Battlezoo Shares The OGL v1.1

Battlezoo, the YouTube channel which shared the initial leak of the new Open Game License, has shared the PDF of the OGL v1.1 draft which is currently circulating. This draft is, presumably, the same document obtained by Gizmodo last week. It's not currently known if this is the final version of the license.

​

 

[TheAlkaizer]

Also, I saw a post earlier on Twitter that reminded me that Free League announced Lord of the Rings 5E mere months ago and also released a version of Symbaroum called Ruins of Symbaroum for 5E. I wonder how they feel about these moves now... and how having a product with a strong IP like LOTR interacts with a license like OGL 1.1

 

[Henry]

I am 98% sure Paizo would just release PF2 without the OGL. It doesn't need it. They only did it so other people could release content for it and to support the OGL / OGC concept.

But I do have the books I need.

I am really not sure that’s true, and in fact if Paizo tries to ditch the OGL and republish, I’m reasonably sure WotC WOULD sue, and tie them in court long enough to kill them, because that would be the most precedent-setting case of any case WotC would care to wager.

Paizo’s best bet, in my non-lawyer opinion, would be to attempt to join or initiate a class-action with other publishers over the revocation of OGL 1.0a, because the lawsuit over “what is a game mechanic vs. what is art” is a MUCH larger endeavor than “can this license which everybody used to agree was irrevocable be revoked?”

 

[JDragon]

I am 98% sure Paizo would just release PF2 without the OGL. It doesn't need it. They only did it so other people could release content for it and to support the OGL / OGC concept.

But I do have the books I need.

Glad to hear you have what you need.

Based on my knowledge of 3.0/3.5/PF1/PF2 I'm fairly certain PF2 as it is currently written can not stand without OGL 1.0(a) and a game written without it would be very different. Now I am not a 3PP, just a gamer that's been around a while so I will acknowledge I could be wrong about this. For the sake of Paizo I hope I am wrong, but based on a few things I have seen I don't think I am.

Perhaps someone that actually puts out 3PP products could confirm?

 

[Bayushi_seikuro]

I continue to be doubtful on the veracity of the leak. I can't imagine anyone vetting something like this going out in any official capacity:

"We’re giving You a license, not agreeing to take on potential liability when We do so. To be honest, We’re not really sure what We could do while making Dungeons & Dragons content available to You that could ever be “grossly negligent,” but Our lawyers say We need to include that last clause under Washington law, so in it goes."

There's also a ton of vagueness that I can't see ending up in a legal document. Case in point, the use of the word "something" in this section:

"A. You agree that nothing prohibits Us from developing, distributing, selling, or promoting something that is substantially similar to a Licensed Work."

Although, it makes one wonder if this isn't a case of tracking down leaks. It's why mapmakers would put fake towns on maps - because then they knew someone just stole their map. You can track down the leak 'easily' if a different word is misspelled on different pages -like if publisher A's copy has a word wrong on page 5, and publisher B's copy has it wrong on 13 etc

 

[EthanSental]

Also, I saw a post earlier on Twitter that reminded me that Free League announced Lord of the Rings 5E mere months ago and also released a version of Symbaroum called Ruins of Symbaroum for 5E. I wonder how they feel about these moves now... and how having a product with a strong IP like LOTR interacts with a license like OGL 1.1

I did notice i received an email from Free League of an update to the 2 preorder PDFs for the final form going to print this morning on the 5e lord of the rings and shire adventure. Odd timing or them trying to get the books/PDFs out to people before this OGL issues catches them in the last stages of creating product?

 

[Bayushi_seikuro]

I completely understand why someone who makes their living as a 3PP would be upset (angry even, if that's how they roll). And those of us who feel like we're "friends" with publishers like Morrus (even if only because we hang out here) can reasonably "defend" our friends.

But what I've seen goes quite a bit beyond all that. People who have never bought a 3PP are OUTRAGED. At least, that's how it appears.

I'm sure that most D&D fans haven't even heard about it yet.

I think this comment really hits close to how I feel. Parasocial relationships are a VERY real thing. It would absolutely be interesting to see, with these comments around, the breakdown of people who've bought 3PP, how many people's PDFs come from DM Guild/Drivethru versus the Trove, etc.

