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.

​

 

[Rabulias]

Is this missing sections? Trying to find the IX.B.2 for qualifying revenue, am i missing it?

I think that is a typo. Qualifying Revenue is detailed in section VII.B.2 (in the OGL 1.1 Commercial).

 

[Rabulias]

I have not seen this mentioned yet: they are throwing a bone to 3PPs in that:

Delayed Collection: Though this agreement is effective January 13, 2023, no royalties will be due on any income earned before January 1, 2024 – no matter how much that income is. We want to give Our community a lot of lead time to plan for this. For clarity, all other requirements of this agreement are in effect from the time You enter into the agreement.

 

[mangamuscle]

As someone else pointed out, WotC may be perfectly happy with a bigger piece of a smaller pie.

WotC maybe, but the big hakunas at Hasbro will want explanations and a few shrunken heads as trophies to show the shareholders mob ... eventually.

 

[bedir than]

As someone else pointed out, WotC may be perfectly happy with a bigger piece of a smaller pie.

No. Because their goal is one billion dollars in five years. S smaller pie doesn't hit that number. The current pie doesn't hit that number

 

[TheAlkaizer]

I have not seen this mentioned yet: they are throwing a bone to 3PPs in that:

Not much of a bone when effective January 2023 they can't print or sell products. Royalties on no sales are pretty low.

 

[Rabulias]

Not much of a bone when effective January 2023 they can't print or sell products. Royalties on no sales are pretty low.

Not sure what you mean. They would have to sell under the 1.1 license, yes, but for a year they would not pay the fee. If they plan to not use 1.1 then the bone is not for them.

 

[TheAlkaizer]

Not sure what you mean. They would have to sell under the 1.1 license, yes, but for a year they would not pay the fee. If they plan to not use 1.1 then the bone is not for them.

The clauses in the 1.1 are incredibly restrictive and undesirable. It's not much of a choice.

 

[Rabulias]

The clauses in the 1.1 are incredibly restrictive and undesirable. It's not much of a choice.

Oh I agree that 1.1 takes things in a bad direction, but I think a number of the 3PPs in the over-$750K club will sign their special deals with WotC anyway.

 

[Yaarel]

The one chink of light here is that, despite WotC's comments implying this isn't opt-in, it may be that in reality, it does operate on an opt-in basis. WotC went to great lengths to obscure that, though, if so, and have had since Thursday to say something about it.

The predatory practice of scare-tactics and time-pressure implies Hasbro-WotC knows the Anti-OGL can only be opt-in.

It wants people to sign all their rights away − and afterward literally be unable to sue Hasbro-WotC for misrepresentation and fraud.

 

[JEB]

Those influencers are also going to lose. No matter what non-D&D topic in ttrpg they talk about their audience dramatically shrinks.

Those influencers built their audience on D&D, but whether or not changing topics will lose that audience entirely depends on the charisma and entertainment value of the influencer. Critical Role successfully drew interest to other RPGs through various one-shots, for example, so the appeal there is more than just "they play D&D!"