The OGL, Ravenloft and You

[Jester of the FoS]

That said, while we're not violating copyright we ARE violating their trademarks. Like... constantly. Terms like "Ravenloft" and the like are trademarked and the property of WotC and we're using them without permission.

Are we though? There are tons of Ravenloft products marketed in DMGuild. Same with Eberron, Mystara, Darksun, Dragonlance etc. For Dragonlance and Ravenloft with the campaign lines, there are a great many products. And Forgotten Realms? Easily in the thousands fan-made products that are marketed for profit using the DMGuild.

The DMsGuild website operates under a separate license and different set of rules.
It doesn't use the OGL and nothing on their is open under the OGL. The rules there are much less restricted because it was designed for fans to create content rather than 3rd Party Publishers, so there's less of a legal document to sign. But the content there is limited to the DMsGuild and can't be sold elsewhere.

You can use all monsters from the Monster Manual and any opened setting, which currently includes Dragonlance, Ravenloft, the Forgotten Realms, Eberron, and Spelljammer. But fans can't make content for other settings, like Dark Sun or Greyhawk.

Actually, D&D is doing quite well. Recent books have still been selling out and D&D has been on a streak for the last few years. If 2022 was a slump, it was only because 2021 and 2020 were D&D's best years ever. (Even including the height of D&D in 1983-84!)

D&D (and WotC) is, but its owner - Hasbro - is bleeding money. A fair number of questionable business decisions means their stock is not doing well. Throw in the current economy (people willing to spend less on overpriced plastic toys) means investors are getting antsy. At their last Q3 report they were not happy.

Hasbro is also a separate company. They can only excerpt so much control over WotC without micromanaging. The managers there all have their own divisions to run. If they wanted to run WotC as well, they would have absorbed the company rather than keeping it separate.
Hasbro has a lot of debt and its stock is plummeting. But that really seems to be the result of inflation and people choosing necessities rather than toys. As inflation stabilizes, their revenue should increase. Especially with a new Transformers movie coming.

So Hasbro is looking to squeeze more money from one of their few productive golden geese. They have done this recently with MtG - it brought in the money for a while, but overproduction is seriously reducing the overall long term value.

That'd likely be the new management at WotC rather than Hasbro. Cynthia Williams was hired as President of Wizards of the Coast in February of 2022, with the former Wizards head becoming the CEO of Hasbro. You can bet a lot of the recent initiatives started with her.

I imagine this is less them trying to kill 3rd Party Publishers and more trying to get a piece of the Critical Role action. Crit Role has made millions included an animated series, books, comics, and the like off of WotC's game and IP.

Oh you can bet their eyes lit up brighter than the sun at the thought of getting their paws on that CR action. However I think CR is somewhat owned/partnered with Amazon - who has lots of lawyers. But if they cripple Paizo in the meantime, I doubt they will shed any tears.

They're partnered with Amazon to make a cartoon, so WotC probably won't go after that. But it's not like they can't go after CR itself.

[Speedwagon]

Thanks for the clarification Jester! EDIT: I did want to mention by the way that I've bought all your Ravenloft stuff on DM's Guild and have used it to great effect, so thanks a ton for the campaign help!

To me, regardless of if it's Hasbro puppeteering WotC (which your comments do not support) or the new CEO making this decision, it's still the same rich stupidity from corporations today that I dislike. While that isn't productive to say, I felt the urge to vent somehow.

What I'm really wondering (and concerned about) are twofold: first, is this OGL and its policies going to hold up in Europe or in European courts? And secondly (and more importantly to me), how will this affect VTTs like Roll20 or FoundryVTT or FantasyGrounds? I extensively use Roll20 for all my D&D stuff and am running 2 Ravenloft campaigns there, and have bought at this point hundreds of maps and tokens and other goodies since I subscribed to Pro back in 2020 (started in 2017-2018). The range of speculation runs the gamut from "nothing will happen with pre-existing material just new stuff will be affected" to "Roll20's gonna get shut down by the mages of the shore and all your hard work is null and void".

And that's not the only thing I really worry about. I buy and support a lot of 3rd party publishers on not just the DM's Guild but through DrivethruRPG, Patreon, and more. Guys like Kobold Press, Green Ronin, Ghostfire Gaming/Grim Hollow, Brancalonia, Humblewood and Pathfinder/Starfinder? I straight up have either bought some of their hardcovers or own a decent chunk of their PDFs, if only because of the fact that 1) I am always looking for inspiration and stuff to make running my games easier and 2) WotC content doesn't fully address what I'm looking for. These are also the same types of content creators that I loved to see during events like Pax East when I went in the past, prior to and after the worst of the pandemic, so I'm deeply concerned to see them go "before their time" if that makes any sense.

