D&D 5E Will 3PP be able to produce material for 5e under the OGL?

[Herremann the Wise]

Firstly, please excuse my possible misunderstanding of the OGL fine print.
Secondly, please excuse my lack of knowledge regarding 5E aside from info on this site and others.

Now let's say Wizards produces 5e which from how it initially seems is going to have many of the standard D&D concepts (Ability Scores, Hit Points and so on) covered by the OGL. Does this mean that a third party publisher can stretch and adapt the OGL to cover pretty much any 5E wizards comes up with to produce supplements, material or perhaps even an effective "reprinting" of the new rules?

If the answer is a "yes" (and as I said, I don't know enough to answer that), does this possibly mean that Wizards knowing this are going to be best to produce a more open license than the GSL and the debacle it caused? Is the horse out of the gate regardless of what WotC do? What could WotC do to shut such efforts down?

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Kzach]

This is really a question that only WotC can answer. I am hopeful, however, that the answer is yes and not only yes but also some assurance that future editions won't kill off the 3PP industry like 4e did.

 

[Jeff Carlsen]

The OGL is simply a license that allows reprinting of material labeled as Open Game Content and released under the OGL. Most of the third edition rules were released in the System Reference Document under the OGL, and so those specific documents are out there forever. That's why Paizo was able to copy text directly from them.

5E would also have to release it's rules under the OGL for them to be copied directly. We do not yet know what their licensing plans are.

That said, mechanics themselves are not protected by copyright, only the descriptions of them. Theoretically, if someone wanted to completely rewrite descriptions for identical mechanics, they could.

As for producing material for 5E goes, there's almost certainly going to be some form of license. Even if there isn't, there's nothing stopping a company from released compatible content, so long as they don't copy any content out of copyrighted materials. Writing up a stat block of a new monster doesn't violate copyright laws.

 

[MichaelSomething]

Won't the real question to consider be, "would people buy 3PP if it doesn't mesh with whatever digital tools WOTC provides?"

 

[Sunseeker]

It's unlikely that direct copies of rules as was done for Pathfinder will happen with 5e. I doubt Wizards has any interest in allowing such direct competition with a product that they are struggling to keep Hasbro from canning.

However, there's absolutely nothing stopping 3pp from creating 5e compatible materials. Even if nothing in 5e is covered under the OGL aside from basic mechanics, all that means is the 3pp's would have to come up with their own descriptions and unique powers. Neither of which I have a problem with, it's the only reason I buy 3PP material, 'cause if you're not creative, what's the point?

But really, TTRPGs are a splintered and weak market, and that is likely doing more to prevent 3PPs from producing content than anything WOTC is doing.

 

[Yora]

"We'll have more information on the GSL as it relates to the next edition in the near future. Personally, I have a copy of 'The Cathedral & the Bazaar' on the shelf at work From my days as a programmer and as a freelance RPG designer, the bulk of my work involved open platforms which did a lot for a game that relies so much on individual creativity." - Mike Mearls.
"And although of course no one can possibly speak with actual authority of the future on this topic, I can assure you that the OGL issues that plagued 4th Edition's release are lessons that did not go unheeded." - Bruce Cordell.
"I think that an open license speaks to how people think about D&D, and in some ways it is a big part of the game’s culture. We want people to feel like we’re making an effort to include everything that they love about the game, and we’re exploring options for third party publishers." - Mike Mearls.

And again, Paizo only became competition when WotC decided to drop 3rd Edition and effectively not allowing other companies to support 4th Edition. Yes, you could support 4th Edition, but the licence was so restrictive that you would have to be really stupid to accept it.
I think we can expect something fairly open again this time. If they play the "we don't allow anyone to participate" game again, the D&D brand is pretty much done for.

Won't the real question to consider be, "would people buy 3PP if it doesn't mesh with whatever digital tools WOTC provides?"

Since I don't know anyone who uses any digitial tools by WotC, I don't think that actually matters much.

 

[variant]

Wizards went against the wants and demands of the RPG player base and they suffered for it. Paizo filled the gap simply because Wizards screwed up so badly.

