Game makers stage mass exodus from <em>Dungeons & Dragons</em>’ “open” license

WotC is "an existential threat to our game," one publisher says.

See full article...

 

[Voldenuit]

You'd think the best way for them to grow their userbase would be to look at barriers to entry for new players playing and DMing D&D.

My impression is that people see the 3 book set as daunting and believe that the rules are complicated and difficult.

The company has the power to improve both the reality and the reputation of D&D along those lines.

Players only need 1 book, the PHB.

DMs need 3, but that's only one guy at the table.

WOTC would rather sell a $6/mo subscription (soon to be $30/mo if they have their way) to every player at the table than to make a one-off sale of $50 to 6 players and $150 to 1 DM.

And they wanted a ruinous cut of every 3rd party book (25% of revenue would bankrupt all the small 3rd party publishers).

Players should run, not walk, away from such a greedy company that clearly does not have their interests in mind, whether it be goodwill or transactional.

 

[Fancy Internet Person]

You should be a little more specific here. Gary Gygax has more than one son and only one of them made those remarks. (Specifically it was Earnest Gary Gygax, Jr.) The Quora question "Why has TSR Games distanced itself from Ernie G. Gygax Jr.?" and top answer provide a very illuminating explanation.

Thank you. I've added that link to my post along with specifying it was Ernie G. Gygax Jr.

 

[The Dark]

(Tongue in cheek)

It's shown that D&D is also for the theater kids, for the improv nerds, for the jugglers, the unicyclists, and the anime nerds too!

At least in my experience, the theater kids already knew that - my gaming group in high school was a mix of theater kids and band nerds.

 

[TroubleMan]

While this may be a hot take, the biggest barriers to entry are the expectations created by pop culture D&D stuff. Outsiders look at stuff like Critical Role and Stranger Things and expect that level of polish and drama from a Wednesday-night pick-up Adventurer's League game run by some rando doing effectively free labor. It also affects the DMs who see things like CR and assume that they're doing a poor job because they can't do a million different voices or only use dry-erase mats instead of intricate terrain or have grand designs for their campaign.

The PHB/MM/DMG can be daunting, but nothing craters interest like watching Matt Mercer's voice acting in action on Twitch, then driving to your LFGS to hear Randy the Claims Adjuster tell you in a flat monotone that your Level 2 Rogue got killed by a Bugbear in one swing. I don't even watch CR (I've tried, but it feels hard to get into someone else's game when you have your own), but I feel like it's had an overall negative impact.

Who the hell goes into a local roleplaying campaign expecting Matt Mercer levels of production at your buddy's kitchen table?

Honestly that situation would make a hilarious SNL skit or youtube comedy video.

I would bet that Critical Role, and it's like, had an extreme net positive on the TTRPG community. Sure some people might go into it with unrealistic expectations, but I would guess the large majority go into it not thinking it's professional production, and instead think it's just a fun thing to do with some friends, or even possibly some strangers.

I'm sure there are some that saw the glitz, the glamor, and the drama from the high end productions, and tried it out based on that. Then later they decided it wasn't for them....but that's okay. For every one of those, there are many that found out it was for them.

 

[E.Murphy]

Players only need 1 book, the PHB.

DMs need 3, but that's only one guy at the table.

WOTC would rather sell a $6/mo subscription (soon to be $30/mo if they have their way) to every player at the table than to make a one-off sale of $50 to 6 players and $150 to 1 DM.

And they wanted a ruinous cut of every 3rd party book (25% of revenue would bankrupt all the small 3rd party publishers).

Players should run, not walk, away from such a greedy company that clearly does not have their interests in mind, whether it be goodwill or transactional.

This is ultimately why Hasbro wants to kill Paiso, 3rd party publishers, and other VTTs. It's easier to charge high prices if you don't have competitors offering equivalent / arguably better products for cheaper. What Hasbro knows is that they have the most recognized brand in the genre, but what they don't want people to discover is that you don't have to pay them recurring gobs of money to keep having fun.

 

[Fancy Internet Person]

WotC's latest position, presented without commentary: https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1428-a-working-conversation-about-the-open-game-license

 

[Wheels Of Confusion]

They haven't walked back de-authorizing OGL1.0a stuff. And we know they plan to roll out the more expensive, more restrictive terms for DDB.

They have learned nothing.

 

[JT308]

And with all the kickback, none of that is going to matter to Hasbro, because the people up in arms aren't funneling money to Hasbro, so Hasbro could care less. That's kind of their point in waning the changes in the first place; to cash in on what's been built up around D&D, and to lock people into perpetually paying for "D&D as a service", like software companies are doing.

