Paizo Announces New Irrevocable Open RPG License To Replace the OGL

1673564461522.png

Paizo, the maker of Pathfinder, has just announced a new open license for use with RPGs. The license will not be owned by Paizo - or by any TTRPG company, and will be stewarded by Azora Law, a company which represents several tabletop gaming companies, until it finds its home with an independent non-profit. This new license is designed to be irrevocable.

We believe, as we always have, that open gaming makes games better, improves profitability for all involved, and enriches the community of gamers who participate in this amazing hobby. And so we invite gamers from around the world to join us as we begin the next great chapter of open gaming with the release of a new open, perpetual, and irrevocable Open RPG Creative License (ORC).

The new Open RPG Creative License will be built system agnostic for independent game publishers under the legal guidance of Azora Law, an intellectual property law firm that represents Paizo and several other game publishers. Paizo will pay for this legal work. We invite game publishers worldwide to join us in support of this system-agnostic license that allows all games to provide their own unique open rules reference documents that open up their individual game systems to the world. To join the effort and provide feedback on the drafts of this license, please sign up by using this form.

In addition to Paizo, Kobold Press, Chaosium, Green Ronin, Legendary Games, Rogue Genius Games, and a growing list of publishers have already agreed to participate in the Open RPG Creative License, and in the coming days we hope and expect to add substantially to this group.

The ORC will not be owned by Paizo, nor will it be owned by any company who makes money publishing RPGs. Azora Law’s ownership of the process and stewardship should provide a safe harbor against any company being bought, sold, or changing management in the future and attempting to rescind rights or nullify sections of the license. Ultimately, we plan to find a nonprofit with a history of open source values to own this license (such as the Linux Foundation).

Read more on Paizo's blog.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad


log in or register to remove this ad

People like to say this, but history shows something different with TSR and Mayfair, TSR and GDW. Neither Mayfair nor GDW lost the lawsuit, but both were effectively hobbled by the law suits, taking away time and money to release product and so both settled with TSR, ending further plans.
None of them were "tied up in court for years". AFAICT with Mayfair it was all over pretty quickly. I can't find much on the GDW one, I don't think that one even got to court, so explain how they were "tied up in court"?

And to be clear, relatively speaking to the costs of running a legal case, Paizo is insanely richer than Mayfair ever was. It's probably wealthier than TSR was back then! I'd be unsurprised.
 

No, the whole exchange of
Player: “I got an X (Y on the die +Z mod)!”
DM: “Ok, their AC is N, with a -N from [source], so that’s [result]!”
Other player: But wait, that should actually be [other result] because of [factor].”
I don't play pf2 (have not tried) but that sounds like 2e.

I rolled a 17 and have +3 str +1 magic and +2 specialization so 23 with a Thac0 of 14 so I hit a -9
Wait they took a parry applying a -2 to you and don't forget bless
 


Alzrius

The EN World kitten
that was 25 30 years ago, maybe the courts are better now?
Animated GIF
 

None of them were "tied up in court for years". AFAICT with Mayfair it was all over pretty quickly. I can't find much on the GDW one, I don't think that one even got to court, so explain how they were "tied up in court"?

And to be clear, relatively speaking to the costs of running a legal case, Paizo is insanely richer than Mayfair ever was. It's probably wealthier than TSR was back then! I'd be unsurprised.
Even if WotC went after a smaller 3pp company than Paizo, with current public sentiment trending the way it is, a crowdfunding campaign to pay legal fees to oppose the revocability of 1.0a would raise literal millions in short order.
 

Steel_Wind

Legend
Or drag Paizo through years of litigation until they go bankrupt.
I think you under-estimate the financial resources of Paizo owner, Lisa Stevens by quite a bit. She was the 2nd largest shareholder in WotC when Hasbro bought it. She and Adkinson each got a veritable dump truck o cash from Hasbro, back-in-the-day. In the meanwhile, Paizo's been profitable.

The costs of a court case are not going to bankrupt Paizo. And in the meanwhile, they continue to do business -- and WotC continues to piss into the wind without a legal remedy.

tl;dr: Nope. It's not that easy
 

No, the whole exchange of
Player: “I got an X (Y on the die +Z mod)!”
DM: “Ok, their AC is N, with a -N from [source], so that’s [result]!”
Other player: But wait, that should actually be [other result] because of [factor].”
i mean for one that's...not really what happened. i'm pretty sure he just typed 12 for the attack modifier by accident instead of 22. i was just pointing that out. unless you want to say that counts, in which case...i guess if you want to be overly vague about it?

but second...i've had that happen in 5e. a lot, actually. it's uh. kind of a universal thing.
I don't play pf2 (have not tried) but that sounds like 2e.

I rolled a 17 and have +3 str +1 magic and +2 specialization so 23 with a Thac0 of 14 so I hit a -9
Wait they took a parry applying a -2 to you and don't forget bless
i didn't think it'd be possible for me to hate THAC0 more then i already did. clearly i was wrong.
 

AlwaysMerlin

Villager
i mean...yeah.

item can usually be regarded as a permanent modifer (i say "usually" because the alchemist exists), and status is almost always specifically applied by an ability, but circumstance modifiers come up a lot.
To add to this for PF2e:
You only ever take one circumstance bonus and penalty at most, so it’s like 2-1= +1. Same goes for status modifiers. The most complex math would be something like shooting a bow in heavy wind from 5 range increments away, frightened 2, and heroism on you. (-8, +2, +1, -2). That would be super rare. If the player was shooting from that far away consistently, I’d expect them to take care of their range increment modifiers and just give me the number so we can add the final +1.

I’ve never had it so bad that it slowed down play anymore than when I ran 5e and we discussed whether someone had advantage or disadvantage due to circumstances.
 

mamba

Legend
A product can use both ORC and OGL 1.0a.

There problem is later. When Hasbro-WotC officially (tries to) end the OGL 1.0a, it will start throwing lawsuits around. For those unable to fight Hasbro-WotC in court, they would need to remove all the SRD content that depended on the OGL 1.0a.
if it had any in the first place then I am not sure how it can be dual licensed under ORC. Is only your contribution dual-licensed ?
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top