D&D OGL 1.1 and the future of Solasta

https://gizmodo.com/dnd-wizards-of-the-coast-ogl-1-1-open-gaming-license-1849950634

Based on this revelation I wonder if we will get any more content for Solasta? I don't see how it will be financially viable for TA to keep working on content based on OGL 1.0 if that can be yanked from them at any moment. Everything TA have spent so much resources on creating thus far with Solasta can potentially be wiped out by WotC in a completely unilateral and capricious way. :(

This is why no one in the global gaming industry or community should have anything more to do with WotC. They are untrustworthy, malicious, greedy, and awful.

While I am uneasy with their current proposal [EDIT: not only is it not confirmed, I think it is fake], I have to make the more fair and more objective statement about reality: WotR is trying to return to the traditional copyright / commercial logic used by pretty much all companies.  The more free concepts created for D&D 3.5 and D&D 5e are rare and exceptional.  Does Tactical Adventures and Larian Studios make their creative content accessible with an equivalent OGL?  No.  Boycotting WotC for this would be fair only if we boycott 100% every other copyrighted product in gaming. 

Pathfinder 2 though does have its own form of OGL, where you can create new content for PF2 without paying Paizo (various limitations and rules to follow, but no cost). 

Yes, you are correct, that a "Solasta 2" game, using a traditional copyright, would require a negotiated license from WotC. 

That said, I support OGL, and especially fair use, and I trust WotC will have to change their proposal, and backtrack.  They are going too far, beyond the OGL thing, when they suggest streamers of 5e sessions should pay a cut if they make over 50K profit. 

I would be surprised if this doesn't end up with a backtrack of some kind, since it is a bit of a PR problem that will hurt the brand.

Funnily enough, it could lead to a competitor taking over as the lead in parts of the market. IIRC, Pathfinder sold more during the less than well received 4e.

If... the document is even real, which I greatly doubt it is. 

The bit that says 20 to 25% of qualified revenue is out of whack and tells me this so-called leak is most probably fake or modified.  

And the notion that streamers like CR might have to pay a cut is also silly... and probably would not stand in a court of law. 

That said, Hasbro investors and commercial fools do want to make more money off the super popular 5e, but I don't think they will butcher the OGL that way for past 5e rules, but OneD&D will most probably have a different license.  A good chunk of 5e rules is already using the usual commercial copyright, so not much change for that aspect.  As for the OGL for D&D 3 used by Pathfinder, I doubt WotC/Hasbro can just screw over what was formerly negotiated and there is not much profit to be gained from that I think (it would only be bad PR). 

Addendum : As it stands, it seems to me that independent books and campaigns for 5e are not really a huge market, and would not be affected even under the supposed or fake license, but the online services like D&D Beyond can generate much more profit and is now under WotC.  It is confirmed that Hasbro hopes D&D Beyond can offer services that players (not just DMs) are willing to pay for.  Hasbro might attempt to screw over other services presented as being for D&D 5e and ask for a cut if a company makes a lot of profit using 5e (copyrights usually ask a small amount per sale, not the crazy 25% named in the fake license). 

If... the document is even real, which I greatly doubt it is. 

The bit that says 20 to 25% of qualified revenue is out of whack and tells me this so-called leak is most probably fake or modified.  

And the notion that streamers like CR might have to pay a cut is also silly... and probably would not stand in a court of law. 

That said, Hasbro investors and commercial fools do want to make more money off the super popular 5e, but I don't think they will butcher the OGL that way for past 5e rules, but OneD&D will most probably have a different license.  A good chunk of 5e rules is already using the usual commercial copyright, so not much change for that aspect.  As for the OGL for D&D 3 used by Pathfinder, I doubt WotC/Hasbro can just screw over what was formerly negotiated and there is not much profit to be gained from that I think (it would only be bad PR). 

Addendum : As it stands, it seems to me that independent books and campaigns for 5e are not really a huge market, and would not be affected even under the supposed or fake license, but the online services like D&D Beyond can generate much more profit and is now under WotC.  It is confirmed that Hasbro hopes D&D Beyond can offer services that players (not just DMs) are willing to pay for.  Hasbro might attempt to screw over other services presented as being for D&D 5e and ask for a cut if a company makes a lot of profit using 5e (copyrights usually ask a small amount per sale, not the crazy 25% named in the fake license). 

