<em>D&D</em> maker retreats from attempts to update longstanding “open” license

Negative response to latest draft was "in such high volume" as to force WotC's hand.

See full article...

 

[see]

No, they aren't...

Signed, someone who has played TTRPGs for 25+ years.

My TTRPG group was into GURPS and Rifts in the mid-1990s and switched to World of Darkness (old and new) and GURPS 4Ed in the 2000s. I played D&D for six months in 2000 when 3rd Ed was new, got bored with it, and never looked back.

As someone who has actually received paychecks from both Steve Jackson Games and White Wolf for game writing . . . no, really, D&D and TTRPGs have been "nigh synonymous". Not perfectly synonymous, but the supermajority of TTRPG gaming has always been D&D.

 

[Boskone]

Glad to see these shenanigans have come to a halt for now.

100% this was instigated by an MBA somewhere who just had absolutely no understanding about the community.

Yea...anyone with an actual clue would think twice about considering using a license document to pull a fast one on a community that reads and applies rules for fun.

 

[Boskone]

. . . . for now

A good GM always leaves plot hooks for use later.

 

[ghostcarrot]

As I wrote previously (and after visiting the future), much ado about nothing. The hobby did not die.

Is the death of an entire genre of hobby the only criteria upon which something can become Something? Things are either apocalyptic or a nothingburger?

It's much ado about nothing only because the fans rebelled and won. I'm not a frequent D&D player, but it is heartening to see a company listen to its community which the community says "No."

 

[Murry Wilson]

let's pretend weird anecdotal evidence about your friends in the 90s matters to literally anyone that isn't you

 

[piaw]

As someone who has actually received paychecks from both Steve Jackson Games and White Wolf for game writing . . . no, really, D&D and TTRPGs have been "nigh synonymous". Not perfectly synonymous, but the supermajority of TTRPG gaming has always been D&D.

You actually got a paycheck! I went so far as to convert a whole adventure to d20. After they agreed to buy it I never saw a check. Years later I got Chaosium to acknowledge that they weren't ever going to do anything with it, so I published it: http://cthulhu.piaw.net/index.html

 

[WillArsTechUser]

I hope no one forgets how the YouTube 5e gameplay channels (eg. Critical Role, High Rollers, etc) responded to this issue. NDA's BE DAMNED!!! Thanks to amazing creators like Ginny Di, for giving players a voice!

 

[orwelldesign]

Go find 100 random TTRPG players and ask them what game they're playing. D&D will be an easy majority. Many of those people will have only ever played 5e and not even realize some of these games exist. And if we're talking market share and dollars, it's even more lopsided.

D&D absolutely is synonymous with TTRPGs for most of the people playing them. Even when they're playing something else, you'll hear people say "it's D&D night, we're playing Fate".

More importantly, go ask anyone who doesn't play TTRPGs anything about the subject. Most of them have heard of d&d. Most of them have not heard of any of the other ones.

I managed an FLGS for two years. We had strong groups of several RPGs -- Tuesdays had usually four or five different groups in the back room. Most nights at least one. Not all D&D.

And every person who didn't play D&D, knew what that is. Couldn't say the same for Shadowrun or GURPS, and Pathfinder was always "well, it's D&D, but better," as a description.

 

[Fancy Internet Person]

More importantly, go ask anyone who doesn't play TTRPGs anything about the subject. Most of them have heard of d&d. Most of them have not heard of any of the other ones.

I managed an FLGS for two years. We had strong groups of several RPGs -- Tuesdays had usually four or five different groups in the back room. Most nights at least one. Not all D&D.

And every person who didn't play D&D, knew what that is. Couldn't say the same for Shadowrun or GURPS, and Pathfinder was always "well, it's D&D, but better," as a description.

The last week of Twitter flap had me hoping for more unhinged FishBlade recommendations.

It's sad to see people only flogging their preferred D&DBut.

 

[randomcat]

Been looking for something sneaky about this but can't find anything. Seems like a genuine Win. That's weird.

 

[Ildatch]

If any of ya’ll are looking for a new hobby, Warhammer 40K is over here with its crazy-expansive-expensive lore.

^ Fixed that for you.

Been looking for something sneaky about this but can't find anything. Seems like a genuine Win. That's weird.

This whole debacle has been such a disaster that I'm still unnerved and expecting there to be a catch.

