D&D General WotC's Dan Ayoub talks OGL mistakes--"we're recovering from loud public missteps"

In an interview with Wargamer, Dan Ayoub--head of Dungeons & Dragons at Wizards of the Coast--talked about the trust the company lost when it tried to rescind the Open Gaming License back in 2023. Ayoub took over at WotC in 2025, two years after the crisis, and said of the events "But I don't want to skirt the focus of your question. It was a rug pull, right? A lot of people and businesses were built up around a specific thing. Trust was given to the brand, and people rightly felt the rug was pulled from under them. In some cases, it's caused damage we are still trying to fix today."

He also spoke about D&D's new franchise model, reconnecting with classic D&D creators like Margaret Weis, Tracy Hickman, Bob Salvatore and Luke Gygax, and bringing on new partners. Check out the interview here.

 

[kenmarable]

Also, with the "x products on DDB are using the OGL" it would be best to double check when the products were first released. Even if they are being released on DDB recently, many of them were originally released prior to the CC-BY SRD (but might have a 5.5 update for DDB). So there's nuance there.

That being said, many companies are still using the OGL simply because they are already familiar with it and it's faster to cut-n-paste boilerplate to re-use from old products than to use the CC-BY. It's autopilot legalese.

(Also, quick edit to add that I'm still a fan of the OGL especially for the access to the massive catalog of OGC even though most publishers never tap into that. Some even running significant kickstarters didn't even realize you can use the OGL to access anything other than WotC's SRD. It is pretty shocking how many are having a lot of revenue dependant on the OGL without fully understanding it.)

 

[Maxperson]

And as little effort it is to do the CC BY work, it would be even less work for them to weigh in on the permanence of the OGL as it relates to third parties. That they choose to do neither says to me that it was an empty promise they are ignoring now that the crisis is "over" from their perspective.

Weighing in won't do anything, though. They weighed on what it meant when they created the OGL and the fiasco went back on that. Any future weighing in won't hold any weight as it can still be changed by the next group of folks to run the company.

CC is really the only way to put the issue to bed.

 

[bsss]

Weighing in won't do anything, though. They weighed on what it meant when they created the OGL and the fiasco went back on that. Any future weighing in won't hold any weight as it can still be changed by the next group of folks to run the company.

CC is really the only way to put the issue to bed.

I agree that the CC is the best way to put the issue to bed, but there is some work involved, and I don't think the OGL is dead, either. I'm no lawyer or contract specialist, but if WotC, owners of the OGL and "root" of all the d20 OGL usages, made a statement strengthening past and current OGL works, that would be a benefit to the community.

This is a bit of theory on my part, I will admit, but for me, I think the true crisis of the OGL was not WotC choosing to move away from it or change it for their own uses (they can do whatever the hell they want with their works, obviously --- just see 4e), but the implication that their word alone might undo their past agreements, and especially the past agreements with people totally unrelated to WotC. They could clarify that in a heartbeat. But they won't, because it only helps the community, not their bottom line.

"Our stated position is that OGL v1.0a is only invalidated if parties agree to some future license that invalidates it, and doing so only affects the parties that agree to that invalidation." Easy, I think (IANAL, etc.).

 

[mamba]

Right now WotC can pull the OGL Fiasco again, any time they want. They cannot pull it if it's in CC.

sure, but while they can, why would they? They probably haven’t forgotten that it turned out to be somewhat unpopular, and even if they did, it changes things for 3e and the OSR and nothing for 5e, so there is no incentive

People are also free to intentionally shoot themselves in the foot, and yet it rarely ever happens

 

[Incenjucar]

The OGL Fiasco was the end of good faith relations with the industry. WotC signaled that they desire to use dubious legal tactics to change an agreement and significantly increase the cost of business.Whether or not their punch connected, they showed a willingness to throw one, and there's no going back from that. Tying their hands with the CC at least lets everyone stop looking for the next punch.

 

[Maxperson]

sure, but while they can, why would they? They probably haven’t forgotten that it turned out to be somewhat unpopular, and even if they did, it changes things for 3e and the OSR and nothing for 5e, so there is no incentive

People are also free to intentionally shoot themselves in the foot, and yet it rarely ever happens

Because different people are...............different and have different priorities. It's reasonable to think that in the future there could be executives who view the angering of however many customers to be small potatoes and not relevant in the long run.

Is it guaranteed? No. Is it possible? Hell yes! And that possibility is where the problem is and why CC is the way to go.

 

[Parmandur]

I was among those persuaded that OGLGate ultimately had a pretty limited effect on D&D’s bottom line and didn’t do lasting harm. But if that’s the case I’m not sure why Ayoub’s messaging is so focused on apologizing for it 2+ years later. If that is indeed who he’s apologizing too (again, my assumption was more that he’s wooing aggrieved old guys).

It does seem that Dan Ayoub is keen to have Joe Mangienello, Luke Gygax, Tracy Hickman, et al approve of him.

Not everything is about money, this feels like maybe the impact of having someone who is actually an enfranchised hobbyist in Ayoub's position, for good or for ill.

 

[Zardnaar]

At least two of the companies I listed have million dollar kickstarters. At least four have multiple 500k Kickstarters. At least two WotC hired talent from recently.

These are not small RPG companies using the OGL still.

Erm that's small potatoes these days.

WorC bad comparison but even 2nd tier ones get way more than a million eh Paizo.

Can they do thst year in year out vs one off kickstarters? Probably not.

I wouldnt bet money they'll be around in 5-10 years. 3 companies like that are less than 1%.

 

[Zardnaar]

Not for your particular build and combat-centric playstyle perhaps. But you are in a definite minority in terms of what you focus on and find frightfully important to the D&D game (if most of your posts on ENWorld are any indication.)

So if WotC wasn't able to build the new version of the game up in the direction you hoped for to your satisfaction... well... they were never going to please everybody anyway. They went in the direction they felt was going to please the most people while simultaneously inspire the most people to purchase the next set of books. Which is exactly the same thought every single development team in the history of the game has gone with. And in every case... there are people who get left behind and don't like the new books. But that's just too bad for them. It's the way it goes. Second verse, same as the first.

I focus in discussions like that because its more objective.
Across multiple D&D editions no one online eally cares about your home games so talking about that tends to get few or 0 responses.

A lot dont even bother posting it anymore. Have a look on ENworlds front page. Theres probably 0 posts about someone's home game or role-playing. If there is very few responses generally.

This is duplicated across most forums/reddit etc.

 

[Mark Craddock]

And you can support 3e or a fan version of that game right now. What is your point exactly?

I'm not going to explain it again. Chill out.