Paizo Announces New Irrevocable Open RPG License To Replace the OGL

​

Paizo, the maker of Pathfinder, has just announced a new open license for use with RPGs. The license will not be owned by Paizo - or by any TTRPG company, and will be stewarded by Azora Law, a company which represents several tabletop gaming companies, until it finds its home with an independent non-profit. This new license is designed to be irrevocable.

We believe, as we always have, that open gaming makes games better, improves profitability for all involved, and enriches the community of gamers who participate in this amazing hobby. And so we invite gamers from around the world to join us as we begin the next great chapter of open gaming with the release of a new open, perpetual, and irrevocable Open RPG Creative License (ORC).

The new Open RPG Creative License will be built system agnostic for independent game publishers under the legal guidance of Azora Law, an intellectual property law firm that represents Paizo and several other game publishers. Paizo will pay for this legal work. We invite game publishers worldwide to join us in support of this system-agnostic license that allows all games to provide their own unique open rules reference documents that open up their individual game systems to the world. To join the effort and provide feedback on the drafts of this license, please sign up by using this form.

In addition to Paizo, Kobold Press, Chaosium, Green Ronin, Legendary Games, Rogue Genius Games, and a growing list of publishers have already agreed to participate in the Open RPG Creative License, and in the coming days we hope and expect to add substantially to this group.

The ORC will not be owned by Paizo, nor will it be owned by any company who makes money publishing RPGs. Azora Law’s ownership of the process and stewardship should provide a safe harbor against any company being bought, sold, or changing management in the future and attempting to rescind rights or nullify sections of the license. Ultimately, we plan to find a nonprofit with a history of open source values to own this license (such as the Linux Foundation).

Read more on Paizo's blog.

 

[darjr]

 

[darjr]

Pathfinder 2E - PF2E Gurus teach me! +

Basically what would you say to someone looking to give it a wirl? What pitfalls, what works, what are some of the best interpretations, what is a good intro adventure. How do I navigate the web for more? Like what’s the paces at Paizo, what are the good 3pp places. I ask a lot because am...

www.enworld.org

 

[dbolack]

Generally these CC licenses forbid making a profit when borrowing from CC-licensed content.

This means, people who put in effort to build up the content lack a way to gain sustenance from their effort.

The OGL 1.0a solved this problem.

To the best of my knowledge none if the CC licenses let you mix open and closed material in a publication, so no concept of PI.

 

[Branduil]

This is basically the best possible news to come out of this debacle. Make no mistake, lots of people will still suffer because of WotC's decision, but this at least paves the way for a better future.

I hope the drafters of ORC will also address some of the legitimate criticisms of the OGL 1.0a, like:

For most users, accepting this license almost certainly means you have fewer rights to use elements of Dungeons and Dragons than you would otherwise. For example, absent this agreement, you have a legal right to create a work using noncopyrightable elements of D&D or making fair use of copyrightable elements and to say that that work is compatible with Dungeons and Dragons. In many contexts you also have the right to use the logo to name the game (something called “nominative fair use” in trademark law). You can certainly use some of the language, concepts, themes, descriptions, and so forth. Accepting this license almost certainly means signing away rights to use these elements. Like Sauron’s rings of power, the gift of the OGL came with strings attached.

 

[Greg Benage]

I hope the drafters of ORC will also address some of the legitimate criticisms of the OGL 1.0a, like:

I think it will be extremely interesting to watch this develop.

 

[BMaC]

Generally these CC licenses forbid making a profit when borrowing from CC-licensed content.

This means, people who put in effort to build up the content lack a way to gain sustenance from their effort.

The OGL 1.0a solved this problem.

That's not true. All of Wikipedia is under a CC license and can be used for commercial purposes. The big thing about a CC license is that a user cannot stop another person from using CC content. So, for example,a photo of a castle under a CC license can be used by anyone in a commercial publication but must reproduce the CC license. There is a non commercial CC license, cc-by-nc, but it is mostly used by universities and such.

 

[Clint_L]

Aside from everything else, this just seems like good timing, and here is why I think that.

I was a teen during D&D's first explosion in the early 80s. But by the latter part of the decade, it was in decline. A big reason for that is my D&D generation was growing out of it - many left the game, and many of those who remained were ready to try new things. We were RPG curious. So you got the rise of a lot of different systems, some of which got pretty huge - Shadowrun, Vampire, Call of Cthulhu, etc.

Similarly, 5e seems to have started to decline in the last year or so, and I think it's for similar reasons. It basically hit peak D&D for this generation, and now a lot of players are aging out of it. Many will leave, but those who remain are interested in trying new things (anecdotally, the students in D&D Club at my school have been mixing in other RPGs for awhile). So I think the table is set for someone to offer viable competition.

So here come Paizo and friends offering a new system at the exact moment that lots of fans were probably ready for that anyway, while Hasbro help out by doing their best Dirk Dastardly impression. I like their chances.

 

[Yaarel]

That's not true. All of Wikipedia is under a CC license and can be used for commercial purposes. The big thing about a CC license is that a user cannot stop another person from using CC content. There is a non commercial CC license, cc-by-nc, but it is mostly used by universities and such.

Wikipedia is a situation where modifying the webpage itself is noncommercial, and these modifications can inherently be used and modified by others.

Creating a game Product Identity is something different − even when that Product Identity itself includes modifications of certain Open Content.

 

[TreChriron]

Thank you Paizo!! Just. Wow. Thank you.

WEG D6? That can't be right they lost the license before then. You thinking of somwthing else?

WEG made all D6 books from WEG open content under the 1.0a OGL before WEG winded down. You can learn more at;

• OpenD6 - Home | OpenD6
• OpenD6 - OGC
• The OpenD6 Project | A System Reference Document and Development Forum for OpenD6.

 

[John R Davis]

I hope all these new games still use d20s otherwise the plastic waste issue will get very bad indeed!!!!