WotC Walks Back Some OGL Changes, But Not All

Wizards of the Coast has finally made a statement regarding the OGL. The statement says that the leaked version was a draft designed to solicit feedback and that they are walking back some problematic elements, but don't address others--most notably that the current OGL v1.0a is still being deauthorized.
  • Non-TTRPG mediums such as "educational and charitable campaigns, livestreams, cosplay, VTT-uses" are unaffected by the new license.
  • The 'we can use your content for any reason' provision is going away
  • The royalties aspect is also being removed
  • Content previously released under OGL v1.0a can still be sold, but the statement on that is very short and seems to imply that new content must still use OGL v1.1. This is still a 'de-authorization' of the current OGL.
  • They don't mention the 'reporting revenue' aspect, or the 'we can change this in any way at 30 days notice' provision; of course nobody can sign a contract which can be unilaterally changed by one party.
  • There's still no mention of the 'share-a-like' aspect which defines an 'open' license.
The statement can be read below. While it does roll back some elements, the fact remains that the OGL v1.0a is still being de-authorized.

D&D historian Benn Riggs (author of Slaying the Dragon) made some comments on WotC's declared intentions -- "This is a radical change of the original intention of the OGL. The point of the OGL was to get companies to stop making their own games and start making products for D&D. WoTC execs spent a ton of time convincing companies like White Wolf to make OGL products."

Linda Codega on Gizmodo said "For all intents and purposes, the OGL 1.1 that was leaked to the press was supposed to go forward. Wizards has realized that they made a mistake and they are walking back numerous parts of the leaked OGL 1.1..."

Ryan Dancey, architect of the original OGL commented "They made an announcement today that they're altering their trajectory based on pressure from the community. This is still not what we want. We want Hasbro to agree not to ever attempt to deauthorize v1.0a of the #OGL. Your voices are being heard, and they matter. We're providing visible encouragement and support to everyone inside Wizards of the Coast fighting for v1.0a. It matters. Knowing we're here for them matters. Keep fighting!"


Screen Shot 2023-01-09 at 10.45.12 AM.png

When we initially conceived of revising the OGL, it was with three major goals in mind. First, we wanted the ability to prevent the use of D&D content from being included in hateful and discriminatory products. Second, we wanted to address those attempting to use D&D in web3, blockchain games, and NFTs by making clear that OGL content is limited to tabletop roleplaying content like campaigns, modules, and supplements. And third, we wanted to ensure that the OGL is for the content creator, the homebrewer, the aspiring designer, our players, and the community—not major corporations to use for their own commercial and promotional purpose.

Driving these goals were two simple principles: (1) Our job is to be good stewards of the game, and (2) the OGL exists for the benefit of the fans. Nothing about those principles has wavered for a second.

That was why our early drafts of the new OGL included the provisions they did. That draft language was provided to content creators and publishers so their feedback could be considered before anything was finalized. In addition to language allowing us to address discriminatory and hateful conduct and clarifying what types of products the OGL covers, our drafts included royalty language designed to apply to large corporations attempting to use OGL content. It was never our intent to impact the vast majority of the community.

However, it’s clear from the reaction that we rolled a 1. It has become clear that it is no longer possible to fully achieve all three goals while still staying true to our principles. So, here is what we are doing.

The next OGL will contain the provisions that allow us to protect and cultivate the inclusive environment we are trying to build and specify that it covers only content for TTRPGs. That means that other expressions, such as educational and charitable campaigns, livestreams, cosplay, VTT-uses, etc., will remain unaffected by any OGL update. Content already released under 1.0a will also remain unaffected.

What it will not contain is any royalty structure. It also will not include the license back provision that some people were afraid was a means for us to steal work. That thought never crossed our minds. Under any new OGL, you will own the content you create. We won’t. Any language we put down will be crystal clear and unequivocal on that point. The license back language was intended to protect us and our partners from creators who incorrectly allege that we steal their work simply because of coincidental similarities . As we continue to invest in the game that we love and move forward with partnerships in film, television, and digital games, that risk is simply too great to ignore. The new OGL will contain provisions to address that risk, but we will do it without a license back and without suggesting we have rights to the content you create. Your ideas and imagination are what makes this game special, and that belongs to you.

A couple of last thoughts. First, we won’t be able to release the new OGL today, because we need to make sure we get it right, but it is coming. Second, you’re going to hear people say that they won, and we lost because making your voices heard forced us to change our plans. Those people will only be half right. They won—and so did we.

Our plan was always to solicit the input of our community before any update to the OGL; the drafts you’ve seen were attempting to do just that. We want to always delight fans and create experiences together that everyone loves. We realize we did not do that this time and we are sorry for that. Our goal was to get exactly the type of feedback on which provisions worked and which did not–which we ultimately got from you. Any change this major could only have been done well if we were willing to take that feedback, no matter how it was provided–so we are. Thank you for caring enough to let us know what works and what doesn’t, what you need and what scares you. Without knowing that, we can’t do our part to make the new OGL match our principles. Finally, we’d appreciate the chance to make this right. We love D&D’s devoted players and the creators who take them on so many incredible adventures. We won’t let you down.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

So you feel its logical to expect someone to enter a store, pick up a book, look over the contents, having prior knowledge of D&D/WoTC, see a bunch of content you are concerned with, and say "OMG Wizards how could you produce this as D&D content!"
Yeah, man! I mean, for expectation-setting, in the US, a significant portion of the people thought that AD&D in the early '80's was literally instructions for worshiping Satan. That portion was significant enough that in 2022 the most recent episode of Stranger Things could reference it and not really have to justify or explain it. TOM HANKS was in a movie about it. Harry Potter went through it.