 

[trancejeremy]

And again, Paizo only became competition when WotC decided to drop 3rd Edition and effectively not allowing other companies to support 4th Edition. Yes, you could support 4th Edition, but the licence was so restrictive that you would have to be really stupid to accept it.
I think we can expect something fairly open again this time. If they play the "we don't allow anyone to participate" game again, the D&D brand is pretty much done for.

Since I don't know anyone who uses any digitial tools by WotC, I don't think that actually matters much.

That's debatable. I personally think Pathfinder was so successful simply because it was basically D&D 3.75 and not a 4th edition that people had to completely re-learn, as well as discard all their 3.x books.

Beyond that, Paizo wins customers because their products are just so high quality. If Pathfinder was based on The Spawn of Fashan and not 3e, they'd probably still have made a big dent in WOTC's sales of 4e, simply because WOTC puts out a lot of mediocre products (at least they did in the 3e era, and I have no reason to believe they changed).

Paizo is like TV shows on cable (like the Sopranos or the Shield or a host of others) compared to TV shows on network TV - just a big leap in quality and maturity.

 

[delericho]

Now let's say Wizards produces 5e which from how it initially seems is going to have many of the standard D&D concepts (Ability Scores, Hit Points and so on) covered by the OGL. Does this mean that a third party publisher can stretch and adapt the OGL to cover pretty much any 5E wizards comes up with to produce supplements, material or perhaps even an effective "reprinting" of the new rules?

It will almost certainly be possible to produce support material (adventures, settings, etc) under the OGL, just as it was for 4e. It might even be possible to do a clone of the game under OGL (which I believe is possible for 4e), but would require a much higher standard of oversight, because if you copy their active game without explicit permission, and you get something wrong, they'll have you for breakfast.

If the answer is a "yes" (and as I said, I don't know enough to answer that), does this possibly mean that Wizards knowing this are going to be best to produce a more open license than the GSL and the debacle it caused? Is the horse out of the gate regardless of what WotC do? What could WotC do to shut such efforts down?

It really depends what WotC want to do.

If they want 5e to succeed, then I'm convinced they'll need to adopt the OGL (or an equivalently open license).

If they're serious about "uniting the editions", they'll certainly have to go this route - without it, it's all just words.

On the other hand, if their goal is to kill 3rd party support, then I would suggest they should pay lip-service to the OGL, but then provide a very appealing DDI offering, and refuse to allow anyone else to expand or interface to it. That will mean that people can support the game... but those hard-core customers who might buy 3pp will probably not be interested because they'll take the DDI route instead.

Finally...

Won't the real question to consider be, "would people buy 3PP if it doesn't mesh with whatever digital tools WOTC provides?"

If WotC really want a Pathfinder-killer, their best approach may well be to open 5e using the OGL and provide a mechanism for people to make their creations available on the DDI. Allow fans (and indeed companies) to create their own powers/items/monsters/whatever on DDI, and open these for the use of others. They might even arrange some sort of micro-payment model for people to generate money out of it (an app store, essentially).

Then, as time goes on, they can adopt the best/most popular elements as being "official" (they could even write the ability to do this into the Conditions of Use), and thus take them forward into some future 6e. In effect, this crowd-sources the game, and would perhaps be an even better model than the "evolution through OGL" path that Ryan Dancey originally envisaged for the game.

Whether WotC/Hasbro have the mindset to even try something like that is questionable. Whether or not it would succeed (or is anything more than my mad ramblings) is an even bigger question. But it would be glorious to see them try.

 

[Yora]

Beyond that, Paizo wins customers because their products are just so high quality. If Pathfinder was based on The Spawn of Fashan and not 3e, they'd probably still have made a big dent in WOTC's sales of 4e, simply because WOTC puts out a lot of mediocre products (at least they did in the 3e era, and I have no reason to believe they changed).

In which case the OGL had even less to do with WotC losing market leadership.

It will almost certainly be possible to produce support material (adventures, settings, etc) under the OGL, just as it was for 4e. It might even be possible to do a clone of the game under OGL (which I believe is possible for 4e), but would require a much higher standard of oversight, because if you copy their active game without explicit permission, and you get something wrong, they'll have you for breakfast.

That's the real issue here. It doesn't matter what you can and can't do. What matters is having legal security and knowing what you can do without getting into trouble. I wouldn't want to try my luck against Hasbros lawyers, so I won't touch anything unless I have a written official permission to do so.