 

[C.M. Allen]

This whole debacle has been yet another wonderful example of just how utterly useless and stupid all those 'upper-management 'and 'exec' types are in reality, that all the other idiots, twits, morons, and 'bro' failures aren't an aberration when everything is controlled by such incompetent people. They don't actually know anything useful. The only tool they have in their basket is the metaphorical hammer, to which any and all problems look like a nail. And the only reason they ascend to such positions is because they 'know the right people.' Which, in full and blunt honesty, is the only thing 'ivy league' schools are really selling -- connections -- because the quality of the education they provide is, at best, above average. After all, look at the idiots who hold ivy-league degrees who can barely tie their shoes...and that's when they have help!

 

[Fancy Internet Person]

This whole debacle has been such a disaster that I'm still unnerved and expecting there to be a catch.

There's nowhere to put a loophole in licensing SRD 5.1 under a Creative Commons license.

They might make the new version less compatible than they've claimed with SRD 5.1 content (this will happen) and only offer the next SRD under a different license, but that's a big edition schism waiting to happen.

 

[ardent]

This just guarantees that OneDnD will not be released on a public license. A nice, closed license for their incredibly important "not an MMO" VTT.

 

[RoninX]

This whole debacle has been yet another wonderful example of just how utterly useless and stupid all those 'upper-management 'and 'exec' types are in reality, that all the other idiots, twits, morons, and 'bro' failures aren't an aberration when everything is controlled by such incompetent people. They don't actually know anything useful. The only tool they have in their basket is the metaphorical hammer, to which any and all problems look like a nail. And the only reason they ascend to such positions is because they 'know the right people.' Which, in full and blunt honesty, is the only thing 'ivy league' schools are really selling -- connections -- because the quality of the education they provide is, at best, above average. After all, look at the idiots who hold ivy-league degrees who can barely tie their shoes...and that's when they have help!

But CEO Chris Cocks has omni-channel experience. How can you beat that?
/s

 

[Ildatch]

There's nowhere to put a loophole in licensing SRD 5.1 under a Creative Commons license.

They might make the new version less compatible than they've claimed with SRD 5.1 content (this will happen) and only offer the next SRD under a different license, but that's a big edition schism waiting to happen.

I'm not thinking about the SRD 5.1; the CC is ironclad there as you say. I also don't care what they do with 6e. Wizards still hasn't admitted it cannot revoke 1.0a even though they decided not to at this time, and there is still 3.0, 3.5, and independent 3PP content operating under 1.0a. They could conceivably attack 1.0a again in the future even though the most relevant content by size/popularity (5e) is safe under CC now. One could say that the market share of 3.x content is too small for WotC to bother but that's not a guarantee with the force of law behind it.

 

[Fancy Internet Person]

I'm not thinking about the SRD 5.1; the CC is ironclad there as you say. I also don't care what they do with 6e. Wizards still hasn't admitted it cannot revoke 1.0a even though they decided not to at this time, and there is still 3.0, 3.5, and independent 3PP content operating under 1.0a. They could conceivably attack 1.0a again in the future even though the most relevant content by size/popularity (5e) is safe under CC now. One could say that the market share of 3.x content is too small for WotC to bother but that's not a guarantee with the force of law behind it.

I don't think they'll be quick to step on that rake again. This last month has been a painful failure and P.R. disaster.

 

[malor]

Tough. It took 20 years to build a reputation they destroyed in 2 minutes. It'll take another 20 years to rebuild that trust. Do NOT let them get away with this.

They didn't get away with it. From a direct monetization perspective, now that they've released the core rules under the CC license, they're in much worse shape now than they were a few weeks ago. They've made it very difficult for themselves to demand a piece of anyone else's pie, which is the exact opposite of what they originally set out to do.

Going forward, they'll have to actually earn money by making products people want to buy, instead of trying to filch cashflow from other major players. Ultimately, they will probably make more money from this approach, but it will be a get-rich-slowly kind of thing, instead of a huge cash grab.

Their evil MBA dreams have been hopelessly crushed. They have been thoroughly punished. And they can't do it again, at least not with this particular set of rules.

 

[brionl]

This whole thing has been an unforced error unseen in the TTRPG space since Wizards of the Coast did basically the same thing with D&D 4e, using a much more restrictive GSL licence instead of the OGL. The market's response to that was to create Pathfinder and switch to that en-masse.

The lesson they learned from that one was "We need to change the old license too, or everybody will just ignore our new stuff."

This is barely even a temporary truce. IMO the chances of 6ed being under any kind of open license are pretty small.

 

[Shavano]

Glad to see these shenanigans have come to a halt for now.

