An IP lawyer just broke down the new OGL draft (v1.2)

[Minigiant]

I took @Minigiant to be calling for a wider range of RPGs including non-D&D ones. So I don't feel it refutes their suggestion to point out that D&D derivatives are mechanically very complicated!

And I would like nothing more than to see Minigiant’s wish come to fruition. I just think the comparison used (videogames) isn’t apt.
Videogames are, on average, massively easier to get into than TTRPGs. Learning a new tabletop rpg will often require more time and effort than the average casual fan is willing to invest, which doesn’t happen with 95% of videogames.

The point is no one is fighting for being a new entry point for TTRPGs.

Everyone wants have a sematic and legal fight the OGL to be open in order to make more and more advanced versions of the D&D

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

I don't think the Monster Manual from 1997 is open game content though. My claim to commercial exploitation rights over the poor thing is almost entirely based on the OGL 1.0(a) (and of course the fact that's it's just not that original to begin with). Hasbro/WotC is now trying to monopolize it, and I'm not okay with that. Agreements ought to be kept.

Errr... wut? I was just posting what I thought was an interesting history of the owlbear in D&D...

 

[demoss]

You can learn a new video game or board game in 15 mins. TTRPGs take days, months, or even years if we’re talking about the GM role. Not the same ballpark, at all.

This is false. There isn't a single game where learning to GM takes years. There may be GMs who choose to do that, yes, but it is absolutely not required.

There isn't a single game where you can't play within 15 min of arriving at the table. (The first game is going to be a learning experience, yes, but it's a game, not studying rules.)

 

[Olrox17]

This is false. There isn't a single game where learning to GM takes years. There may be GMs who choose to do that, yes, but it is absolutely not required.

There isn't a single game where you can't play within 15 min of arriving at the table. (The first game is going to be a learning experience, yes, but it's a game, not studying rules.)

I've seen people failing to become DMs at all, actually. They gave up when they realized the required reading to be at least remotely decent at it.

Also, I guess you've been blessed to only play with either very intelligent or very hardcore people. I've had players still not knowing which die to roll for attacks and damage months into a campaign. Some of them were actually good MMO players.
Funny that, it's almost like having a game engine doing all the math for you, and presenting crucial information readily instead of you having to look for stuff through a hundred pages book is somehow...easier.

The point is no one is fighting for being a new entry point for TTRPGs.

Everyone wants have a sematic and legal fight the OGL to be open in order to make more and more advanced versions of the D&D

Yes. I understand your frustration at that, but creating content for the d20 system is just going to guarantee better sales and it's understandable that 3PP would rather do that.

 

[Minigiant]

Yes. I understand your frustration at that, but creating content for the d20 system is just going to guarantee better sales and it's understandable that 3PP would rather do that.

My point is this whole drama and chaos with WOTC was craeated by the community indirectly.

If the Fantasy TTRPG community
does not fund competetion between the top brands in Fantasy TTRPGs or TTRPGs in general
and
insist that legally the top brand should have limited options to make sustainable profits

This is what happens. Yeah WOTC make a 1billion last year. But it has to make 1.2 billion this year now. And there's no 500m-1b company for them to worry about when making decisions. So there's only us to look at.

I work in corporate. But my corp has competitors. This keeps the execs from promoting policies that hurt our customer. How much easier my job would be if our closest competitor was 1/10th our strength. My policies and attitude to customers would be some much worse.

 

[pemerton]

Re the Owlbear. One of the Torchbearer books has Owlbears in it. And BWHQ doesn't have any sort of licence from WotC that I'm aware of - they don't claim to publish under the OGL, for instance.

But their blood-sucking four-winged flocking parasites are called Stryxes, not Stirges.

 

[mamba]

Mike Shae (SlyFlourish) has some thoughts too:

Don't attempt to "deauthorize" the OGL 1.0a. The best way to begin to repair the D&D brand is to not attempt to "deauthorize" the OGL 1.0a. It's not even clear it's legal to do so

Release lists of the names of species, spells, magic items, and monsters in the 5.1 SRD under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license. Include the lists of names of species, monsters, magic items, and spells. This is very likely material we could use anyway under copyright law but it helps if we know that WOTC agreed.

Use independent third party arbitration for hateful content. There's no way WOTC should have the sole right to decide what is hateful content.

Add "Royalty Free". The current draft OGL 1.2 does not describe itself as a "royalty free" license

Make it Truly Irrevocable. As written, the OGL 1.2 redefines irrevocable to mean that the license can't be revoked when applied to a product but not that the license itself can't be revoked. This license, on its own and applied to their system resource documents, should be irrevocable. This is the whole reason we're in this problem to begin with.

Rewrite the termination clause. As written, the termination clause in the OGL 1.2 is far too wide. Who determines if a licensee has infringed on WOTC's intellectual property? How is that arbitrated?

Rewrite the severability clause. As written, the severability clause in 9(d) almost certainly gives WOTC the ability to invalidate the license. Given that WOTC intends to attempt to deauthorize the OGL 1.0a on a technicality, I have no faith WOTC won't try it again here.

Section 3(a) - Strike language prohibiting creators from seeking injunctive relief.

Section 6(e) - Strike or rewrite to account for international laws. A creator in the US can't be expected to abide by laws in other countries and vice versa.

Section 7(b)(ii) - Expand time to cure to 180 days and better define what actions are sufficient to cure a breach.

 

[Olrox17]

My point is this whole drama and chaos with WOTC was craeated by the community indirectly.

If the Fantasy TTRPG community
does not fund competetion between the top brands in Fantasy TTRPGs or TTRPGs in general
and
insist that legally the top brand should have limited options to make sustainable profits

This is what happens. Yeah WOTC make a 1billion last year. But it has to make 1.2 billion this year now. And there's no 500m-1b company for them to worry about when making decisions. So there's only us to look at.

I work in corporate. But my corp has competitors. This keeps the execs from promoting policies that hurt our customer. How much easier my job would be if our closest competitor was 1/10th our strength. My policies and attitude to customers would be some much worse.

I understand, a true competitor for WotC and for the D&D ecosystem would be great, it would promote evolution in the hobby, and but my point is that's easier said than done.

 

[pemerton]

In my view, there is an obvious in-principle competitor to D&D and D&D-like RPGs: AW and AW-like RPGs.

There are two obstacles that I think exist, though.

One is that AW doesn't support a commercial publishing model based on selling people lists of mechanical elements and stories to play through.

The other is that most RPGers appear to want a type of gameplay that is based around lists of mechanical elements plus stories to play through. The best-known non-D&D example of that that I know is CoC and variants like Trail of Cthulhu. But for whatever reason those don't seem to be able to grow as big as D&D.

 

[demoss]

Also, I guess you've been blessed to only play with either very intelligent or very hardcore people. I've had players still not knowing which die to roll for attacks and damage months into a campaign. Some of them were actually good MMO players.

Oh, I've had players like this - and guess what: they're the same in boardgames.

They can still play just fine, they just need a bit of support.

I've also seen people fail to become GMs or DMs, but mostly because of unrealistic expectations related to either performance at the table, or learning lots of material by heart.