Paizo Announces New Irrevocable Open RPG License To Replace the OGL

​

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.

 

[Staffan]

That's why you make an SRD and release that under CC.

How does that work downstream? My non-lawyer reading is that it depends on what CC license the original work uses.

Let's say you figure out how to untangle Level Up from the 5e SRD and can release an SRD-ified version under whatever license you want, and I want to make an adventure for it. As adventures tend to do, it includes a mix of old and new stuff (monsters and magic items). It also includes a bunch of stuff I'd rather not put into the wild, like some setting material (the history of a particular magic item, the description of a nearby town, the adventure itself).

• If you release it under the OGL as it has previously been understood to work, I have no problem. I can release the adventure and make all stat blocks (old and new) and the names and game mechanics of any magic items Open Content, while preserving history and setting material as Product Identity.
• If your license is CC-BY, I'm cool with whatever as long as I include some language giving EN Publishing the cred the license demands. I do not have to release my adventure as CC itself, so my setting stuff is safe. It would be cool of me to produce a separate document with my new rules bits and release that as CC-BY, but it's not a requirement.
• But if your license is CC-BY-SA (the one that seems closest to the OGL), I'm in a bit of a bind. I can't use your monsters and spells and items without releasing my adventure as CC-BY-SA as well. And I can't go the SRD route, because I still need your contributions for my adventure, and I can't use them without releasing it as CC-BY-SA.

Unless perhaps CC-BY-SA has provisions for releasing parts of the work under license but not other parts? But that seems counterproductive to the general share-alike principles.

 

[Steampunkette]

IF EN Publishing De-OGL-ifies the Level Up System (which mostly involves renaming and stuff) AND joins the ORC License, then 3pp like me can use the ORC license to make Level Up content.

Which is A5e D&D by a different name.

So you'll be able to get your 5e D&D from EN Publishing without a single red cent going to WotC. Your already extant 5e Material? Works just fine in Level Up.

 

[WarDriveWorley]

If 5-6 small publishers each release their own game systems distanced from D&D then I am sorry to say I foresee a divide and conquer issue. None of those game systems will become big enough to sustain the community and commentary that 5e does and so the streamers, influencers, you-tubers, blogs? Websites will have to stay with 5e to maintain and grow the audiences they need. Those games become as relevant as the myriad of systems out there now that you struggle to get anyone to talk about (my own preferred WFRP included)

I feel that there is enough of a base to maintain interest in a a variety of smaller games as opposed to one monolithic one. Heck the market supports it now. Yes DnD is the 5000 lb gorilla in the room and is the attention hog of the community, but there are other games that are profitable that don't fit the same niche. Honestly I think breaking up the DnD hold will only help those lesser known systems thrive.

 

[Grazzt]

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"?

Little info in the "After TSR" section of this interview.

The Kyngdoms - interview with Gary Gygax

 

[Alzrius]

The more I think about this, the more I hope that Paizo finds a way to grandfather Open Game Content from the Open Game License v1.0a into the ORC License. I have no idea if that's possible at all, if they'd need WotC to be onboard somehow, or what it would otherwise entail, but there's just so much that can't (or likely won't) be able to make the jump from the OGL to the ORC if they don't.

Consider, for example, where the OSR falls in all of this. OSRIC, Swords & Wizardry, Old School Essentials, Castles & Crusades, etc., all work off of the 3.5 SRD. If there's no way to get the 3.5 SRD into the ORC License, then these systems – and the companies that are invested in their product lines – are going to be stuck with the OGL, regardless of how generous the ORC License is.

Another one is companies that are defunct now, and so aren't in a position to create an SRD under the ORC License. For instance, my understanding is that West End Games, which created the OpenD6 system under the OGL, has since shut its doors. So anyone who wants to keep creating OpenD6 content, which relies on the OpenD6 SRD, has to stick with the OGL, since only West End Games could make a new OpenD6 SRD for the ORC License...and they're not around to do so.

