We got an official leak of One D&D OGL 1.1! Watch Our Discussion And Reactions!

[bedir than]

I have other sources, who aren't going public, unrelated to Mark and Stephen. There are clear signs they are getting their info from a different source and that it corroborates (and predates) rather than duplicates what Mark and Stephen have.
To be honest, it freaks me out. I still find this fantastically difficult to think it what is, for sure, happening.
So I'm not trying to convince anyone of anything other than: this isn't a single source or a ratings stunt.

Thank you

 

[Staffan]

What Ryan Dancey likely did NOT anticipate was where we are now where multiple people are using the OGL to create D&D clones that people can buy and play without any reference to D&D itself as currently in print, however.

Ryan Dancey is on record as saying that one of the purposes of the OGL was to make sure that if Wizards went under or made intolerable changes to D&D, the game would be able to go on anyway. Pathfinder was not an unintended consequence of the OGL, one of the purposes of the OGL was to enable that very thing.

Back in the day, there was a companion license to the OGL called the d20 System Trademark License which was much more restrictive. It allowed you to use the "d20 System" logo and to write something along the lines of "Requires the use of the D&D Player's Handbook" on your product (thereby claiming compatibility with D&D, something the OGL specifically disallows), and in exchange you had to follow a long list of rules. Among those rules were that you were not allowed to include the rules for creating or leveling up a character. You could have a class writeup, but you could not say "When you get so-and-so many XP, you gain a level and follow this procedure." In addition, the SRD did not include those rules, and nor did it (as I recall) include most other rules related to XP (such as how much XP you get for a level X encounter) – that, by the way, is why Pathfinder 1 has highly different XP tables from 3.5e and doesn't use the "level vs CR" system 3e used and instead awards a fixed number of XP based on CR, and adjusts the XP tables accordingly.

So the idea was that the SRD itself was extremely open. You could do pretty much anything with it. One of the FAQs was even "Could I publish the whole thing?" and the answer was "Sure. If you think someone would be willing to pay for it, you're more than welcome to try." (And I do believe someone did publish a "pocket SRD", basically just reprinting the SRD in a smaller and more portable format.) But if you wanted to use the d20 logo and the name "d20 system", you basically had to make your product a support product for D&D (or eventually d20 Modern).

 

[Desdichado]

Ryan Dancey is on record as saying that one of the purposes of the OGL was to make sure that if Wizards went under or made intolerable changes to D&D, the game would be able to go on anyway. Pathfinder was not an unintended consequence of the OGL, one of the purposes of the OGL was to enable that very thing.

Yes, yes, I remember, but we're not really talking about what Ryan Dancey and Peter Adkison wanted, we're talking with what the current management of WOTC thinks about it. After they struggled through the dominance of the OSR and Pathfinder competing head to head with 4e, I can imagine that they're not very happy with the actual result of the OGL. And although 5e has been pretty dominant, I doubt that the WOTC management sees Pathfinder or the OSR as actually helping grow D&D further.

 

[Nikosandros]

(And I do believe someone did publish a "pocket SRD", basically just reprinting the SRD in a smaller and more portable format.)

Yes, Mongoose did publish some pocket books. I remember that I had the pocket PHB, which was quite convenient at the gaming table.

 

[Scribe]

What I'm hung up on is, even very recently, WotC's line was that what they really cared about was people play D&D, in whatever form. Now it seems they have contracted that desire. A lot.

The idea or claim that 'WotC' actually cares about anything they claim to, has been, and forever will be, lip service to avoid negative PR, and maximize profits.

 

[Desdichado]

New article on Gizmodo about the topic too: Dungeons & Dragons’ New License Tightens Its Grip on Competition

 

[Cadence]

New article on Gizmodo about the topic too: Dungeons & Dragons’ New License Tightens Its Grip on Competition

Same as the one in post #343 (with link to it in post #3)?

 

[jerryrice4949]

The idea or claim that 'WotC' actually cares about anything they claim to, has been, and forever will be, lip service to avoid negative PR, and maximize profits.

This is beyond over simplistic. I imagine many members and employees of WoTC care deeply about many things. However what the CEO and shareholders care about may be different.

 

[Sacrosanct]

2022: LaNasa managed to have everyone rooting for the big bad corporation. WotC had a lot of goodwill
2023: Wotc: "Well, we can't have that, can we! Hold my beer!"

 

[Scribe]

This is beyond over simplistic. I imagine many members and employees of WoTC care deeply about many things. However what the CEO and shareholders care about may be different.

Hence the quote 'WoTC'.

Individual employees are probably just as pissed as a lot of folks, and feel bad for the people who are fearful for their income/jobs.

WotC? Does not care.