Ryan Dancey -- Hasbro Cannot Deauthorize OGL

I reached out to the architect of the original Open Gaming License, former VP of Wizard of the Coast, Ryan Dancey, and asked his opinion about the current plan by WotC to 'deauthorize' the current OGL in favour of a new one.

He responded as follows:

Yeah my public opinion is that Hasbro does not have the power to deauthorize a version of the OGL. If that had been a power that we wanted to reserve for Hasbro, we would have enumerated it in the license. I am on record numerous places in email and blogs and interviews saying that the license could never be revoked.

Ryan also maintains the Open Gaming Foundation.

As has been noted previously, even WotC in its own OGL FAQ did not believe at the time that the licence could be revoked.

7. Can't Wizards of the Coast change the License in a way that I wouldn't like?

Yes, it could. However, the License already defines what will happen to content that has been previously distributed using an earlier version, in Section 9. As a result, even if Wizards made a change you disagreed with, you could continue to use an earlier, acceptable version at your option. In other words, there's no reason for Wizards to ever make a change that the community of people using the Open Gaming License would object to, because the community would just ignore the change anyway.

​

 

[The DM Lair]

This rumor mill has already had a chilling effect on third-party publishers I know personally. Suffice it to say the bullying train is going according to plan.

Agreed. As a 3PP, I can confirm that the rumor mill is wreaking havoc in multiple ways. My team and I are hoping we all get something official from WOTC soon.

 

[ngenius]

Reading all the debates about the legal standing of the OGL 1.0 versus the OGL 1.1 is just giving common folk mental trauma. Sorry for the all questions below, but the hobby is in chaos in 2023 now.

For simplicity, what effect will the OGL 1.1 have on projects like EN Publishing's Level Up 5e?

In simple terms is Level Up 5e dead in the water come 2024?

Or will Level Up 5e exist as an alternative set of variant rules like Paizo's Pathfinder did in the 4e era?

Those of us who already have these books are fine, but how do we bring in new Players if those people cannot purchase the Level Up 5e core rulebook in 2024?

Will Wizards of the Coast issue cease and desist to all publishers who refuse to update to OGL 1.1?

I am thinking of selling mine, if there is no guarantee that variant rules will remain legal in 2024.

 

[S'mon]

For simplicity, what effect will the OGL 1.1 have on projects like EN Publishing's Level Up 5e?

No one knows yet. I'm sure ENP doesn't know.

 

[aeFact]

Isn't Ryan Dancey the one who's still of the opinion that, if we use free Open Game Content in our D&D mods, then we must offer them openly and for free too?

 

[Ranger REG]

I wonder if this will sour any Open Gaming movement provided by the new incarnation of the OGL. This is probably the worse thing since 4e GSL, IMNSHO. This is like being railroaded to WotC's conformity and compliance, rather than allow creative innovations by 3PP.

I better get all my 3e/d20 third-party products downloaded from drivethrurpg.com before they shut it down, the products, not the website.

 

[Reynard]

I am thinking of selling mine, if there is no guarantee that variant rules will remain legal in 2024.

Do you think someone is going to come take them? Why would you sell them for that reason? No one can stop you from playing LevelUp even if WotC somehow manages to make future supplements and adventures untenable.

 

[Reynard]

I wonder if this will sour any Open Gaming movement provided by the new incarnation of the OGL. This is probably the worse thing since 4e GSL, IMNSHO. This is like being railroaded to WotC's conformity and compliance, rather than allow creative innovations by 3PP.

Again, the GSL was tied to a unpopular major revision of D&D. The OGL 1.1 isn't. There's no reason to believe consumers en masse will care enough to leave D&D over it. So there's no reason to believe 3PPs won't support it, especially the ones like Kobold that invited to super secret NDA meetings with WotC. That's what WotC is banking on, and they probably don't care one way or another about people and companies that do a few tens of thousands or less dollars a year in sales.

But I bet thet all but kill unofficial and unlicensed VTT support for D&D.

 

[Staffan]

Isn't Ryan Dancey the one who's still of the opinion that, if we use free Open Game Content in our D&D mods, then we must offer them openly and for free too?

I'm not Ryan, but: if you rely on the OGL to publish a work, that work also has to be published under the Open Gaming License. That doesn't mean you have to release it for free, but you can't publish it as a "closed" work. You can mark parts of it as "Product Identity" (such as NPCs, setting elements, and so on), making them off-limits.

 

[Reynard]

I'm not Ryan, but: if you rely on the OGL to publish a work, that work also has to be published under the Open Gaming License. That doesn't mean you have to release it for free, but you can't publish it as a "closed" work. You can mark parts of it as "Product Identity" (such as NPCs, setting elements, and so on), making them off-limits.

Yeah, you are in violation of the OGL if you use OGC in a product and then try and close derivative material (such as calling a monster stat block Product Identity). Not that lots of 3PP didn't try and do that during the early days.

 

[Alzrius]

I wonder if this will sour any Open Gaming movement provided by the new incarnation of the OGL. This is probably the worse thing since 4e GSL, IMNSHO. This is like being railroaded to WotC's conformity and compliance, rather than allow creative innovations by 3PP.

I better get all my 3e/d20 third-party products downloaded from drivethrurpg.com before they shut it down, the products, not the website.

Crap. Now I have a lot of downloading to do.