IF they do not want the storm of discord this will bring, why not just bring them into the fold instead of casting them out. It would be smarter and possibly make them more money. Let people make their own content and if it is successful see if they want to come in, "promote creation instead destroy imagination."
I will not financially support Wizards of the Coast if they attempt to revoke any previous OGL. #opendnd
Dude, it's speculation. Calm tf down lol
Yes it's bad, but from what I understand, WotC is literally unable to revoke the previous OGL.
It's not speculation. The ogl 1.1 that was sent out, attached to executable contracts just before Christmas, has leaked on line. If anything, it's actually worse than people are making it out to be. WotC may not be able to legally revoke the previous ogl, but what they can do is backrupt every single company that makes ogl products while they try and tie the matter up in court for years.
Hey, dude, leaks aren't necessarily real anyway. Have you seen the Smash Bros. community?
I will not financially support Wizards of the Coast if they attempt to revoke any previous OGL. #opendnd
Dude, it's speculation. Calm tf down lol
Yes it's bad, but from what I understand, WotC is literally unable to revoke the previous OGL.
It's not speculation. The ogl 1.1 that was sent out, attached to executable contracts just before Christmas, has leaked on line. If anything, it's actually worse than people are making it out to be. WotC may not be able to legally revoke the previous ogl, but what they can do is backrupt every single company that makes ogl products while they try and tie the matter up in court for years.
Hey, dude, leaks aren't necessarily real anyway. Have you seen the Smash Bros. community?
I'd argue that WotC complete failure to clarify this matter undermines this argument; they're a company that is media savvy enough to know that they're dealing with a PR catastrophe and yet they've failed to put forward the T&C of their OGL to the public so we can all judge it.
Like the levels of trust that some folk are willing to put into WotC after we've all heard the teleconference call where they were saying that the game is undermonetized is honestly mindboggling.
The entire document has now be shared publicly in multiple places and many 3PPs are openly discussing it. If after the ENTIRE thing has been released and WotC still hasn't released a statement denying it, ESPECIALLY when major media are now covering the story, I think the probabilities are highly shifted towards it being real.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Orcs are savage raiders and pillagers with stooped postures, low foreheads, and piggish faces with prominent lower canines that resemble tusks." MM p245 (original printing) You don't OWN your books on DDB: WotC can change them any time. What do you think will happen when OneD&D comes out?
I found the OGL online and read through it. All the legalese. I'm one of the weirdos they mention when they say "or if you somehow enjoy reading legalese...".
Things I noticed:
It doesn't give WotC any rights over your creations. They specify that you need to say what is their content in every book, which is work but doable, and then they say that they have the rights over all of that content. Not your own content. So, if you write a story about a tiefling hunting an owlbear whilst riding a 9-legged hympgrumph which you made up, you would have rights over the hypogrumph, and they would have rights over the Tiefling and Owlbear. If you make a character who's a tiefling that has a backstory, then the backstory is yours, and the character is yours, but the concept of a Tiefling remains theirs. That is all.
It has a lot of jargon about kickstarter campaigns and pateron and al lthe other ways of making money. This is to cover all bases. Long story short - if you sell anything, you need to sign up and get the badges (badges? We don't need no steenking badges!) to put on the cover, and put a list of everything you've used of WotC content at the back, and you're good to go. If you make $50k+ per year, you have to tell them what you sold. If you make $750k+ per year, you wil have to pay royalties on everything over $750k - you don't suddenly lose money! And if you consistently make more than that, then they will make you your own licence, which they say will be mutually beneficial. IE, they will hire you, freelance.
It seems to clarify everything that was there in the OGL, and simply adds a piece on for people making fortune soff this to maybe pay WotC something for their part in your success.
That I noticed was absent, but people have claimed it says:
it doesn't say that all your work is theirs. It actually says they have rights over licenced content, which they defin eas the content the yare licencing you to have. They are saying you can borrow their car, then confirming that it's still their car - not that they have rights over any land speed records you break whilst driving it, or money you make delivering pizza whilst driving it, unless you make a fortune. They claim absolutely none of your cotent as their own, only the content you use of theirs.
It doesn't stop anyone from using the same content as before. If anything, they will likely expand on the list of things you can use. It also won't spell an end to third party publishers - if they need to make every penny over $750k to not go buts, then they were going bust in the next few years anyway.
