WotC's announcement of their "new OGL" is about centralizing control and cashing in on the big moneymakers of the #dnd hobby. But who will it really affect? And will it accomplish what Wizards thinks it will?
#dnd5e #onednd #ttrpg #osr #dnd

Good video.

Elsewhere I read some further analysis that pointed out that, by definition, anything that requires "accepting terms" and engaging in specified actions (reporting what you're producing) is NOT an open license, it's actually a contract and each time you decide to add a product you have an obligation to inform WotC of it... effectively signing a new contract each time (meaning they can change terms in between... this week it's $50k/750k, but next week to register a new product you must agree to the new terms of $40k/500k). The fact that they're calling it 1.1 already suggests a 1.2, 1.3, etc. will be forthcoming as they figure out the best way to squeeze.

They also pointed out that WotC intends to require online registration, i.e. it's a binding contract they can legally enforce if you fail to comply with their reporting and royalty requirements.

Similarly, the requirements being on revenue vs. profits means Hasbro is looking to base their fee structure on Gross rather than Net. You brought in $60k in sales, but spent $59k on production... you have to report it. Similarly, the royalties (the threshold for which is certain to be lowered over time) are on revenue... 10% of 750k is $75k... and if you spent $675k on bringing it to market, you own your entire net to Hasbro.

Of similar concern is that this contract requires a producer to include a "Creator Product badge" on any work and the conditions for those can be completely different from the OGL's requirements. For example, the Creator Product badge required for DM's Guild works requires you to surrender all rights to your work to WotC.

Would the OGL-associated Creator Product badge have the same requirements? Not necessarily, but it's Hasbro so I wouldn't put it past them. The fact they're already announcing explanatory videos, FAQs and a registration web portal along with "help available to creators to navigate the new process" suggests it's not intended to be anything like a genuine OGL and is instead binding contract they're mislabeling to diffuse criticism until various content creators are locked in.

My observation; if you're a content creator, don't walk away from DnDone... Run.

If someone is going to release content; sidestep the 1.1 Fiasco, and fall back on the 3.X or 5.0 compatible opportunities.  They are, and will still be available.  Don't sign up and step into the new 1.1 bear trap.

It seems to me that WotC are just repeating the errors of TSR. But we will see.

Quote from: squirewaldo on December 23, 2022, 10:52:25 AM
It seems to me that WotC are just repeating the errors of TSR. But we will see.

TSR never even remotely went this far off the deep end.

That was "you post it online - we own it" Palladium.
And "You work for us - we own everything you create, even at your home" White Wolf and Games Workshop.

Quote from: Omega on December 23, 2022, 09:30:28 PM

Quote from: squirewaldo on December 23, 2022, 10:52:25 AM
It seems to me that WotC are just repeating the errors of TSR. But we will see.

TSR never even remotely went this far off the deep end.

I'm not sure how to compare. TSR never came even close to anything remotely open license. Related behavior is how TSR sued Mayfair Games, New Infinities, GDW, and others for trying to publish similar or compatible material -- as well as many cease and desist notices that they sent out over the Internet at people creating material online.

Related video from an actual lawyer raising a lot of similar concerns;

https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=HgQ48eOsUC4

Some takeaways from it and the comments are;

A) if the DM's Guild is anything to go by "half" is what WotC considers fair for a royalty split from 3rd parties.

B) the fact they're talking to 3rd parties under NDAs and have had to put out this statement means they're aware of the pushback against what looks like is trying to do the 4e GSL under cover. That means now is absolutely the time to keep making noise to make it clear their efforts to lock down on things will hurt their bottom line.

C) the "creator product badges" are where they're likely going to be most "anti-OGL" by essentially saying "the OGL is still open" but then making the requirements for the badges to comply with the OGL1.1 extremely restrictive and onerous (ex. the current DM's Guild badge requires half the sales revenue and surrendering your rights to the material you created).

D) the reason for reporting what you're creating is independent of revenue reporting and indicates that WotC intends to restrict approval (likely through badge access) to only "approved content."

E) the "separate deal for non-static digital material" is likely to poison pill any alternate VTT while still allowing WotC to feign being reasonable... i.e. "we tried to reach an agreement with Foundry, but they wouldn't compromise with us and are locking their customers out of our content because of their greed."

F) "Folk vs. Official" will be a much more important divide than OSR vs. New School in terms of opposing WotC power grab.

