D&D 5E So, 5e OGL

[Trickster Spirit]

I'm not fully convinced either, but until a better explanation comes a long this one makes the most sense. We really need to rethink D&D's business side with 5e. When the PHB came out last year, if I would have told you only two RPG books would come out in 2015, that they were both in the FR and that one of them would feature Drizzt and Demogorgon, would you have believed me?

I actually reviewed my post history to check - I'm going to say no, at least at the time that the PHB was released, but by October of last year I would have:

http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...-before-the-horse/page9&p=6404500#post6404500

Forgive me if I'm wrong but it was my understanding that the original ogl did not cover video games or anything other than print (or pdf I suppose) books.

You can't make OGL video games.

You're correct - however one thing the OGL did do was make it clear that anyone could use D&D monsters (but not characters or settings!) except those explicitly reserved a "Product Identity" but WotC (i.e. beholders and mindflayers).

I don't really see what that has to do with why they'd wait until after Sword Coast Legends was out to release an OGL, even if it made beholders and mindflayers publicly useable. Unless of course the legal department got tied up dealing with the licensing of SCL and are therefore still working on the language of an OGL because of it.

EDIT: I stand corrected, Morrus clearly knows more about the topic than I.

 

[Morrus]

Forgive me if I'm wrong but it was my understanding that the original ogl did not cover video games or anything other than print (or pdf I suppose) books.

You can't make OGL video games.

The OGL doesn't care about format. It doesn't even mention format, other than the line which defines "Distribute" as "reproduce, license, rent, lease, sell, broadcast, publicly display, transmit or otherwise distribute".

You can read it here - no need to guess at what it says:

http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/ogl.html

 

[Hussar]

I stand corrected.

 

[Mistwell]

The OGL doesn't care about format. It doesn't even mention format, other than the line which defines "Distribute" as "reproduce, license, rent, lease, sell, broadcast, publicly display, transmit or otherwise distribute".

You can read it here - no need to guess at what it says:

http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/ogl.html

I stand corrected.

Actually you're both right.

While the OGL does not mention format, the FAQ for it does. The OGL does require certain things which are much more difficult to do with a video game (apparently intentionally so). You can read more in the Software FAQ.

This issue is real enough that the Pathfinder MMO varies somewhat noticeably from the Pathfinder game due to these restrictions, partially because of this issue.

 

[Nylanfs]

The no video games and faq were primarily driven by the d20 stl, which is why we at PCGen dropped the STL. I'm guessing the FAQ was never rewritten once the d20 license was discontinued.

 

[Jester David]

Actually you're both right.

While the OGL does not mention format, the FAQ for it does. The OGL does require certain things which are much more difficult to do with a video game (apparently intentionally so). You can read more in the Software FAQ.

This issue is real enough that the Pathfinder MMO varies somewhat noticeably from the Pathfinder game due to these restrictions, partially because of this issue.

Which is also why the Pathfinder minis from WizKids often have non-D&D names, because the licence doesn't apply to miniatures.

 

[MechaPilot]

I just hope we get a decent license fairly soon.

5e has a lot of inherited settings on its plate, and I feel that the only way we are likely to get a new setting is if it comes from a third party.

 

[aramis erak]

"d20 system" was a terrible marketing move; say "works with Dungeons & Dragons" on the cover, maybe have controls in place.

It was plenty fine for the non-D&D-compatible games built off the core. Games like True20 or T20 Traveller's Handbook, or Mutants and Masterminds. Close enough to use monsters and steal players, far enough to not be wanting "D&D" on the cover.

 

[Morrus]

"d20 system" was a terrible marketing move; say "works with Dungeons & Dragons" on the cover, maybe have controls in place.

Of course it wasn't. What an odd thing to say. It worked perfectly. For a few years, d20 books sold like hotcakes. It was a bubble, and it burst, but that had nothing to do with what it was called.

"Works with Dungeons & Dragons" wouldn't have worked, given that many d20 products did not work with Dungeons & Dragons. Interestingly, the 4E GSL did have a version of "works with Dungeons & Dragons", and we all know how well that worked out.

 

[Parmandur]

Of course it wasn't. What an odd thing to say. It worked perfectly. For a few years, d20 books sold like hotcakes. It was a bubble, and it burst, but that had nothing to do with what it was called.

"Works with Dungeons & Dragons" wouldn't have worked, given that many d20 products did not work with Dungeons & Dragons. Interestingly, the 4E GSL did have a version of "works with Dungeons & Dragons", and we all know how well that worked out.

I mean as a name. Sounds silly. Conveys nothing to the unilluminated, unlike say D&D. I'll predict here that the eventual license will include something more like 4E or Pathfinder in regards to identification.