D&D 5E Prepping for the 5e gaming licence

[Sacrosanct]

I don't think it's so much an agreement, but a blind eye.

some of these unofficial 5e publishers have stuff fairly ready to go that they dare not work on beyond a certain point to attract attention.

Maybe, but doubtful. I think it's more like 3PP have 5e stuff they've worked on, but because they have things in there that aren't specifically covered in the OGL (like terms like "advantage" or the names of certain abilities like "pack tactics"), they want to see a 5e license to give them a sense of ease before publishing. I mentioned this in another thread, but as a 3PP, I've had Felk Mor (old school superdungeon) done for coming up on 2 years now, waiting for a license. I haven't held off publishing it because I'm worried about WotC's attention. I've held off because if I publish it using the OGL, I have to make modifications and take some things out that I think would hurt the quality of a 5e specific adventure. For example, some of the key NPCs I have tear away pages just for them, but without a 5e specific license, I don't feel comfortable listing things like "champion fighter with second wind and indomitable" even if I don't say what those things do. I know for sure listing what they do is verboten, but it's still a bit shaky if you're in violation for just using the same words of the ability. Obviously those things aren't in the OGL. So If I go the OGL route, I have to take out a lot of that, which creates more work for the players.

Alas, it looks like that's exactly what I will end up doing, since there is no 5e license in sight or in the near future. How many more years must I hold off lol.

 

[Dausuul]

So 'have an existing relationship with WotC before publishing anything 5E related', then?

No, you don't need an existing relationship with WotC. What you do need is advice from a lawyer.

Contrary to what a lot of folks believe, it has always been legal to publish D&D stuff without using the OGL/GSL, and even to advertise your stuff as "for use with Dungeons & Dragons." My favorite example is "Kingdoms of Kalamar," which was published for 4E outside of the GSL, and Wizards never said boo. The publisher, KenzerCo, is run by a guy whose other job just happens to be "lawyer specializing in copyright law," so he knows what he can and can't do, and it turns out that he can do quite a bit.

The drawback to going this route is that you and your lawyer have to be extra super duper careful. You're way outside of the OGL safe harbor, sailing in the open ocean. Dave Kenzer can do this. Unless you have nerves of steel and utmost confidence in your legal advice, you probably don't want to. (Remember, just because you're legally in the right, it doesn't mean you won't get sued.)

Because 5E is built on a 3E chassis, there's a somewhat less nerve-wracking option, which is to use the original OGL. This is what Necromancer Games did with their 5E monster books. You still need to consult a lawyer before doing this, but what it boils down to is that as long as you stick to terminology that existed in 3E, you're mostly okay.

The last option is to just say to heck with it and publish. Legally, this is a bad, bad idea. Practically speaking, however, if you're not charging money for it and sticking to material from the Basic Rules, Wizards may decide it's not worth going after you and turn a blind eye. I'm not advocating this, rather the contrary, but people are doing it. But if you do, watch your mailbox (physical and electronic), and if you get a C&D, take your stuff down immediately.

 

[Pauper]

No, you don't need an existing relationship with WotC. What you do need is advice from a lawyer.

Contrary to what a lot of folks believe, it has always been legal to publish D&D stuff without using the OGL/GSL, and even to advertise your stuff as "for use with Dungeons & Dragons." My favorite example is "Kingdoms of Kalamar," which was published for 4E outside of the GSL, and Wizards never said boo. The publisher, KenzerCo, is run by a guy whose other job just happens to be "lawyer specializing in copyright law," so he knows what he can and can't do, and it turns out that he can do quite a bit.

First off, be careful about saying something has 'always' been legal -- when it comes to contract law and intellectual property law, 'legal' is what you negotiate or what's decided in a court. Nothing stops you from publishing an adventure 'compatible with the world's greatest role-playing game', but the barest hint of infringement on WotC's intellectual property is likely going to land you in court, or at the very least with a cease-and-desist letter (admittedly as you note).