On the otherhand the the ecosystem built around D&D has pulled more people in, making everyone stronger. And the backlash and perception is harming them by people leaving. I think Hasbro does realize this, at least to the second point, and they may back down. As the article states though; the damage is done.

 

[Fancy Internet Person]

They haven't walked back de-authorizing OGL1.0a stuff. And we know they plan to roll out the more expensive, more restrictive terms for DDB.

They have learned nothing.

They've drawn a lot of attention to how their existing policies and licensing terms are very favorable towards WotC alone.

The previous truce was very good for them and was tolerable for many others. I don't think it was wise of them to signal they were altering the agreement.

 

[The Dark]

Bundle of Holding is striking while the iron's hot and offering a pair of packages of alternate fantasy RPGs.

The Alternatives to D&D bundle has Five Torches Deep, Tiny Dungeon, Chivalry & Sorcery, Basic Fantasy, Lightmaster, Dungeon Crawl Classics, Shadow of the Demon Lord, Hackmaster, and Fragged Empire plus Fragged Kingdom.

The Non-OGL Fantasy bundle has Mythras, The Dark Eye, Advanced Fighting Fantasy 2e, Heroes Against Darkness, The Oldskull Manifesto, Worlds Without Number Deluxe, Sword Chronicle, Warlock! Traitor's Edition, Fantasy Age, and Against the Darkmaster.

 

[E.Murphy]

And with all the kickback, none of that is going to matter to Hasbro, because the people up in arms aren't funneling money to Hasbro, so Hasbro could care less. That's kind of their point in waning the changes in the first place; to cash in on what's been built up around D&D, and to lock people into perpetually paying for "D&D as a service", like software companies are doing.

On the otherhand the the ecosystem built around D&D has pulled more people in, making everyone stronger. And the backlash and perception is harming them by people leaving. I think Hasbro does realize this, at least to the second point, and they may back down. As the article states though; the damage is done.

The bigger backlash is if all those creators and YouTube personalities drawing in D&D players start funneling them to places outside of D&Ds shiny new walled garden. Imagine if every-time someone googles How to start playing D&D they see an article stating, that rather than start playing D&D they should play TTRPG XYZ instead since it is more flexible and cheaper. Particularly if game stores jump in.

 

[Fancy Internet Person]

Also, their latest statement doesn't address the biggest problem with their OGL changes.

Nobody else wants the OGL to change.

For better or worse, some people found the existing one useful enough. But they weren't clamoring for a change -- certainly not a change where WotC sets the terms.

 

[electric_mayhem]

I can only speak to my own experience here, but here it is:

Dungeons and Dragons' market dominance comes from two places: being first and building the largest community. We can't change #1, but we can change #2. Many of us feel that we have to change #2.

Dungeon/Game Masters are incredibly important in the community. Each D/GM is often responsible for buying materials that support 3 - 7 players (or more). It's the DM who buys all the books, has extra dice, etc. DMs influence player choices, recruit players, etc. They're a key link in the chain that keeps D&D on top.

For me, the instant I heard this news, I felt like contributing to Hasbro/WotC's insanity was indefensible. Sure, my group's campaign wasn't going to spend any more money for another four months, but I was still helping build a DnD group, still contributing to the DnD machine. The videos I watched for inspiration were all DnD channels. The articles I read were all DnD articles. The links I clicked... well, you get the idea. It's not just about the physical money I spend, it's about the mindshare I create.

Instead, we switched to Pathfinder 2E. For my non-rules-knowing players, I converted their characters myself and gave them new versions that are 90% like their old ones. (If they don't like my choices, I'll of course let them retrain.) I bought a new copy of the PF2 Core Rulebook to vote for Paizo with my money. I hope they'll use the big, big profits they make from that one purchase to fill their legal coffers.

And what's different now? I'm watching Pathfinder 2E vids, reading Pathfinder 2E articles. I'm hitting Pathfinder 2E websites. I paid a modest fee for a Pathfinder character builder. My players are getting used to saying, "We play Pathfinder" instead of "We're playing DnD."

Now, I'm the smallest of small time GMs. I'm honestly not very good at it, but for my group, I'm all they've got. Now four more people are playing Pathfinder. If they want books or dice, when they go to the store, they ask for "Pathfinder." Now multiply that by even a quarter of the GMs who dropped DnD Beyond subs, then multiply that by all of those GMs' players.

