WotC non-OGL alternative to D&D

[Faolyn]

Because they wanted an easy licence for people to be able to make content for their system, I would guess? And being OGL makes it incredibly easy for people to legally make stuff for your system. I know they're not the only non-d20 game that's OGL.

Sounds about right. I guess it's easier/cheaper to use a standard OGL than hire lawyers to make your own, properly, as well.

 

[GMMichael]

This might be a good point to distinguish between the Wizards OGL (woggle?) and other OGLs. Because I'm pretty sure Fate owes nothing to WotC.

 

[Stormonu]

Savage Worlds has a fan license for free distribution, anything to be sold has to go through an official licencing track.

Licensing

LICENSING If you'd like to use the Savage Worlds game system for your own materials, there are currently four ways to do so: the unapproved Fan license, the Savage Worlds Adventurer’s Guild on OneBookShelf.com (including DriveThruRPG.com and other platforms), the Media Network Content...

peginc.com

 

[Ruin Explorer]

This might be a good point to distinguish between the Wizards OGL (woggle?) and other OGLs. Because I'm pretty sure Fate owes nothing to WotC.

Ryan Dancey was pretty sure the OGL was impossible to take away or negatively change.

 

[J.Quondam]

This might be a good point to distinguish between the Wizards OGL (woggle?) and other OGLs. Because I'm pretty sure Fate owes nothing to WotC.

Doesn't WotC literally own "the" OGL, though? It begins:

OPEN GAME LICENSE Version 1.0a​

The following text is the property of Wizards of the Coast, Inc. and is Copyright 2000 Wizards of the Coast, Inc ("Wizards"). All Rights Reserved.​

which I pulled from the Fate SRD licensing site.

There are other open licenses, but when one says "the OGL," I think they're referring to that license specifically, the one created and released by WotC.

I could get behind making a distinction between OGL 1.0, the "actually open OGL", and this latest OGL 1.1 "the not-really-open OGL in name only."

 

[Voadam]

Is there a version of Earthdawn where the rules aren't dreadful? Serious question, because I need to get it if so. Conceptually ED is great, and for 1993, the rules aren't terrible, but for 2022...

I know they did a couple of other system conversions at one point such as pathfinder 1e. Not sure if there is a savage worlds but I think it was like three system conversions with a core book, monster book, etc. for each.

I am only really familiar with the Earthdawn 1e stuff.

 

[Cadence]

From Twitter ...

 

[Random Task]

The Fantasy Trip. Also probably qualifies as OSR.

Warhammer

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I know they did a couple of other system conversions at one point such as pathfinder 1e. Not sure if there is a savage worlds but I think it was like three system conversions with a core book, monster book, etc. for each.

I am only really familiar with the Earthdawn 1e stuff.

They did do a Savage Worlds but it apparently sucks.

I wish the 4E ED had gone ahead.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Is there a version of Earthdawn where the rules aren't dreadful? Serious question, because I need to get it if so. Conceptually ED is great, and for 1993, the rules aren't terrible, but for 2022...

The problem with questions like this is it makes a presumption that the reader may not agree with, so its hard to answer the question since it does not detail what about the system is "dreadful". I ran a whole campaign using the original system back in the day and did not find them terrible, but I'll also admit that my taste in rules has not changed that substantially in 30 years, so...