WotC Announces OGL 1.1 -- Revised Terms, Royalties, and Annual Revenue Reporting

There has been a lot of speculation recently about WotC's plans regarding the Open Gaming License and the upcoming One D&D. Today, WotC shared some information.

In short, they will be producing a new Open Gaming License (note that the previous OGL 1.0a will still exist, and can still be used). However, for those who use the new OGL 1.1, which will be released in early 2023, there will be some limitations added with regards the type of product which can use it, and -- possibly controversially -- reporting to WotC your annual OGL-related revenue.

They are also adding a royalty for those third party publishers who make more than $750K per year.

Interestingly, only books and 'static electronic files' like ebooks and PDFs will be compatible with the new OGL, meaning that apps, web pages, and the like will need to stick to the old OGL 1.0a.

There will, of course, be a lot of debate and speculation over what this actually means for third party creators, and how it will affect them. Some publishers like Paizo (for Pathfinder) and others will likely simply continue to use the old OGL. The OGL 1.0a allows WotC to update the license, but allows licensees to continue to use previous versions "to copy, modify and distribute any Open Game Content originally distributed under any version of this License".

OGLs, SRDs, & One D&D

We love the interest and passion the community has for D&D. We love D&D, too. So, when we see the D&D community concerned by rumors and misu...

www.dndbeyond.com

1. Will One D&D include an SRD/be covered by an OGL?

Yes. First, we’re designing One D&D with fifth edition backwards compatibility, so all existing creator content that is compatible with fifth edition will also be compatible with One D&D. Second, we will update the SRD for One D&D as we complete its development—development that is informed by the results of playtests that we’re conducting with hundreds of thousands of D&D players now.

2. Will the OGL terms change?

Yes. We will release version 1.1 of the OGL in early 2023.

The OGL needs an update to ensure that it keeps doing what it was intended to do—allow the D&D community’s independent creators to build and play and grow the game we all love—without allowing things like third-parties to mint D&D NFTs and large businesses to exploit our intellectual property.

So, what’s changing?

First, we’re making sure that OGL 1.1 is clear about what it covers and what it doesn’t. OGL 1.1 makes clear it only covers material created for use in or as TTRPGs, and those materials are only ever permitted as printed media or static electronic files (like epubs and PDFs). Other types of content, like videos and video games, are only possible through the Wizards of the Coast Fan Content Policy or a custom agreement with us. To clarify: Outside of printed media and static electronic files, the OGL doesn’t cover it.

Will this affect the D&D content and services players use today? It shouldn’t. The top VTT platforms already have custom agreements with Wizards to do what they do. D&D merchandise, like minis and novels, were never intended to be part of the OGL and OGL 1.1 won’t change that. Creators wishing to leverage D&D for those forms of expression will need, as they always have needed, custom agreements between us.

Second, we’re updating the OGL to offer different terms to creators who choose to make free, share-alike content and creators who want to sell their products.

What does this mean for you as a creator? If you’re making share-alike content, very little is going to change from what you’re already used to.

If you’re making commercial content, relatively little is going to change for most creators. For most of you who are selling custom content, here are the new things you’ll need to do:

1. Accept the license terms and let us know what you’re offering for sale
2. Report OGL-related revenue annually (if you make more than $50,000 in a year)
3. Include a Creator Product badge on your work

When we roll out OGL 1.1, we will also provide explanatory videos, FAQs, and a web portal for registration to make navigating these requirements as easy and intuitive as possible. We’ll also have help available to creators to navigate the new process.

For the fewer than 20 creators worldwide who make more than $750,000 in income in a year, we will add a royalty starting in 2024. So, even for the creators making significant money selling D&D supplements and games, no royalties will be due for 2023 and all revenue below $750,000 in future years will be royalty-free.

Bottom line: The OGL is not going away. You will still be able to create new D&D content, publish it anywhere, and game with your friends and followers in all the ways that make this game and community so great. The thousands of creators publishing across Kickstarter, DMsGuild, and more are a critical part of the D&D experience, and we will continue to support and encourage them to do that through One D&D and beyond.

 

[Prime_Evil]

And, having watched the unbelievably level of over reaction when 4e rolled out - yes, yes, I know, WotC did themselves absolutely no favors at the time either - I'd really rather not see that happen again. Every time the collective fandom gets a bee in its bonnet about something, WotC just moves further and further away from actually directly interacting with fans. I can't blame them. Like I said, it doesn't matter if WotC said that rain was wet, people would loudly proclaim that WotC is only trying to screw over gamers.

I don't think WoTC are trying to "screw over gamers". I do think they are making business decisions based upon their own perceived best interest. The health of the broader RPG industry isn't their problem, except insofar as it impacts on their brands.

 

[Hussar]

I don't think WoTC are trying to "screw over gamers". I do think they are making business decisions based upon their own perceived best interest. The health of the broader RPG industry isn't their problem, except insofar as it impacts on their brands.

My comment wasn't really directed at anyone in particular. But, as we saw in the last page or so with some Mod Red Ink being splashed across, it's not exactly a rare perspective.

The point is, people are spinning themselves into knots based on speculation. This is not the time (yet) to get out the pitchforks and torches. There's nothing wrong with waiting a couple of weeks and seeing what is actually being put forward as the new OGL and THEN, fair enough, light up the torches.

But, it does seem that there are a number of people who have already made up their minds about what WotC is going to do and they have basically created this big old nasty monster out of smoke and fog. Mostly to drive clicks for their Youtube channels if I'm being particularly cynical.

 

[Morrus]

My point was that it isn't only 20 out if all the 3PP, as some seem to have implied. It's the biggest and most visible 20, who collectively represent all 3PP to some degree.

