WotC To Give Core D&D Mechanics To Community Via Creative Commons

Wizards of the Coast, in a move which surprised everbody, has announced that it will give away the core D&D mechanics to the community via a Creative Commons license.

This won't include 'quintessentially D&D" stuff like owlbears and magic missile, but it wil include the 'core D&D mechanics'.

So what does it include? It's important to note that it's only a fraction of what's currently available as Open Gaming Content under the existing Open Gaming License, so while it's termed as a 'give-away' it's actually a reduction. It doesn't include classes, spells, or magic items. It does include the combat rules, ability scores, and the core mechanic.

 

[Xyxox]

No trial by jury means trial by judge. The judge will make the ruling.

Jury trials are only a constitutional right for criminal law stuff.

Amendment VII to the United States Constitution disagrees with you:

"In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law."

 

[FormerLurker]

Whether or not you or I want people making racist and offensive games is not the right question. The problem is, "who gets to decide what is racist and/or offensive?" What happens when you personally don't agree with the person who makes that call about whether something is offensive? By its nature, "what is offensive" is a SUBJECTIVE call, and it can change in a single person over time. I will suggest you watch Tom Scott's excellent video, "There is no algorithim for truth" which spells out a lot of the problems on getting someone to admit their deeply held beliefs may in fact be wrong when there is incontrovertible OBJECTIVE evidence, let alone subjective disagreements:

I've seen that and also know he brings up the Nazi Bar analogy, which ties into the paradox of tolerance. If you allow Nazis to come into a bar and let them stay, they'll drive out the non-Nazis and you'll have a Nazi bar.
And we don't need that for the hobby. We don't need the racists and haters taking over.

This isn't really productive. You seem to already have your mind made up.

Pot meet kettle?
I hadn't made up my mind and was waiting for WotC to crap the bed or not. I was dubious two weeks back, but I'm liking what I see now.

 

[Voadam]

For reference on WotC and morality clauses Curse of Hearts story.

 

[kenada]

Indeed, this whole debacle seems at this point to be intended to prevent people from reproducing their races, classes, spells, monsters, or magic items without having to go after anyone to stop them.

It does make things more difficult to release a game that uses the CC-BY content as its base, but maybe that’s not a bad thing. One uncertainty is whether they think those other things represent the line where idea becomes expression, and you can’t use them even if you restate them without using WotC’s words. That could spell trouble for retroclones.

That, and to give them the power to take the license away from anyone who they think is making them look bad by association.

The harmful content section is problematic (if for no reason other than there is no way to contest a decision), though I suspect it is aimed at certain people and communities rather than content. For example, would Satine Phoenix lose her rights to publish compatible content due to her conduct? Maybe. It’s up to WotC.

 

[Yaarel]

Hasbro-WotC will give D&D mechanics to the CC license.

LOL! I marvel at the corporate cynicism. Here, I am honestly impressed.

D&D mechanics CANNOT be copyrighted.

Hasbro-WotC knows this full well.

There is some debate if a non-D&D system can use all six ability scores by name, which together might be an "expression" of a rule system. But any of these theoretical concerns about expression can be trivially averted.

Content creators can use D&D rules mechanics, whenever they feel like it, without any license, because Hasbro-WotC cannot legally own "rules".

When Hasbro-WotC gives the D&D mechanics to the CC, it is a trap!

By signing on to the CC license, the content creator is forced to make the product nonexclusive Open Content, thus preventing protected Intellectual Property.

And. Hasbro-Wotc can use any of these CC modifications in their own products. Of course, Hasbro-WotC would never use the CC themselves, because they absolutely care about controlling their Intellectual Property.

Hasbro-WotC continues the path of nefarious deception.

The goal of Hasbro-WotC executives is to destroy the OGL 1.0a and its gaming community.

 

[Voadam]

Amendment VII to the United States Constitution disagrees with you:

"In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law."

You are right, I misspoke. I should have gone with guaranteed.

It is a Constitutional right that can be waived such as in a contract.

Let me be clear I am not offering legal advice here.

 

[Michael Linke]

Existing products.

Once it goes into effect, you can't make or supplement new ones.

The a

Actually, that's wrong - civil trials can be by jury... I know because a few years ago I served on a jury in a civil trial.

Juries are used in both criminal and civil trials; the difference between the two is basically (1) the "prosecutor" in a criminal trial is always the government, (2) only a criminal trial can result in jail time, and (3) the standard of proof is higher in a criminal trial ("beyond a reasonable doubt" - in other words, there is no other reasonable explanation than that provided by the prosecution) than a civil trial ("preponderance of the evidence" - in other words, which side's story is more likely).

I'll let the resident lawyers go deeper if they want to, but I can guarantee civil trials can be by jury since I was part of one.

Last time I was on jury duty, i was in the selection pool for a civil trial. The judge mentioned that there was flexibility over whether civil trials were by jury, or whether they were just heard by the judge. This specific judge was a big proponent of civil juries, and gave a long boring speech about why they felt that way.

Also, the Depp/Heard defamation trial was a civil trial by jury.

 

[kenada]

Jury trials are only a constitutional right for criminal law stuff.

Technically, the seventh amendment provides for a right to a jury trial in some civil matters, but it can be waived.

Edit: Beaten!

 

[Mistwell]

The classes are not part of the 1.2 OGL.

Yes, I think either WOTC should add to the "anything already published under 1.0a is OK to continue" the 3.0 and 3.5 and D20 Modern SRD is good to continue under 1.0a as well, OR add those three to 1.2. Probably my first bit of feedback when I take the survey.

 

[Bosen]

You gotta keep in mind that a monster has multiple elements: mechanics, fluff, appearance/art. The core concept of an orc, elf, or dragon is pretty generic, but D&D has unique expressions of those parts. As a good example, elves being immune to sleep and charm magic is pretty unique to D&D. You could make an elf race, but it wouldn't necessarily have darkvision, trance, fey ancestry/charm immunity, free cantrips, etc. You could pull from all manner of fantasy tropes or mechanic, as long as your final mix isn't a D&D elf.

Right - and so using an elf-like race/species will require quite a bit of creativity... none of which should even get close to the D&D-specific material. However, some of the specifics were drawn from other works and legends, and could be used... Even so, one must tread carefully, even in creating things out of whole-cloth that memory might fail to remind was rooted in something protected. Something every author must always consider anyway. Will be interesting to see the first infringement case based on this... and how finely each side will split hairs.