WotC Unveils Draft of New Open Gaming License

As promised earlier this week, WotC has posted the draft OGL v.1.2 license for the community to see.

A survey will be going live tomorrow for feedback.

Starting the OGL ‘Playtest’

In this article, you can review a draft of OGL 1.2, submit feedback via survey, and learn about a Creative Commons license that puts D&D's core mech...

www.dndbeyond.com

The current iteration contains clauses which prohibit offensive content, applies only to TTRPG books and PDFs, no right of ownership going to WotC, and an optional creator content badge for your products.

One important element, the ability for WotC to change the license at-will has also been addressed, allowing the only two specific changes they can make -- how you cite WotC in your work, and contact details.

This license will be irrevocable.

The OGL v1.0a is still being 'de-authorized'.

 

[jerryrice4949]

A safe haven with a CC license is important.

But leaving out the older SRDs is not good.

See Sacrosancts posts. This does not preclude OSR.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

WotC might be saying that this is a red line, but history suggests that the level of concern they have for this is unwarranted. Between that, and how much trust they've already lost, and that this isn't (as you correctly noted) an open license, this isn't something I personally feel comfortable compromising on, and I hope the rest of the tabletop RPG community doesn't either.

At a certain point, you have to take "Yes," for an answer.

You might not be willing to compromise. But this is a company with a brand. They have reason to fear - especially recently (nuTSR) and especially with regard to their movie and other products coming out.

In the end, "But we have to force them to allow terrible racists products for D&D," may not be the hill you want to die on.

 

[Dragonblade]

Its "irrevocable" except when we want to revoke it because we decided to classify your content as "hateful". Which will mean whatever we want it to mean...

If I was a publisher, I couldn't run my business with this Sword of Damocles hanging over my head. Just release a new D&D GSL for your IP if this what you want. Destroying the OGL over this trojan horse requirement is totally unacceptable.

 

[eyeheartawk]

For everything else, there's ORC.

No, ORC doesn't include a WOTC divorced substitute for the 3.5 SRD, or any SRD for that matter.

 

[Nikosandros]

For everything else, there's ORC.

ORC is just a license. Somebody will have to create a non-infringing SRD which clones that rules and then release it under ORC.

 

[Princessmaker]

The biggest issue, does someone see something they can use to change the license to something else later? If the core rules are licensed at CC-BY, just add the CC-BY 2 lines text and be done with it.

 

[Sacrosanct]

Or you want to use 3rd Edition rules or, more likely, all the products derived from that SRD.

Let me say this for a third time. You don't need a 3.5 SRD to have a 3.5 rules system. There was never an AD&D or B/X SRD, and yet the clones used the OGL and newer SRD to make them. Including....gasp...descending AC! There isn't more work needed than before. It's always been that way. So 3.5 fans can do what OSR fans have been doing for 20 years.

 

[Nikosandros]

Let me say this for a third time. You don't need a 3.5 SRD to have a 3.5 rules system. There was never an AD&D or B/X SRD, and yet the clones used the OGL and newer SRD to make them. Including....gasp...descending AC! There isn't more work needed than before. It's always been that way. So 3.5 fans can do what OSR fans have been doing for 20 years.

It means starting from scratch. OSRIC was a lot of work.

 

[Remathilis]

ORC is just a license. Somebody will have to create a non-infringing SRD which clones that rules and then release it under ORC.

I suspect that will happen 20 minutes after ORC goes live.

 

[Alzrius]

Let’s face it for the majority of people on this forum nothing short of nothing will change. all will be the same forever is going to be ok. Not sure how fair that is though. Times change and 20 years is a long time. Much of the rest of the world has shifted dramatically in two decades. Perhaps adjustments aren’t a bad thing.

This idea of "things are different now, so perpetual agreements shouldn't be treated as perpetual" is reasoning that I find deeply unconvincing. WotC knew what it was doing when it released the OGL into the wild back in 2000, and the idea that they can break their agreement because of some nebulous appeal to "things are different" doesn't hold up.

If you got married twenty-three years ago, and just found out that your spouse cheated on you, would them saying "twenty-three years is a long time! Things are different now! The world has changed dramatically!" at all make what they did less of a betrayal? And yes, this is an apt analogy, because in both cases there was an expectation that was clearly understood, and known to be perpetual.