It doesn't require you to sell your soul to Hasbro, along with your firtborn child, in order to use it. You juts need to sign up and say "hey, I want to make content!" and they will say "sure, add it to the list and here's a badge to put on it, be sure to give us credit for our stuff!"
Largely, I think this is not a problem. I thought it gave them rights to our inventions, but it doesn't. At all.
I found the OGL online and read through it. All the legalese. I'm one of the weirdos they mention when they say "or if you somehow enjoy reading legalese...".
Things I noticed:
It doesn't give WotC any rights over your creations. They specify that you need to say what is their content in every book, which is work but doable, and then they say that they have the rights over all of that content. Not your own content. So, if you write a story about a tiefling hunting an owlbear whilst riding a 9-legged hympgrumph which you made up, you would have rights over the hypogrumph, and they would have rights over the Tiefling and Owlbear. If you make a character who's a tiefling that has a backstory, then the backstory is yours, and the character is yours, but the concept of a Tiefling remains theirs. That is all.
it doesn't say that all your work is theirs. It actually says they have rights over licenced content, which they defin eas the content the yare licencing you to have. They are saying you can borrow their car, then confirming that it's still their car - not that they have rights over any land speed records you break whilst driving it, or money you make delivering pizza whilst driving it, unless you make a fortune. They claim absolutely none of your cotent as their own, only the content you use of theirs.
Apparently you missed this (I added the Bolding):
X. OTHER PRODUCTS. Sometimes, great minds think alike. We can’t and won’t cancel products out of fear that they’d beseen as “similar to” Licensed Works. Therefore: A. You agree that nothing prohibits Us from developing, distributing, selling, or promoting something that is substantially similar to a Licensed Work. B. You own the new and original content You create. You agree to give Us a nonexclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, sub-licensable, royalty-free license to use that content for any purpose.
"Orcs are savage raiders and pillagers with stooped postures, low foreheads, and piggish faces with prominent lower canines that resemble tusks." MM p245 (original printing) You don't OWN your books on DDB: WotC can change them any time. What do you think will happen when OneD&D comes out?
X. OTHER PRODUCTS. Sometimes, great minds think alike. We can’t and won’t cancel products out of fear that they’d beseen as “similar to” Licensed Works. Therefore: A. You agree that nothing prohibits Us from developing, distributing, selling, or promoting something that is substantially similar to a Licensed Work. B. You own the new and original content You create. You agree to give Us a nonexclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, sub-licensable, royalty-free license to use that content for any purpose.
Yes, that is the standard clause in any business contract where there is a possibility of parallel design. If WotC did not add this clause, they would be unable to develop anything new ever again because of the chance that someone made a similar thing in a 3rd party space and may sue. All they are doing is acknowledging that you own your work that you make and saying that you cannot sue them if they release similar work.
This is definition of false outrage, we as of yet have no official info on what will or will not be in 1.1. Most of the outrage is coming from Youtube channels , and they are acting like it will affect them. Hint it wont. "OMG I have to change my format because the OGL is changing." Not even Pointy hat who publishes homebrew content through his channel would have to change. Because fair use protects most content on Youtube, reviewing rules, lore, and other material is also covered under fair use in the USA (Hint Disney is super sue happy over copyright, look at all the Star Wars and MCU channels). Advertising and selling OGL kickstarter on Youtube might be a grey area, but I doubt that will be affected.
Who's affected? Big name competitors. ie Pathfinder may have to pay WotC money for OGL use, and a few other big game companies. Solestra... might be affected (Doubt it though) I see no issue with WotC making money from their content, and I don't have an issue with them charging other game companies for the use of their material, which is what they are doing.
This crying about Capitalism is dumb, hint, Capitalism is why we have gaming at all.
#1 - The fees for those profits above the 750k limits will be paid by customers, or else the publisher will go bankrupt. Maybe you don't buy Paizo (I don't either), but some people do, and they have the right to be upset after a 20+ time span. OGL was a solid thing until a month ago, a thing people trusted to the point to invest time and money on it. A lot of people ha founded KS that are at risk now. They have the right to be upset.
#2 - most important. With the leaked OGL, any creator who sign and creates anything is actually donating its product to WotC that can re-use it without even the need to contact the creator. No creator would accept anything similar. With that point they are killing the very purpose of the OGL, and they know. People have the right to be upset for what it could have been but probably from now on will neve be.
no, wait, if I use their work they can sue me, but if they use mine, I can't sue them?
It doesn't work that way...
