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.

 

[MoonSong]

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.

It is two goals that are unterrelated. I want 3pps to get the best possible outcome, but also to save/preserve existing OGC. 1.0a solves both.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I refuse to believe that past behavior is meaningless.

as I jsut said to someone else... does that include the past behavior of back peddling when they get called out? If so, then you don't need to worry about them shutting anything down (unless you think that they are going to in some way win over all us in the fan base).

 

[Micah Sweet]

I agree... the fact that they backed down just the other day on multi things (like the royalties) shows that they are worried about public backlash... so the past behavior makes me think in the future they will at least need a plausible excuse to do anything.

how did that end again... oh right the company caved and let the book go

calling there past bad acts up without ALSO looking at the fact that they back peddle the minute we speak up shows that you are cherry picking

To be fair, they haven't yet backpeddled on anything the community really cares about.

 

[eyeheartawk]

calling there past bad acts up without ALSO looking at the fact that they back peddle the minute we speak up shows that you are cherry picking

I mean, no?

The fact that they weren't successful in their attempt with Weis and Hickmann and GF9 was because they got taken to court over it and only then backed down. The fact that they didn't succeed isn't really relevant now is it? People are saying "There is nothing to stop them from trying again 20 years from now" etc. We don't want them to try while also hoping they wouldn't succeed in the attempt if they do. Those two things are not contradictory, they are, actually, perfectly rational and complementary. That you think this is some gotcha moment is, I don't know even know what to say about that, honestly.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

To be fair, they haven't yet backpeddled on anything the community really cares about.

you... they have not yet back peddled on what YOU want.
The fact that more and more of the community is willing to come to the table shows they are giving on things SOME of us want.

 

[mamba]

I'm pretty sure that WotC could care less about 3PP publishing traditional print materials. Which is most 3PP. They want to prevent another Pathfinder in the digital and media spaces, but using the 5e rules

then why are they releasing the rules as CC

 

[TheSword]

1.0 is the best deal.

1.0 is the line.

I disagree to your terms.

You haven’t done much negotiation have you?

 

[DarkCrisis]

I need them to put their statements in game terms so I better understand them.

Like is "The Mark" an AC 20 and they combined roll an 8 to hit?

 

[Scribe]

You haven’t done much negotiation have you?

A wide diverse community isn't in a negotiation either.

 

[mamba]

I think discussions of morality are besides the point. The whole purpose of legal contracts is that you don't have to rely on someone else's morality.

you cannot enter into a clearly immoral contract, that makes the contract void