BTW, my dice, minis, maps, etc. all work just peachy with Pathfinder 2E. The middle schooler in me hasn't shaken the fear that I'm not buying the books that everyone else has, but it hasn't been hard or terribly expensive to switch. And encounters really, really are easier to build. My prep time has decreased. And... (I'll go on all day if I don't stop myself.)

I hope that helps!

Thank you for the thoughtful answer. My primary hobby has always been tabletop analog gaming on the whole, but I have not spent much time as the DM for an RPG group since high school in the 90s. Most of my gaming is miniature wargaming and for me that is where I will spend time/money to organize groups of other players similar to what you mentioned above. Thank you for providing more context as an DM.

 

[TheMolesRevenge]

Let's not overstate the situation. Every activity--every single one--has a stick/bounce ratio. When I studied Aikido, we knew that January would be busier than any other month because of New Year's Resolutioners. Of the five newbies we'd get, maybe one would stick around. Now, maybe we were a terrible group. Maybe Aikido just wasn't a good fit for the bouncers. Maybe Steven Segal made them think Aikido was something that it wasn't. There are a ton of variables. We practiced in good faith and tried to be welcoming.

However, if the general stick/bounce ratio is 1/5, and a movie called The Aikido Kid doubled our newbie count, we'd still double our stick numbers for the month. Not every DM is Matt Mercer, not every play is a Broadway spectacular, and not every person you date is a supermodel. That doesn't mean that the big shots are responsible for people leaving RPG groups, not doing theater, or breaking up with their significant other.

The other benefit of something like Critical Role has been the normalization of the hobby. Kids get made fun of less for participating. The products are more widely available. People are more likely to give it a try. These are all net positives.

And Humble Bundle is acting on that - I've just had an e-mail from them advertising an "Alternatives to D&D" bundle, obviously hoping to catch people while they're mad at Hasbro/WotC

 

[CraigJ ✅]

It seems WoTC dipped their toe in some hot water, and are going to be left with a hell of a burn.
Is this the first death save?

I'm going to rule that a critical hit while unconscious - 2 failed saves.

 

[CraigJ ✅]

Lot's of people have said this, but the OGL is a useless to publishers anyway - it gives you permission to publish things that aren't copyrightable in the first place.

IANAL, but I can understand basic English:

Copyright law does not protect ideas, methods, or systems. Copyright protection is therefore not available for ideas or procedures for doing, making, or building things; scientific or technical methods or discoveries; business operations or procedures; mathematical principles; formulas or algorithms; or any other concept, process, or method of operation.

Section 102 of the Copyright Act (title 17 of the U.S. Code) clearly expresses this principle: “In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work.”

Inventions are subject matter for patents, not copyrights.

Game rules are not copyrightable. Period. Only the specific expression is copyrightable. So you can express the individual rules, mechanics, etc as defined in any of WotCs books and you don't need permission from them or anyone else. What you can't do is publish WotC's expression of those rules - ie you can't just reproduce their content as sell it as your own.

 

[Kesh]

WotC's latest position, presented without commentary: https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1428-a-working-conversation-about-the-open-game-license

This is a good step back. I expect the plan is to leave OGL 1.0a alone, and establish OGL 2.0 as the new license for One D&D / 50th Anniversary Edition when it comes out.

Which means there will be a lot less content released for 50e, but I don't think Hasbro cares about that.

 

[brionl]

Bundle of Holding is striking while the iron's hot and offering a pair of packages of alternate fantasy RPGs.

The Alternatives to D&D bundle has Five Torches Deep, Tiny Dungeon, Chivalry & Sorcery, Basic Fantasy, Lightmaster, Dungeon Crawl Classics, Shadow of the Demon Lord, Hackmaster, and Fragged Empire plus Fragged Kingdom.

The Non-OGL Fantasy bundle has Mythras, The Dark Eye, Advanced Fighting Fantasy 2e, Heroes Against Darkness, The Oldskull Manifesto, Worlds Without Number Deluxe, Sword Chronicle, Warlock! Traitor's Edition, Fantasy Age, and Against the Darkmaster.

DriveThru RPG has a general sale on "New Year, New Game" until tomorrow:
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/rpg_newyear.php?&filters=0_0_0_0_0_44298
Chaosium also has The Call of Cthulhu and RuneQuest starter sets and the Basic Role Playing book on sale for 99¢ until tomorrow.

https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/260810/Call-of-Cthulhu-Starter-Sethttps://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/370454/RuneQuest-Starter-Sethttps://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/24384/Basic-Roleplaying
Hero system Basic Rulebook is not on sale, but it's only US$14.99 regular price
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/64691/HERO-System-Basic-Rulebook

 

[Voldenuit]

Lot's of people have said this, but the OGL is a useless to publishers anyway - it gives you permission to publish things that aren't copyrightable in the first place.