Sure it does. You are using their work to make your work. Make your own game system and your own game and then you can sue them if they use it without licensing it first.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The mongoose blew out its candle and was asleep in bed before the room went dark." —Llanowar fable
"The "brand" is ultimately built out of all the bits and pieces people put back into it. D&D taps into the same well as open-source, remix, and fanfic cultures, and the OGL was a conscious decision to embrace that."
Piggybacking on a pre-existing brand might help in some small way to build the overall brand as a whole... but I would dispute the degree of impact that some random 3rd party publisher that sold a couple thousand pdf copies of an adventure they published in 2019 has had on the game that has existed for more than 40 years...
"seen as a betrayal of the spirit of the decision to open things up"
The OGL (1.0) has existing in mostly the same form for more than 20 years... and people have been able to ride the coat tails of WOTC/Hasbro that entire time... now that the corporation has decided it would like people to stop riding in the car without paying a little for gas, it's a problem?
This is definition of false outrage, we as of yet have no official info on what will or will not be in 1.1. Most of the outrage is coming from Youtube channels , and they are acting like it will affect them. Hint it wont. "OMG I have to change my format because the OGL is changing." Not even Pointy hat who publishes homebrew content through his channel would have to change. Because fair use protects most content on Youtube, reviewing rules, lore, and other material is also covered under fair use in the USA (Hint Disney is super sue happy over copyright, look at all the Star Wars and MCU channels). Advertising and selling OGL kickstarter on Youtube might be a grey area, but I doubt that will be affected.
Who's affected? Big name competitors. ie Pathfinder may have to pay WotC money for OGL use, and a few other big game companies. Solestra... might be affected (Doubt it though) I see no issue with WotC making money from their content, and I don't have an issue with them charging other game companies for the use of their material, which is what they are doing.
This crying about Capitalism is dumb, hint, Capitalism is why we have gaming at all.
I would suggest that storytelling and gaming pre-date capitalism.
Yes, that is the standard clause in any business contract where there is a possibility of parallel design.
I've never in my life seen a business contract that says that. They are not saying that they can't be sued in case of parallel development, they're flat-out saying that they can USE YOUR CONTENT ANY TIME THEY WANT AND NEVER PAY YOU. And you can't sue them for it, either. In what way does that equal ownership? (A) would count if you and Wizards both came up with a similar "Gladiator" subclass, for example. Fine. (B) would be that they could take your "Gladiator of Ashen Fall" subclass, grab the City of Ashen Fall from your world for good measure, take the map you hand-drew and scanned, publish everything uncredited, and then tell you where to shove it when you objected. There's a wee bit of difference. (A) could be considered standard. (B) is so evil that it's practically something that a Saturday morning cartoon villain would come up with.
Just waiting until 2024 when the entire OGL thing won't even be a problem. Things like this are never as big an issue as people think.
I think you are wildly underestimating how angry people are.
Like, this whole stupid thing is a giant thumb to the eye of an entire cottage industry that has grown up around 5e (including groups addapting older modules for 3rd edition, independant modules, VTTs, twitch streamers ect.) and we're already starting to see those people beginning to respond both with their frustrations and moves to undermine the draconian measures WotC has put forward.
Heck, you talk about 6th and all I can feel at this point is apathy since the company has become more and more mediocre in it's rush to put out poor products and sand blast away any sort of distinction between races/species/phenotypes/fera; We are getting effectively less depth and nuance so that no one anywhere can be offended by any of it.
Just waiting until 2024 when the entire OGL thing won't even be a problem. Things like this are never as big an issue as people think.
I think you are wildly underestimating how angry people are.
Like, this whole stupid thing is a giant thumb to the eye of an entire cottage industry that has grown up around 5e (including groups addapting older modules for 3rd edition, independant modules, VTTs, twitch streamers ect.) and we're already starting to see those people beginning to respond both with their frustrations and moves to undermine the draconian measures WotC has put forward.
Heck, you talk about 6th and all I can feel at this point is apathy since the company has become more and more mediocre in it's rush to put out poor products and sand blast away any sort of distinction between races/species/phenotypes/fera; We are getting effectively less depth and nuance so that no one anywhere can be offended by any of it.
The species thing has nothing to do with this, dude.
Just waiting until 2024 when the entire OGL thing won't even be a problem. Things like this are never as big an issue as people think.
I think you are wildly underestimating how angry people are.
