New OGL - what would be acceptable? (+)

[Greg Benage]

It wasn't intended for someone to use 3.5e to make 3.75e, 3.8e, or 3.9999e and compete with 3.5e or the eventual 4e. Especially not for free.

I think Ryan and Peter and the other decision-makers definitely contemplated the OGL being used for complete games, and that was part of its intent. I don't think their intent was for competitors to use the OGL and the Open Game Content they released under it to clone any version of D&D. If that was their intent, why weren't character creation rules designated as Open Game Content? In my view, their intent was always, "Make whatever you want, as long as we're selling Players Handbooks!"

If I were Paizo or a retroclone publisher with significant business, the thing that would keep me up at night is character creation. It's core, it's fundamental to this genre of games, and it was never in any OGC released by Wizards. Would a court find that I crossed the line from function to expression in my character creation rules, and therefore, find that I infringed on Wizards' copyright? Is there anything in there I reproduced a little too closely?

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Just leave out the part about 1.0a being deauthorized, and offer some incentives for going with the new license.

 

[Olrox17]

Just leave out the part about 1.0a being deauthorized, and offer some incentives for going with the new license.

That's exactly what I would have done in their shoes, and I can't fathom why they aren't doing that.

"Hello 3rd party publishers! The OGL for OneD&D will have royalties. We will determine the exact amounts after consulting with all of you and the OGL document will state that we'll never increase them. In return for those royalties, you will now be part of the D&D ecosystem we are building! Your content will be fully integrated into DnD Beyond, in our VTT service, and into our content online stores. We will do whatever we can to help your content succeed!
Of course, if you aren't interested in the OneD&D project and the opportunities it'll open, the old OGL is always available."

Or something like that.

 

[Scribe]

Impossible to know and likely incorrect.

Had I won a huge lottery jackpot between 2004-2008, I 100% would have funded a 3.75e with many of the 3e complaints designed out.

No offense intended here, but if Wizards doesnt move off the 3.5 design line, do you honestly believe people would have moved to a hypothetical 3.75 and abandoned the D&D name to the same degree as they with 4e?

 

[MonsterEnvy]

That's exactly what I would have done in their shoes, and I can't fathom why they aren't doing that.

They might do that, the actual 1.1 has not been put out yet.

 

[Olrox17]

They might do that, the actual 1.1 has not been put out yet.

We can only hope the backlash will convince them, if their own intellect didn't already.

 

[Reynard]

That's not the argument being made.

The OGL 1.0 allows you to design a form of D&D with WOTC's system and compete against WOTC's current and future systems.
It was designed to allow the system to live in case the caretaker dies, not allow the system betray and attempt to kill the caretaker.

That's the opposite of what happened from Paizo's perspective, and apparently A LOT of D&D fans agreed. Whether it is accurate or even reasonable for people to feel that 4E and the GSL was an attempt to kill the "real" D&D is irrelevant. Some people felt that way and used the OGL to "save" D&D. Multiple companies in fact -- Castles and Crusades is another example -- but only Paizo succeeded at any level worth WotC's concern.

 

[Reynard]

They might do that, the actual 1.1 has not been put out yet.

The problem is that it doesn't matter. They showed their hand. Only a fool would keep on keeping on with the OGL now.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

The problem is that it doesn't matter. They showed their hand. Only a fool would keep on keeping on with the OGL now.

Yes it does, so long as it says something different.

 

[Reynard]

Yes it does, so long as it says something different.

If they backpedal now, it just means they are looking for a different strategy to accomplish the same thing. The OGL is not safe.