D&D 5E Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition OGL?

[Nylanfs]

And an added comment, tides rise all boats.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

I don't see WotC moving back to the OGL, however much I might desire it. I think they will loosen up the GSL, but not nearly as much as the OGL. Right or wrong, I think many in WotC identify the 3pp game systems based off the d20 system as harmful to D&D, and the newest iteration of the license will aim to cut those off while still encouraging fan-based creations.

Something as simple as putting a page and font size restriction in the new license could have some success, ie derived products could not exceed 32 pages (plus cover), and a minimum font size of 8 (whatever that is in picas and various measurements). I don't think Arcana Unearthed would have ever gone to press if it had to be printed and sold as 10 different products.

And 3pp stay away from 5e in droves, Pathfinder remains holding the #1 spot....

WotC would do better not having a 3pp license at all than using a 32 page choke chain. That would be an insult, not a license.

The Auld Grump

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Well There are things I both like and dislike about the OGL and GSL. I like the GSL in that it references the items in books, instead of the separate SRD from the OGL. Which is great because then 3PP publishers don't have to wait until the errata FINALLY gets into the SRD.

Of course the original GSL has the poison pill (and several other objectionable) clauses.

One thing that I would really, REALLY like to see , if there is a future OGL/GSL for 5e, is something like the following clause.

"Every publisher must CLEARLY identify OGC content that they use in sourcebooks and the original source. This may be listed on a business website as opposed to listed in each sourcebook."

This is a direct result of my work with PCGen, there are so many publishers using other's works, there should be a direct way to ensure that the original creator is recognized for their work. This way it makes my job easier, AND the added benefit of making the Sec. 15 of the OGL page WAY clearer.

This on the other hand.

I used section 15 as a shopping list on occasion. Found some good books that way. (Swashbuckling Adventures by AEG had a particularly tasty section 15.)

The Auld Grump

 

[Mark CMG]

I used section 15 as a shopping list on occasion. Found some good books that way.

I picked up some good ones by this method too. I like the idea of a more explicit section 15 and OGC designations because it can be difficult to know just what stuff came from where at a glance. That seems like a reasonable addition to expect from an OGL 2.0 but I doubt you can tell people what they can and cannot make. I think the OGL is a "how" contract not a "what" guide.

 

[Nellisir]

WotC would do better not having a 3pp license at all than using a 32 page choke chain. That would be an insult, not a license.

I'm not saying I favor it in the least. However, it would eliminate most, or all, of the print 3pp, while leaving a clear field for the supplemental rules pdf market (ie supergenius games, etc, etc).

 

[TheAuldGrump]

I'm not saying I favor it in the least. However, it would eliminate most, or all, of the print 3pp, while leaving a clear field for the supplemental rules pdf market (ie supergenius games, etc, etc).

It would also eliminate all interest in the game on the part of the 3PP, and leave a clear field. Clear as in empty.

A recipe for failure that WotC has already sampled with the GSL.

The Auld Grump

 

[Hussar]

/snip

2) Feeding game design innovations back into 5E. People forget that many of 4E's innovations can be traced to Mearls, and Mearls was an OGL Master before he was a WotC Developer. Who knows who the next Mearls is waiting to be tapped for a future D&D?

Everyone who dislikes the OGL can feel free to tell me how wrong I am and how unnecessary it is.

And yet, Mearls isn't a designer anymore. Monte Cook is designing. And Monte came to D&D by way of Rolemaster, not OGL. For every OGL designer you can name, there's one that isn't. Not that Monte didn't embrace OGL, he certainly did. I get that. But, the argument that gaming innovation comes from OGC isn't exactly accurate considering the innovations for 3e came from (at least in part) Rolemaster.

 

[Tallifer]

The only benefit I can imagine right now is that the third party publishers could make adventur paths and setting guides. That is a thankless task for the Wizards, because they cannot please every customer. If other companies made stuff for Planescape, Spelljammer, Dragonlance, Greyhawk and even new settings, that would let the Wizards off the hook. The Wizards could even decide right from the start to release certain setting properties and never worry about them ever after. It would also keep the Dragon and Dungeon magazines less cluttered.

Would third parties be willing to make that stuff however? Or do they only want to make their own retroclones and variant systems?

 

[drothgery]

It would also eliminate all interest in the game on the part of the 3PP, and leave a clear field. Clear as in empty.

A recipe for failure that WotC has already sampled with the GSL.

As opposed to merely almost empty, which we got with 3.5, despite having the exact same licensing as 3.0. And with pre-3e D&D, where all licensing was purely on an ad hoc, company-to-company basis.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

As opposed to merely almost empty, which we got with 3.5, despite having the exact same licensing as 3.0. And with pre-3e D&D, where all licensing was purely on an ad hoc, company-to-company basis.

I hate to tell you this, but there was a lot of 3PP stuff for 3.5.

Not as much as for 3.0, but I easily have fifty or more PDF and print books for 3.5. [Swedish Chef]Here we make the smorgasbord! Mmm, bork, bork, bork![/Swedish Chef] I loved the OGL.

Really, if they do what you suggest then they will fail. The 3PP won't switch, and 5e will make 4e's time on Earth seem lengthy. (Why yes, I do think that it is do or die time for D&D, why do you ask?) It was one of the main reasons that 3PP decided to skip 4e. WotC even decided to drop that when they revised the GSL. Doing it again would be stupid!

The Auld Grump