IANAL, but I can understand basic English:



Game rules are not copyrightable. Period. Only the specific expression is copyrightable. So you can express the individual rules, mechanics, etc as defined in any of WotCs books and you don't need permission from them or anyone else. What you can't do is publish WotC's expression of those rules - ie you can't just reproduce their content as sell it as your own.

Leaving aside that game rules and algorithmic processes may not be copyrightable (but somehow software is copyrightable), it is very hard to play DnD or a DnD-compatible campaign without references to things in the core books that may be copyrightable artistic expression.

Take for instance healing spells for clerics or attack spells for wizards. Do you expect the DM (or Paizo, or Chaosium) to make generic copies of every spell in the PHB for players to use? What about monsters? Orcs and goblins are in the MM, does the campaign or expansion pack need to duplicate those as well?

WOTC's solution to this in the past was to explicitly make "core" components of the D20 system license- and royalty-free with the System Reference Document (SRD). So generic spells like Magic Missile and Cure Light Wounds were explicitly reusable, many flavor spells from Greyhawk like Bigby's Crushing Hand or Tasha's Hideous Laughter were genericized to just 'Crushing Hand' and 'Hideous Laughter', and spells from non-open campaigns like Forgotten Realms, such as 'Simbul's Synostodweomer' (sp) were not covered by the SRD or OGL (afaik). There were also generic versions of most monsters from the Monster Manual for players and companies to easily re-use or plug in to external campaigns.

This allowed 3rd party publishers like Paizo to release compatible expansion packs, campaigns and even full on rule sets without having to reinvent the wheel every single time, but OGL 1.1 (as leaked) would have demanded 25% of their gross revenue for the "privilege" of doing so.

 

[parasyte]

Lot's of people have said this, but the OGL is a useless to publishers anyway - it gives you permission to publish things that aren't copyrightable in the first place.

IANAL, but I can understand basic English:



Game rules are not copyrightable. Period. Only the specific expression is copyrightable. So you can express the individual rules, mechanics, etc as defined in any of WotCs books and you don't need permission from them or anyone else. What you can't do is publish WotC's expression of those rules - ie you can't just reproduce their content as sell it as your own.

It does not particularly matter whether game rules are eligible for copyright protection. I mean, at a basic level, it does matter, but copyright gets hashed out in individual trials with facts specific to the particular infringement claim.

What this means is that despite a work based on OGL likely not infringing WotC's copyrights, they can still file suit, and will argue as much as possible to get an adverse ruling. Did you use too many similar words? Did the particulars of a list of adventuring items, or a bunch of monster descriptions open up copyright liability? These will be argued in court before a judge if you get sued and don't immediately settle, and that court time costs money to pay your lawyers and any fees, expert witnesses, etc.

Making this worse for those who aren't WotC, 17 USC 505 makes any costs or legal fees recoverable to the prevailing party at the discretion of the judge; you could win an infringement lawsuit and still bankrupt your company, because the judge decided the suit wasn't filed in bad faith or various other reasons.

Again, whether a work is legally infringing or not is not the value of the OGL; the value was in knowing that as long as you adhered to the terms, you would not be sued. Now that WotC has shown what they want from a new OGL, that value is gone entirely.

 

[Hack-n-Slash]

Lot's of people have said this, but the OGL is a useless to publishers anyway - it gives you permission to publish things that aren't copyrightable in the first place.

Again, whether a work is legally infringing or not is not the value of the OGL; the value was in knowing that as long as you adhered to the terms, you would not be sued. Now that WotC has shown what they want from a new OGL, that value is gone entirely.

CraigJ was part of the Oracle v Google threads... he really should know that.

 

[niftykev]

Leaving aside that game rules and algorithmic processes may not be copyrightable (but somehow software is copyrightable), it is very hard to play DnD or a DnD-compatible campaign without references to things in the core books that may be copyrightable artistic expression.

Just want to make a point on this. The rules and processes are not copyrightable but the expression of the rules are. Meaning, rolling a d20 adding bonuses and comparing it to a target to determine success or failure is not copyrightable. The language that WotC uses in the SRD to describe how that rule works is copyrightable. The language they use to describe the the mechanics in the SRD is the same as the points you made with the classes and spells.

