New OGL - what would be acceptable? (+)

[Branduil]

I'm not sure what you mean.

WotC's counter offer could be to choose a CC license off that list. Then release an SRD under said license.

They wouldn't own the license and thus couldn't change it. No need to trust them. Sure you'd need to trust that license, but it's one from the Creative Commons folks which I think grants them quite a bit of trust in that license. Note you wouldn't need to trust the CC folks either, just that thier license is sound.

WotC wouldn't have to promise not to change it because they couldn't change it. Even if they wanted to.

I think this is really the only way for anyone to sign onto a new OGL. WotC has "irrevocably" demonstrated they can never be trusted again as stewards of an open license. Any future OGLs must be authored in such a way that they cannot be revoked, not just because of specific wording, but because there isn't even any specific owner who can claim to do such a thing.

 

[Clint_L]

...no NFTs...

I think this is one thing all parties can agree upon!

 

[darjr]

I think this is one thing all parties can agree upon!

I cannot agree more.

 

[Yaarel]

I think this is one thing all parties can agree upon!

NFTs are just a place to put artwork.

If people want to throw money at NFTs that is their business. (Heh, it wont be me.)

 

[Scribe]

1. The current OGL remains as is, updated only to state it is unrevocable and will not be changed. This leaves all current products as is, and without risk.

That is step one to me.

 

[mamba]

Going back and forth on my idea of the fork in the road and having an unrevocable 1.0b for the current and prior SRDs and a separate one for 1DD that is closer to WotC’s ideas.

The issue is: at that point I stay with 1.0a/b and leave WotC behind (but do not boycott everything Hasbro at least ). I have no problem with that but I assume WotC does, so it kinda misses the point of the initial question. So if WotC wants me to stick with them / 1DD, it does indeed take what I wrote in my first post, a free, open, perpetual and unrevocable OGL 1.1

Also, out of curiosity, if there were a fork like that, do we have any idea where the 3PPs would fall? Stick with 1.0, move to 1.1, publish for both?
I guess anyone with their own rulebook stays with 1.0, anything else would be foolish, but what about the ones actually publishing for 5e? Still not seeing any incentive for anyone to switch to 1.1, even under improved terms.

 

[Malmuria]

I cannot agree more.

Though I sort of wonder if that's there for wotc to show how an updated "OGL" is necessary...that there are these new technologies that the original OGL could not have anticipated and so require an update

 

[mamba]

Though I sort of wonder if that's there for wotc to show how an updated "OGL" is necessary...that there are these new technologies that the original OGL could not have anticipated and so require an update

it does not require an update unless you want to exclude them from the license

 

[Scars Unseen]

It depends on the level of "acceptability" we're talking. To avoid a scorched earth, self-harming boycott where I won't even buy material from older editions they have for PoD on DriveThruRPG and trying to convince anyone I ever game with again to do the same? Publicly scrapping 1.1 in total, and a show of intent not to invalidate 1.0a and earlier versions. If they want to make a GSL for 1D&D that only harms the 3pp space around the newest edition, that's their prerogative.

To get me to actually consider buying into 1D&D on whatever merits it may or may not possess as a product? They need to first do a full 180 of intent and fully enshrine the OGL with a new version that closes any loopholes they thought to exploit in 1.1 that protects all earlier editions of D&D and 3pp created for them - including editions not currently included in the OGL - and let that stand as a legacy license that anyone can use. At that point, again, I'm fine with them trying whatever license they want going forward with new content, because the legacy of D&D would be as protected as it can be at that point. WotC's D&D would just be another option among many (it already is, but this would cement that status), and the only people truly harmed by Hasbro's bad decisions would be Hasbro's shareholders.

And that's really it. Protect the OGL's intent, and then they can do what they want otherwise.

 

[Jadeite]

As much as I despise NFTs, excluding them from the OGL would just give Hasbro exclusive rights to create them. And I'd be surprised if they haven't already thought about that.