I'd also be careful in using Kenzer & Co as an example of what's possible. Yes, Dave Kenzer is educated as a copyright attorney, but they also had the advantage of being able to negotiate a very advantageous 3E license in exchange for not pursuing WotC for reprinting Knights of the Dinner Table in their Dragon Magazine Archive. Kenzer & Co never published another Kalamar 4E book after their initlal 4E PDF that raised such a stink, and their previously licensed 3E books aren't for sale anymore on their web store, since that license has long since expired. They've published exactly zero 5E products, though it's hard to distinguish between 'too fraught with legal peril to publish' and 'not likely to earn enough profit to be worth publishing' -- especially when both could well be true.

 

[Tia Nadiezja]

I'm not sure why a license is necessary. The vast bulk of the gaming industry doesn't offer licenses (I've certainly never seen one for a White Wolf/Onyx Path or a Steve Jackson game); why is WotC expected to offer their work up for others to use to turn a profit (and, in the case of Paizo, actively and directly compete with WotC's newer games) for free?

The majority of the d20 boom OGL stuff was, frankly, absolute garbage - unsuable in game, poorly designed, playtested, and balanced, and a complete waste of the gamer's money and time. There were gems there, things like Monte Cook's Arcana Evolved and his psionics stuff, but the chaff outweighed the wheat by orders of magnitude. I'd really rather not spend another edition sifting through that.

 

[Shades of Eternity]

yeah, but if you refine enough of the slag, you might just get something really good from it.

fate has made serious inroads by using an ogl for example.

 

[Dausuul]

The majority of the d20 boom OGL stuff was, frankly, absolute garbage - unsuable in game, poorly designed, playtested, and balanced, and a complete waste of the gamer's money and time. There were gems there, things like Monte Cook's Arcana Evolved and his psionics stuff, but the chaff outweighed the wheat by orders of magnitude. I'd really rather not spend another edition sifting through that.

Nobody's forcing you to sift through third-party material. If you don't want 3PP stuff, just buy from WotC.

The advantage of the OGL was that for people who were willing to hunt through the chaff, there were those gems to be found. One such gem was "Iron Heroes," created by a certain Mike Mearls.

First off, be careful about saying something has 'always' been legal -- when it comes to contract law and intellectual property law, 'legal' is what you negotiate or what's decided in a court. Nothing stops you from publishing an adventure 'compatible with the world's greatest role-playing game', but the barest hint of infringement on WotC's intellectual property is likely going to land you in court, or at the very least with a cease-and-desist letter (admittedly as you note).

I'd also be careful in using Kenzer & Co as an example of what's possible. Yes, Dave Kenzer is educated as a copyright attorney, but they also had the advantage of being able to negotiate a very advantageous 3E license in exchange for not pursuing WotC for reprinting Knights of the Dinner Table in their Dragon Magazine Archive. Kenzer & Co never published another Kalamar 4E book after their initlal 4E PDF that raised such a stink, and their previously licensed 3E books aren't for sale anymore on their web store, since that license has long since expired.

All quite true, and I certainly would not want to go the KenzerCo route. For 5E, the Necromancer Games approach (using the original OGL) looks a lot more promising. But either way, consult a lawyer first.

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

I'd also be careful in using Kenzer & Co as an example of what's possible. Yes, Dave Kenzer is educated as a copyright attorney, but they also had the advantage of being able to negotiate a very advantageous 3E license in exchange for not pursuing WotC for reprinting Knights of the Dinner Table in their Dragon Magazine Archive. Kenzer & Co never published another Kalamar 4E book after their initlal 4E PDF that raised such a stink, and their previously licensed 3E books aren't for sale anymore on their web store, since that license has long since expired. They've published exactly zero 5E products, though it's hard to distinguish between 'too fraught with legal peril to publish' and 'not likely to earn enough profit to be worth publishing' -- especially when both could well be true.

Since I don't feel like doing research on the matter, I won't argue about the how/why of "3E license" which seems not to really be needed given the OGL - but you could be talking about their license with WotC that allowed them to make a real version of the game the Knights of the Dinner Table play in the comics, so long as its products maintained their parody nature.

For similar reasons, I won't argue about the 4th edition Kingdoms of Kalimar situation even though I remember it being more in protest of the GSL WotC proposed.

