Foundry VTT Author Chimes in on OGL 1.1

[Steel_Wind]

Posted earlier today on Foundry VTT's Discord Announcement Channel:

===================================
A Preliminary Statement Regarding The OGL Controversy
===================================
Hello everyone. Over the past week our team, like many of you, have been closely following the news regarding anticipated updates to the Open Gaming License that has served the TTRPG community for the past two decades. A multitude of voices are rightfully expressing anger about the leaked 1.1 license terms. We are deeply concerned too, the terms of the draft license are wholly unacceptable to the creator community.

We have directly communicated those concerns to Wizards of the Coast. We are committed to supporting our fantastic network of content creator partners many of whom create content for D&D or other game systems using the OGL. We are determined to offer an industry-leading virtual tabletop that supports our users' most beloved game systems to the extent allowed by licensing requirements.

It is unfortunate that Wizards of the Coast has not posted an official statement. Many creators are rightfully feeling as if their livelihoods are under attack. We had wished to share a statement in response to official details posted by WOTC, but after several days of silence on the issue we feel compelled to join our team's voice to this conversation.

We hope that the strong community reaction and lack of official response imply that this dangerous path is being actively reconsidered. Until we have more clarity, it is essential for the community to continue expressing concerns to ensure the seriousness of this issue is understood by decision makers at WOTC and Hasbro. We encourage you to engage respectfully with this issue using the following resources:

• The ogl channel in this Discord server where you may discuss this topic.
• The #OpenDND website which contains an open letter discussing the issue as well as links to several resources to learn more.
• The #OpenDnD hashtag on Twitter and other social media platforms.

 

[dave2008]

I'm glad to hear someone with some authority is stepping up to tell WotC that this is unacceptable.

 

[payn]

Hmm, are VTTs the real target with OGL 1.1?

 

[dave2008]

Hmm, are VTTs the real target with OGL 1.1?

I think they are a part of it, but I doubt they are the only target.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Hmm, are VTTs the real target with OGL 1.1?

The primary one I think. It’s no secret where the market is going, and how VTT is continuing to grow and is the future. They are trying to lock that market down

 

[dave2008]

The primary one I think. It’s no secret where the market is going, and how VTT is continuing to grow and is the future. They are trying to lock that market down

They should do that with a superior product, not by breaking the knee caps of your competitors.

 

[Sacrosanct]

They should do that with a superior product, not by breaking the knee caps of your competitors.

I agree, but I also know how corporations work.

 

[LordEntrails]

Personally, I don't blame WotC for trying to reduce what I have seen as a huge .. hole in the current approach of Foundry and other VTTs. I have felt from day 1 it was unethical what people were doing to get WotC content into Foundry and other non-licensed VTTs. I feel it is about time that these people who are taking advantage of technical loopholes finally be made to compete on a fair and level playing field. Other VTTs have licenses, Foundry et al should be required to obtain and comply with such if they are to allow use of WotC IP.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I agree, but I also know how corporations work.

Indeed. Why do the work of making and marketing an actually superior product, when you can, with a tenth the cost and a few hours of a lawyer's time, deny anyone else the ability to compete with whatever product you produce?

 

[Steel_Wind]

Personally, I don't blame WotC for trying to reduce what I have seen as a huge .. hole in the current approach of Foundry and other VTTs. I have felt from day 1 it was unethical what people were doing to get WotC content into Foundry and other non-licensed VTTs. I feel it is about time that these people who are taking advantage of technical loopholes finally be made to compete on a fair and level playing field. Other VTTs have licenses, Foundry et al should be required to obtain and comply with such if they are to allow use of WotC IP.

Unethical? As a result of switching over to 5e from PF2 on Foundry VTT in March of 2022, I bought the following on DDB:

PHB
DMG
MM
Tasha's
Xanathar's
Fizban's
Rime of the Frost Maiden
Candlekeep Mysteries
Shadow of the Dragon Queen; and
2 six month Master subscriptions

All of that spent on DDB over the past nine months. Without Foundry VTT? Not one nickel would have gone to WotC for that.

Respectfully, what you think to be the case, and what actually is the case are two very different things when it comes to Foundry VTT & 5e.