100% this was instigated by an MBA somewhere who just had absolutely no understanding about the community.

Or the law. Perpetual license means perpetual. Also you can't copyright the rules of a game (only their particular expression).

 

[GitM]

It took a while, but Hasbro finally realized that hole in their foot was a) self inflicted and b) painful.

Maybe a gaming company will listen to gamers before planning major changes in operation now.

…

Nah.

 

[Eurynom0s]

Glad to see these shenanigans have come to a halt for now.

100% this was instigated by an MBA somewhere who just had absolutely no understanding about the community.

It's not just that, it's failing to to understand that this stuff drives people into WotC's paid content. It's like crying about the fan content creators eating the crumbs falling off the table, but with the crumbs also being kind of imaginary because they only exist because of the fan creators' work in the first place.

 

[drouu]

This is going to throw a spanner in the works for their whole “walled garden” virtual tabletop business model that they’d laid out for long term business outlooks to shareholders late last year.

It’s going to be very interesting to see Hasbro’s next quarterly investor meeting and plans for revenue growth (because make no mistake, that’s the driver for all of this).

I simply don’t know how they’ll go forward without a complete rethink of their business plans.

as a D&D gamer for several decades and long-position hasbro shareholder, i very much want a complete rethink of their business plans, thank you. i also wouldn't mind whichever people were most responsible for deciding to dick around with the OGL to lose their jobs in a very public way.

 

[senjaz]

While the V5.1 SRD is now out under the CC4.0IL, nothing prevents WOTC from releasing D&DV6(or whatever it will be called) under different terms. That was pretty much what they did when V4 came out. I get the feeling that WOTC was hoping the most of the negative publicity from a new more restrictive license would be abated by the time the actual new D&D hits the market. May still be their plan. Guess we will find out when V6 is officially released and we see the attached license terms.

Which doesn’t matter. 5e is great and people will continue to play it. The whole reason Pathfinder exists is because players didn’t want to stop playing 3.5e.

If WotC decides to try updating the terms for a new edition then the established community will stick with what we have and rely upon 3rd parties for all our content needs. Worse it would likely entirely kill D&D as a brand in table top going forward.

Such a move won’t stop me playing D&D of various editions. It will only stop me from giving money to WotC.

 

[fishbait]

This is almost certainly a result of their lawyers realizing that if the OGL in any form was challenged in court, they would lose. because there is a loooong standing Supreme Ct opinion that says you can't copyright the rules of a game. That's also why they've made the SRD available license free.

Absolutely this.

 

[Oliver Weichhold]

They will try again for sure once the dust has settled.

 

[gsgrego]

I don't think they'll be quick to step on that rake again. This last month has been a painful failure and P.R. disaster.

They shouldn't of been dumb enough to do it in the first place. While it is unlikely they will do it again I do not think the argument can be made that they aren't dumb enough to do it again. That would require learning and critical thinking skills none of which they applied in the lead up to this or during the initial criticism.

 

[GottaSaySomething]

This is such a huge unforced blunder that I still don't see how WotC come back from this, but maybe they'll surprise me. Players and DMs might be tempted to come back now, but surely publishers will be exceptionally wary that WotC will just try to pull the rug out from under the OGL 1.0a again (I don't see a mention of that being irrevocable at least).

So WotC is in a weaker position overall compared to pre-OGL revocation attempt with the SRD now being under CC-BY, but also they've burned all the brand stewardship trust they had slowly accrued since OGL 1.0a in the past 20 years.

This is mentioned in the article but it is worth elaborating on:

You do not have to trust them. They put it out there under creative commons. It's done. You can download or save a PDF or whatever that is marked creative commons and even if they release a new version not under it (as is their right as copyright holders) the one you have is forever yours under the CC

This is a well-trodden thing with code (as CC is used on a lot of open source documentation) - if I write some code and slap the GPL on v1 and give that to you you always have that. You always have that GPL licensed bit of code

If I (the copyright holder) release v1.2 under something entirely different I can do that (even the GPLed v1 stuff can be used by me here as I have copyright to it) - but you still have your v1 and you will always have it under the terms of the GPL

So again, by putting a CC license on it, it's out there and they cannot take that back - that's the point of these licenses, "open source when I feel like it" is not open source.

A quick bit at the end: As long as you do as the CC variant requires (usually attribution, but there are no-commercial variants) - you can use it. If you break the CC license by not giving attribution or whatever you open yourself up to legal problems and may not be able to use it.

Google "creative commons" - Lawence Lessig (a famous name here) wrote the thing and a great FAQ.


