What's All This About The OGL Going Away?

This last week I've seen videos, tweets, and articles all repeating an unsourced rumour that the OGL (Open Gaming License) will be going away with the advent of OneD&D, and that third party publishers would have no way of legally creating compatible material. I wanted to write an article clarifying some of these terms. I've seen articles claiming (and I quote) that "players would be unable...

This last week I've seen videos, tweets, and articles all repeating an unsourced rumour that the OGL (Open Gaming License) will be going away with the advent of OneD&D, and that third party publishers would have no way of legally creating compatible material. I wanted to write an article clarifying some of these terms.

audit-3929140_960_720.jpg

I've seen articles claiming (and I quote) that "players would be unable to legally publish homebrew content" and that WotC may be "outlawing third-party homebrew content". These claims need clarification.

What's the Open Gaming License? It was created by WotC about 20 years ago; it's analagous to various 'open source' licenses. There isn't a '5E OGL' or a '3E OGL' and there won't be a 'OneD&D OGL' -- there's just the OGL (technically there are two versions, but that's by-the-by). The OGL is non-rescindable -- it can't be cancelled or revoked. Any content released as Open Gaming Content (OGC) under that license -- which includes the D&D 3E SRD, the 5E SRD, Pathfinder's SRD, Level Up's SRD, and thousands and thousands of third party books -- remains OGC forever, available for use under the license. Genie, bottle, and all that.

So, the OGL can't 'go away'. It's been here for 20 years and it's here to stay. This was WotC's (and OGL architect Ryan Dancey's) intention when they created it 20 years ago, to ensure that D&D would forever be available no matter what happened to its parent company.


What's an SRD? A System Reference Document (SRD) contains Open Gaming Content (OGC). Anything in the 3E SRD, the 3.5 SRD, or the 5E SRD, etc., is designated forever as OGC (Open Gaming Content). Each of those SRDs contains large quantities of material, including the core rules of the respective games, and encompasses all the core terminology of the ruleset(s).

When people say 'the OGL is going away' what they probably mean to say is that there won't be a new OneD&D System Reference Document.


Does That Matter? OneD&D will be -- allegedly -- fully compatible with 5E. That means it uses all the same terminology. Armor Class, Hit Points, Warlock, Pit Fiend, and so on. All this terminology has been OGC for 20 years, and anybody can use it under the terms of the OGL. The only way it could be difficult for third parties to make compatible material for OneD&D is if OneD&D substantially changed the core terminology of the game, but at that point OneD&D would no longer be compatible with 5E (or, arguably, would even be recognizable as D&D). So the ability to create compatible third party material won't be going away.

However! There is one exception -- if your use of OneD&D material needs you to replicate OneD&D content, as opposed to simply be compatible with it (say you're making an app which has all the spell descriptions in it) and if there is no new SRD, then you won't be able to do that. You can make compatible stuff ("The evil necromancer can cast magic missile" -- the term magic missile has been OGL for two decades) but you wouldn't be able to replicate the full descriptive text of the OneD&D version of the spell. That's a big if -- if there's no new SRD.

So you'd still be able to make compatible adventures and settings and new spells and new monsters and new magic items and new feats and new rules and stuff. All the stuff 3PPs commonly do. You just wouldn't be able to reproduce the core rules content itself. However, I've been publishing material for 3E, 3.5, 4E, 5E, and Pathfinder 1E for 20 years, and the need to reproduce core rules content hasn't often come up for us -- we produce new compatible content. But if you're making an app, or spell cards, or something which needs to reproduce content from the rulebooks, you'd need an SRD to do that.

So yep. If no SRD, compatible = yes, directly reproduce = no (of course, you can indirectly reproduce stuff by rewriting it in your own words).

Branding! Using the OGL you can't use the term "Dungeons & Dragons" (you never could). Most third parties say something like "compatible with the world's most popular roleplaying game" and have some sort of '5E' logo of their own making on the cover. Something similar will no doubt happen with OneD&D -- the third party market will create terminology to indicate compatibility. (Back in the 3E days, WotC provided a logo for this use called the 'd20 System Trademark Logo' but they don't do that any more).

What if WotC didn't 'support' third party material? As discussed, nobody can take the OGL or any existing OGC away. However, WotC does have control over DMs Guild and integration with D&D Beyond or the virtual tabletop app they're making. So while they can't stop folks from making and publishing compatible stuff, they could make it harder to distribute simply by not allowing it on those three platforms. If OneD&D becomes heavily reliant on a specific platform we might find ourselves in the same situation we had in 4E, where it was harder to sell player options simply because they weren't on the official character builder app. It's not that you couldn't publish 4E player options, it's just that many players weren't interested in them if they couldn't use them in the app.

But copyright! Yes, yes, you can't copyright rules, you can't do this, you can't do that. The OGL is not relevant to copyright law -- it is a license, an agreement, a contract. By using it you agree to its terms. Sure WotC might not be able to copyright X, but you can certainly contractually agree not to use X (which is a selection of material designated as 'Product Identity') by using the license. There are arguments on the validity of this from actual real lawyers which I won't get into, but I just wanted to note that this is about a license, not copyright law.

If you don't use the Open Gaming License, of course, it doesn't apply to you. You are only bound by a license you use. So then, sure, knock yourself out with copyright law!

