion here is that it will be available, but not freely, and thus not 'open' in that context.
 


For the overwhelming majority of content creators for D&D, this new OGL will make zero difference. And even for those that it will impact - basically those who are making a living on 3rd party content (those making more than 50 grand a year), the disclosure requirements are not going to change anything. Why would having to tell WotC, "Hey, yes, my 3rd party product makes 65 grand a year." have any impact?
See point #3 of the official Wotc statement: Point #3: Requires a creator badge on all 1.1 OGL products. This will have a HUGE impact on content creators, just like the d20 STL did.

Previous creator badges , like the d20 trademark included with the D20 STL are controlled by Wotc, they can revoke the trademark at any time. That will absolutely affect content creators.

If they can pull the creator badge at any time, tell me, what incentive do I have to use the new license when the old 1.0a allows me to keep my content published indefinitely?
 



I mean, I get not wanting to shell out another 150 dollars when your current books are still playable. All for saving money. What I don't get is why some in the hobby get so hot and bothered by reprints and new editions. I mean, just don't buy them.
1) no matter what they say or others say no company wants to put something out you wont buy.
2) staying current with edition makes finding groups and talking to people easier.

Just here, on enworld I have seen people twist arguments based on "You didn't say it was 5e" when everyone else agrees that is what we were talking about. You know what I don't see (and remember we tend to be older then the player base) a lot of people talking about the older editions.

Right now I am 'settling' for 5eD&D, and so is most if not all of my friends. We all have editions or games we would rather play, but those editions/games are not all the same. So to keep our friend group going we are all playing our 3rd or 4th favorite TTRPG instead of playing with a fraction of that size group of friends there first or second choice.
If this 5.5/6/1D&D is just slight modifications to 5e, we have to decide. Do we all spend $50-$150 on new books to play the updated 5e, or do we just not keep up with modern gameing?
 

1) no matter what they say or others say no company wants to put something out you wont buy.
2) staying current with edition makes finding groups and talking to people easier.

Just here, on enworld I have seen people twist arguments based on "You didn't say it was 5e" when everyone else agrees that is what we were talking about. You know what I don't see (and remember we tend to be older then the player base) a lot of people talking about the older editions.

Right now I am 'settling' for 5eD&D, and so is most if not all of my friends. We all have editions or games we would rather play, but those editions/games are not all the same. So to keep our friend group going we are all playing our 3rd or 4th favorite TTRPG instead of playing with a fraction of that size group of friends there first or second choice.
If this 5.5/6/1D&D is just slight modifications to 5e, we have to decide. Do we all spend $50-$150 on new books to play the updated 5e, or do we just not keep up with modern gameing?
This. I've chosen not to keep up, but it's a hard choice after 35 years.
 

But, that doesn't make the license any less open.
The very definition of an open license is that you can use the licensed material without restrictions or charges. Adding restrictions and charges is the way you make a license less open. That is what Wizards is doing.

You may argue that the restrictions are reasonable and the charges modest. You may even be right. But it is very definitely a less open license than the 1.0 OGL.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top