Addendum: I cannot think of any other action they could do which would more clearly say "we will not do this" - they've made it more free than it was!

But remember they, the copyright holders, could make a new version and not CC that - but the CC'ed ones they're forever out there now, they no longer have a say in that. It's done.

 

[Fluppeteer]

It took a while, but Hasbro finally realized that hole in their foot was a) self inflicted and b) painful.

Maybe a gaming company will listen to gamers before planning major changes in operation now.

…

Nah.

I'm... not sure. This got a fair amount of free publicity in the mainstream press. Having backtracked, they hopefully haven't don't permanent damage to their installed base (I appreciate there's a lot less trust now, but if they'd stayed with the changes they'd have lost a lot more people). As is, a lot of people have just had D&D cross their consciousness just as a film is about to come out.

I'm not saying this was all the plan of an evil mastermind, and I'm of the "forgive and (mostly) forget" philosophy now they've actually backed down (otherwise companies will learn NOT to back down). But I wouldn't be surprised if another company doesn't think this actually worked out quite well and starts thinking about ways to rile up their customer base just enough to make the news.

(Reference: Samsung lost a legal case for a lot of money which was largely about whether rounded rectangles were a design patent. But in the process they got the judge to say a Galaxy Tab was basically the same as an iPad, but cheaper, in front of the world's press, and a lot of people paid more attention than they would to a poster campaign - and from which perspective, wheeling out ST:TNG as precedent was a genius move even if it didn't persuade the court. I've no idea whether it worked out positive in the end, but there are definite upsides to being on the losing end of a public dispute. So long as you don't do a Ratner, anyway.)

 

[Cognac]

Yea...anyone with an actual clue would think twice about considering using a license document to pull a fast one on a community that reads and applies rules for fun.

This was exactly my thought process. The community they were trying to rip off consists of many people, a lot of whom know how to read rules for very minute advantages and are good at min-maxing. How did they think this was going to end well?

 

[SubWoofer2]

It’s going to be very interesting to see Hasbro’s next quarterly investor meeting and plans for revenue growth (because make no mistake, that’s the driver for all of this).

I simply don’t know how they’ll go forward without a complete rethink of their business plans.

At the meeting, the point will be made that the business plans were based on perspectives about licenses which might not hold up in law, but this only became known after expert legal opinion on what commercially are very unusual licensing arrangements, not found elsewhere in the business and not found elsewhere in the industry, and these legacy issues have (to be clear) now required ring-fencing, and (more importantly) have now required revisiting our business plans. That's all been completed. As a result, we refer to slides 13 and 14, see: kittens! Aren't they cute.


Translated: whoops. We shoudn't have tried to bank that.

 

[Golgatha]

I wonder if one of the WotC people got to tell one of the Hasbro people "I told you so."

Man, I'd love to have an insight into that. This has been a spectacular PR nightmare. I don't think I can remember one that's been more spectacular in the last decade, besides maybe Kanye? And that's competing on a whole different axis.

Axis as in Axis powers for Kanye....holy hell this world is crazy.

 

[IncorrigibleTroll]

Go find 100 random TTRPG players and ask them what game they're playing. D&D will be an easy majority. Many of those people will have only ever played 5e and not even realize some of these games exist. And if we're talking market share and dollars, it's even more lopsided.

D&D absolutely is synonymous with TTRPGs for most of the people playing them. Even when they're playing something else, you'll hear people say "it's D&D night, we're playing Fate".

And the broader population that doesn’t play TTRPGs has a tendency to consider the entire hobby to be D&D. They’ve never heard of the acronym TTRPG in the first place.

 

[marsilies]

WotC today:

 

[Hawkeye666]

Imagine that, they can't stuff the djinn back into the lamp.

 

[Geeklaw]

President (who is also the COO) of Hasbro is getting the boot (uh, I mean, is 'stepping down'), as announced today.

Of course that needs to be just the start.

Hasbro's business operations have had issues for years despite the growth in board games, D&D, and MtG, in recent years. The surprising thing about the current situation is that it didn't happen before now.

 

[Starch_industries]

it was to increase revenue (somewhat) and protect IP...you can't blame them for trying to update a 23 year old license.

Look at LOTR. Billions upon billions made. D&D? arguably a much denser, more complete world... but a fraction of the revenue by comparison.

The issue is, you're dealing with a bunch of nerds that can read the fine print and understand rules. Even the best lawyer would have a hard time negotiating with D&D nerds over rules.