But the company's choice to not keep going with 4E products was more about their focus changing to produce their own game, now free of mandatory parody since it has been built from the ground up as its own game instead of being AD&D+house-rules & parody.

And that, doing their own game which has a small, but seemingly very loyal following, is why Kenzer & Company aren't putting out stuff for 5th edition - they are dedicating their time to being 1st-party, rather than 3rd-party.

 

[Pauper]

All quite true, and I certainly would not want to go the KenzerCo route. For 5E, the Necromancer Games approach (using the original OGL) looks a lot more promising. But either way, consult a lawyer first.

And/or work with a former WotC employee who might be able to give you some inside info -- as Necromancer Games/Frog God Games has done with their Kickstarted 5E books, co-authored by former WotC and TSR grognard Steve Winter.

Again, the trend seems to be 'if your project involves a former WotC employee, you're probably OK'. The ENWorld En5ider project is just about the only thing I've seen that doesn't follow that trend.

Since I don't feel like doing research on the matter, I won't argue about the how/why of "3E license" which seems not to really be needed given the OGL - but you could be talking about their license with WotC that allowed them to make a real version of the game the Knights of the Dinner Table play in the comics, so long as its products maintained their parody nature.

Read more: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...for-the-5e-gaming-licence/page3#ixzz3noiQr8ZC

Hackmaster wasn't a parody -- it was derived from a license acquired by Kenzer to the old AD&D game system. That's why, after that license expired, Hackmaster got a revision to basically divest itself of its AD&D roots and position itself as an independent game (the '1st party' you're referring to in your comment).

And Kenzer's 3E license allowed them to put the 3E D&D logo on all their Kalamar products, which is not something you can do via the OGL; you can't even use the d20 logo with the OGL unless you're also compliant with the d20 license. (That logo decision is part of why Kenzer doesn't sell their own back-stock of 3E Kalamar material anymore.)

Sure, you're welcome to prefer the version of Kenzer & Co that exists in your own head, but it's not that difficult to do the research -- mine pretty much consisted of visiting the Kenzer & Co website and checking my PDF copy of Shannon Applecline's 'Designers & Dragons', so it's not like I'm claiming to be definitive here, just a bit more grounded in reality than "I seem to recall this thing from 7 years ago..."

--
Pauper

 

[Tia Nadiezja]

Nobody's forcing you to sift through third-party material. If you don't want 3PP stuff, just buy from WotC.

The advantage of the OGL was that for people who were willing to hunt through the chaff, there were those gems to be found. One such gem was "Iron Heroes," created by a certain Mike Mearls.

I loved Iron Heroes. It was a beautiful mess of a game, and I had a ton of fun with it in spite of - and occasionally because of - its being inherently broken.

I think the biggest issue with the OGL was embodied in Iron Heroes, Arcana Evolved, and Pathfinder, though... the very best stuff was the complete variant games. Those are also the things Hasbro/WotC has the least compelling interest in permitting, though, because they're the things that compete most strongly with WotC's own product (especially Pathfinder - I honestly think we can blame Paizo for the fact that true open gaming is never, never coming back). If I'm Hasbro, what reason do I have, knowing that Pathfinder can happen, to allow it - or Iron Heroes or Arcana Evolved - to exist in the first place?

And if I'm a player or GM, what reason do I have to sort through a ton of mostly-useless books written for D&D itself in a process that will take longer between finding anything of use than just homebrewing my own stuff would?

 

[AaronOfBarbaria]

[MENTION=17607]Pauper[/MENTION], I'm having trouble deciding whether you are more informed and being a bit rude about it, or you're just not used to the same definitions of words as I am. You clearly seem to have a bit more sources for your knowledge, and some good points regarding logo usage which had slipped my mind... but the HackMaster 4th Edition game was absolutely a parody of AD&D, which doesn't stop it being a perfectly playable game that can be loads of fun mind you, it just meant the game products had a tone to them that was poking fun at the DM vs. Players adversarial divide which folks (however inaccurately) attribute to AD&D.

There is a reason why the new version of HackMaster not only has different rules (whether because of Kenzer & Co. choosing to, or being forced to by expiration of license) but also doesn't keep quite the same over-the-top tone (which they could freely do if they felt like it).