Wizards Closing the Source

4th & Dragon : Dungeons and Dragons...and stuff

Hello there, stranger. Stay and sit a while.

You should Login or Register

A really neat article talking about the open-source database software, MySQL, talks at length about Wizards closing the “source” of the OGL.

The GSL license has not yet been made public, but there are rumors, speculations, and concerns, fueled by online posts made by the brand manager and licensing manager for Dungeons and Dragons, and relayed by the lead writer of third-party publisher Necromancer Games that the GSL will contain a “poison pill” clause – that is, in order to use the GSL, a game company must not publish anything under the OGL.

This would be like Microsoft saying that developers for Windows Vista are forbidden from publishing anything under the GNU public license. And the upshot is now that developers have to choose between not developing games with the improved system or destroying their back-catalogs.

Also, some great comments direct from Necromancer Games about this development over at ENWorld.

I believe, in fact, that it is even a bit more restrictive than people are seeing. It is not just that you cant mix the two licenses in one product. It is that if you use the GSL you cannot also use the OGL for 3E products.

In other words, publishers have to decide if they want to stay 3E or if they want to come along for the 4E ride.

Wizards also released a statement on their website about the new licensing system as well.

Wizards of the Coast is pleased to announce that third-party publishers will be allowed to publish products compatible with the Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition game system under the new Dungeons & Dragons 4E Game System License (D&D 4E GSL). This royalty-free license will replace the former d20 System Trademark License (STL), and will have a System Reference Document (SRD) available for referencing permissible content.

We Recommend

Good thing "add to cart" is an at-will action

4th Edition Core Rulebook Gift Set
Why buy them separately when you can get all three core rulebooks in one package!

Dungeon Delve
Hopefully the adventure itself will show more inspiration than the title suggests.

Players Handbook 2
Presumably more classes, races, and other goodies to extend 4e.

P2: Demon Queen’s Enclave
An adventure in the underdark where you can fight drow (pronounced like crow in my book).

Martial Power
The first 4th edition splat book. Cool.

Arcane Power
Here's those powers your wizard has been waiting for.

Monster Manual 2
More monsters = more fun, right?

Adventurers Vault 2
There is absolutely nothing wrong with more magic items!

Cameron

Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 01:37 PM

If true, I think they’re going to cut off their noses to spite their faces here. They’ve already got Paizo going against them and this kind of thing will only alienate the smaller publishers.

Ummm… Wow. A poison pill clause in the new GSL? This is the first I’ve heard of this. That would really suck if it turns out to be true. I’m not doubting the veracity of what people are reporting they have been told, but until the GSL is released publically, it is subject to change.

If it does contain a poison pill clause, I fully expect publishers like Piazo to suddenly have a much stronger leg to stand on. OGL publications designed to make the 3.5 rule set function more like 4e will suddenly be a much more marketable resource.

Why you might ask? Well, because the OGL cannot be closed in truth, only in effect. OGL released material is OGL material for life. That’s the way the OGL is written. WotC cannot revoke the OGL. The poison pill clause in the 4e GSL may have the effect of preventing companies using the 4e GSL from making OGL material but it can’t prevent the continued publication of OGL material altogether.

Indeed, as the computer industry has amply demonstrated, they can’t even prevent someone from publishing a OGL version of their proprietary products so long as IP’s aren’t violated. OpenOffice has all the same functionality of Microsoft Office, but is built using a totally different code base, thus preserving Microsoft’s IP. Piazo (or some other publisher) could take the 4e classes, see how it is that they function at the game table and then design classes based on the OGL rules that function in much the same way. In fact, if I were them, I’d start consulting with my legal team right away to see just how far they can push that possibility.

A poison pill clause in the 4e GSL can only be successful if the consumer public, en masse, switches to 4e and stops buying OGL materials. So long as people continue to buy OGL material, there will be companies that continue to produce it. Given the right circumstances, I could even see the OGL driving WotC back into the fold it created.

Of course, I fully expect WotC to fight that tooth and nail.

Kyle Watt

Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 04:55 PM

WotC is supposed to address a number of these issues with an FAQ. Perhaps confirming, perhaps refuting this stuff. It is supposed to be posted on their site and will probably hit the EN World newspage within the next few days.

Catfish_Man

Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 07:46 PM

I’ll wait and see what happens before I freak out about it, but if this is true I’ll rather regret preordering those books…

Thursday, April 24, 2008 at 07:56 PM

I just read through Scott Rouse and Linae Foster’s posts at ENWorld. They’ll update, as Kyle noted, in an FAQ soon. However, rereading their posts, it looks like the company’s won’t be prohibited from releasing both OGL and GSL products, but that they can’t release the same product under both OGL and GSL - it’s either compatible with Dungeons and Dragons (GSL) or is under the Open Gaming License.

It’s like Dungeon Crawl Classics vs Mutants and Masterminds. DCC are compatible with the d20 license. M&M is compatible with OGL. But you can’t use the d20 license with M&M - in the sense that M&M doesn’t follow d20 rules at all. DCC does use both d20 and OGL, but that’s because of how those licenses worked. I envision that DCC can be released under either OGL (meaning it doesn’t follow 4E rules and is envisioned for use with a different system, like Pathfinder) or GSL (meaning you can drop it right into D&D). But you won’t be able to release the same product (with appropriate modifications for system differences) under both.

Not a lawyer, so I can’t be sure, but that’s how I take it.

tikkchik fen tikktikk

Friday, April 25, 2008 at 06:33 AM

I’m not a publisher, so I’m going to wait until the new licenses are released for public view before I freak out.

But if this is even a little bit true, WotC will destroy all the good will they created during v3.x.

The obvious problem is there is no advocate on the order of Ryan Dancy inside WotC arguing for continued openness.

That they have taken so long to publically release even a preview of the license is somewhat encouraging. It does suggest there is significant struggle both inside WotC and between WotC and those publishers “lucky” enough to have seen a preview.

Friday, April 25, 2008 at 06:35 AM

I also have to agree with everyone saying this is great news for Pathfinder RPG, should it be true.

Login to Post a Comment

Alas, the gods have forsaken us and left us open to the attacks of the evil, plane-jumping spam demons. You’ll need to login before you can post. If you don’t have an account you will need to create one. Its quick and painless, like Corvalo the bard. You’ll also gain access to our great Forums and be able to add one of those nifty avatar thingies.

4th & Dragon : Dungeons and Dragons...and stuff

Hello there, stranger. Stay and sit a while.

You should Login or Register