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.

 

[Voadam]

Agreed and I think since "harmful" is something so unclear. I suspect it is so they could cut off certain publishers that continue to work with artists/writers that are "problematic". I really don't like it as a clause but I see why they have put it in. It's probably the main reason this isn't truly an open license.

It is a big open vulnerability to people who sign on that is quite different from OGL 1.0 which has no such comparable risk for licensees.

No it doesn't that stuff is allowed in the OGL, but aren't in the Creative Commons bit, if you didn't use the OGL then you would have to come up with your own Elves. Use the OGL and you can use WotC ones. If you come up with your own Elves then you aren't infringing and don't need to use the OGL so it couldn't be terminated anyway. If you use their Elves then you are under the OGL and wouldn't infringe either because you are using it under license.

That depends entirely on WotC's interpretation of their IP rights and what infringes on it. How far their IP extends on elves is not a clear line.

This is more so they can stop people using Beholders or Eberron as a setting. I think the main concern that this clause is in to protect, is the "bring an action challenging our ownership" say you produce a feat or several feats, and later WotC produce a book that has similar feats. There have been publishers in the past that have claimed WotC is copying their content. I don't think any have gone to court, but they have certainly claimed so on twitter. They want to protect against that, because they might have come up with it independently.

Probably, but it also shields them (to the extent threatened termination is leverage) from anyone licensing stuff under the OGL challenging them if they claim the licensee's non-OGL stuff is too close to licensed content under the OGL. So if WotC push their elves interpretation or whatever they could use a threat of immediate termination to get licensees to knuckle under on non-OGL stuff.

It is another potential avenue for WotC to leverage control over licensees outside of the licensed products.

I think it would be prudent to consider how things can potentially go under the licenses if there are changes of direction at WotC. They have been known to change their mind on licenses after all .

 

[overgeeked]

I think it would be prudent to consider how things can potentially go under the licenses if there are changes of direction at WotC. They have been known to change their mind on licenses after all.

Exactly. Before you sign listen to the more cynical voices and read what the lawyers are saying.

Just because you want to believe WotC now doesn’t mean management will never change or they’ll never abuse these easily abusable terms. It’s the potential for abuse that’s the problem. WotC has repeatedly shown themselves to be acting in bad faith, breaking contracts, lying, abusing morality clauses, on and on and on. No matter how much you like the game they produce, they’re still bad actors.

 

[Velderan]

Exactly. Before you sign listen to the more cynical voices and read what the lawyers are saying.

Just because you want to believe WotC now doesn’t mean management will never change or they’ll never abuse these easily abusable terms. It’s the potential for abuse that’s the problem. WotC has repeatedly shown themselves to be acting in bad faith, breaking contracts, lying, abusing morality clauses, on and on and on. No matter how much you like the game they produce, they’re still bad actors.

And also consider a larger corporation like Disney may someday buy Hasbro and be even less inclined to have anything open, so any clause that allows them to revoke a license could be twisted in ways we may not consider today.

 

[eyeheartawk]

And also consider a larger corporation like Disney may someday buy Hasbro and be even less inclined to have anything open, so any clause that allows them to revoke a license could be twisted in ways we may not consider today.

Right, well, Disney had the distinct legal position that when they buy a company, say 20th Century Fox, they only bought its assets and not its liabilities. So they weren't paying royalties they should have been. Which, I'm no lawyer but I'm pretty sure it doesn't work that way. If these companies think they can get away with it, no matter how wrong it is, they'll try. There needs to be ironclad language and mechanisms to ensure that they can't abuse it or change their mind again at any point in the future.

 

[Parmandur]

Like KP is gonna drop Black Flag regardless.

Yeah, one of the main effects here is that Kobold Press can use the 5E rules verbatim without even agreeing to the OGL, and just make their own Classes, Races, Spells, Monsters, etc. and put those options out as open content. That's awssome

 

[Xyxox]

Do you mean (d) as I did mention that (b) doesn't seem to mention anything about being revoked. I did mention 9d.

The point of section 9d is (quoted below) is that if the license is unenforceable then there is no point in having the license. The whole point of a license is so it has some legal standing, if it is shown not to have any then it makes sense to void it, because it will have effectively been voided anyway.

"9 (d) Severability. If any part of this license is held to be unenforceable or invalid for any reason, Wizards may declare the entire license void, either as between it and the party that obtained the ruling or in its entirety. Unless Wizards elects to do so, the balance of this license will be enforced as if that part which is unenforceable or invalid did not exist."

It is a pretty common clause to have. Severability Clause Sample Clauses: 6k Samples | Law Insider

The old OGL also had a bit about it being unenforceable.

14. Reformation: If any provision of this License is held to be unenforceable, such provision shall be reformed only to the extent necessary to make it enforceable.

If anything that's worse, that's say we can change the license you've already agreed to if we find it can't be enforced to make it enforceable. At least with the new license they can't change it on you without you getting out of it.

"Wizards may declare the entire license void"
That's all you need to know bout that.

 

[Xyxox]

Yeah, one of the main effects here is that Kobold Press can use the 5E rules verbatim without even agreeing to the OGL, and just make their own Classes, Races, Spells, Monsters, etc. and put those options out as open content. That's awssome

I don't see how it is possible for Kobold Press to do that under what is proposed.To get everything in the 5E rules, they must agree to the new OGL.

 

[overgeeked]

I don't see how it is possible for Kobold Press to do that under what is proposed.To get everything in the 5E rules, they must agree to the new OGL.

Or they release something before the new OGL is officially released which means that product is grandfathered in.

 

[timbannock]

I don't see how it is possible for Kobold Press to do that under what is proposed.To get everything in the 5E rules, they must agree to the new OGL.

They don't want to publish "everything in the 5e rules." They want to publish a game system that uses the open parts (in the current draft, that would be the CC mechanics spelled out from the SRD 5.1) and build their own Classes, Races, Spells, Monsters, etc. Since they already have a giant back catalog of those, that may be easier for them to pull off than many.

 

[Bosen]

The concept and the name "elf" belong to the cultural heritages of Nordic and British nations, and to some degree elsewhere too.

Elf is public domain.

Right, though the specific expression of certain features/abilities may not be... mileage will vary.