We got an official leak of One D&D OGL 1.1! Watch Our Discussion And Reactions!
Alzrius
The EN World kitten
According to the Gizmodo article, the new OGL v1.1 "takes a strong stance against bigoted content, explicitly stating the company may terminate the agreement if third-party creators publish material that is “blatantly racist, sexist, homophobic, trans-phobic, bigoted or otherwise discriminatory.”"
While on its face this is a good thing, it ignores the fact that there can be reasonable disagreements about what constitutes any of those things (even using the "blatantly" qualifier). The idea that describing a new humanoid monster as "savages," for instance, could be described as blatantly racist, and assigning fixed ability score modifiers could be viewed much the same insofar as it's indicative of biological determinism. The possibility that WotC revokes the agreement for a product that someone else puts out with the aforementioned content is not zero; that's a level of uncertainty I foresee a lot of publishers not wanting to deal with.
It's entirely possible to go too far in pursuit of a good thing, and this strikes me as an instance of that line being crossed.
While on its face this is a good thing, it ignores the fact that there can be reasonable disagreements about what constitutes any of those things (even using the "blatantly" qualifier). The idea that describing a new humanoid monster as "savages," for instance, could be described as blatantly racist, and assigning fixed ability score modifiers could be viewed much the same insofar as it's indicative of biological determinism. The possibility that WotC revokes the agreement for a product that someone else puts out with the aforementioned content is not zero; that's a level of uncertainty I foresee a lot of publishers not wanting to deal with.
It's entirely possible to go too far in pursuit of a good thing, and this strikes me as an instance of that line being crossed.
Remathilis
Legend
You can thank NU-TSR for that.
Ondath
Hero
I just read this and I hate being justified in my worries. So they are actually killing OGL v1.0a entirely. I really hope publishers like EN World and Paizo have a response ready because I really hate the idea of the entire d20-adjacent space suddenly becoming WotC's vassals.
mamba
Legend
“There is no mention of perpetual, worldwide rights given to creators (which was present in section 4 of the original OGL), and one of the caveats is that the company “can modify or terminate this agreement for any reason whatsoever, provided We give thirty (30) days’ notice.””
with all of this we are at a more restrictive GSL, there is no way any of this is received well by anyone
with all of this we are at a more restrictive GSL, there is no way any of this is received well by anyone
Greg Benage
Legend
Holy naughty word: 20-25% royalty on Qualifying Revenue.
Well...that's, like, double what I considered an unrealistic worst-case scenario. That's a "don't try to make real money on this" kind of number.
Well...that's, like, double what I considered an unrealistic worst-case scenario. That's a "don't try to make real money on this" kind of number.
BrokenTwin
Biological Disaster
So... WotC can't force creators currently using the OGL to switch to this new license, can they? That's ridiculous. Feeling a lot better about the fact that I haven't bought any of their books in years, but actually starting to get worried for the people whose work I have been supporting.
Vaalingrade
Legend
Stop trying to make me like this.
Microsoft was successfully sued for monopolistic practices because they included Internet Explorer with Windows 95.
mamba
Legend
they cannot force you onto 1.1, but they sure try to force you off 1.0
Similar Threads
