OGL v1.2 Survey Feedback: 'Hasn't Hit The Mark'

WotC has shared some of the (still ongoing) survey feedback following the release of the Open Game License v1.2 draft last week.

We want to thank the community for continuing to share their OGL 1.2 feedback with us. Already more than 10,000 of you have responded to the survey, which will close on February 3.

So far, survey responses have made it clear that this draft of OGL 1.2 hasn't hit the mark for our community. Please continue to share your thoughts.

Thanks to direct feedback from you and our virtual tabletop partners it's also clear the draft VTT policy missed the mark. Animations were clearly the wrong focus. We'll do better next round.

We will continue to keep an article updated with any new details posted here or elsewhere on the OGL. You can read it here

The linked FAQ (no, not THAT linked FAQ, the one where they say the original OGL cannot be revoked, I think we're supposed to ignore that one!) indicates that recent rumours about $30 subscriptions and homebrew content are false. They also say that they will be revising the 'harmful content' morality clause in the recent OGL draft, which in practice gives WotC power to shut down competitors at will.

You can still take the survey here until Feb 3rd.

 

[TheSword]

Absolutely. If they get away with revoking any version of the license, they can revoke any version of the license - and they all become worthless.

A license isn’t worthless unless it’s permanent. It’s not as valuable, but it’s not worthless. As the millions of dollars profit made by 3pp up to this point demonstrates.

 

[dave2008]

Okay, I will acknowldge your original statement and its intent:
"The only public draft that was released."

I believe the conflict on my part was due to the terms of this sentence. Once the NDA was broken, and 1.1 was released, it was public. Regardless of intent of Wizards.

I was also misreading your statement as a statement the first was a draft as well. I literally blame my eyes.

Apologies. I retract my general argument on the subject. Would you rather I edit the posts, or leave them for public record, or add retractions per post?

We are good, no need to do anything else on my part. I think this whole issue gets us all worked up and sometimes our minds work faster than our eyes!

 

[delericho]

A license isn’t worthless unless it’s permanent. It’s not as valuable, but it’s not worthless. As the millions of dollars profit made by 3pp up to this point demonstrates.

No, but a license that can be revoked on a whim is.

 

[MNblockhead]

We can't get so holier than thou that we forget that a lot of 3PP rely on a relationship with WotC to make a living. They want D&D to succeed, and they want to keep access to that large, concentrated marketplace. Blowing it all up might feel great for some folks with no skin in the game, but it would be disastrous for a lot of the people that we claim to be supporting.

I would like to focus on solutions that help 3PP, not ones that punish WotC. Let's keep our priorities straight.

Also, lots of players want to see D&D succeed, myself included. But part of my picture of success is a thriving ecosystem of third-party creators. WotC has lost nothing from me to third-party publishers. I own everything WotC has published for 5e in D&D Beyond and also bought a good number of their books in physical form. But I also use (well, at least buy ) a lot of third-party content. I pretty much ignore posts expressing schadenfreude or foaming at the mouth about WotC crossing their red line and that they'll never buy another WotC book. Everyone it entitled to their opinions, tastes, and are free to buy from or boycott whatever game publisher they want. But those conversations are neither interesting nor helpful to me personally.

I want to continue playing D&D, buying from WotC, and buying 5e-compatible content from third party publishers. So I want to see a good solution. If they can expand the SRD to include most everything that is covered in by the OGL 1a and associated SRDs (and hopefully expand to include content from other editions), fix the language relating to VTTs, and fix (preferably drop, but I don't see that happening) the "no hateful content and conduct" provision, I expect that will preserve the ecosystem enough for me to live in it.

If sufficient compromise with third-party publishers can't be reached, then I'll have to see how much content third-party publishers put out that I like and which is compatible with 5e. It remains to be seen whether anyone will play chicken with WotC and stick with the 1a OGL. And it is similarly up in the air on whether the ORC license will be enough for publishers to sell content that I can use in my 5e game.

 

[eyeheartawk]

"Listen, Mr. Landlord, I know I signed a 12 month lease, but paying this much rent isn't working out for me anymore. My circumstances changed. I'll pay you half, which you should accept because it's the best deal you're going to get".

 

[OldeGreybeard]

Can you provide a link to the article? The only links are to the FAQ and I can't seem to find it on DnD Beyond.

I am glad to see they are, apparently, being open with what we all probably thought the response would be. I don't think this will quell the voices of those who claim this playtest of the OGL is a shame, but it is another step in the right direction IMO.

The statement is in a Tweet thread rather than an article.

 

[Clint_L]

I think we also have to be careful about turning OGL 1.0a into a victory symbol. Again, the point is not to enshrine OGL 1.0a, it's to get the best deal possible for 3PP. It may be that enshrining OGL 1.0a is essential to that, but we should not foreclose other possibilities that might be better, nor hold hold 3PP to an OGL 1.0a purity test.

Victory is not beating WotC. D&D continuing to do well is necessary for most of the folks we are purporting to back. Victory is 3PP coming out with at least what they previously had, if not more.

 

[TheSword]

No, but a license that can be revoked on a whim is.

It really isn’t. Because all the things you published while it was active and all the money you made doing so has a value. In life there are lots of agreements that exist allowing each party to give notice - rent being just one of them.

"Listen, Mr. Landlord, I know I signed a 12 month lease, but paying this much rent isn't working out for me anymore. My circumstances changed. I'll pay you half, which you should accept because it's the best deal you're going to get".

Sorry but no. We agreed for the possibility that our relationship might need to change by limiting our agreement to 12 months. I’m happy to look at the rent again at that point. However Im confident that the value of the property is fair. If you think it isn’t then you’re welcome to leave the property when I have someone else to take it over… in fact someone enquired the other day so it shouldn’t be long.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

No, but a license that can be revoked on a whim is.

and nothing so far has indicated said 'oh a whim' other then tin foil hat "They MIGHT someday" conspiracies

 

[Scribe]

I think we also have to be careful about turning OGL 1.0a into a victory symbol. Again, the point is not to enshrine OGL 1.0a, it's to get the best deal possible for 3PP. It may be that enshrining OGL 1.0a is essential to that, but we should not foreclose other possibilities that might be better, nor hold hold 3PP to an OGL 1.0a purity test.

Victory is not beating WotC. D&D continuing to do well is necessary for most of the folks we are purporting to back. Victory is 3PP coming out with at least what they previously had, if not more.

1.0 is the best deal.

1.0 is the line.

I disagree to your terms.