Wow. You are very trusting of WotC and Hasbro even in the face of everything they've tried to pull for years and years in the past.

I am very sure the document is real. However, it is a leaked document and not the official final word from WotC. So, given the firestorm the leaked document has unleashed, they may decide to revise the document significantly before it is made official. But that won't make this leaked version "false" in any way. It still means this is what they initially intended, but then backtracked when they faced a huge PR disaster.

Wow. You are very trusting of WotC and Hasbro even in the face of everything they've tried to pull for years and years in the past.

I am very sure the document is real. However, it is a leaked document and not the official final word from WotC. So, given the firestorm the leaked document has unleashed, they may decide to revise the document significantly before it is made official. But that won't make this leaked version "false" in any way. It still means this is what they initially intended, but then backtracked when they faced a huge PR disaster.

Not really : it is a fact that Hasbro investors and other fools want to make more money off 5e, and I don't doubt OneD&D is cooking up a new license, etc.  I though feel the leaked document contains bullshit: the 20 to 25% bit off revenue is silly out of norm and the notion of asking streamers to pay is also out of norm and would probably be illegal.  But, yes, I do trust WotC knows their shit and will contest stupid decisions, though Hasbro might force them in an odd path. 

"I though feel the leaked document contains bullshit: the 20 to 25% bit off revenue is silly out of norm and the notion of asking streamers to pay is also out of norm and would probably be illegal."

No, and no.

First point: 

many intermediate platforms that serve to advertize third-party products or provide them "marketing facilitators" ask around 30% (Valve / Epic / Apple etc). I'm pretty sure Disney also contracts licenses to use Star Wars and the like's trademarks for *at strict minimum 20%*, because they know they can allow it.

Agressive tarifications (to not call them rip-offs) are actually pretty common, it's simply a matter of a) respective weight in negociation and b) market perspectives. 

As long as the final price with cut included is still viable to make profit, and both know it with arguments to back it up, >20% share can and will be negociated / forced.

Second point

As long as you are using graphics, sounds, or even characters / recognizible universe elements that are trademarked to create your own content, unless it's an extremely minor part or you can manage to enter the restrictively defined use-case of "legal exceptions", you NEED license to use legally because you're using someone else's work to create derivative work.

Just, usually nobody gives a fuck because it's vastly too much of a hassle to chase after random streamers for the expected benefit. But that's a tolerance, nothing more.

Remember how Youtube was left alone for years although it was brimming with illegal copies of movies / audio clip / whatever and then *in the thirty days after Google announced buying it all tradeholders "woke up" by miracle, drawed guns and started firing lawsuits like an artillery range.

Remember how Nintendo shut down like DCA (and continues to do so) many streamers or amateur developers who create derivative content just because they didn't like how it reflected on their brands.

You have all legitimacy in the world to find this legal system at best ill-suited for 21th century of digital transmission and exploitation, at worst a completely obsolete and harming paradigm. But that's still what it is. And nobody can change that before a long, long time considering the immense lobbying power entites like Apple and Disney have.

The example using online platforms that offer services that require many employees, much hardware and resources, has nothing to do with copyright royalties.  They do not compare at all.  It is utterly unrelated. 

Do you think Larian Studios, for BG3, has a license that states they will give "20% of revenue" ?  That notion of out of whack. 

Also, stuff people create for 5e (campaigns, new rules) do not belong to WotC and the whole shit storm is a gross exaggeration, and I maintain the supposed leaked document contains much noob bullshit. 

The example using online platforms that offer services that require many employees, much hardware and resources, has nothing to do with copyright royalties.  They do not compare at all.  It is utterly unrelated. 

Do you think Larian Studios, for BG3, has a license that states they will give "20% of revenue" ?  That notion of out of whack. 

Also, stuff people create for 5e (campaigns, new rules) do not belong to WotC and the whole shit storm is a gross exaggeration, and I maintain the supposed leaked document contains much noob bullshit. 

I totally agree with you, WotC better clear up this shit storm real quick if they don't want to have the most epic RPG spinoffs in any field in over 20 years.

The example using online platforms that offer services that require many employees, much hardware and resources, has nothing to do with copyright royalties.  They do not compare at all.  It is utterly unrelated. 