I would expand upon this further by speculating on the following:

1. Not only does WOTC want to better control the third-party space, and force people to pay royalties, licensing fees, etc., they also want to create a "walled-garden" around their product using the new digital tool-set and "immersive virtual experience" (aka video game).
2. This walled-garden will not simply be a place people need to pay to enter, but a closely monitored digital world. Live game sessions with be monitored in real-time, or there will be some custodial control of the entire affair. If someone says something wrong, types something wrong, or plays in a way that is "unacceptable" to the people at WOTC, they will be banned from the platform. Not only will they be prevented from entering the digital world, their DCI card/membership will be suspended. Data-gathering and digital analytics will tie player's real names and identities to their online presence and DCI membership. You will have a literal D&D "social credit score"
3. The "revised" edition of 5e will be bat-shi* crazy --if we think things are loony now, just wait until this comes out. WOTC has an entire section on their website devoted to "Diversity and Inclusion", and vows to "do more"

I was at a seminar at a convention recently, and a member of the WOTC team (a woman) was saying how the company needed to "erase the cancer of whiteness from the hobby"

But beside the obvious reasons, why would WOTC be doing this?

Simple: there are tens of millions of potential D&D players in China. If WOTC is going to get those players into their digital world (and reap huge profits), they need to create a walled-garden that can be accessed by certain "officials" to make sure users aren't using the platform to spread anti-government sentiment. Piss off the CCP and get banned

But this is a corporation committing suicide--they are right  on the edge of alienating most of their players, pissing everyone off, and forcing people out of the hobby. There is only so much people will take before moving to other games--and they already are. Which ones?

Free League. This company has produced a rules-lite, intuitive system and some amazing game worlds. I have been to a bunch of conventions in the last couple of years, and their events immediately sell-out, with people lining up to play things like Forbidden Lands, Vaesen, Aliens, and Blade Runner. Both the system and game worlds reach a wide audience (girls like games that don't require a 800 page ruleset and spreadsheets), and the production values are some of the best in the industry. I predict that Free League is going to take a whole lot of market share away from WOTC in the TTRPG space in the next 2-3 years.

Now that is *if* Free League doesn't screw up and get ideological / political. The makes of Mork Borg have already done some stupid shi*. So we will see

Here come all the "I'm not a socialist I just play one on message boards when it's about a capitalist RPG company doing ordinary capitalist things" people.

Which, in this case, includes Pundit. Whose position is much more towards the socialist/marxist end of the spectrum than it would be about a non-RPG topic. Corporation does things to make more money should not be a "money-grab = bad!" position for an actual capitalist.

But the whole anti-marxist thing was always for show.

WOTC will either make products and services people want to spend money on and will make more money, or they will not and will fail. That's ordinary capitalism.

If they make a VTT people want and like, people will buy it and if not they won't and it will fail to their competition.

If they make a rules system so popular and modable that other companies want to use and expand on and sell products from and report their income on and pay a royalty if it gets big then they will. If it's not to their liking enough those companies will instead write their own rules system or use a cheaper competing rules system.

This is all ordinary capitalism and not a "money-grab." The purpose of a corporation is to make money. The purpose of a public company like Hasbro is to make money for their shareholders. This is the whole point and anyone bashing it all as a "moneygrab" is a socialist at heart who has just been hiding their socialism because it was about topics that didn't impact their interests. The moment it's something THEY like and use suddenly the socialism/marxist comes out and it's wankery about evil corporations trying to be "greedy" and "grab" people's money like it's friggen Scrooge McDuck.

Quote from: Mistwell on December 24, 2022, 01:05:10 PM
Here come all the "I'm not a socialist I just play one on message boards when it's about a capitalist RPG company doing ordinary capitalist things" people.

Which, in this case, includes Pundit. Whose position is much more towards the socialist/marxist end of the spectrum than it would be about a non-RPG topic. Corporation does things to make more money should not be a "money-grab = bad!" position for an actual capitalist.

But the whole anti-marxist thing was always for show.

What are you reading??? This post and the comments are not about pro- or anti-capitalism. Capitalism isn't about supporting corporations. Capitalism is about allowing everyone to be free to compete. Bad businesses fail, good ones take their place. When governments start picking winners and losers that is not capitalism. When companies form cartels to control the market that is not capitalism. Criticizing bad or stupid companies is not anti-capitalist, though it can be part of that if you are so inclined.

You are like the guy with a hammer and everything is a nail... tedious.

Quote from: squirewaldo on December 24, 2022, 01:14:02 PM

Quote from: Mistwell on December 24, 2022, 01:05:10 PM
Here come all the "I'm not a socialist I just play one on message boards when it's about a capitalist RPG company doing ordinary capitalist things" people.