I can't keep up with the outrage machine, but I keep getting sucked back in. What was the outrage before? Non-thieving kenders? And what was before that? I'm trying to remember what came between that and the outrage over Tasha's... its mind-eating.

 

[mangamuscle]

I’m reasonably sure WotC WOULD sue, and tie them in court long enough to kill them, because that would be the most precedent-setting case of any case WotC would care to wager.

It is relevant to comment that is precisely what happened when Gygax published Dangerous Journey's, he did a gamesystem that had nothing to do with (a)d&d yet TSR still sue them.

 

[Bayushi_seikuro]

It'll be interesting to see. My gut feel is that stuff like the dreaded youtube algorithm might help us a little here.

Ten years in the past, this would have been a storm in a teacup. If you weren't actively on ENWorld or similar, you'd probably have never heard about any of this (unless post facto you saw stuff disappearing from the shelves of your FLGS and asked the guy behind the counter why).

Now, we have the algorithms. Even a casual D&D player has probably at some point watched an episode or two of Critical Role, or checked out WotCs Dragonlance trailer, or whatever. The algorithm remembers, and once you've done that, it'll feed you related videos forever. Right now, pretty much every bit of D&D content going up on youtube (and probably tictok etc too, but I'm not on there so i don't know!) is all about this OGL stuff, and that's going to affect recommendations. It's going to bring the issue to the attention of a whole lot of more casual players who probably have never heard of ENworld or even the OGL at all. Whether or not they actually watch the videos or care is another matter, but it'll be harder for people to be completely oblivious to it.

And as I've said before, Critical Role have enormous power here, should they choose to use it. They have nearly 2 million subscribers on Youtube alone, and then there's Twitch etc. I wouldn't expect them to criticise WotC publicly over this while OGL 1.1 still hasn't been officially released, but if they did eventually speak out, they'd bring the issue to the attention of a vast number of people, and that'd be a PR nuke that even WotC would find hard to withstand.

I think this is a good time to point out that while the vast majority of Critical Role is D&D, they're not shy about playing other systems and settings, like Honey Heist or the absolutely amazing Undeadwood (in case you needed undead in your Deadwood series)

 

[JDragon]

I think this comment really hits close to how I feel. Parasocial relationships are a VERY real thing. It would absolutely be interesting to see, with these comments around, the breakdown of people who've bought 3PP, how many people's PDFs come from DM Guild/Drivethru versus the Trove, etc.

I can't keep up with the outrage machine, but I keep getting sucked back in. What was the outrage before? Non-thieving kenders? And what was before that? I'm trying to remember what came between that and the outrage over Tasha's... its mind-eating.

I get not being able to / wanting to keep up with the latest outrage, I know I don't.
The thing is this is different, this is not some small rule or lore change, this will change the entire TTPRG industry and at least in the short term it will be for the worse.
I have been around RPG's since before WotC ever existed and while I don't use 3PP products very often I do have some on my game shelf and 100% believe the OGL was a boon for the RPG industry.
It has given talented people opportunities they would otherwise not likely had. It's forced the games and supplements to get better, trust me much of the early 3PP stuff for 3.0 was scary bad.
It has also given us things like Roll20, HeroLab and on and on. I mean I've lost count of the number of times WotC has tried to do digital support and failed horribly at it.

 

[Henry]

I completely understand why someone who makes their living as a 3PP would be upset (angry even, if that's how they roll). And those of us who feel like we're "friends" with publishers like Morrus (even if only because we hang out here) can reasonably "defend" our friends.

But what I've seen goes quite a bit beyond all that. People who have never bought a 3PP are OUTRAGED. At least, that's how it appears.

I'm sure that most D&D fans haven't even heard about it yet.

For me, it’s more than just my relationships with 3rd party publishers as a result of years at ENWorld and at conventions; it’s the fact that I am a fan of open licenses, and the spurs to innovation and creativity that they bring. I’ve seen it first hand, played the results of these labors, in real life I use the product of open licenses every day. This attempt to kill an open license that’s been benefiting the community for twenty+ years, WotC included, and pervert its original intent into a one-way siphon frankly PISSES ME OFF as a customer.