D&D 5E So, 5e OGL
- Thread starter Michael Morris
- Start date
Yup. It means there is no real need for WotC to release a 5E System Reference Document under the OGL. Other companies can release products that can be run using 5E by using most D&D terminology through the 3.0 SRD. They just can't use the D&D logos or branding.
Sacrosanct
Legend
Not true. If you follow the OGL, you can't claim compatibility because the OGL says you can't and you're agreeing to that by using the OGL. However, if you don't follow the OGL, you can put "compatible with Dungeons&Dragons TM", as long as you're not violating any other trademark or copyright. It's why you see a million products out there that say they are compatible with a trademark. For example, go into an auto store and you'll see "compatible with the Dodge Dakota pickup" and such.
There's a great reason for them to do it. The Roman Empire strategy. More and more companies are going their own way producing compatible products. By providing a license, WotC can pull all that under their sphere of influence. They can make them vassal countries rather than rebel countries.
Yes I'm specifically taking about using the OGL while claiming compatibility with "5th edition". The agreement said your can't claim compatibility with a trademark, so you can't say " compatible with Dungeons and Dragons 5th edition. ". But the phase " 5th edition " is too generic to be trademarked, so there is nothing to stop you from using it under the OGL as long as you don't specify that your material is compatible with the 5th edition of what.
This seems to be exactly what Sasquatch is doing with Primeval Thule.
If you had a non OGL product you could stamp it "compatible with D&D" providing you don't use the D&D logo. But then you wouldn't be able to use spell and monster names and other trade dress that WotC owns which are specifically allowed under the OGL.
Last edited:
Nellisir
Hero
Already knew that. Frog God Games did it months ago.
Jester David
Hero
Well, that works for existing companies that are familiar with the OGL and its legal requirements and can afford to pay a copyright lawyer to double checked what they can or cannot do. It doesn't work as well for fans trying to publish stuff on their website or new publishers getting their start.
After all, so many of the name publishers in the current market (Paizo, Green Ronin, Kobold Press) started as 3e OGL publishers and allowed a generation of new designers to cut their teeth and earn some experience before moving onto other games.
Without a new OGL it's mostly going to be more of the same, with Paizo taking the lead at shepherding new talent to the forefront. There'll simply be fewer opportunities for new names to make their mark. Not without the risk of sinking money into a lawyer for the *chance* to make money.
The fact that companies are still able to use the 3.0 OGL and SRD to make products in 5E shows how much that document opened WotC D&D up to problems controlling their intellectual property in the TTRPG market. I'm sure they wish they had never opened that door. Yet it is open.
After thinking about it more from a business perspective, it would probably be in WotC's best interest to find a way to leverage the open door to bring in more revenue. As Morrus said create vassal countries rather than rebel countries. What's done is done. It cannot at this point be undone. It is a legal hassle to try to undo it with the undesirable effect of alienating their customer base. I feel this isn't going to happen until someone can show the corporate people at Hasbro that oversee WotC that this situation is not best resolved by taking a hard stance against an OGL. Some lawyer has to wake up to the fact that the 3.0 OGL is binding and going forward they have to acknowledge this and adapt to its existence, while retaking market share in the TTRPG market.
3.0 was a highly successful edition with strong community support. Third party products did not seem to compete with WotC products. The more businesses you have on board promoting your core product can save you a lot of money on marketing. The main thing they have to do is ensure that the edition cannot be taken and turned into a new company that competes directly for their market share. The OGL was productive other than that major downside effect. The only way to ensure that is produce a high quality game that causes customers to return to the D&D tent. Once they get that tent as close to full as it used to be, perhaps a modified OGL can be released to get the community support back to the level it was at in the 3rd edition era.
After thinking about it more from a business perspective, it would probably be in WotC's best interest to find a way to leverage the open door to bring in more revenue. As Morrus said create vassal countries rather than rebel countries. What's done is done. It cannot at this point be undone. It is a legal hassle to try to undo it with the undesirable effect of alienating their customer base. I feel this isn't going to happen until someone can show the corporate people at Hasbro that oversee WotC that this situation is not best resolved by taking a hard stance against an OGL. Some lawyer has to wake up to the fact that the 3.0 OGL is binding and going forward they have to acknowledge this and adapt to its existence, while retaking market share in the TTRPG market.
3.0 was a highly successful edition with strong community support. Third party products did not seem to compete with WotC products. The more businesses you have on board promoting your core product can save you a lot of money on marketing. The main thing they have to do is ensure that the edition cannot be taken and turned into a new company that competes directly for their market share. The OGL was productive other than that major downside effect. The only way to ensure that is produce a high quality game that causes customers to return to the D&D tent. Once they get that tent as close to full as it used to be, perhaps a modified OGL can be released to get the community support back to the level it was at in the 3rd edition era.
It's not a new OGL, it's a 5E SRD.
As far as Paizo taking the lead "shepherding" new talent... so what? Why should that be a concern? To WotC or anyone else? If that's what Paizo has become and continues to be, then good for them! If new writers feel trying to release Pathfinder products is the safest bet due to the PF SRD, then they can go right ahead and learn the trade that way.
The only reason why a new writer wouldn't want to do that would be if they felt they wouldn't actually make much money that way, and wanted to release 5E products because that's the "new big thing" most likely to generate revenue. But it's not WotC's job to create revenue for people outside their company. And if a 5E SRD would allow people outside the company to take the statblocks and data WotC's already created and put them directly into their products (thereby not requiring a person to actually need a 5E PH or MM at the table to play the product they made), then what urge does WotC have to release an SRD?
Right now things seem to be in a place WotC probably prefers. Because there's no 5E SRD, there's no major infux of 5E product watering everything down, and instead it's a lighter trickle. There's still a large playground of additional material still to be mined from the 5E game that WotC can create for themselves (while a few other companies produce additional products too using 3E and PF terms for 5E material, thereby giving those fans who want more "stuff" the chance to get it).
The only thing lost by not having a 5E SRD is every Tom, Dick, and Harry trying to make money off the back of WotC. But I would not think they'd consider that a big loss.
Similar Threads
- Locked
