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 the D&D 5E SRD (ie the rules of the game less the fluff text) has been released under a Creative Commons license.

OGL 1.0a & Creative Commons

Over the past few weeks you, the community, have made your voices heard. And we’ve listened. OGL 1.0a will remain untouched AND the entire SRD 5.1...

www.dndbeyond.com

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.

• SRD 5.1-CC

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.

Over 1,500 Publishers Support Paizo's Upcoming Open RPG Creator's License

Paizo has revealed some of the 1,500+ tabletop RPG publishers who have expressed an interest in their new Open RPG Creator's License (ORC), describing the group as the 'ORC Alliance'. The license itself is still being worked on, so these 1,500 publishers have not actually seen it or signed...

www.enworld.org

 

[FrogReaver]

I see a future ten years from now, in which the 3PP market is split between ORC, CC, and OGL licences, and WotC chooses to somehow try to end the 1.0a licence. Only this time, because only a small fraction of the industry relies on the OGL, they face relatively little pushback.

And this is the real issue. If there's no value for them to revoke, why are they reluctant to formally make it irrevocable?

Okay. But if only a small fraction remains on it in 10 years what does it really matter at that point?

 

[FrogReaver]

Devs can always release an OGL and CC license for the same content. Future proofing everything going forward.

 

[masdog]

This is total speculation, but based on what we saw from Wizards, here's what I think happened:

The initial decision to revoke the OGL was not seen as a big deal by whoever was calling the shots at the time (supposedly Chris Cao, but since we don't know for sure, I'll just call this person Cersei). They considered the OGL an obstacle to be swept aside, and didn't anticipate much pushback.

Then things leaked and there was PUSHBACK like whoa. This set off an internal struggle between Cersei and some other person or faction whom I'll call Tyrion. Tyrion wanted to drop the whole thing and re-commit to the original OGL. There were many acrimonious meetings -- this was the period of about a week when there was total radio silence from Wizards.

Eventually everyone realized that something had to be said, and Cersei, who was still nominally in charge, issued the 2.0 proposal and the "We all win!" statement. This did not help matters. At this point, someone higher up the chain whom I'll call Tywin said, "This has got to stop. Cersei, you need to fix this right now."

Cersei came up with the OGL 1.2 proposal. Tyrion slipped a limited Creative Commons release into it, then argued that it should be put to a trial by comb... er, public survey, to see if it would in fact be enough. This was done and the survey came back with results that could be summed up as "Gregor Clegane versus Drogon."

Tywin said, "You had your chance, Cersei. I'm putting Tyrion in charge. Tyrion, do whatever you have to do, but I have a meeting Monday with the Iron Board of Haasbros, and I want this whole thing gone."

Tyrion said, "The one thing everybody liked in the survey was this Creative Commons bit. If we put the whole 5E SRD under it, and agree to back off the OGL, I think that would do the trick."

To which Tywin replied, "I don't care what you do as long as I can bring good news to the Iron Board. But if I have to give them bad news..."

"I know. Heads. Spikes. Walls."

Tyrion released the original OGL from the black cells and put the 5E SRD into Creative Commons, and the common people rejoiced, and Tywin got to bring good news to the Iron Board. But none of them knew about the AI Dungeon Masters gathering beyond the GPT Wall...

I almost feel like we watched a corporate civil war play out with the 3PP and fans/gamers/public as pawns for the side that won.

 

[Ashtagon]

And then everyone just shrugs and continues using the same content under CC.

As I already noted, a lot of content CAN'T be updated to use CC. Not all the publishers are still alive.

Now, it's true we can't think of a reason right now why they might try again to revoke 1.0a. But this time last year, it was unimaginable that they'd be doing what they just tried. Our failure to imagine is no excuse to be relaxed about this.

 

[JEB]

They won’t try to revoke again.

They shouldn't have tried in the first place, and it was never intended for them to be able to try... and yet they did.

Wizards seems to understand in today's statement that we have every reason not to trust them. Disclaiming any future right to revoke OGL 1.0a would do a lot to restore that trust.

 

[JEB]

Devs can always release an OGL and CC license for the same content. Future proofing everything going forward.

I certainly would! Throw ORC in there too. Redundancy is good.

 

[ThorinTeague]

priceless

 

[Greg Benage]

Some of the lawyers have suggested it’s not actually that easy to create a standing offer that can never be withdrawn. That being the case, I honestly don’t know what could possibly say “We’re leaving the OGL alone” more forcefully than releasing 5.1 under a CC license.

Everyone’s risk tolerance is different, but IMO it’s fair to say publishing under the OGL is less risky today than it’s ever been. It was tested for the first time and it withstood the assault purely through overwhelming support from the community and (presumably) from inside the company as well.

 

[ThorinTeague]

If they aren’t going to inc


I just don’t trust them. Something about this sounds slimy. People clearly meant they wanted the OGL to be irrevocable but they say “you want irrevocability” then only apply it to the Creative Commons license. The lesson I have learned from all this is, if they think they can do something, they will. If they won’t clearly acknowledge that the OGL 1a is irrevocable, they will at some point probably deauthorize again

Oh but they've been so trustworthy up to this point, you cynical ol' curmudgeon, you.

 

[JEB]

That being the case, I honestly don’t know what could possibly say “We’re leaving the OGL alone” more forcefully than releasing 5.1 under a CC license.

Formally and publicly disclaiming that they or their successors have the right or ability to ever de-authorize or revoke OGL 1.0a would be a pretty forceful statement.

Mind, releasing 5.1 under a CC license is amazing and great, but it doesn't do anything to protect everything outside 5E released under the OGL, to include material for D&D 3.0 and 3.5 and d20 Modern (and lots of games Wizards never touched).