# DND OGL - Is anyone following this? Thoughts? **URL:** \ **Category:** The Game Room\ **Tags:** rpg-dnd-wargames\ **Created:** [January 8, 2023, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dnd-ogl-is-anyone-following-this-thoughts/977886 "2023-01-08T18:54:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 15
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2023, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dnd-ogl-is-anyone-following-this-thoughts/977886/281 "2023-01-26T21:37:12Z")
> [@Acsenray](#): > > - Fundamental flaw of this whole entire controversy: The rules of the game can’t be subject to exclusive rights under copyright law. Thus, no license is required in order to make products that are compatible with the rules, so long as they aren’t infringing any trademarks or copyrights. > - the OGL “kind of sucks” because “It mainly allowed you to use stuff you were already allowed to use.” > > Which has been my question throughout this thread: What does the original OGL allow you to do that you aren’t already legally entitled to do? > > I could be wrong, but it seems my answer is: Nothing. OGL 1.0 wasn’t doing _anything_ legally. Well, first of all, the old TSR was suing lots of people who used what are now common game terms, such as _Hit points’, saving throw_, etc. Games Workshop is _notorious f_or suing everyone, including fan artists. Sure, those lawsuits may not prevail, but most creators cant afford to fight them. But the OGL does a lot. For example- say the Fireball spell. Sure, without the OGL, you can have a spell that does a ball of fire. But with the OGL, you can use the exact 5e or whatever, description. You can use class nomenclature, etc, all of what is stuff you need, when designing a module that is compatible with 5e- not to mention you want to put “5th edition compatible” on your product so it will sell. Because frankly, new systems _don’t sell._ People want to get stuff compatible to a game most people play- which sure could include GURPs, etc, but a “5th edition compatible” logo will mean your product will sell a lot more. _Maybe_ you can put that on your product, but then there’s all the other stuff to make it really compatible. > [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > My understanding, admittedly limited, is that the mechanics aren’t copyrightable, but the language describing them is. Rolling a 20-sided die and adding a variable value to it, and comparing the result to a set number to determine success or failure at resisting an effect, isn’t copyrightable…The OGL said, in effect, “We give you permission to use some of our copyrightable language, and in return, you agree to follow these conditions when you use that language.” Exactly. > [@Acsenray](#): > > That kind of functional description of the rules is very unlikely to have any enforceable copyright protection. Very unlikely doesn’t stop a suit that you _can’t afford to fight._ > [@Miller](#): > > The OGL did allow other publishers to just cut and paste rules text into their own books, which is arguably something that might have infringed on copyright. You can’t copyright rules, but you can copyright a particular expression of the rules, and it’s not immediately obvious how much you need to rewrite the description of magic missile to avoid a copyright violation. And “not immediately obvious” means Hasbro wins, because they can afford the court case, and 95% of independent game publishers cannot. Exactly. ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2023, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dnd-ogl-is-anyone-following-this-thoughts/977886/282 "2023-01-26T22:13:37Z")
As an example, here’s a description of a fireball (from my memory of the rules): > [@](#): > > A burst of fire erupts from any point within range, and expands to fill a 20’ radius sphere. Any creature engulfed in the flames takes 8d6 points of fire damage; a successful Dex save reduces the damage by half. Unattended flammable objects in the area are ignited. > > If you cast this spell using a higher-level spell slot, the damage increases by 1d6 per level. Here’s the text of the rules from the actual book: > [@](#): > > A bright streak flashes from your pointing finger to a point you choose within range and then blossoms with a low roar into an explosion of flame. Each creature in a 20-foot-radius centered on that point must make a Dexterity saving throw. A target takes 8d6 fire damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one. > > The fire spreads around corners. It ignites flammable objects in the area that aren’t being worn or carried. > > At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 4th or higher, the damage increases by 1d6 for each slot level above 3rd. And here’s the text from [d20srd.org](http://d20srd.org) , a third-party website that uses D&D content under the OGL: > [@](#): > > A bright streak flashes from your pointing finger to a point you choose within range and then blossoms with a low roar into an explosion of flame. Each creature in a 20-foot-radius sphere centered on that point must make a Dexterity saving throw. A target takes 8d6 fire damage on a failed save, or half as much damage on a successful one. > > The fire spreads around corners. It ignites flammable objects in the area that aren’t being worn or carried. > > _ **At Higher Levels.** _ When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 4th level or higher, the damage increases by 1d6 for each slot level above 3rd. All three are the same rules. Without the OGL, someone would probably be in the clear, posting what I posted on a reference site somewhere, because despite being the same rules, it’s phrased very differently from what’s in the book. But first of all, it’d be a lot of work to re-write everything in the SRD that way, and second, even if court would find for me if I did, it’d still be a court case that I probably can’t afford. But with the OGL, the third-party site was able to quote that spell verbatim, as well as every other spell in the game, and lots and lots of other material as well. That quantity of exact quoting would almost certainly be a copyright violation, because it’s not just the rules. A site like [d20srd.org](http://d20srd.org) wouldn’t be possible without the OGL. ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [January 26, 2023, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dnd-ogl-is-anyone-following-this-thoughts/977886/283 "2023-01-26T22:49:03Z")