Even Paizo would be affected by this. I don't know if Pathfinder 2E really is different enough from the 3.5 mechanics that they could "deOGLify" it, but I sincerely doubt that Starfinder is. Unless they're prepared to jettison that entire RPG (or start rushing a Starfinder 2E into production), the loss of the 3.5 SRD will hit them fairly hard in that regard. And I've already mentioned that a lot of other companies will be forced to stop producing PF1 content if there's no PF1 SRD...which would also require the 3.5 SRD to be part of the ORC License.

Paizo, I love what you're doing; it's not an overstatement to say that the ORC License (and your courageous announcement that you'll take WotC to court to protect the OGL v1.0a from being revoked) has made you the saviors of the tabletop RPG community. But please, don't just stop at making a new, truly open and irrevocable license. We need this to be past-proof as well as future-proof; please please please find a way to get Open Game Content from the OGL v1.0a into the ORC License. Get WotC onboard if you have to; tell them that it will help rehabilitate their image (which it will), since they'll lose nothing by doing this and potentially gain back some of the goodwill they've lost.

This ORC needs to keep the Past In Esteem.

 

[Steampunkette]

Today's Penny Arcade comic is about biting the hand that feeds... and ends with an orc joke about D&D specifically.

Acquisitions Incorporated is almost certainly about to go through some changes. Dunno what, if anything, that means for the Neverwinter MMORPG.

The more I think about this, the more I hope that Paizo finds a way to grandfather Open Game Content from the Open Game License v1.0a into the ORC License. I have no idea if that's possible at all, if they'd need WotC to be onboard somehow, or what it would otherwise entail, but there's just so much that can't (or likely won't) be able to make the jump from the OGL to the ORC if they don't.

Consider, for example, where the OSR falls in all of this. OSRIC, Swords & Wizardry, Old School Essentials, Castles & Crusades, etc., all work off of the 3.5 SRD. If there's no way to get the 3.5 SRD into the ORC License, then these systems – and the companies that are invested in their product lines – are going to be stuck with the OGL, regardless of how generous the ORC License is.

Another one is companies that are defunct now, and so aren't in a position to create an SRD under the ORC License. For instance, my understanding is that West End Games, which created the OpenD6 system under the OGL, has since shut its doors. So anyone who wants to keep creating OpenD6 content, which relies on the OpenD6 SRD, has to stick with the OGL, since only West End Games could make a new OpenD6 SRD for the ORC License...and they're not around to do so.

Even Paizo would be affected by this. I don't know if Pathfinder 2E really is different enough from the 3.5 mechanics that they could "deOGLify" it, but I sincerely doubt that Starfinder is. Unless they're prepared to jettison that entire RPG (or start rushing a Starfinder 2E into production), the loss of the 3.5 SRD will hit them fairly hard in that regard. And I've already mentioned that a lot of other companies will be forced to stop producing PF1 content if there's no PF1 SRD...which would also require the 3.5 SRD to be part of the ORC License.

Paizo, I love what you're doing; it's not an overstatement to say that the ORC License (and your courageous announcement that you'll take WotC to court to protect the OGL v1.0a from being revoked) has made you the saviors of the tabletop RPG community. But please, don't just stop at making a new, truly open and irrevocable license. We need this to be past-proof as well as future-proof; please please please find a way to get Open Game Content from the OGL v1.0a into the ORC License. Get WotC onboard if you have to; tell them that it will help rehabilitate their image (which it will), since they'll lose nothing by doing this and potentially gain back some of the goodwill they've lost.

This ORC needs to keep the Past In Esteem.

De-OGL-ify it. At least in theory, it can be done. S'what a lot of designers are doing in the EN Publishing discord as we speak.

Release a new edition, or a revised ruleset, which uses the same basic ideas (d20+modifiers) but doesn't use infringing language or naming.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Little info in the "After TSR" section of this interview.

The Kyngdoms - interview with Gary Gygax

Aha, thank you very much, that's actually VERY interesting re: Mythus/Dangerous Journeys because the design of the game system makes a huge amount more sense given it was originally Horror (presumably with a modern-day setting).