Which, in this case, includes Pundit. Whose position is much more towards the socialist/marxist end of the spectrum than it would be about a non-RPG topic. Corporation does things to make more money should not be a "money-grab = bad!" position for an actual capitalist.

But the whole anti-marxist thing was always for show.

What are you reading??? This post and the comments are not about pro- or anti-capitalism. Capitalism isn't about supporting corporations. Capitalism is about allowing everyone to be free to compete. Bad businesses fail, good ones take their place. When governments start picking winners and losers that is not capitalism. When companies form cartels to control the market that is not capitalism. Criticizing bad or stupid companies is not anti-capitalist, though it can be part of that if you are so inclined.

You are like the guy with a hammer and everything is a nail... tedious.

Hasbro wants to make more money from a brand they own which isn't making nearly as much money per player as a lesser known brand of theirs and this makes them want to modify their approach. Pundit, and others here, are calling that a "moneygrab" which is exactly what socialists call any corporation trying to ordinarily make more money in the normal course of capitalism. It implies there is something unethical about a company trying to make more money from their customers. That's the "grab" part of "moneygrab."

Quote from: Mistwell on December 24, 2022, 01:05:10 PM
Here come all the "I'm not a socialist I just play one on message boards when it's about a capitalist RPG company doing ordinary capitalist things" people.

Which, in this case, includes Pundit. Whose position is much more towards the socialist/marxist end of the spectrum than it would be about a non-RPG topic. Corporation does things to make more money should not be a "money-grab = bad!" position for an actual capitalist.

But the whole anti-marxist thing was always for show.

WOTC will either make products and services people want to spend money on and will make more money, or they will not and will fail. That's ordinary capitalism.

If they make a VTT people want and like, people will buy it and if not they won't and it will fail to their competition.

If they make a rules system so popular and modable that other companies want to use and expand on and sell products from and report their income on and pay a royalty if it gets big then they will. If it's not to their liking enough those companies will instead write their own rules system or use a cheaper competing rules system.

This is all ordinary capitalism and not a "money-grab." The purpose of a corporation is to make money. The purpose of a public company like Hasbro is to make money for their shareholders. This is the whole point and anyone bashing it all as a "moneygrab" is a socialist at heart who has just been hiding their socialism because it was about topics that didn't impact their interests. The moment it's something THEY like and use suddenly the socialism/marxist comes out and it's wankery about evil corporations trying to be "greedy" and "grab" people's money like it's friggen Scrooge McDuck.

and where did Pundit, or anyone else, say WOTC couldn't do what they wanted with their IP, or seek maximum profit?

Quote from: MerrillWeathermay on December 24, 2022, 01:26:28 PM

Quote from: Mistwell on December 24, 2022, 01:05:10 PM
Here come all the "I'm not a socialist I just play one on message boards when it's about a capitalist RPG company doing ordinary capitalist things" people.

Which, in this case, includes Pundit. Whose position is much more towards the socialist/marxist end of the spectrum than it would be about a non-RPG topic. Corporation does things to make more money should not be a "money-grab = bad!" position for an actual capitalist.

But the whole anti-marxist thing was always for show.

WOTC will either make products and services people want to spend money on and will make more money, or they will not and will fail. That's ordinary capitalism.

If they make a VTT people want and like, people will buy it and if not they won't and it will fail to their competition.

If they make a rules system so popular and modable that other companies want to use and expand on and sell products from and report their income on and pay a royalty if it gets big then they will. If it's not to their liking enough those companies will instead write their own rules system or use a cheaper competing rules system.

This is all ordinary capitalism and not a "money-grab." The purpose of a corporation is to make money. The purpose of a public company like Hasbro is to make money for their shareholders. This is the whole point and anyone bashing it all as a "moneygrab" is a socialist at heart who has just been hiding their socialism because it was about topics that didn't impact their interests. The moment it's something THEY like and use suddenly the socialism/marxist comes out and it's wankery about evil corporations trying to be "greedy" and "grab" people's money like it's friggen Scrooge McDuck.

and where did Pundit, or anyone else, say WOTC couldn't do what they wanted with their IP, or seek maximum profit?

Oh no he's not saying they "can't" do it. He's implying it's "unethical" to do it. That's the "grab" part.

Quote from: Mistwell on December 24, 2022, 01:28:21 PM

Quote from: MerrillWeathermay on December 24, 2022, 01:26:28 PM

Quote from: Mistwell on December 24, 2022, 01:05:10 PM
Here come all the "I'm not a socialist I just play one on message boards when it's about a capitalist RPG company doing ordinary capitalist things" people.

