WotC Backs Down: Original OGL To Be Left Untouched; Whole 5E Rules Released as Creative Commons

Hundreds of game publishers sigh in relief as, after extensive pressure exerted by the entire open gaming community, WotC has agreed to leave the original Open Gaming License untouched and put the whole of the 5E rules into Creative Commons. So, what's happened? The Open Gaming Licence v1.0a which most of the D&D third party industry relies on, will be left untouched for now. The whole of...

Hundreds of game publishers sigh in relief as, after extensive pressure exerted by the entire open gaming community, WotC has agreed to leave the original Open Gaming License untouched and put the whole of the 5E rules into Creative Commons.

So, what's happened?
  • The Open Gaming Licence v1.0a which most of the D&D third party industry relies on, will be left untouched for now.
  • The whole of the D&D 5E SRD (ie the rules of the game less the fluff text) has been released under a Creative Commons license.

WotC has a history of 'disappearing' inconvenient FAQs and stuff, such as those where they themselves state that the OGL is irrevocable, so I'll copy this here for posterity.

When you give us playtest feedback, we take it seriously.

Already more than 15,000 of you have filled out the survey. Here's what you said:
  • 88% do not want to publish TTRPG content under OGL 1.2.
  • 90% would have to change some aspect of their business to accommodate OGL 1.2.
  • 89% are dissatisfied with deauthorizing OGL 1.0a.
  • 86% are dissatisfied with the draft VTT policy.
  • 62% are satisfied with including Systems Reference Document (SRD) content in Creative Commons, and the majority of those who were dissatisfied asked for more SRD content in Creative Commons.
These live survey results are clear. You want OGL 1.0a. You want irrevocability. You like Creative Commons.
The feedback is in such high volume and its direction is so plain that we're acting now.
  1. We are leaving OGL 1.0a in place, as is. Untouched.
  2. We are also making the entire SRD 5.1 available under a Creative Commons license.
  3. You choose which you prefer to use.
This Creative Commons license makes the content freely available for any use. We don't control that license and cannot alter or revoke it. It's open and irrevocable in a way that doesn't require you to take our word for it. And its openness means there's no need for a VTT policy. Placing the SRD under a Creative Commons license is a one-way door. There's no going back.

Our goal here is to deliver on what you wanted.

So, what about the goals that drove us when we started this process?

We wanted to protect the D&D play experience into the future. We still want to do that with your help. We're grateful that this community is passionate and active because we'll need your help protecting the game's inclusive and welcoming nature.

We wanted to limit the OGL to TTRPGs. With this new approach, we are setting that aside and counting on your choices to define the future of play.
Here's a PDF of SRD 5.1 with the Creative Commons license. By simply publishing it, we place it under an irrevocable Creative Commons license. We'll get it hosted in a more convenient place next week. It was important that we take this step now, so there's no question.
We'll be closing the OGL 1.2 survey now.

We'll keep talking with you about how we can better support our players and creators. Thanks as always for continuing to share your thoughts.

Kyle Brink
Executive Producer, Dungeons & Dragons


What does this mean?

The original OGL sounds safe for now, but WotC has not admitted that they cannot revoke it. That's less of an issue now the 5E System Reference Document is now released to Creative Commons (although those using the 3E SRD or any third party SRDs still have issues as WotC still hasn't revoked the incorrect claim that they can revoke access to those at-will).

At this point, if WotC wants anybody to use whatever their new OGL v1.x turns out to be, there needs to be one heck of a carrot. What that might be remains to be seen.

Pathfinder publlsher Paizo has also commented on the latest developments.

We welcome today’s news from Wizards of the Coast regarding their intention not to de-authorize OGL 1.0a. We still believe there is a powerful need for an irrevocable, perpetual independent system-neutral open license that will serve the tabletop community via nonprofit stewardship. Work on the ORC license will continue, with an expected first draft to release for comment to participating publishers in February.


 

log in or register to remove this ad

Haplo781

Legend
My response:

Screenshot_20230127-130417~2.png
 

log in or register to remove this ad

MNblockhead

A Title Much Cooler Than Anything on the Old Site
Yeah, when you're making a massive bet on a product, you don't want to completely sour your potential audience years before you release it.

I do wonder if the damage is already done, though.
I think the damage will be minor. This was a short period of time and they reversed course in time. Third-party publishers will still be looking at the various open license options but I expect things will be back to normal soon. Most of the never-WotC folks were already in that camp or close to it. For most of us who enjoy and are invested in 5e AND the community of 3rd party publishers who have created content for 5e, we can breathe a sigh of relief.
 

Staffan

Legend
I had a look at the CC SRD they released.
It specifically applies to that version of the 5.1 SRD.
Unlike the OGL it has no language about also applying to later versions of the SRD.
This almost makes me think they intend this to be the last SRD version they release, and that whatever DnD One will become it would not have a SRD.
The OGL has no such language. You are likely thinking of section 9, which covers updated versions of the license itself. To my knowledge, Wizards has never promised to release future material under the OGL or any other license.
 

Cadence

Legend
Supporter
MAYBE. But that'd also be a lot of individual work.
What parts of your (absolutely backed on KS) psionics book would you want to be reusable by others vs. not? Is that the same as asking which parts you marked as 1.0a under product identity and which parts you left for open game content?

I'm trying to picture how much would be hard to pull out.

Shifting products, in a campaign setting it feels like one could pull the spells, classes, and monsters out fairly easily from the NPCs and places, for example.
 

SoonRaccoon

Explorer
I don't think we can say that everyone who thought WotC was never going to budge were also the same people saying "just go along with it." Matt Colville is in the first group and not the second one, for instance.
I said that one way they could start to build trust again would be to release the entire SRD under CC-BY. I never actually expected them to do it. It was mostly a way to underscore how deeply everyone now distrusts WotC. But they called my bluff, and I'm thrilled. I seriously thought killing OGL 1.0a was their line in the sand.
 

Jimmy Dick

Adventurer
As a few noted, this does not cover ONE DND. I fully expect a separate usage license for it. I wonder if they think the immense player base will shift to it and leave 5e behind relatively swiftly. There's more to this than just ending the fight over the OGL.
 


MNblockhead

A Title Much Cooler Than Anything on the Old Site
Is there anything preventing WOTC to attempt deauthorizing the OGL v1.oa in the future?
I'm mostly excited by the SRD 5.1 being under a CC-BY license. But, yeah, I don't see anything that clearly states that 1a is irrevocable. For now it seems safe to publish under it. But I would like to see WotC take the extra step to take steps to make it very difficult to try this again in the future.
 



Remove ads

Remove ads

Top