95% of you didn't need the OGL and you don't need ORC

[Greggy C]

The point of the OGL was the "safe harbor" it provided, specifically a literal promise in writing not to sue you for copy and pasting open game content.

Fair enough, I guess it makes more sense if you are producing something and don't want to learn the legal ins and outs.

 

[mamba]

They are arguing about whether the original OGL can be revoked and other topics, not whether a dragon with colors requires a license, it doesn't.
You are just further confusing everyone.

I wouldn't be so sure about that. Plenty people who are fimilar with this topic have disagreed with you on this.

Whenever you are certain about something and smart people who know the topic disagree with you, make sure you are not a victim of the Dunning Kruger effect.

 

[overgeeked]

Fair enough, I guess it makes more sense if you are producing something and don't want to learn the legal ins and outs.

I don't want to be taught the legal ins and outs in a court and be on the hook to pay the legal fees of Hasbro when they sue me.

Huge difference.

 

[JThursby]

The OP is straddling the line between bad take and misinformation. If a working share-a-like license held no value, there would be no controversy about the OGL changes. Either the totality of the TTRPG publishing world is entirely wrong about how they conduct business, or the OP is wrong.

 

[trancejeremy]

The point of the OGL was not that you could reprint the rules and make your own game (that probably didn't happen for a couple year after it came out, even Troll Lord started with d20 stuff)

The point was you could use material from D&D - monsters, spells, and what not without resorting to the sort of vague language used in unofficial supplements like Mayfair did with Role-Aids.

 

[Reynard]

I love how everyone is declaring this now, as if it is so blindingly obvious that only a simpleton wouldn't realize it. Where, I wonder, were all these sages 3 or 7 or 12 years ago?

 

[Alzrius]

But for all these third-party products, supplements, home brew campaigns, new character classes, new settings... you didn't need the OGL, and you don't need OGL 1.1
nor, in fact, will you need the ORC.

Because that worked out so well for Mayfair Games with their Role Aids line of compatible products.

 

[overgeeked]

The OP is straddling the line between bad take and misinformation. If a working share-a-like license held no value, there would be no controversy about the OGL changes. Either the totality of the TTRPG publishing world is entirely wrong about how they conduct business, or the OP is wrong.

People with actual skin in the game tend to be more cautious. Keyboard warriors tend to be more out spoken.

 

[Charlaquin]

The OGL was a trick to force you on DMSGuild to give away half your profits.

Some trick, considering the DMs guild uses a completely different license!

The rules lawyer addresses this specifically at around 11 mins.
Ben talked about this in the past as well.


Of course, if you write an adventure and don't create your own monsters, you just reproduce all the WOTC ones,
a) That is a little lazy.
b) You need the OGL/ORC.

a) It’s perfectly reasonable for someone creating D&D content to direct their efforts towards creating new things instead of retreading existing ground. If your adventure calls for a fight with goblins, it would frankly be silly not to use monster manual goblins.

When you realize all this, you also learn how disgusting OGL 1.1 was, trying to steal from prominent creators like Critical Role with no legal standing to do it.

I certainly don’t disagree that 1.1 was (and still is) disgusting!

D&D will return when they innovate a 6th edition, but we must teach the Microsoft Executives a lesson. Hopefully, they will be fired.

I’m not one to hope for people to get fired. I do think it’s in the RPG community’s best interest to stop buying WotC products, and ideally start playing other games than D&D in greater proportion, if not stop playing D&D entirely. At least until we see some real changes at WotC, starting with the commitment to keep OGL 1.0 available in perpetuity, and with the addition of an “irrevocable” clause.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Because that worked out so well for Mayfair Games with their Role Aids line of compatible products.

Or the most ironic case, that being WoTC nearly being destroyed by Palladium in their lawsuit. Right or wrong hasn't been clearly defined on this topic, and it's doubly dangerous to ignore how even if you were right, fighting that in court can destroy you.