It would not take very much for someone to decide to use D&D as a prop in some culture war talking point. The general public won't understand the nuances of the OGL vs. "D&D," and bad actors and punditry with axes to grind and people who profit off of moral panics would lap it up.

One of the big things you need to consider as a Brand is that there are people out there who are real flies in the ointment, and you're not immune from them. The US has had the Red Scare, the Satanic Panic, fears of backmasking, overblown articles about the dangers of the Tide Pod Challenge, terror about "groomers," armed disruptions of drag queens telling stories to kids, absolute media breathlessness over "rainbow fentanyl," persistent articles cherry-picking data about the rise in crime rates, periodic alarmists shouting about migrant caravans, an ongoing anxiety about cancel culture, nonsense fears about critical race theory and litterboxes in schools. Moral panics are the base air that like a third of this country breathes. D&D is not immune to this, and nerd culture more generally is very vulnerable to this stuff specifically because it's a weird subculture that normies don't always get.

A news article like "Your toy company could be selling your child pornography/satanism/woke leftist propaganda/drugs" coming out opening weekend of the D&D movie is absolutely a real risk the D&D brand faces.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad



The US does better on free speech and so on, but I feel like the UK, publicly suggesting, in writing, that another lawyer was even possibly engaged in actively leaking a document or the like, without evidence, is the sort of thing that gets you in front of the Bar Council or the SRA. YMMV.

I'm not saying "how dare you" lol. Quite the contrary. I'm saying "Errrr is that a good idea?!".
Why does it have to be a lawyer who possibly leaked the document? I'm sure there were several people at Paizo who had access and opportunity.
 

Really? What state? I have known several landlords who didn’t really deserve to have their reputation besmirched with the title who had no trouble keeping their properties affordable.
Alameda County, California. Fees and such were designed to get money based on what the County and State felt were "fair market prices" that rent should cost. Nor what rent was actually set to.
 

My kickstarters I backed and backer numbers -
Dungeon delvers - 3023
Level up - 6135
Mythological figures and monsters- 2444
Seas of Vodari - 978
Tegel Manor 5e - 1355
Stronghold and streaming - 28918
Ultimate npc warrior - 1114
Ultimate npc skullduggery - 1335

These numbers, other than Matt’s with 28k, aren’t enough to keep a new game system alive or make a living like they can for 5e consumer base. Look at 7th sea 2nd edition folding a year after the Kickstarter. Dnd will survive fine for those taking the off cliff view point of “I’ll never buy WoTC and only ORC.”

Making 3pp content for a less popular or much smaller user base will find those making a living off 5e, not able and then if they still do, it’s just for fan content to share…kinda like what the OGL initially invisioned,

Edit - enjoyed reading these kickstarters since I’m a Dm more than a player but haven’t used any of it.
 
Last edited:

These numbers, other than Matt’s with 28k, aren’t enough to keep a new game system alive or make a living like they can for 5e consumer base. Look at 7th sea 2nd edition folding a year after the Kickstarter. Dnd will survive fine for those taking the off cliff view point of I’ll never buy WoTC and only ORC.
I agree, these numbers would not be enough, but if people unsubscribe from DDB in sufficient numbers to worry WotC, maybe they do not stay that way.

There certainly is room for a few, Paizo already manages to survive, MCDM managing 28k with something rather specialized should translate into higher numbers with a full ruleset (or maybe not, as it is not for D&D, hard to say actually)
 
Last edited:

So heres my thing.

I dont think you are wrong here. I think PF1 was far more distinct (and better) than what we get with 5e, but you know what Wizards could do?

Actually release content. They could actually pay for more art. Actually get a unified art direction (gasp horror) and actually BRAND D&D.

Imagine that?

Then, they could actually put in work to you know, provide Source Books! Imagine!

This is the issue with Wizards. They dont want to actually do the work to push the brand!
This is kinda silly IMO.

Wizards is doing the work. Or they were, until the new leadership came in.

It just wasn’t what you personally wanted from them.
Same here, my landlords have always been able to keep prices reasonable.
Yeah, I had an apartment for 5 years that went up less than $100 in that time, because the landlords weren’t using any excuse possible to raise rent.


Alameda County, California. Fees and such were designed to get money based on what the County and State felt were "fair market prices" that rent should cost. Nor what rent was actually set to.
Ah, yeah that’s a whole thing. I also live in CA, though, and I’ve had landlords who rented well below state or city average prices without any issues, but I’ve heard Alameda is pretty pricey.
 

So you feel its logical to expect someone to enter a store, pick up a book, look over the contents, having prior knowledge of D&D/WoTC, see a bunch of content you are concerned with, and say "OMG Wizards how could you produce this as D&D content!"

Like, someone educated enough in the hobby, is actually going to make that association, and someone NOT educated enough, is going to somehow stumble upon said product, OR, said product will become SO SUCCESSFUL, that it will influence public perception of the D&D name?

Thats your worry?
Imagine some company made a book like Orcs of Thar. Or had a module with Gringott's goblins-like racial caricatures. Or someone makes Hadozee 2.0. and it makes a stir with the community. Then you get headlines and YouTube thumbnails that say "D&D supplement RACIST?!!" while burying deep into the copy the fact it is some third party OGL book. People turn to WotC and ask "how could you let this happen?" And WotC is supposed to say "Nothing we can do. We signed away our power to stop this 20+ years ago."
 

Ah, yeah that’s a whole thing. I also live in CA, though, and I’ve had landlords who rented well below state or city average prices without any issues, but I’ve heard Alameda is pretty pricey.
It was an unincorporated area, too, which tends to be higher rent. He was really scarred by the experience of trying to do right in the system as set up.
 

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top