[![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/j4YQjcgS9FQ/maxresdefault.jpg "A Message From WotC About OGL") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4YQjcgS9FQ) Stranger ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2023, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dnd-ogl-is-anyone-following-this-thoughts/977886/284 "2023-01-27T00:04:40Z")
That is a parody and not a message from WotC at all. Not to mention, it goes on about the draft OGL, which is dead and gone. It is out of date already. ---
**Author:** ![Odesio](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/odesio/32/20003_2.png) [@Odesio](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Odesio)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2023, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dnd-ogl-is-anyone-following-this-thoughts/977886/285 "2023-01-27T00:22:24Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > That is a parody and not a message from WotC at all. Thanks for making that clear. I think a lot of us were confused as to the authenticity of the message. ---
**Author:** ![puzzlegal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puzzlegal/32/3827_2.png) [@puzzlegal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puzzlegal)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2023, 4:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dnd-ogl-is-anyone-following-this-thoughts/977886/286 "2023-01-27T04:21:08Z")
Because the opening image looks exactly like a real corporate message. ---
**Author:** ![gnoitall](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bb73d2/32.png) [@gnoitall](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gnoitall)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2023, 4:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dnd-ogl-is-anyone-following-this-thoughts/977886/287 "2023-01-27T04:51:49Z")
That whoosing sound was not a bound draft of OGL 1.1 being thrown over your head. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Bravo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_bravo/32/493_2.png) [@Johnny\_Bravo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Bravo)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2023, 4:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dnd-ogl-is-anyone-following-this-thoughts/977886/288 "2023-01-27T04:58:49Z")
You mean Approachable Spokesperson isn’t a real wotc employee? ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2023, 5:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dnd-ogl-is-anyone-following-this-thoughts/977886/289 "2023-01-27T05:03:32Z")
I said it was a parody. But the right way to do it is **A MESSAGE** (not) **FROM WIZARDS OF THE COAST.** ---
**Author:** ![Jophiel](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jophiel/32/66_2.png) [@Jophiel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jophiel)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2023, 5:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dnd-ogl-is-anyone-following-this-thoughts/977886/290 "2023-01-27T05:50:28Z")
We’ll just have to disagree on that one. Now I wanna play just so I can start saying _Chill Touch_ like that. That’s a well-named spell. ---
**Author:** ![puzzlegal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puzzlegal/32/3827_2.png) [@puzzlegal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puzzlegal)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2023, 9:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dnd-ogl-is-anyone-following-this-thoughts/977886/291 "2023-01-27T09:52:27Z")
The label was part of the opening graphic, not something stranger wrote. And the opening graphic was clearly marked as a parody with nonverbal cues. The facial expression of “approachable spokesperson” was pretty explicit about that. ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2023, 9:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dnd-ogl-is-anyone-following-this-thoughts/977886/292 "2023-01-27T09:53:19Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > But the right way to do it is > > **A MESSAGE** (not) **FROM WIZARDS OF THE COAST.** It’s _swell_ that you’re around to explain to all of us rubes about “The Right Way” to do satire. > [@puzzlegal](#): > > The facial expression of “approachable spokesperson” was pretty explicit about that. On the other hand, I’m pretty sure the Wizards of the Coast management is actually confused about the distinction between _Dungeons & Dragons_ and _Dave & Busters_. