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

I do not really see that relevance, other than to be surprised WotC wants to go after that little money at the risk of alienating a not insignificant part of their customers.
We don't know the rate, or whether it will be progressive, but it would seem to offer Hasbro some protection for certain kinds of scenarios. For example, just making numbers up here: Do you think Paizo would have chosen to build a business on the OGL if they'd been required to pay a royalty graduated up to 10% on any revenues the company earned, knowing they not only wouldn't be able to use the D&D brand but would have to compete with it?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

mamba

Legend
We don't know the rate, or whether it will be progressive, but it would seem to offer Hasbro some protection for certain kinds of scenarios. For example, just making numbers up here: Do you think Paizo would have chosen to build a business on the OGL if they'd been required to pay a royalty graduated up to 10% on any revenues the company earned, knowing they not only wouldn't be able to use the D&D brand but would have to compete with it?
they get 20% from DMsG for more than they offer here, so let’s just say 10% for the sake of the argument. Not that we know how much the top 20 make either ;)

So basically you see this as a deterrence more than a way to make money directly. My issue with that is that anyone is still free to branch off 5e under OGL 1.0. I totally see this as a deterrence to adopting 1.1, but not to a second Paizo using the current SRD.
 


So basically you see this as a deterrence more than a way to make money directly. My issue with that is that anyone is still free to branch off 5e under OGL 1.0. I totally see this as a deterrence to adopting 1.1, but not to a second Paizo using the current SRD.
I guess I'd just say, it probably isn't about "so little money," which was your comment that I was responding to. I don't know how much revenue the top 20 are generating, and I'm not going to go crawl through Kickstarters to try to figure it out, but I don't think Wizards is doing it for a little money. ;)

If I were doing it, I wouldn't want someone doing with 1.1 what Paizo did with 1.0/a. I wouldn't want it because everybody's got a boss, but also, it strikes me as a really bad outcome for the business. So this seems like the kind of thing I might do if I didn't want someone taking 1.1 and building a multi-million dollar business on it. As for someone doing a Paizo with 5e under 1.0/a, that seems like a risk. Might even be Paizo again! ;) I don't think they can put that horse back in the shed, but maybe they think they can at least make it less likely that the next horse gets out.

Note that I have no idea what anyone at Wizards or Hasbro actually thinks about this. Maybe none of the executives have a problem with Paizo or Pathfinder for reasons that aren't apparent to me, or maybe it's a minor annoyance in the grand scheme of things that I don't get to see from my seat on the sidelines. My "analysis" could be entirely ignorant.
 
Last edited:

mamba

Legend
I guess I'd just say, it probably isn't about "so little money," which was your comment that I was responding to. I don't know how much revenue the top 20 are generating, and I'm not going to go crawl through Kickstarters to try to figure it out, but I don't think Wizards is doing it for a little money. ;)
relative to the 1 billion target, this is peanuts.

Let’s do some much too simple math. Each of the top 20 makes $2M per year, 25% of which is profit, with WotC getting 10% of that. That amounts to 1M or 0.1% of their goal.

Don’t think we are off by a lot here, double it if you want to, still amounts to nothing. The risk vs reward is much too skewed towards risk imo
If I were doing it, I wouldn't want someone doing with 1.1 what Paizo did with 1.0/a. I wouldn't want it because everybody's got a boss, but also, it strikes me as a really bad outcome for the business.
WotC has their best years right now, so how bad is the outcome really… incidentally (or not) their worst years were when they tried this last time. How well D&D does will depend on WotC’s actions and products much more than anything else - and right now they try hard to become unpopular (again)
So this seems like the kind of thing I might do if I didn't want someone taking 1.1 and building a multi-million dollar business on it. As for someone doing a Paizo with 5e under 1.0/a, that seems like a risk.
Why? 1.0 is much safer than 1.1 might turn out to be, Paizo already proved that there is no risk, and it costs you less as well ;)
 
Last edited:



darjr

I crit!
It would be Ironic if after all the video production and software and hiring crew to deal with this they get so few takers it ends up costing them money.
 

Hussar

Legend
As far as some sort of review process goes, how long does it take to put something up on Dms Guild? Is there a delay when you put something up for sale there?

If there isn’t, then it is pretty safe to assume that there won’t be going forward.
 

darjr

I crit!
As far as some sort of review process goes, how long does it take to put something up on Dms Guild? Is there a delay when you put something up for sale there?

If there isn’t, then it is pretty safe to assume that there won’t be going forward.
There used to be a terrible wait for convention created content. Sometimes there still is an existing wait on the remaining convention content that isn't Dungeon Craft stuff. In fact the DC program was created so they could back off of CCCs.

The time it takes to get simple AL guidance out is kind of a running joke now. For instance the Dragonlance stuff is only now in "beta" form. It's not even on the main web site yet.

One of the recent AL documents ended up being just a few notes in a blog entry. I think it still isn't linked from the main site either.

This is their public play program. It directly makes them money.

AL Content on the DMSGuild has traditionally been among the best selling content.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top