WotC Unveils Draft of New Open Gaming License

As promised earlier this week, WotC has posted the draft OGL v.1.2 license for the community to see.

A survey will be going live tomorrow for feedback.

Starting the OGL ‘Playtest’

In this article, you can review a draft of OGL 1.2, submit feedback via survey, and learn about a Creative Commons license that puts D&D's core mech...

www.dndbeyond.com

The current iteration contains clauses which prohibit offensive content, applies only to TTRPG books and PDFs, no right of ownership going to WotC, and an optional creator content badge for your products.

One important element, the ability for WotC to change the license at-will has also been addressed, allowing the only two specific changes they can make -- how you cite WotC in your work, and contact details.

This license will be irrevocable.

The OGL v1.0a is still being 'de-authorized'.

 

[Kinematics]

Okay, people smarter than me: why did they go with CC for the "core mechanics"?

Most likely because that's the part that is most un-copyrightable (and thus they risk the least), while also being something that generally should be taken as a whole (which is where CC works best), and being an existing and known licensing system that is entirely out of their control, and thus not subject to the fears that 1.1 brought up.

 

[Alzrius]

Let me say this for a third time. You don't need a 3.5 SRD to have a 3.5 rules system. There was never an AD&D or B/X SRD, and yet the clones used the OGL and newer SRD to make them. Including....gasp...descending AC! There isn't more work needed than before. It's always been that way. So 3.5 fans can do what OSR fans have been doing for 20 years.

Are you suggesting that the 5.1 SRD can be used to retro-clone the 3.5 SRD?

 

[Vaalingrade]

So your argument is "I want to create a product that uses these rules, I just don't want to put in the work."?

Yeah, not a lot of sympathy here.

This is the same terrible argumentation that's been with us sense the start. We're talking about an engine that people thne built their own things off of.

What you're saying here is: "Oh, you want to just make art without weaving your own canvas and crushing your own beetles for carmine red? Pfft. Lazy Scrub."

 

[eyeheartawk]

At the same time, it's all starting to make sense as to what they're actually after and willing to burn their house down over: all the monsters and spell names we were all shocked were in the SRD back in the day.

Is that it? Is there much more of that in the 3.5 SRD than in the 5.1 SRD? Are they just clawing back some capitalized nouns?

 

[mamba]

So...pre-existing stuff is fine, but no new 1.0??

Is that right?

Essentially. Keep selling PF1/LevelUp/OSR stuff, but...nothing new?

I take this as the new stuff needs to be under 1.2, not as there cannot be any new stuff

 

[Nikosandros]

So your argument is "I want to create a product that uses these rules, I just don't want to put in the work."?

Yeah, not a lot of sympathy here.

No, I want the existing work to still be expanded without everyone (OSRIC; OSE, etc.) having to start from scratch.

I generally like your posts, but how about you tone down the aggressivness a notch and not misrepresent my position? I'd appreciate it.

 

[mamba]

First glance, what they cannot actually copyright they are issuing under Creative Commons. Then they make dubious and overreaching claims on things that they probably cannot copyright and are sweeping into OGL 1.2 which has various poison pills. And they are deauhtorizing 1.0a.

Nope.

are we reading the same announcement?

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

No, we don't. That's what the courts are for.

Good luck with that.

I've met a lot of people who talk big about litigation. "It's about the principle!"

That usually lasts for about, oh, one ... maybe two bills.

That's not a good enough reason, for me at least. They don't get to renege on their agreement because they've decided that they don't like it anymore.

Actually, that's exactly why we have courts and attorneys. Because one side (or the other) wants to do something else. I mean ... I hope you never learn what "efficient breach" is.

I feel quite comfortable with that prospect, actually, save for the fact that I don't think I (we) will die here.

No one is going to die. I'm just saying that they have a reasonable concern, this is common for businesses, they can point to a recent real event that many people are familiar with, and given that they have retreated on everything else ... I don't think most 5e fans are going to be as supportive when the only thing remaining is, "Let's make sure they have no rights to defend the product against racists appropriating it."

But maybe I'm wrong. It happens all the time.

 

[Bedrockgames]

It looks like it affirmatively de-authorizes the OGL 1.0a

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

1. We're giving the core D&D mechanics to the community through a Creative Commons license, which means that they are fully in your hands.
2. If you want to use quintessentially D&D content from the SRD such as owlbears and magic missile, OGL 1.2 will provide you a perpetual, irrevocable license to do so.

Huh. Those both sound good. Obviously, the devil is in the details, but this is an interesting start.