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![puzzlegal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puzzlegal/32/3827_2.png) [@puzzlegal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puzzlegal)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2023, 9:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dnd-ogl-is-anyone-following-this-thoughts/977886/293 "2023-01-27T09:58:22Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > But with the OGL, the third-party site was able to quote that spell verbatim, as well as every other spell in the game, and lots and lots of other material as well. That quantity of exact quoting would almost certainly be a copyright violation, because it’s not just the rules. A site like [d20srd.org](http://d20srd.org) wouldn’t be possible without the OGL. That’s true. And third parties like d20srd benefit wizards of the coast, IMHO. But they also aren’t particularly related to producing content, racist or otherwise. I’ll have to watch that clip from Devin Stone. Because I’ve been wondering how wizards of the coast can restrict the proud boys from publishing a module compatible with d&d. I mean, maybe they have to talk about “eyeball monsters”, like order of the stick. But does that really slow them down? ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2023, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dnd-ogl-is-anyone-following-this-thoughts/977886/294 "2023-01-27T19:55:16Z")
> [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](#): > > It’s _swell_ that you’re around to explain to all of us rubes about “The Right Way” to do satire. Glad to be of service. Bit of course, in defending that idiotic parody , you forget my main point- that is it complaining about the Draft OGL, which was dead and gone before this was posted. The video is beating a dead horse. ---
**Author:** ![Jophiel](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jophiel/32/66_2.png) [@Jophiel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jophiel)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2023, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dnd-ogl-is-anyone-following-this-thoughts/977886/295 "2023-01-27T22:47:17Z")
> **[OGL 1.0a & Creative Commons](https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1439-ogl-1-0a-creative-commons)** > > Over the past few weeks you, the community, have made your voices heard. And we’ve listened. OGL 1.0a will remain untouched AND the entire SRD 5.1... We’re all winners, again! OGL 1.0 to remain plus SRD moving to Creative Commons ---
**Author:** ![gnoitall](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bb73d2/32.png) [@gnoitall](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gnoitall)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2023, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dnd-ogl-is-anyone-following-this-thoughts/977886/296 "2023-01-27T23:29:01Z")
So, complete climbdown. The monetization faction in the company has evidently been completely defeated, and the firm is apparently in the hands of the creatives now. ---
**Author:** ![Jophiel](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jophiel/32/66_2.png) [@Jophiel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jophiel)\ **Post date:** [January 27, 2023, 11:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dnd-ogl-is-anyone-following-this-thoughts/977886/297 "2023-01-27T23:42:02Z")
I’ll wait for someone to complain that this is terrible because now _Super Hitler KKK Ultra-Racist RPG (5e Compatible)_ is the true winner here 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2023, 4:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dnd-ogl-is-anyone-following-this-thoughts/977886/298 "2023-01-28T04:45:03Z")
I will not complain but I would not trust them either. If I were a content creator using D&D I would now be forever looking over my shoulder. Hasbro/WotC are looking for any way to monetize D&D. While they need to wait a bit for the hub-bub to die down over this mistake I have no doubt they will be lurking and seeking new ways to extract money from their players. I have not played D&D for 40+ years (unless you count computer games which I have probably played most of them) but I had been considering starting again. I was only looking for D&D groups until this happened. Now I am strongly considering other systems (like Pathfinder). Their backtracking on this doesn’t change that for me. They already sent me down a different path that is not them. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2023, 4:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dnd-ogl-is-anyone-following-this-thoughts/977886/299 "2023-01-28T04:51:12Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Hasbro/WotC are looking for any way to monetize D&D. While they need to wait a bit for the hub-bub to die down over this mistake I have no doubt they will be lurking and seeking new ways to extract money from their players. They got greedy, and they probably just did more to _de_-monetize D&D than anyone in the game’s history has ever done before. The past several weeks are going to be a case study in what not to do, and they’ll reverberate through the hobby for decades. They ventured into the kobold’s lair in search of easy loot. And they came out three weeks later, bloodied and bruised and terrified. Who knew kobolds could fight back? Many years from now, they’ll be telling their grandchildren to stay away from the kobolds. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [January 28, 2023, 4:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dnd-ogl-is-anyone-following-this-thoughts/977886/300 "2023-01-28T04:54:41Z")
I could not have said that better. I really mean that. You summed it up perfectly IMO. +2 on your next dice roll. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dnd-ogl-is-anyone-following-this-thoughts/977886.md?page=14) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dnd-ogl-is-anyone-following-this-thoughts/977886.md?page=16)