Which, in this case, includes Pundit. Whose position is much more towards the socialist/marxist end of the spectrum than it would be about a non-RPG topic. Corporation does things to make more money should not be a "money-grab = bad!" position for an actual capitalist.

But the whole anti-marxist thing was always for show.

WOTC will either make products and services people want to spend money on and will make more money, or they will not and will fail. That's ordinary capitalism.

If they make a VTT people want and like, people will buy it and if not they won't and it will fail to their competition.

If they make a rules system so popular and modable that other companies want to use and expand on and sell products from and report their income on and pay a royalty if it gets big then they will. If it's not to their liking enough those companies will instead write their own rules system or use a cheaper competing rules system.

This is all ordinary capitalism and not a "money-grab." The purpose of a corporation is to make money. The purpose of a public company like Hasbro is to make money for their shareholders. This is the whole point and anyone bashing it all as a "moneygrab" is a socialist at heart who has just been hiding their socialism because it was about topics that didn't impact their interests. The moment it's something THEY like and use suddenly the socialism/marxist comes out and it's wankery about evil corporations trying to be "greedy" and "grab" people's money like it's friggen Scrooge McDuck.

and where did Pundit, or anyone else, say WOTC couldn't do what they wanted with their IP, or seek maximum profit?

Oh no he's not saying they "can't" do it. He's implying it's "unethical" to do it. That's the "grab" part.

maybe, but did you watch the video? It sounds like he is more focused on the control that WOTC seeks to exercise over third-party creators and individuals who play the game. That was certainly the point of my post

even back in the early 80s, TSR was pretty nasty and litigious towards people it viewed "infringed on their copyrights". This goes way beyond that

this whole strategy by WOTC might work, and lead to record revenues (especially if they crack the Chinese market, which I suspect is one of the primary objectives) but I think it is going to fail. Their product is largely directed towards middle-aged, left-leaning men (despite their claims of a diverse audience). The quality of their product has gone down considerably, especially when compared to offerings from other companies like Free League, Studio Agate, and Cubicle 7, and the huge corporate structure and mandates handcuff them from being innovative or even friendly towards their customers. Their public-relations efforts are some of the worst I've seen from any large company (hiring an ex-porn star to act as a brand ambassador, apologizing for the perceived racism in their own products, getting into public feuds with their employees, etc.)

my son is in high school, and no one in his school plays D&D. They think it is woke boomer bullshi*.

but we will see how this all pans out

Quote from: Mistwell on December 24, 2022, 01:05:10 PM
Here come all the "I'm not a socialist I just play one on message boards when it's about a capitalist RPG company doing ordinary capitalist things" people.

Which, in this case, includes Pundit. Whose position is much more towards the socialist/marxist end of the spectrum than it would be about a non-RPG topic. Corporation does things to make more money should not be a "money-grab = bad!" position for an actual capitalist.

But the whole anti-marxist thing was always for show.

WOTC will either make products and services people want to spend money on and will make more money, or they will not and will fail. That's ordinary capitalism.

If they make a VTT people want and like, people will buy it and if not they won't and it will fail to their competition.

If they make a rules system so popular and modable that other companies want to use and expand on and sell products from and report their income on and pay a royalty if it gets big then they will. If it's not to their liking enough those companies will instead write their own rules system or use a cheaper competing rules system.

This is all ordinary capitalism and not a "money-grab." The purpose of a corporation is to make money. The purpose of a public company like Hasbro is to make money for their shareholders. This is the whole point and anyone bashing it all as a "moneygrab" is a socialist at heart who has just been hiding their socialism because it was about topics that didn't impact their interests. The moment it's something THEY like and use suddenly the socialism/marxist comes out and it's wankery about evil corporations trying to be "greedy" and "grab" people's money like it's friggen Scrooge McDuck.

This position is insane.

"I hate the new Rings of Power, they just want to make money with no respect for the IP", "Well, that's capitalism, you can't complain!"

"DMs Guild cuts are too high, I prefer using the OGL 1.0", "what would you expect! The poor sobs just want to make money! Are you a Marxist?".

There is no rule in capitalism prohibiting people to criticize companies. Companies are not sacred.

Maybe you can't criticize the CCP but at least we can still badmouth Hasbro and even Facebook or Google (at least for now...).

(as an aside, I think IP is anti-capitalist by nature, but your point sounds absurd even if I thought IP to be the most capitalist thing ever)