And that's not even getting into how this might affect QtR, which you guys mentioned above. Already I can think of the articles of Mistmaster that uses Pathfinder rules or Hell_Born's really cool articles on adapting GrimHollow stuff (which I own) into Ravenloft. Plus there are other dedicated fan communities with their own netbooks out there like Threshold Magazine and Mr. Welch of Mystara singlehandedly making his own Mystara's player guide under the D&D ruleset.

I'll admit, I like 5e D&D. In fact, it's the very 5e book, Van Richten's Guide to Ravenloft, that, while (understandably) not as well received here as in other circles, made me interested in the campaign setting and inspired me make an account here and follow the QtR and even think about making content for the netzine (this year, hopefully, depending on how this situation goes idk). I may have my grievances with the system as a whole but that's mostly out of playing it for so long (since 2017) and wanting to try a new TTRPG out. And I was cautiously optimistic for OneD&D, and for the other D&D releases coming out this year like that Giants splatbook or that heist anthology book or even the new Planescape book (assuming it doesn't go the route of VRGTR; the Dragonlance book made me a bit hopeful as I liked that one). But now, I'm very concerned with the direction of D&D and the most that I can really do is not engage with the official WotC content and continue to support those 3rd party publishers and other competitors in the TTRPG market as much as I can (like Savage Worlds or Shiver or Pathfinder 2e or any new system I've looked at while shopping but never bought and tried) to essentially vote with my wallet and signal my displeasure with the current direction. But I'm not sure that's enough, even with more people doing that.

And that's what really scares me. I don't want the game (and due to name and brand recognition, the hobby as a whole) to go the way of video games with microtransactions and a stifling lack of innovation or creativity.

Finally, there's been further discussion and releases of information regarding the OGL 1.1 and its terminology recently that might be worth checking out, so I can leave some links here.




These links come from the OGL megathread on the DnDnext subreddit and were considered acceptable by the mods there, I can also post a link to the megathread if you guys want to parse through the various takes and responses to the news.


(if this goes against the Cafe de Nuit's policy I can take these links down, I don't mean to cause any trouble to the community).

[DustBunny]

In the end, it appears that the only ones who will win are lawyers.

[tomokaicho]

Quoth the Raven is covered under the fansite policy, not the OGL. So the new OGL should not be relevant at this time. However, the following is an indicator that the fansite policy will soon be updated also.

XII. OTHER PRODUCTS. Sometimes, great minds think alike. We can’t and won’t cancel products out of fear that they’d be viewed as “similar to” Licensed Works.

Therefore: A. 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.

This is CYA but it also makes it likely that WotC will use certain fan works in the future.

On the plus side, and this is my subjective opinion, I deem it unlikely that WotC can "de-authorize" and then invalidate the previous OGL in the legal sense. Here is why.

Much has been said about how "irrevocable" does not appear in the old OGL. For this reason, it has been claimed that the OGL is revocable. Which is true as far as it goes, but the old OGL has always been revocable, in the case of an uncured breach. And the old OGL spells out exactly under what circumstances revocation happens. And revocation does not invalidate the license, it merely revokes use of the license for the violator.

Because the license is revocable in the case of an uncured breach, "irrevocable" cannot appear in the first instance. The word "perpetual", combined with the wording for revocation, and the WotC FAQ on the OGL makes very clear the intent of the OGL, and how the OGL was understood by all parties until literally a week ago.

WotC is leaning heavily on the term "authorized versions", and claiming that previous versions are no longer valid. That should be interesting to see in court. I expect that WotC lawyers are going to have a hell of a time in court.

The fact that WotC attempted to get the major players to sign away their rights (with a contract) instead of just asserting the right of WotC to enforce their new OGL is suggestive that WotC thinks there is a good chance that this will not fly in court. Note that if you accept the new OGL, it will fully apply to you, because you agreed to it.

If it reaches court, which I hope it does but may not because WotC will likely back out, witnesses will be bought in and asked what their understanding of the OGL was at the time it was created. Any court case is a gamble and could go either way, but I expect that the odds are heavily stacked against WotC, even if they can afford the best lawyers.

By the way, I strongly recommend that anyone that has not yet read OGL 1.1 do so. The entire document oozes with a self-righteous arrogance and smarminess that is probably part of the reason why this document has become such a lightning rod.

That's always how the OGL has worked. You've always been able to take something someone has declared open content and reprint it for free.
Early Pathfinder modules regularly featured monsters from Frog God Games' Tome of Horrors or modified by Green Ronin's Advanced Bestiary.

This is not how the OGL 1.1 works. You cannot declare restricted IP, rather WotC will be able to make use of ALL of your IP that appears in a work using the OGL 1.1, or perhaps even the old OGL as WotC claims that old versions are superceded by the new.

