What's All This About The OGL Going Away?

This last week I've seen videos, tweets, and articles all repeating an unsourced rumour that the OGL (Open Gaming License) will be going away with the advent of OneD&D, and that third party publishers would have no way of legally creating compatible material. I wanted to write an article clarifying some of these terms. I've seen articles claiming (and I quote) that "players would be unable...

This last week I've seen videos, tweets, and articles all repeating an unsourced rumour that the OGL (Open Gaming License) will be going away with the advent of OneD&D, and that third party publishers would have no way of legally creating compatible material. I wanted to write an article clarifying some of these terms.

audit-3929140_960_720.jpg

I've seen articles claiming (and I quote) that "players would be unable to legally publish homebrew content" and that WotC may be "outlawing third-party homebrew content". These claims need clarification.

What's the Open Gaming License? It was created by WotC about 20 years ago; it's analagous to various 'open source' licenses. There isn't a '5E OGL' or a '3E OGL' and there won't be a 'OneD&D OGL' -- there's just the OGL (technically there are two versions, but that's by-the-by). The OGL is non-rescindable -- it can't be cancelled or revoked. Any content released as Open Gaming Content (OGC) under that license -- which includes the D&D 3E SRD, the 5E SRD, Pathfinder's SRD, Level Up's SRD, and thousands and thousands of third party books -- remains OGC forever, available for use under the license. Genie, bottle, and all that.

So, the OGL can't 'go away'. It's been here for 20 years and it's here to stay. This was WotC's (and OGL architect Ryan Dancey's) intention when they created it 20 years ago, to ensure that D&D would forever be available no matter what happened to its parent company.


What's an SRD? A System Reference Document (SRD) contains Open Gaming Content (OGC). Anything in the 3E SRD, the 3.5 SRD, or the 5E SRD, etc., is designated forever as OGC (Open Gaming Content). Each of those SRDs contains large quantities of material, including the core rules of the respective games, and encompasses all the core terminology of the ruleset(s).

When people say 'the OGL is going away' what they probably mean to say is that there won't be a new OneD&D System Reference Document.


Does That Matter? OneD&D will be -- allegedly -- fully compatible with 5E. That means it uses all the same terminology. Armor Class, Hit Points, Warlock, Pit Fiend, and so on. All this terminology has been OGC for 20 years, and anybody can use it under the terms of the OGL. The only way it could be difficult for third parties to make compatible material for OneD&D is if OneD&D substantially changed the core terminology of the game, but at that point OneD&D would no longer be compatible with 5E (or, arguably, would even be recognizable as D&D). So the ability to create compatible third party material won't be going away.

However! There is one exception -- if your use of OneD&D material needs you to replicate OneD&D content, as opposed to simply be compatible with it (say you're making an app which has all the spell descriptions in it) and if there is no new SRD, then you won't be able to do that. You can make compatible stuff ("The evil necromancer can cast magic missile" -- the term magic missile has been OGL for two decades) but you wouldn't be able to replicate the full descriptive text of the OneD&D version of the spell. That's a big if -- if there's no new SRD.

So you'd still be able to make compatible adventures and settings and new spells and new monsters and new magic items and new feats and new rules and stuff. All the stuff 3PPs commonly do. You just wouldn't be able to reproduce the core rules content itself. However, I've been publishing material for 3E, 3.5, 4E, 5E, and Pathfinder 1E for 20 years, and the need to reproduce core rules content hasn't often come up for us -- we produce new compatible content. But if you're making an app, or spell cards, or something which needs to reproduce content from the rulebooks, you'd need an SRD to do that.

So yep. If no SRD, compatible = yes, directly reproduce = no (of course, you can indirectly reproduce stuff by rewriting it in your own words).

Branding! Using the OGL you can't use the term "Dungeons & Dragons" (you never could). Most third parties say something like "compatible with the world's most popular roleplaying game" and have some sort of '5E' logo of their own making on the cover. Something similar will no doubt happen with OneD&D -- the third party market will create terminology to indicate compatibility. (Back in the 3E days, WotC provided a logo for this use called the 'd20 System Trademark Logo' but they don't do that any more).

What if WotC didn't 'support' third party material? As discussed, nobody can take the OGL or any existing OGC away. However, WotC does have control over DMs Guild and integration with D&D Beyond or the virtual tabletop app they're making. So while they can't stop folks from making and publishing compatible stuff, they could make it harder to distribute simply by not allowing it on those three platforms. If OneD&D becomes heavily reliant on a specific platform we might find ourselves in the same situation we had in 4E, where it was harder to sell player options simply because they weren't on the official character builder app. It's not that you couldn't publish 4E player options, it's just that many players weren't interested in them if they couldn't use them in the app.

But copyright! Yes, yes, you can't copyright rules, you can't do this, you can't do that. The OGL is not relevant to copyright law -- it is a license, an agreement, a contract. By using it you agree to its terms. Sure WotC might not be able to copyright X, but you can certainly contractually agree not to use X (which is a selection of material designated as 'Product Identity') by using the license. There are arguments on the validity of this from actual real lawyers which I won't get into, but I just wanted to note that this is about a license, not copyright law.

If you don't use the Open Gaming License, of course, it doesn't apply to you. You are only bound by a license you use. So then, sure, knock yourself out with copyright law!