Like, this whole stupid thing is a giant thumb to the eye of an entire cottage industry that has grown up around 5e (including groups addapting older modules for 3rd edition, independant modules, VTTs, twitch streamers ect.) and we're already starting to see those people beginning to respond both with their frustrations and moves to undermine the draconian measures WotC has put forward.
Heck, you talk about 6th and all I can feel at this point is apathy since the company has become more and more mediocre in it's rush to put out poor products and sand blast away any sort of distinction between races/species/phenotypes/fera; We are getting effectively less depth and nuance so that no one anywhere can be offended by any of it.
The species thing has nothing to do with this, dude.
It's a contributing reason for me seriously consdering dropping D&D entirely kid; I've been playing this game or reading the novels since the late 80's and the decision to begin dissolving extent lore and world building in favor of something super generic and homgenized does them no favors with me or other folks who enjoyed the depth of the various settings.
Combined with this decision to screw over the most ardent supporters of 5e amd The increasingly frequency of bad products and I'm seriously questioning why I should continue to support a company that is so out of touch with it's customers.
Heck, you talk about 6th and all I can feel at this point is apathy since the company has become more and more mediocre in it's rush to put out poor products and sand blast away any sort of distinction between races/species/phenotypes/fera; We are getting effectively less depth and nuance so that no one anywhere can be offended by any of it.
The species thing has nothing to do with this, dude.
It's a contributing reason for me seriously consdering dropping D&D entirely kid; I've been playing this game or reading the novels since the late 80's and the decision to begin dissolving extent lore and world building in favor of something super generic and homgenized does them no favors with me or other folks who enjoyed the depth of the various settings.
Changing the word "race" to species doesn't alter or take away any preexisting lore. What it does do is make sure a more accurate and less offensive term is in place.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explainHERE.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
IF they do not want the storm of discord this will bring, why not just bring them into the fold instead of casting them out. It would be smarter and possibly make them more money. Let people make their own content and if it is successful see if they want to come in, "promote creation instead destroy imagination."
Hey, dude, leaks aren't necessarily real anyway. Have you seen the Smash Bros. community?
[REDACTED]
I'd argue that WotC complete failure to clarify this matter undermines this argument; they're a company that is media savvy enough to know that they're dealing with a PR catastrophe and yet they've failed to put forward the T&C of their OGL to the public so we can all judge it.
Like the levels of trust that some folk are willing to put into WotC after we've all heard the teleconference call where they were saying that the game is undermonetized is honestly mindboggling.
The entire document has now be shared publicly in multiple places and many 3PPs are openly discussing it. If after the ENTIRE thing has been released and WotC still hasn't released a statement denying it, ESPECIALLY when major media are now covering the story, I think the probabilities are highly shifted towards it being real.
"Orcs are savage raiders and pillagers with stooped postures, low foreheads, and piggish faces with prominent lower canines that resemble tusks." MM p245 (original printing)
You don't OWN your books on DDB: WotC can change them any time. What do you think will happen when OneD&D comes out?
I found the OGL online and read through it. All the legalese. I'm one of the weirdos they mention when they say "or if you somehow enjoy reading legalese...".
Things I noticed:
That I noticed was absent, but people have claimed it says:
Largely, I think this is not a problem. I thought it gave them rights to our inventions, but it doesn't. At all.
Make your Artificer work with any other class with 174 Multiclassing Feats for your Artificer Multiclass Character!
DM's Guild Releases on This Thread Or check them all out on DMs Guild!
DrivethruRPG Releases on This Thread - latest release: My Character is a Werewolf: balanced rules for Lycanthropy!
I have started discussing/reviewing 3rd party D&D content on Substack - stay tuned for semi-regular posts!
Apparently you missed this (I added the Bolding):
X. OTHER PRODUCTS. Sometimes, great minds think alike. We can’t and won’t cancel products out of fear that they’d beseen as “similar to” Licensed Works. Therefore:
A. You agree that nothing prohibits Us from developing, distributing, selling, or promoting something that is
substantially similar to a Licensed Work.
B. You own the new and original content You create. You agree to give Us a nonexclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, sub-licensable, royalty-free license to use that content for any purpose.
"Orcs are savage raiders and pillagers with stooped postures, low foreheads, and piggish faces with prominent lower canines that resemble tusks." MM p245 (original printing)
You don't OWN your books on DDB: WotC can change them any time. What do you think will happen when OneD&D comes out?