 

[bedir than]

Unethical? As a result of switching over to 5e from PF2 on Foundry VTT in March of 2022, I bought the following on DDB:

PHB
DMG
MM
Tasha's
Xanathar's
Fizban's
Rime of the Frost Maiden
Candlekeep Mysteries
Shadow of the Dragon Queen; and
2 six month Master subscriptions

All of that spent on DDB over the past nine months. Without Foundry VTT? Not one nickel would have gone to WotC for that.

Respectfully, what you think to be the case, and what actually is the case are two very different things when it comes to Foundry VTT & 5e.

Foundry doesn't enforce those purchases though. People can just load the content in or use stolen versions, right?

 

[Steel_Wind]

Foundry doesn't enforce those purchases though. People can just load the content in or use stolen versions, right?

You could hand-code in the missing feats, spells, class abilities and bonuses if you know how. Few do, fewer still want to bother with it. It's a massive pain in the ass.

The so called "Plutonium" version of pirated material that could be added to Foundry was very much a point-in-time affair in early 2020 and all discussion of it was banned on any of Foundry's many discord channels. It was nigh impossible to keep it working through the many updates to Foundry over that time. The overwhelming majority don't bother and just pay WotC for the content and Mr. Primate to be able to use it. The original Plutonium version does not work any more, and no version of it I have ever seen has been working since the middle of 2020. Atropos went out of his way to ensure any updates to Foundry would break Plutonium in a bajillion ways. It was very deliberate. To the best of my knowledge, the pirates largely gave up when Mr. Primate's importer offered a cheap solution for those who would buy the books on DDB.

If you want to get banned on a Foundry Discord channel, type the word "plutonium" in a channel and count the seconds to see how long it takes for a mod to arrive in your discussion area. In the summer of 2020, it was less than 10 seconds. It might be as many as 20 now, I don't really know. I have literally never seen it mentioned in Discord since the summer of 2020. [I am being facetious of course; please don't hassle a mod -- but yes, they will ban your ass for it.]

The overwhelming majority of 5e DMs that want to use Foundry VTT to run their 5e games pay to access the material on DDB as well as the Patreon to ensure it is importable. You cannot import a class feature, monster, spell, item, etc, that you do not own on DDB.

I am sure there are those who have limited incomes and just want to run the SRD version of the 5e rules. They don't have to spend money to do that. And they wouldn't otherwise be buying FG2 -- they would just use Roll20 for free with no addons. But for all others? They are paying for it to WotC at full retail via DDB. There is nothing "unethical" about that. Current subscribers for Mr Primate's patreon is about ~30,000 or so? I think that was the number when @darjr and I were talking about it last month. Perhaps I am mistaken and that was the estimated monthly fee Mr. Primate was earning from his patreon.

Whatever the case, it indicates that there are a lot of people who are using DDB for Foundry VTT for 5e use. Those who are using it for PC import only use a free patreon shim by another author so that's more difficult to track. Whatever the case, it's a lot of people on DDB paying money to WotC to use their content in an online game of 5e.

 

[Scribe]

The overwhelming majority of 5e DMs that want to use Foundry VTT to run their 5e games pay to access the material on DDB as well as the Patreon to ensure it is importable. You cannot import a class feature, monster, spell, item, etc, that you do not own on DDB.

This speaks I think to a lot of people.

The majority, do not pirate things, and actually want to pay to support people.

Its only when corporations get massive delusions of self importance, and over reach, that people start to recoil in disgust.

 

[Aldarc]

They should do that with a superior product, not by breaking the knee caps of your competitors.

Why pick one or the other when you can try doing both?

 

[Velderan]

The primary one I think. It’s no secret where the market is going, and how VTT is continuing to grow and is the future. They are trying to lock that market down

I'm not saying you're wrong, but it seems weird they just announced DMG content will be unlocked for Roll20 if their plan was to aggressively compete with other VTTs. I'd think they'd keep DMG content exclusive to their upcoming VTT if they wanted another competitive advantage.

I'm not sure what to make of the whole situation at this point.

 

[Umbran]

Why pick one or the other when you can try doing both?

Because your product is nowhere near done, and you'll sour your market in the meantime because you are forcing them to change and your actions leave them a period of no options?

Get a good product out first, then kneecap the others in the market.