 

[Branduil]

I think it’s very worthy of Paizo to pay for the legal fees to set up the license but they aren’t actually changing the circumstances for most 3pp. They are saying that PF2 is open, but it always has been. The take up hasn’t been great because 5e has always been so much popular.

If 5-6 small publishers each release their own game systems distanced from D&D then I am sorry to say I foresee a divide and conquer issue. None of those game systems will become big enough to sustain the community and commentary that 5e does and so the streamers, influencers, you-tubers, blogs? Websites will have to stay with 5e to maintain and grow the audiences they need. Those games become as relevant as the myriad of systems out there now that you struggle to get anyone to talk about (my own preferred WFRP included)

Essentially the legal risk doesn’t go away unless the game is made different enough to make it incompatible with 5e. As soon as it becomes incompatible it no longer benefits from the gravy train.

The ironic thing for me, is that it’s the fan fury that gathers more and more momentum which is pushing 3pp to make statements and push through decisions that could have massive repercussions for their businesses. All without a single public statement from WotC. The mass hysteria from the fandom when nothing has been officially announced gives WotC all the cover they need. They can sit back and watch what their competitors do, then make a new proposal that gathers back in all the commentators, streamers, you tubers, bloggers etc and watch their previous 3pp competitors dwindle into obscurity.

If I was a 3pp the smart move would have been to wait and see and be sensible. It may feel like folks are capitalizing on the moment, but that only lasts until the news cycle shifts and something else takes over.

I think you're severely overestimating how difficult it is to make a 5e-compatible game without infringing copyright. I don't think WotC will have much of a case to say "Yeah we own having 6 ability scores and also the numbers 1-20"

 

[Dungeonosophy]

The more I think about this, the more I hope that Paizo finds a way to grandfather Open Game Content from the Open Game License v1.0a into the ORC License. I have no idea if that's possible at all, if they'd need WotC to be onboard somehow, or what it would otherwise entail, but there's just so much that can't (or likely won't) be able to make the jump from the OGL to the ORC if they don't.

Consider, for example, where the OSR falls in all of this. OSRIC, Swords & Wizardry, Old School Essentials, Castles & Crusades, etc., all work off of the 3.5 SRD. If there's no way to get the 3.5 SRD into the ORC License, then these systems – and the companies that are invested in their product lines – are going to be stuck with the OGL, regardless of how generous the ORC License is.

Another one is companies that are defunct now, and so aren't in a position to create an SRD under the ORC License. For instance, my understanding is that West End Games, which created the OpenD6 system under the OGL, has since shut its doors. So anyone who wants to keep creating OpenD6 content, which relies on the OpenD6 SRD, has to stick with the OGL, since only West End Games could make a new OpenD6 SRD for the ORC License...and they're not around to do so.

Even Paizo would be affected by this. I don't know if Pathfinder 2E really is different enough from the 3.5 mechanics that they could "deOGLify" it, but I sincerely doubt that Starfinder is. Unless they're prepared to jettison that entire RPG (or start rushing a Starfinder 2E into production), the loss of the 3.5 SRD will hit them fairly hard in that regard. And I've already mentioned that a lot of other companies will be forced to stop producing PF1 content if there's no PF1 SRD...which would also require the 3.5 SRD to be part of the ORC License.

Paizo, I love what you're doing; it's not an overstatement to say that the ORC License (and your courageous announcement that you'll take WotC to court to protect the OGL v1.0a from being revoked) has made you the saviors of the tabletop RPG community. But please, don't just stop at making a new, truly open and irrevocable license. We need this to be past-proof as well as future-proof; please please please find a way to get Open Game Content from the OGL v1.0a into the ORC License. Get WotC onboard if you have to; tell them that it will help rehabilitate their image (which it will), since they'll lose nothing by doing this and potentially gain back some of the goodwill they've lost.

This ORC needs to keep the Past In Esteem.

This is well said.

 

[Reynard]

I think it’s very worthy of Paizo to pay for the legal fees to set up the license but they aren’t actually changing the circumstances for most 3pp. They are saying that PF2 is open, but it always has been. The take up hasn’t been great because 5e has always been so much popular.

You seem to be misunderstanding the point of this action.