I think they got what they wanted

[Malmuria]

Some assumptions: what Hasbro/wotc wants in revoking OGL 1.0a is not 3p royalties, which wouldn't amount to much, but complete control over Dnd as an intellectual property and to crowd out as much competition as possible in advance of Onednd. Their strategy would be to aggressively license their IP for movies, games, tv shows, etc, and to make playing onednd something that happens only on their platforms with their products, as much as possible.

If those assumptions are true, I think they got what they wanted? Third parties will not be making onednd compatible material, but instead developing their own games/heartbreakers for a fairly niche audience. Meanwhile, they can probably find beyond+vtt subscription tiers that many people will find acceptable. Arguably, 5e is already written in such a way that people find using online tools (character sheets, automation) to be the best way to play the game.

In sum, I think onednd will be broadly acceptable to people looking to get into dnd. The viral backlash is real, and I do think long term wotc is misunderstanding both the function of third parties and the appeal of ttrpgs vs other media. Medium term, it's a viable plan (even if cynical and soulless.)

 

[Scribe]

Yes, they muddied the water enough to get the focus on things largely not relevant to their short/medium term goals, and we can see it here in practice.

 

[payn]

Right. Success will live and die on the VTT product. If its easy to use, expansive of TTRPG needs, and looks great mission accomplished. If its too expensive, doesn't work right, a PITA to use, sales will go limp.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I actually wonder (tin foil hat on) if they would have gotten here just by the leaks without actual action. They may have been able to do this with less cost. On the other hand maybe they needed the lawyers to come up with "If it doesn't say X" or else it would just be wishful thinking.

I also disagree with you on what they want.

Third parties will not be making onednd compatible material, but instead developing their own games/heartbreakers for a fairly niche audience.

I bet there will still be some small 3pp support, and if they continue (and I bet they will) with the DMs guild there will be that.
I don't think they wanted no one, they just wanted to cut the biggest ones out.

 

[Charlaquin]

Yep, you’re 100% correct. Even if the OGL 1.0 ends up surviving, it’s likely that most 3rd party publishers won’t want to use it (especially once ORC materializes as an alternative), since WotC has proven willing to pull the rug out from under them. That means WotC will achieve their goal of tighter control over the D&D market either way. The only way WotC can actually lose here is if they do “deauthorize” 1.0, someone tries to use it anyway, WotC takes them to court over it, and loses. That would firmly establish that WotC can’t actually get rid of the OGL, so 3PPs could freely use it without fear.

 

[MarkB]

One D&D. I remember thinking it was laughably meaningless marketing gobbledygook when it was announced. Little did I know how blatantly they spelled out their intentions with that name.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I don't think that they got what they wanted- they probably had a lot of different assumptions going in. Like that the 3PPs would be amenable to signing up to something (even if they had to negotiate) and that the NDAs would be respected, for instance. They certainly could not have expected the massive blowback.

But yeah, once everything settles ... this is likely what they want. The royalties don't really matter to them; what matters is the right to exclude - part of the whole need to control the brand and the IP. Whether the long-term plan is successful will depend a lot on the quality of their upcoming products (movie, tv shows, VTT, etc.).

 

[Amrûnril]

If Wizards wanted their digital tools to be the only ones available, all they needed to do was not renew their contracts with Roll20 and other companies in that space. Maybe someone would try to make compatible tools anyway, but I suspect WotC would be on much stronger legal and PR footing litigating the details of how the OGL applies to digital tools than trying to retract it in its entierty.

If the goal was control over D&D as a multimedia franchise, they largely had that already. The SRD licensed under the OGL contains tabletop mechanics, not the IP that would actually translate into other media.

WotC hasn't gained any meaningful increase in control over the parts of the D&D IP that the corporate leadership actually seems to care about, but they've significantly damaged the brand perception and goodwill that make D&D a valuable IP to control in the first place.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I am convinced it was their intention all along to create a poisonous contract no one would sign, giving them control over the game. We will see just what can be under copyright protection and what can't in the next few years I'm guessing, as it gets challenged in court.

 

[Blue]

Some assumptions: what Hasbro/wotc wants in revoking OGL 1.0a is not 3p royalties, which wouldn't amount to much, but complete control over Dnd as an intellectual property and to crowd out as much competition as possible in advance of Onednd. Their strategy would be to aggressively license their IP for movies, games, tv shows, etc, and to make playing onednd something that happens only on their platforms with their products, as much as possible.

If those assumptions are true, I think they got what they wanted? Third parties will not be making onednd compatible material, but instead developing their own games/heartbreakers for a fairly niche audience. Meanwhile, they can probably find beyond+vtt subscription tiers that many people will find acceptable. Arguably, 5e is already written in such a way that people find using online tools (character sheets, automation) to be the best way to play the game.

In sum, I think onednd will be broadly acceptable to people looking to get into dnd. The viral backlash is real, and I do think long term wotc is misunderstanding both the function of third parties and the appeal of ttrpgs vs other media. Medium term, it's a viable plan (even if cynical and soulless.)

They could have gotten complete control over OneD&D by just not releasing it under the OGL. They don't have to release it under any license, or they could easily release it under a different license that meats their needs like they did with 4e.

They obviously did not want huge numbers of subscribers dropping from DnDBeyond, so even if they have not yet given up getting what they wanted, they could have accomplished it in a much better way for them. So even if they haven't yet given up on what they want, they got things they did not want, and for all we know they will have to give up on things they do want - the game isn't over yet.