It is related. In the sense that one entity is grabbing everyone else's balls. 

For online platforms, they keep their third-party providers captive because software publishers would lose a massive market share if not access to those platforms (except when you're a multibillion company like Microsoft).

For WoTC, they (can) keep their third-party providers captive because of the massive surexposition of D&d in general public market compared to 99% other systems that only a very small minority of people know.

Do you think Larian Studios, for BG3, has a license that states they will give "20% of revenue" ?  That notion of out of whack. 

No, but simply because WoTC didn't have that full agressivity zero stop policy YET. Don't forget that game takes years to develop, and contracts months at least to negociate before that. 

BG3 has been publicly presented during summer 2019, game was already in a great enough state for a demo. Development probably started around start, mid 2018 at best depending on how much people Larian could make work in parallel. And I really doubt Larian would have the financial solidity to start developing a project without having secured the copyrights, meaning an optimistic appreciation of negociation delay would put us at mid-2017. 

Now link that to the fact that 2019 was the year when WoTC franchise brought more net income than other branches of Hasbro. Add to that the usual "decision inertia" that spans from months in small companies to years into bigger ones... And we're there. There has definitely been a revolutionary shift in commercial strategy. Before, WoTc was "secondary source of revenue". Now it's "primary". So since financials are the one controlling, and they are a special brew of stupidity and cupidity that always go for the short-term all-in even if leaving burnt land afterwards, they started removing all brakes to pump a maximum of profit in a minimum of time.

Also, stuff people create for 5e (campaigns, new rules) do not belong to WotC and the whole shit storm is a gross exaggeration, and I maintain the supposed leaked document contains much noob bullshit. 

Absolutely not. This is a classic PR move in business and politics: "publish something on the masquerade of it being a leak if people complain, if nobody reacts, make it legal, if people cry, adjust until proportion of cryouts is small enough not to disturb profit anymore".

Does Solasta even use the OGL 1.0a?  They did some minor cross promotion with WoTC when the game was first announced.  I thought they used a custom license agreement that is just very limited in scope.

Does Solasta even use the OGL 1.0a?  They did some minor cross promotion with WoTC when the game was first announced.  I thought they used a custom license agreement that is just very limited in scope.

Pretty sure the OGL does not cover video games at all, so I doubt it. I think they have a separate agreement regarding use of the SRD for their game, or so I seem to remember being talked about on one of their streams.

As this has developed, it really doesn't matter if the leaks have been real or not anymore. The backlash is certainly real, as is the moves done by their competitors. With the announcement of the ORC license by Paizo, they secured themselves a great deal of good PR at the cost of WotC and seemingly stronger relationships with other developers in the field.

Best case scenario, WotC and Hasbro messed up by not adressing falsehoods in a timely fashion. Worst case scenario, the leaks are real (or very close to real) and they think that they can somehow make up the losses with new users. Can they? Maybe, but they handed a major advantage to Paizo in terms of building a lasting consumer base. 

For those of you who didn't believe the leaked info:

https://www.theverge.com/2023/1/13/23554014/dungeons-and-dragons-dnd-open-gaming-license-announcement-wotc-hasbro

https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1428-a-working-conversation-about-the-open-game-license

https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1439-ogl-1-0a-creative-commons

https://gamerant.com/dungeons-dragons-wizards-of-the-coast-cancels-ogl-changes/

The final nail in the coffin of the proposed new OGL. Now WotC has gone even further and released practically everything in the PHB in the new 5.1 SRD Creative Commons License that can never be revoked. This should be a huge boon for TA to now be able to add a whole lot more base D&D material into Solasta!

https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1439-ogl-1-0a-creative-commons

https://gamerant.com/dungeons-dragons-wizards-of-the-coast-cancels-ogl-changes/

The final nail in the coffin of the proposed new OGL. Now WotC has gone even further and released practically everything in the PHB in the new 5.1 SRD Creative Commons License that can never be revoked. This should be a huge boon for TA to now be able to add a whole lot more base D&D material into Solasta!

Yes, as I wrote above, the Wotc is the worst enemy of the Wotc, it will now be very difficult for them to find the confidence of the players ... The most epic shit storm of the last 20 years. . at least ...