So, bullet point summary:
  • The OGL can't go away, and any existing OGC can't go away
  • If (that's an if) there is no new SRD, you will be able to still make compatible material but not reproduce the OneD&D content
  • Most of the D&D terminology (save a few terms like 'beholder' etc.) has been OGC for 20 years and is freely available for use
  • To render that existing OGC unusable for OneD&D the basic terminology of the entire game would have to be changed, at which point it would no longer be compatible with 5E.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


log in or register to remove this ad

Faolyn

(she/her)
So, why didn't you create something original? I mean, I wouldn't want my life's work to be a rehash of something someone else has already done.
Many people who enjoy 5e, or at least the system, also enjoy worldbuilding for themselves and want to share their worlds with other people. Also, worldbuilding is difficult and time-consuming enough without also having to create a brand-new system and playtest that system, possibly for years. And there are so many people who only play 5e that making a brand new world for a brand new system means that a lot of people won't touch it, no matter how good it is. It's easier, cheaper, and more profitable to sell your setting for an existing system, and even more so if it's 5e.
 

3pp are not leeching off WoTC and they are absolutely not encroaching on WoTC's profit. The open gaming license has allowed a flourishing symbiotic relationship which is helping to maintain the popularity of 5e. The most successful Kickstarters tend to be 5e products. This is all free advertising for WoTC as well as keeping fans playing their game.
100% agree on the bolded part. All of the 3pp stuff I've bought was to fill a void that WotC didn't have a product available to buy. For me, there was never a point where I had to make a choice to spend $50 on Tasha's Cauldron of Everything or a 3pp offering of similar material.
 

So, why didn't you create something original? I mean, I wouldn't want my life's work to be a rehash of something someone else has already done.
I am a accountant who wants to be a writer, by this logic if WB called tomorrow and said "Hey that superman fan fic is awesome would you like to come write at DC, you can start with Adventures of superman" I should say "No I don't want my work to be a rehash"

My buddy (and fellow DM/Plyaer) got 1 of his books published as part of a series by other people... tonight when I game should I tell him Paul from Enworld says you shouldn't have done that?

 

delericho

Legend
I believe the "deauthorization" part will go away as WoTC will not want to face the public backlash of killing off most content creators out there. Not sure they could legally remove original OGL anyway.
One thing to consider: WotC have a hugely beneficial relationship with One Book Shelf (in the form of DM's Guild), and we know they've struck a deal with Kickstarter, and both of those are massively dominant in their fields.

So WotC could announce that OGL 1.0 is de-authorized, and if they have OBS and Kickstarter play along by removing and/or no longer allowing 1.0 materials on their site, that would serve as a de facto de-authorization for almost everyone except Paizo - sure, you can legally create new materials (maybe), but good luck raising funds and selling it without access to Kickstarter and DriveThru...

(And, of course, One Book Shelf and Kickstarter are under no obligation to allow anything they don't like on their sites...)
 

overgeeked

B/X Known World
One thing to consider: WotC have a hugely beneficial relationship with One Book Shelf (in the form of DM's Guild), and we know they've struck a deal with Kickstarter, and both of those are massively dominant in their fields.

So WotC could announce that OGL 1.0 is de-authorized, and if they have OBS and Kickstarter play along by removing and/or no longer allowing 1.0 materials on their site, that would serve as a de facto de-authorization for almost everyone except Paizo - sure, you can legally create new materials (maybe), but good luck raising funds and selling it without access to Kickstarter and DriveThru...

(And, of course, One Book Shelf and Kickstarter are under no obligation to allow anything they don't like on their sites...)
And all WotC has to do to get the other, smaller sites to fall in line is have their lawyers rattle some cages.
 

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
One thing to consider: WotC have a hugely beneficial relationship with One Book Shelf (in the form of DM's Guild), and we know they've struck a deal with Kickstarter, and both of those are massively dominant in their fields.

So WotC could announce that OGL 1.0 is de-authorized, and if they have OBS and Kickstarter play along by removing and/or no longer allowing 1.0 materials on their site, that would serve as a de facto de-authorization for almost everyone except Paizo - sure, you can legally create new materials (maybe), but good luck raising funds and selling it without access to Kickstarter and DriveThru...

(And, of course, One Book Shelf and Kickstarter are under no obligation to allow anything they don't like on their sites...)
OBS removing every 5E title from their shelves would be a LOT of products. I can't imagine that wouldn't be costly for them, too.
 



delericho

Legend
OBS removing every 5E title from their shelves would be a LOT of products. I can't imagine that wouldn't be costly for them, too.
Surely the vast majority of those products sell only a relative handful of copies, mostly shortly after release? And they're about to lose a huge chunk of their residual value with the release of OneD&D anyway. Compared with the value to OBS of the Guild, and exclusive rights to sell the old-edition PDFs, they may be a sacrifice they'd make.

If I were WotC, I'd also offer an easy conversion agreement - reissue the PDF with a new badge and with the OGL 1.0 replaced with an abridged OGL 1.1, and we'll waive the reporting and royalties until you publish something new. If the alternative is your product disappearing, that may well mop up a lot of creators.

And even if all that fails, it doesn't really matter - as long as OBS agree not to host any new OGL 1.0 titles, the job is effectively done.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top