To make a fantasy game based on the OGL without using the OGL, one would have to explain the rules without using the SRD language, and create new classes, spells, monsters, etc. Now, obviously, any non OGL game can still have dragons, but it might get murky if the new game had red dragons always breathing fire, black spitting acid, etc.

 

[BorrowedAtoms]

I didn't think Kobold Press had been ambiguous before today as the article states about committing to ORC, but surely today they cleared that up in a press release:

"What exactly is Project Black Flag? Project Black Flag is the code name for an upcoming Kobold Press new core fantasy RPG system, available to any publisher or creator who accepts the terms of the soon-to-be-released Open RPG Creative License (ORC). This new open, perpetual, and irrevocable Open RPG Creative License (ORC) was announced on January 12, 2023, and will be shared with the community soon."

 

[gregorerlich]

That was not my intent, nor did I write that way to give that impression - and my "actually oppressed minority groups" friends (three of them) who I ran the contents of the post past before posting didn't read it that way.

But, OK, as obviously some people have read it that way, then I unreservedly apologise for causing that impression.

FTR my intent was to draw attention to, as Graylshaped put it (and way better than I did), the "tarring people with the same brush" aspect of the ongoing hostility (as you yourself have shown) towards a group of people who don't deserve it just because some people who can be classified within that group do bad things.

I'm not defending the WotC/Hasbro people for what they've done / are doing - I don't like what they're doing to the hobby I've been involved with and loved for over 40 years.

I used the first three statements in my list (as I did all the others) as a form of rhetoric to make a point. Should I have left those three off the list? Perhaps. But would people have been caused to move outside their comfort zones to examine their prejudices in this particular subject had I not? Again, perhaps, but I have my doubts.

In the end people will (hopefully) reflect on their views towards regarding the actions of individuals as the actions of groups and vice-versa - and while some people may not like having their views and preconceived ideas challenged, nether-the-less I have a right to voice my objections to comments I find distasteful and to ask people to stop making those comments (particulalry when they are not true when being generalized), just as others have the right to voice their objections to comments they find distasteful - including this one.

Nah. People who get MBAs know what they're doing. And they've been responsible for great ills in the world.

We would all be better off if MBA programs were shut down and everyone with an MBA moved into retail or fast food.

 

[AngryChris]

I understand the effect on future products from 3rd party companies. I get that part, I mentioned that. What I don't get are the quotes I read from players and DMs talking about how this is going to immediately ruin their DnD games right now. I've seen a fair bit of that - and I don't understand if there is much merit to that or if it's mostly hyperbole. Software impacts I do understand. Is there a significant number of people out there using 3rd party software for DnD? I'm old and I play most games with just the physical components: books, dice, miniatures, terrain, board. Honestly curious because my anecdotal experience is that the game is still mostly played analogue.

For lots of people, finding that a company they're fond of, who they've given a lot of money to in exchange for products they love, sharing positive experiences with friends and building shared experiences, to find that that company has suddenly turned into an asshole can cause negative feelings that make playing the game a negative rather than positive experience.

Not everyone is a robot.

 

[TheMolesRevenge]

For lots of people, finding that a company they're fond of, who they've given a lot of money to in exchange for products they love, sharing positive experiences with friends and building shared experiences, to find that that company has suddenly turned into an asshole can cause negative feelings that make playing the game a negative rather than positive experience.

Not everyone is a robot.

100% this. In spite of Shadowrun being my favourite RPG setting ever, and GMing a campaign that's been running on & off since 1996 and still going, I haven't bought a new SR product since just after 4E came out because of how some of the devs responded to criticism from the fans. It took me two years to be able to come back to my campaign and pick it back up under the 3E rules because for a while the whole game universe was tainted for me.

And yes I know that's not a particularly rational reaction, but I had sunk a lot of time, effort, and love into that game.

(edited for spelling)

 

[verbiage]

One thing I am wondering about (having not tracked Hasbro finances for a while) - I wonder what the hell happened for them to even think about these changes now. Cash flow problems? CEO about to retire and determined to leave a mark? Or could they be thinking that, even with people swearing off D&D, they'll make enough money off the people who remain so that they'll come out ahead in the end anyway?

What a fiasco.

An activist investor tried to force Hasbro to spin WotC off a couple of years ago. Hasbro won the fight but that was the first time that a lot of their biggest investors finally realized just how big a part of the Hasbro bottom line was exclusively WotC. Now that they know it is real money they want it to be MORE money.

Another component is that the Hasbro CEO (who was originally part of WOTC) nearly immediately replaced the heads of WOTC and DND with ex amazon execs after taking power.