Yes, that is the standard clause in any business contract where there is a possibility of parallel design. If WotC did not add this clause, they would be unable to develop anything new ever again because of the chance that someone made a similar thing in a 3rd party space and may sue. All they are doing is acknowledging that you own your work that you make and saying that you cannot sue them if they release similar work.
#1 - The fees for those profits above the 750k limits will be paid by customers, or else the publisher will go bankrupt. Maybe you don't buy Paizo (I don't either), but some people do, and they have the right to be upset after a 20+ time span. OGL was a solid thing until a month ago, a thing people trusted to the point to invest time and money on it. A lot of people ha founded KS that are at risk now. They have the right to be upset.
#2 - most important. With the leaked OGL, any creator who sign and creates anything is actually donating its product to WotC that can re-use it without even the need to contact the creator. No creator would accept anything similar. With that point they are killing the very purpose of the OGL, and they know. People have the right to be upset for what it could have been but probably from now on will neve be.
no, wait, if I use their work they can sue me, but if they use mine, I can't sue them?
It doesn't work that way...
Sure it does. You are using their work to make your work. Make your own game system and your own game and then you can sue them if they use it without licensing it first.
"The "brand" is ultimately built out of all the bits and pieces people put back into it. D&D taps into the same well as open-source, remix, and fanfic cultures, and the OGL was a conscious decision to embrace that."
Piggybacking on a pre-existing brand might help in some small way to build the overall brand as a whole... but I would dispute the degree of impact that some random 3rd party publisher that sold a couple thousand pdf copies of an adventure they published in 2019 has had on the game that has existed for more than 40 years...
"seen as a betrayal of the spirit of the decision to open things up"
The OGL (1.0) has existing in mostly the same form for more than 20 years... and people have been able to ride the coat tails of WOTC/Hasbro that entire time... now that the corporation has decided it would like people to stop riding in the car without paying a little for gas, it's a problem?
I would suggest that storytelling and gaming pre-date capitalism.
I've never in my life seen a business contract that says that. They are not saying that they can't be sued in case of parallel development, they're flat-out saying that they can USE YOUR CONTENT ANY TIME THEY WANT AND NEVER PAY YOU. And you can't sue them for it, either. In what way does that equal ownership? (A) would count if you and Wizards both came up with a similar "Gladiator" subclass, for example. Fine. (B) would be that they could take your "Gladiator of Ashen Fall" subclass, grab the City of Ashen Fall from your world for good measure, take the map you hand-drew and scanned, publish everything uncredited, and then tell you where to shove it when you objected. There's a wee bit of difference. (A) could be considered standard. (B) is so evil that it's practically something that a Saturday morning cartoon villain would come up with.
Petition to rename WotC to Lizards of the Coast.
Just waiting until 2024 when the entire OGL thing won't even be a problem. Things like this are never as big an issue as people think.
[REDACTED]
I think you are wildly underestimating how angry people are.
Like, this whole stupid thing is a giant thumb to the eye of an entire cottage industry that has grown up around 5e (including groups addapting older modules for 3rd edition, independant modules, VTTs, twitch streamers ect.) and we're already starting to see those people beginning to respond both with their frustrations and moves to undermine the draconian measures WotC has put forward.
Heck, you talk about 6th and all I can feel at this point is apathy since the company has become more and more mediocre in it's rush to put out poor products and sand blast away any sort of distinction between races/species/phenotypes/fera; We are getting effectively less depth and nuance so that no one anywhere can be offended by any of it.
The species thing has nothing to do with this, dude.
[REDACTED]
It's a contributing reason for me seriously consdering dropping D&D entirely kid; I've been playing this game or reading the novels since the late 80's and the decision to begin dissolving extent lore and world building in favor of something super generic and homgenized does them no favors with me or other folks who enjoyed the depth of the various settings.
Combined with this decision to screw over the most ardent supporters of 5e amd The increasingly frequency of bad products and I'm seriously questioning why I should continue to support a company that is so out of touch with it's customers.
Changing the word "race" to species doesn't alter or take away any preexisting lore. What it does do is make sure a more accurate and less offensive term is in place.
BoringBard's long and tedious posts somehow manage to enrapture audiences. How? Because he used Charm Person, the #1 bard spell!
He/him pronouns. Call me Bard. PROUD NERD!
Ever wanted to talk about your parties' worst mistakes? Do so HERE. What's your favorite class, why? Share & explain
HERE.