Or, just buy the best competitor you can in the market - then you don't need to kneecap them.

 

[bedir than]

You could hand-code in the missing feats, spells, class abilities and bonuses if you know how. Few do, fewer still want to bother with it. It's a massive pain in the ass.

The so called "Plutonium" version of pirated material that could be added to Foundry was very much a point-in-time affair in early 2020 and all discussion of it was banned on any of Foundry's many discord channels. It was nigh impossible to keep it working through the many updates to Foundry over that time. The overwhelming majority don't bother and just pay WotC for the content and Mr. Primate to be able to use it. The original Plutonium version does not work any more, and no version of it I have ever seen has been working since the middle of 2020. Atropos went out of his way to ensure any updates to Foundry would break Plutonium in a bajillion ways. It was very deliberate. To the best of my knowledge, the pirates largely gave up when Mr. Primate's importer offered a cheap solution for those who would buy the books on DDB.

If you want to get banned on a Foundry Discord channel, type the word "plutonium" in a channel and count the seconds to see how long it takes for a mod to arrive in your discussion area. In the summer of 2020, it was less than 10 seconds. It might be as many as 20 now, I don't really know. I have literally never seen it mentioned in Discord since the summer of 2020. [I am being facetious of course; please don't hassle a mod -- but yes, they will ban your ass for it.]

The overwhelming majority of 5e DMs that want to use Foundry VTT to run their 5e games pay to access the material on DDB as well as the Patreon to ensure it is importable. You cannot import a class feature, monster, spell, item, etc, that you do not own on DDB.

I am sure there are those who have limited incomes and just want to run the SRD version of the 5e rules. They don't have to spend money to do that. And they wouldn't otherwise be buying FG2 -- they would just use Roll20 for free with no addons. But for all others? They are paying for it to WotC at full retail via DDB. There is nothing "unethical" about that. Current subscribers for Mr Primate's patreon is about ~30,000 or so? I think that was the number when @darjr and I were talking about it last month. Perhaps I am mistaken and that was the estimated monthly fee Mr. Primate was earning from his patreon.

Whatever the case, it indicates that there are a lot of people who are using DDB for Foundry VTT for 5e use. Those who are using it for PC import only use a free patreon shim by another author so that's more difficult to track. Whatever the case, it's a lot of people on DDB paying money to WotC to use their content in an online game of 5e.

Thank you. The test drive I took with a group was back in 2020

 

[Sacrosanct]

I'm not sure what to make of the whole situation at this point.

I think this is the wise choice at this point.

 

[Steel_Wind]

This speaks I think to a lot of people.

The majority, do not pirate things, and actually want to pay to support people.

Its only when corporations get massive delusions of self importance, and over reach, that people start to recoil in disgust.

Well, I don't know how true that is. If it's easy to pirate, people will pirate. Just ask anyone in the music industry about the impact of MP3's.

Or anyone in the gaming biz about pirated PDFs, for that matter. I am sure more are pirated than are purchased off of Paizo, Drive Thru or perhaps DMsGuild.

That said, when it comes to that material that represents a true lost sale? I am less persuaded the numbers are as bad as all of that. My guess is that the vast majority of ENWorld users have pirated scanned PDFs of many of WotC's 5e books (if for no other reason that being able to search the OCR text for a word). However, my guess is ALSO that those same people have hardback physical copies and/or DDB versions of them, too.

Is there really lost revenue there? Some, sure -- but I doubt the problem is anywhere near as large as it would appear at first blush for either Paizo or WotC products.

All of that said, if an electronic product provides a value, and the value-in-use of that digital product requires that it be from a legitimate source, then people who were going to buy it are overwhelmingly likely to buy it.

In 2023, that will have to do.

 

[Seramus]

That said, when it comes to that material that represents a true lost sale? I am less persuaded the numbers are as bad as all of that. My guess is that the vast majority of ENWorld users have pirated scanned PDFs of many of WotC's 5e books (if for no other reason that being able to search the OCR text for a word). However, my guess is ALSO that those same people have hardback physical copies and/or DDB versions of them, too.

This is me 100%. I purchase the books like a responsible adult, then immediately download a PDF so that I can search for text and have it available on my phone/laptop/etc. The physical books just sit there, almost never getting actually used.