Read the new OGL located here. Uninformed commentary just adds to the confusion.

[Rebel Mage]

What I'm really wondering (and concerned about) are twofold: first, is this OGL and its policies going to hold up in Europe or in European courts? And secondly (and more importantly to me), how will this affect VTTs like Roll20 or FoundryVTT or FantasyGrounds? I extensively use Roll20 for all my D&D stuff and am running 2 Ravenloft campaigns there, and have bought at this point hundreds of maps and tokens and other goodies since I subscribed to Pro back in 2020 (started in 2017-2018). The range of speculation runs the gamut from "nothing will happen with pre-existing material just new stuff will be affected" to "Roll20's gonna get shut down by the mages of the shore and all your hard work is null and void".

I myself use Foundry, so I at least have a local copy of everything, so if D&D 5e would no longer be allowed there, I'd still have the system locally and I'd be able to run it. (I do recommend switching to Foundry; I did so last year, and I don't regret it, but that's another topic.)

My advice, at the very least: Back up things. Roll20 does work for other systems as well, and it's likely that maps and all that are system agnostic, so they probably won't be affected, but if Roll20 can no longer do D&D, it's likely they'll lose a lot of players, as D&D is the most popular TTRPG here. So: Create back ups!

[tomokaicho]

What is so insidious about this is that even if WotC cannot directly legally enforce its "rights" under OGL 1.1, it can seek to claim money from you directly, such as through its deal with Kickstarter to take 20% of anything published under an OGL, or have you deplatformed from the various publishing platforms if you refuse to comply by agreeing to OGL 1.1.

As we can see from the example of YouTube, it is trivial to deplatform people under various pretexts, and WotC implies that they will "orcs are racist" you if they can when revoking you license (while taking your IP even after you license is revoked), and if they can't use a lame pretext as a reason, they don't need one and you can't sue them either.

I for one am happy to see it come to this and hope it ends in court with WotC losing. And if WotC wins, it still loses and the community will file off the serial numbers of the SRD and create a new one that is truly open (not this travesty though).

[Rock of the Fraternity]

In related news...

[Speedwagon]

In related news...

I saw that earlier today in my emails and on Reddit! I'm fully supporting anything Kobold Press does as I've adored their content so far and am happy to see that they remain relatively undaunted by the recent gaming news. Time to hoist the black flag and set sail!

What is so insidious about this is that even if WotC cannot directly legally enforce its "rights" under OGL 1.1, it can seek to claim money from you directly, such as through its deal with Kickstarter to take 20% of anything published under an OGL, or have you deplatformed from the various publishing platforms if you refuse to comply by agreeing to OGL 1.1.

As we can see from the example of YouTube, it is trivial to deplatform people under various pretexts, and WotC implies that they will "orcs are racist" you if they can when revoking you license (while taking your IP even after you license is revoked), and if they can't use a lame pretext as a reason, they don't need one and you can't sue them either.

I for one am happy to see it come to this and hope it ends in court with WotC losing. And if WotC wins, it still loses and the community will file off the serial numbers of the SRD and create a new one that is truly open (not this travesty though).

What's wrong with the one listed as a travesty, tomokaicho? Genuine question, as I can't tell when it comes to stuff like this what is and is not a good idea.

[Five]

Huh. Quick reads tells me Wizards are casting defensive spells to protect their domain. Years of low percent high profiteering are, potentially, coming to an end. "Thanks for helping with the proliferation of our brand using the tools we supplied you with (wasn't that the whole point?), but if you end up with bags of cash then we want our cut."

Meh. Only fair. Let's be honest here: there is a lot of "tax-free" money flying around out there these days (and, arguably, more creatively-satisfying products than those produced in-house, but that's just me). Just look at Kickstarter for the low-medium end of that range (which gets much larger when you add them all up), not to mention the bigguns playing in the big field across town. As it should be, under current terms of agreement. No fault on either party's side. But "going forward" (tch. Corpspeak...), it's a loss (to the company) that warrants a shore-up and probe. Quantify the potential profit. Tax ("partner" with) the rich (who are making it by promoting your game), etc etc

Thing I'm more interested in will be the policing or enforcement of these new terms of agreement. If Wizards is too heavy-handed then they'll be the sole source of D&D's Great Depression. Corporate greed versus creative (and entrepreneurial) consumers will always be an acrimonious battle of attrition that will only hurt the game in the long run.

If, however, Wizards is looking at it from more of a tithe or levy-type partnership (mutual backscratching) for targeted use, say high rollers, quality content etc, then it's nothing more than business through fine print. Though I'd hope that a job offer, even if framed by mercenary-ish terms, would be first contact...