So, bullet point summary:
  • The OGL can't go away, and any existing OGC can't go away
  • If (that's an if) there is no new SRD, you will be able to still make compatible material but not reproduce the OneD&D content
  • Most of the D&D terminology (save a few terms like 'beholder' etc.) has been OGC for 20 years and is freely available for use
  • To render that existing OGC unusable for OneD&D the basic terminology of the entire game would have to be changed, at which point it would no longer be compatible with 5E.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Steel_Wind

Legend
Well some DM's have many inspirations, including Shakespeare. Maybe they take "The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers." a little too seriously? ;)
There's no court backlog in Iran, North Korea -- or the PRC. Funny about that.

In 1591, Shakespeare didn't think lawyers were something which stood between the State and his fundamental rights (that's because in 1591, he lived in a dictatorship where he and most other Englishmen didn't really have any).
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Faolyn

(she/her)
There's no court backlog in Iran, North Korea -- or the PRC. Funny about that.

In 1591, Shakespeare didn't think lawyers were something which stood between the State and his fundamental rights (that's because in 1591, he lived in a dictatorship where he and most other Englishmen didn't really have any).
The last time I got called to jury duty we had to listen to a tape where the speaker was super-defensive about how awesome lawyers were and how Shakespeare's quote meant that you had to kill them in order to get away with any of your Elizabethan-era antics.
 

Steel_Wind

Legend
The last time I got called to jury duty we had to listen to a tape where the speaker was super-defensive about how awesome lawyers were and how Shakespeare's quote meant that you had to kill them in order to get away with any of your Elizabethan-era antics.
That might be taking Henry VI, Part 2, a wee too far :)

Shakespeare intended it as a joke the audience would laugh out loud at, not civil rights/ political advice!
 



Steel_Wind

Legend
Except WotC itself has said otherwise at various times in the past.
Correct. Moreover, it is more nuanced than that.

It isn't simply whether the OGL can be revoked in a prospective manner so that it doesn't apply to a 6e, say (spoilers: they can get rid of that, in part at least), it is whether it is possible to revoke derivative rights which accrued in the past (and perhaps crystallized, too) but which may still be exercised in a future point in time.

And as to that proposition? I don't think that can be prevented or revoked. That has always been the reason why the OGL has teeth. The sub-license isn't terminated and the derivative rights all soldier on. That aspect of the OGL is not only perpetual -- that part is likely irrevocable, imo.
 

Bluebell

Explorer
That's the thing I think people don't quite get. Most 3PP are dependent on WotC and 5E (or whatever the current edition is), but the folks at CR are independent of that. They can play whatever and will not lose their following. But if they put out their own system and play that, they're instantly one of the top 3 RPG companies.
I agree. But I think this is complicated by the fact that CR has gotten extremely cozy with WotC and has released official content through them. Exandria is now an "official" DnD setting. Given that their campaigns are always set in Exandria, would they be willing to extract it from DnD? Doubtful. And I doubt they will be hurt by this the way that smaller streamers will be anyway.

Dimension 20, which has always been more experimental and willing to switch it up between campaigns, I could see them doing that. But Dimension 20 doesn't have nearly the sway that CR does.
 

overgeeked

B/X Known World
I agree. But I think this is complicated by the fact that CR has gotten extremely cozy with WotC and has released official content through them. Exandria is now an "official" DnD setting. Given that their campaigns are always set in Exandria, would they be willing to extract it from DnD? Doubtful. And I doubt they will be hurt by this the way that smaller streamers will be anyway.

Dimension 20, which has always been more experimental and willing to switch it up between campaigns, I could see them doing that. But Dimension 20 doesn't have nearly the sway that CR does.
Critical Role still owns Exandria. The copyright page of the two CR WotC books are quite clear. WotC simply published and helped develop the books. They don’t own the setting. So CR switching systems is a simple matter and there’s nothing to “extract”.
 

Clint_L

Hero
I agree. But I think this is complicated by the fact that CR has gotten extremely cozy with WotC and has released official content through them. Exandria is now an "official" DnD setting. Given that their campaigns are always set in Exandria, would they be willing to extract it from DnD? Doubtful. And I doubt they will be hurt by this the way that smaller streamers will be anyway.
CR's relationship to WotC is very unusual. Yes, they have official WotC content. But they also more recently released the revised Tal'Dorei setting (the original CR setting), also set on the world Exandria, under the OGL. And even though all of the streamed Vox Machina campaign was D&D5e, they have been very careful to ensure that The Legend of Vox Machina cartoon avoids using any WotC IP.

It gets even weirder, because DnDBeyond not only lets you use official CR material, it also lets you choose some of Matt Mercer's unofficial stuff, such as the Blood Hunter class. Similarly, the official Wildmount setting and the unofficial Tal'Dorei setting frequently reference each other.

I can totally see why Hasbro wants a piece of CR; it is probably the most successful venture to come out of D&D. More than that, CR has created some of the most well known IP associated with the D&D brand, and Hasbro basically gets none of that. On the other hand, they have benefitted from the popularity of CR, though in less quantifiable ways. So there are probably a LOT of discussions happening between those entities right now. CR walking away from D&D would not be a good look for Hasbro, but you could totally see it happening if Hasbro pushes too hard.

And I do think that CR could walk away. Mercer is more than capable of creating his own home-brew system.
 

mamba

Legend
My wish would be for Paizo, Kobold, MCDM, CR and anyone else who wants to to come together, publish a ruleset under a truly open, perpetual and irrevocable license (use those two words) and have all 3PPs move to that.

Just a ruleset, attributes, a handful of races (human, elf, dwarf, gnome) and classes (warrior, thief, cleric, wizard), combat system, etc., basically almost the SRD but feel free to have fewer monsters, spells and magic items.
And then everyone can base their adventures, bestiaries, settings and other supplements on that. I would switch out of principle…

Some talk like that must be going on, I cannot be the only one with that idea ;)
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top