PC Gamer: OGL not worth fighting for.

[Remathilis]

Dungeons & Dragons' OGL isn't worth fighting for

Wizards of the Coast is forcing fans into a struggle for the future of the game—but you don't have to play by its rules

www.pcgamer.com

This is going to rile some feathers.

"What if, instead, we accept that WOTC is determined to alienate huge sections of its audience, and look at that as an opportunity rather than a problem? What if we put our energy towards supporting efforts like Paizo's new rival license, ORC(opens in new tab), which now boasts support from over 1,500 companies(opens in new tab), including Roll20, Pelgrane Press, and Chaosium? Or work to provide clearer gateways for frustrated D&D players to alternative games they might love?"

Sorry if this was discussed elsewhere.

 

[Vaalingrade]

"What if we just... wait the years it takes to develop a new game to eat and pay rent?"

 

[Aspirinsmurf]

I agree with PC Gamer in that a healthier industry would have less products tied to the mechanics of D&D. I don't think that has much to do with the OGL though. There are many RPGs with different rulesets out there already. Some of them have embraced open licenses, others haven't.

D&D mechanics becoming the Linux of TTRPG systems in their ubiquity is precisely because of the OGL. It has benefited WotC greatly. There can be no reasonable world in which that genie can be put back into the bottle. It's everywhere now.

Does this mean that everyone should keep making D&D-adjacent content? Not at all. They really shouldn't. But it would be entirely unacceptable for WotC to try to pull the rug out from under everyone nevertheless.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Why not both?

Push back against what WotC is trying to do, and also support efforts like the ORC.

 

[eyeheartawk]

Yes, more games that are not D&D would be welcomed by me.

But,

A. Alot of games that are already not D&D use the OGL also and

B. Even if everyone went to ORC tomorrow it doesn't solve the issue of all the abandoned products that are in the OGL, right now, that people have built OGC off of never getting updated to another license.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I'm getting real tired of the 'why would any industry use standardization?!' talking point too.

"Why would tire companies use the vulcanization process instead of coming up with a new, creative way of making tires? Where are all the square tires?!"

 

[mamba]

I am all for embracing ORC and cutting WotC down to size and see that as an opportunity. That doesn’t mean they can revoke 1.0a.

I know the two are a little contradictory as having 1.0a probably means more D&D content and less for other TTRPGs, but I understand why some people ‘need’ that license. Me personally, I have basically moved on at this point, I am interested in ORC and what from WotC ends up under CC, the OGL 1.2 itself is too little, too late.

I hope every streamer, youtuber, etc. that created D&D content switches to generic TTRPG / alternatives to D&D content and they get buried once and for all

 

[Steel_Wind]

We can debate the pros and cons of PC Gamer's observations all we like.

In the end, I think WotC has made up its mind and is non-persuadable on the OGL issue to make further meaningful concessions. We are getting a NEW open license, the form of which will be genericized for ORC, but which will focus upon either a SRD for PF2 or an SRD for the 5e forked clone proposed by Kobold Press' "Project Black Flag". I am sure there will be others to come, but those are the big two of consequence in the near term.

Who knows? Maybe this is exactly what fuels real competition for WotC and may amount to a shiv to its kidneys. One can hope.

 

[Jer]

We can debate the pros and cons of PC Gamer's observations all we like.

In the end, I think WotC has made up its mind and is non-persuadable on the OGL issue to make further meaningful concessions.

I'm still in wait-and-see mode on this. Their reaction to the DDB survey less than a week in suggests that they might have finally realized how big the hornet's nest they kicked is. Whether that leads to them backing down entirely or not we'll have to see.

But it's still a good idea for the rest of the industry to get as far away from Wizards as possible as far as licensing goes. Even if this executive team learns a lesson and stops kicking hornet's nests, that doesn't mean that the next one won't show up and do it again because it seems that nobody can learn from the mistakes of others, they have to make those mistakes themselves again before they learn.

 

[Clint_L]

The fundamental problem is that 3PP weren't creating stuff for D&D because they loved WotC or something. They were doing it because there was money to be made. It's easy for a player to talk about switching to another system, but there are a plethora of possibilities, which creates huge risk for 3PP.

So much of RPG gaming being centred on D&D via the OGL created a consumer base that kept a lot of 3PP sustainable. Yes, I profoundly support folks making things that aren't D&D (frankly, I am not that interested in non D&D RPGs unless they are really not D&D). But I don't have to make a living. If the RPG scene completely fractures, that will destroy most small 3PP, at least in the short term. That is why simply walking away from the OGL is not necessarily a feasible option for a lot of folks.

Those of us who are not 3PP should be careful about getting on our high horses and making hyperbolic proclamations. There are a lot of people whose livelihoods are at stake. Mine isn't.