As for sites like this, and with QtR in particular, I wouldn't worry about it for two reasons. One, it is in Wizards best interest to continue to allow (and encourage) fans to gather in setting specific communities with the express intention of exchanging ideas about their game. It's free publicity and creative empowerment (the real Juice behind D&D) all rolled into one. Exclusive to non-devs. Yeah, real people...! Haha jk

As for the second reason why I don't think this place will be razed to the ground by the wizard's templars? There ain't no money to be had here. It'd be a nasty PR minefield to get through, what with a company that promotes creativity through gaming curb-stomping a bunch of out of pocket (I'm assuming) fans who are creatively gaming with their game of creativity. All risk, no reward.

Nevermind the details (unless you're looking to turn a profit); watch for the enforcement, or, partnerships (if you're a half-full kinda person). That'll reveal intent, and maybe even show us a glimpse of the future...

[tomokaicho]

What's wrong with the one listed as a travesty, tomokaicho? Genuine question, as I can't tell when it comes to stuff like this what is and is not a good idea.

The existence of "the board" and "section 12" contains that same "orcs are racist" verbiage of that WotC uses in OGL 1.1. it's a slippery slope, and there WILL be unjust license revocations under section 12.

[Drinnik Shoehorn]

In related news...

Also, Chaosium are selling the BRP System book for 99c (or 81p if you’re in the UK).

[Gonzoron of the FoS]

We operate in a legal grey area because everything we do here violates copyright and trademarks.
We operate under the good graces of WotC who could shut us down at any time, with or without the OGL.

For me, this is what it boils down to. Whatever WotC does with the OGL, dmsguild, etc, doesn't matter to us. We've been playing with their toys all this time. Likely because we make no money from it, they choose to ignore us. When they decide to take the toys and go home, we don't really have a leg to stand on. So we keep doing what we do, hope they see us as free publicity and not a competitor, and in the extremely unlikely event they put something of ours in one of their books, we take it as either a coincidence or a compliment and a thank you.

[Jester of the FoS]

Thanks for the clarification Jester! EDIT: I did want to mention by the way that I've bought all your Ravenloft stuff on DM's Guild and have used it to great effect, so thanks a ton for the campaign help!

Thanks! It was written for fans like you and was a huge passion project.

What I'm really wondering (and concerned about) are twofold: first, is this OGL and its policies going to hold up in Europe or in European courts? And secondly (and more importantly to me), how will this affect VTTs like Roll20 or FoundryVTT or FantasyGrounds? I extensively use Roll20 for all my D&D stuff and am running 2 Ravenloft campaigns there, and have bought at this point hundreds of maps and tokens and other goodies since I subscribed to Pro back in 2020 (started in 2017-2018). The range of speculation runs the gamut from "nothing will happen with pre-existing material just new stuff will be affected" to "Roll20's gonna get shut down by the mages of the shore and all your hard work is null and void".

I can't speak to European law, but I know most VTTs have a separate license and deals with WotC, so it shouldn't affect them.

[Jester of the FoS]

That's always how the OGL has worked. You've always been able to take something someone has declared open content and reprint it for free.
Early Pathfinder modules regularly featured monsters from Frog God Games' Tome of Horrors or modified by Green Ronin's Advanced Bestiary.

This is not how the OGL 1.1 works. You cannot declare restricted IP, rather WotC will be able to make use of ALL of your IP that appears in a work using the OGL 1.1, or perhaps even the old OGL as WotC claims that old versions are superceded by the new.

Read the new OGL located here. Uninformed commentary just adds to the confusion.

Reading it, it says:

A. Content Covered
i. Usable D&D Content (“Licensed Content”) – This is Dungeons & Dragons content that is included in the SRD v. 5.1,
including basic game mechanics and a curated selection of classes, monsters, spells, and items that allow You to make
content compatible with Dungeons & Dragons 5th edition.
[...]
iii. Your Content- These are the characters, classes, settings, spells, items, new rules, and other creations that You have
crafted. They are Your original contributions to the works that You want to sell. This license permits You to combine
Your content with the Licensed Content and commercially distribute the resulting works.
[...]
III. OWNERSHIP. You agree that We own copyright, trademark, and patent rights, if any, in the Licensed Content and the
Unlicensed Content. We reserve all rights not expressly given to You through this agreement. You agree to include any
copyright or other rights notices included with the Licensed Content in Your Licensed Works, and You may not impose
any additional, different, or inconsistent terms or conditions with respect to the Licensed Content in any license You
grant to any Licensed Works.
IV. IDENTIFICATION OF LICENSED CONTENT. You must identify in Your Licensed Works which content is Licensed Content
and which content is Your Content, in a way that allows a reader of Your Licensed Work to understand the distinction
without checking any other document

So, by reading, you still retain ownership of your content.

[DustBunny]

And the plot thickens....

Paizo Announces System-Neutral Open RPG License