It’s not 20 random creators if that’s what you mean. I haven’t seen anybody suggest that.

 

[Prime_Evil]

The point is, people are spinning themselves into knots based on speculation. This is not the time (yet) to get out the pitchforks and torches. There's nothing wrong with waiting a couple of weeks and seeing what is actually being put forward as the new OGL and THEN, fair enough, light up the torches.

But, it does seem that there are a number of people who have already made up their minds about what WotC is going to do and they have basically created this big old nasty monster out of smoke and fog. Mostly to drive clicks for their Youtube channels if I'm being particularly cynical.

It is far too early to see the fine print yet. WoTC probably hasn't figured out all the details themselves. But nature abhors a vacuum and people are speculating based upon what has been announced. YouTube is an outrage machine at the best of times. And fan rage is a great way to drive engagement.

 

[Prime_Evil]

The proposed OGL changes do introduce some dangers for WoTC. We are in a good position right now. WoTC is the official publisher of D&D. They enjoy widespread community support. Sales are strong with a blockbuster movie on the horizon. There is a Fan Content Policy for folks who want to produce free D&D content. There is also an avenue for people to produce third-party products via the DMs Guild. And there is the Open Game License for people who want to do more experimental stuff. The material available as Open Game Content under the OGL is limited. If people want to draw upon the broader corpus of D&D rules and lore, they must agree to the more restrictive terms of the DMs Guild. This includes payment of royalties to WoTC.

WoTC wants to increase the monetization of the brand. If the D&D movie is successful, they know the market will be flooded with crappy knock-off garbage . Hasbro has past experience in this area. I bet there are serious lawyers worried offshore manufacturers will use the OGL as a shield to create stuff to cash in on a wave of popularity. So WoTC want to tighten up the licensing arrangement to increase revenue and limit damage to their brand. This is understandable.

But they are walking a very fine line. They don't want to alienate existing fans. They don't want to shoot the goose that lays the golden eggs. And they don't want to create resistance and friction. They need as many people as possible to adopt the upcoming revision. So they will tread carefully. They've already seen what can happen if they mishandle the transition.

 

[Hussar]

I bet there are serious lawyers worried offshore manufacturers will use the OGL as a shield to create stuff to cash in on a wave of popularity

Honestly, this thought occurred to me as well. They're not terribly worried about the current 3rd party producers, I doubt. Even the guys that are pulling the million dollar Kickstarters are not really competitors but, more massive hype machines for D&D.

But, now that D&D is hitting that mainstream popularity (or, at least far more mainstream than it ever has been in the past) there probably is some concern that we might see a flood of Iphone Apps and whatnot from people trying to cash in on D&D's currently popularity. Which, IMO, was never what the OGL was meant for.

 

[mamba]

But, now that D&D is hitting that mainstream popularity (or, at least far more mainstream than it ever has been in the past) there probably is some concern that we might see a flood of Iphone Apps and whatnot from people trying to cash in on D&D's currently popularity. Which, IMO, was never what the OGL was meant for.

then drop the registration, reporting and fee part and leave in the limitations that restrict it to static data in print documents and PDFs (and allow VTT content).

If you do that then I for one have no objections, and I assume many others that are concerned now would too. That does sound fair and in the original spirit.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I bet there are serious lawyers worried offshore manufacturers will use the OGL as a shield to create stuff to cash in on a wave of popularity. So WoTC want to tighten up the licensing arrangement to increase revenue and limit damage to their brand. This is understandable.

I'm curious as to what material you think "offshore manufacturers" will make that they would have used the OGL to do, and that OGL 1.1 prevents. What is it you think will happen, more specifically?

I mean, will people attempt to cash in on the brand? Sure. Will the OGL in any form have absolutely anything to do with that? I don't see how.

Already in the OGL all the key IP stuff is excluded. Ryan Dancey saw that coming 20+ years ago.

But, now that D&D is hitting that mainstream popularity (or, at least far more mainstream than it ever has been in the past) there probably is some concern that we might see a flood of Iphone Apps and whatnot from people trying to cash in on D&D's currently popularity. Which, IMO, was never what the OGL was meant for.

How would that even work, though, can you explain?

What apps would be created that don't already exist? How would they market themselves without being immediately C&D'd and unceremoniously dumped from Apple Store? In order to cash in, you'd pretty much have to violate trademarks like "Dungeons and Dragons", because it's not like fantasy/RPG apps and games aren't incredibly common. No version of the OGL would shield you there.

 

[Nylanfs]

I'll see if I can dig out the reference. It came from the Basic Roleplaying forums about two years ago. It was part of the statements made by Rick Meints and MoB upon the release of the BRP System Reference Document and the BRP-OGL. Someone asked them to explain why they didn't go with the OGL for the BRP System Reference Document. From my understanding, they had legal advice that because "wizards or designated Agents" had the power to update the licence at any time, the contractual relationship created would always be between WoTC and the end user. This advice also noted the text of the OGL is text is the property of Wizards of the Coast, Inc with All Rights Reserved. This rendered the use of the OGL by other companies problematic. Indeed, Chaosium representatives argued that because the legal relationship was always between WoTC and the end licensee, it was not possible to release derivative works under the OGL not created using WoTC IP. Some folks argued that the reason for the separate BRP-OGL was the addition of extra terms around Prohibited Content (to prevent licensees from making games in direct competition with Chaosium products).

That logic made me do a Sanity check.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It’s not 20 random creators if that’s what you mean. I haven’t seen anybody suggest that.

That's not what I mean. I was just saying that the fact that there are far, far more than 20 3PPs out there says nothing about the relevance of the 20 in question, who collectively are the most visible and comprise the most-used content.