Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
So, 5e OGL
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Mistwell" data-source="post: 6305432" data-attributes="member: 2525"><p>Actually that is the one claim he had predicted that he hasn't continued to claim since then. The original plan was that all OGL games would NEED a PHB to play them. That didn't happen. Indeed, they didn't actually expect people to replicate the same rules they had published in addition to making their own games based on them. But that is exactly what happened - you didn't need a PHB to play all those other games, because they were simply replicating all the rules they needed to replicate in their books. You didn't need a PHB to play Spycraft or M&M or Call of Cthulu or Delta Green. The original intent was for everyone to buy the PHB to play any other game based on the open license, and it ended up there were definitely NOT selling PHBs to all those other game players. And you sure as heck never needed a DMG or MM to play those other games.</p><p></p><p>And it wasn't just non-fantasy games of course...Pathfinder proves that one, and other companies were starting to do it before them (and one company even had the call to put out a miniature PHB). It was inevitably leading to nobody ever needing a WOTC product to play any d20 game.</p><p></p><p>To address this oversight they first tried to put out new OGL licenses (different numbers). Most people simply ignored the new ones though - why use a more restrictive one when the older one remains indefinitely in effect and is less restrictive. </p><p></p><p>So the next step was a shift in the edition. This was one primary force behind 3.5e. Monte Cook has talked about it, how the OGL wasn't functioning quite as intended in that respect (though he was not pleased with the shift).</p><p></p><p>And you don't hear Dancey claiming it anymore either, and in the distant past when he did he refused to put any numbers on it, unlike everything else he was saying. That aspect of the OGL did not work out. They did not sell more copies of the PHB, and certainly not the DMG or MM, because of companies putting out OGL games which had nothing to do with D&D, and then eventually games which were like D&D but which had their own type of PHB.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mistwell, post: 6305432, member: 2525"] Actually that is the one claim he had predicted that he hasn't continued to claim since then. The original plan was that all OGL games would NEED a PHB to play them. That didn't happen. Indeed, they didn't actually expect people to replicate the same rules they had published in addition to making their own games based on them. But that is exactly what happened - you didn't need a PHB to play all those other games, because they were simply replicating all the rules they needed to replicate in their books. You didn't need a PHB to play Spycraft or M&M or Call of Cthulu or Delta Green. The original intent was for everyone to buy the PHB to play any other game based on the open license, and it ended up there were definitely NOT selling PHBs to all those other game players. And you sure as heck never needed a DMG or MM to play those other games. And it wasn't just non-fantasy games of course...Pathfinder proves that one, and other companies were starting to do it before them (and one company even had the call to put out a miniature PHB). It was inevitably leading to nobody ever needing a WOTC product to play any d20 game. To address this oversight they first tried to put out new OGL licenses (different numbers). Most people simply ignored the new ones though - why use a more restrictive one when the older one remains indefinitely in effect and is less restrictive. So the next step was a shift in the edition. This was one primary force behind 3.5e. Monte Cook has talked about it, how the OGL wasn't functioning quite as intended in that respect (though he was not pleased with the shift). And you don't hear Dancey claiming it anymore either, and in the distant past when he did he refused to put any numbers on it, unlike everything else he was saying. That aspect of the OGL did not work out. They did not sell more copies of the PHB, and certainly not the DMG or MM, because of companies putting out OGL games which had nothing to do with D&D, and then eventually games which were like D&D but which had their own type of PHB. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
So, 5e OGL
Top