WotC WotC (Mistakenly) Issues DMCA Takedown Against Baldur's Gate-themed Stardew Valley Mod

Wizards of the Coast recently issued a DMCA takedown notice against Baldur's Village, a popular fan-created Stardew Valley mod which was based on Baldur's Gate 3.

Created by a modding team called Nexus Mods, the mod featured BG3 characters such as Astarion and Shadowheart, 20+ NPCs, and various locations and events. The mod, which has had over 4,000 downloads, took over a year to make, according to the team, and garnered praise from Swen Vincke, the CEO of Larion, the company which made Baldur's Gate 3, who also posted about the situation on Twitter:

“Free quality fan mods highlighting your characters in other game genres are proof your work resonates and a unique form of word of mouth. Imho they shouldn’t be treated like commercial ventures that infringe on your property. Protecting your IP can be tricky, but I do hope this gets settled. There are good ways of dealing with this.”

The mod went into "moderation review" on March 29th. However, it seems this was a 'mistake'--WotC has since issued a statement:

"The Baldur's Village DMCA takedown was issued mistakenly—we are sorry about that. We are in the process of fixing that now so fans and the Stardew community can continue to enjoy this great mod!"

So, the mod is back again! To use it you need the have the Stardew Modding API, the Content Patcher, and the Portraiture mod.

This isn't the first time WotC has 'erroneously' issued takedown notices against fans. In August 2024, the company took action against various YouTubers who were previewing the then-upcoming 2024 D&D Player's Handbook. A few days later, after some public outcry, WotC reversed its decision.

 

[CleverNickName]

Wondering if this mod got more attention because of it, honestly?

I certainly hadn't heard of it before this thread.

Maybe a little? Here's the current download graph from the Nexus Mod page (on the second image, I moused over the graph to display the numbers for today). Page views and downloads are up slightly today, but they both peaked on March 10th.

 

[Faolyn]

Oh I'm not surprised; some people here want WotC's head on a spike no matter what happens, or what's done about it. (shrug)

Or, as several of us have pointed out, WotC keeps doing the same thing. They repeatedly make a decision which hurts people and then claim "whoops, it was a mistake!" when it proves to be unpopular (or in this case, shortly after Swen Vincke tweeted about it). There's only one can excuse that.

 

[Clint_L]

People need to stop buying anything made by WotC.

Yeah, damn them for correcting the situation as soon as it was brought to their attention!

 

[Older Beholder]

<shrug> I was seriously disappointed by the production values in Spelljammer, which happened to be the last book I bought from them. Noticeably thinner paper

Apologies in advance for the off topic tangent but: Was the paper in the Spelljammer books thinner? I could have sworn it was way thicker, like I was constantly thinking I was turning two pages at once?

 

[Chaltab]

Streaming games using WotC IP is actually expressly permissible under WotC’s fan content policy:

Fan Content Policy | Wizards of the Coast

Wizards of the Coast Fan Content Policy.

company.wizards.com

You’re even allowed to derive passive/sponsor income doing it, and you can even ask the audience to tip you. You just can’t put it behind a paywall.

I guess that only applies to WOTC adventures because isn't Dimension 20 beyond a paywall?

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I guess that only applies to WOTC adventures because isn't Dimension 20 beyond a paywall?

Dimension 20 doesn't use any WotC IP that I'm aware of, unless evil Santa mutants are a WotC thing.

 

[Maxperson]

That's how. The hiring firm doesn't necessarily know about, much less specifically intend, these sorts of things.

I mean, it seems fairly dumb to hire a firm to look for these things and not provide that firm with a list of instances being used with permission.

 

[Distracted DM]

I mean, it seems fairly dumb to hire a firm to look for these things and not provide that firm with a list of instances being used with permission.

Generally they're provided with examples and/or lists of targets, but beyond that it's up to judgement. This of course assumes that they contract out to a BP company/IP firm

 

[Faolyn]

Apologies in advance for the off topic tangent but: Was the paper in the Spelljammer books thinner? I could have sworn it was way thicker, like I was constantly thinking I was turning two pages at once?

You may be correct; I'm too lazy to get up and check. But it was definitely of a weight that was not the regular type. It probably was thicker, now that you mention it, and it artificially made the books thicker while having fewer pages.

 

[Distracted DM]

You may be correct; I'm too lazy to get up and check. But it was definitely of a weight that was not the regular type. It probably was thicker, now that you mention it, and it artificially made the books thicker while having fewer pages.

I learned a few weeks ago that printing very thin/fine book paper is actually more expensive than thick.