PDA

View Full Version : 4e Open Gaming License Info



TheOOB
2008-01-09, 02:49 AM
A news piece was posted today on the WotC website, explaining about how they are planning on releasing the OGL and SRD for 4e.

4E SRD and OGL (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/4news/20080108a)

And here's the text for those who can't/don't feel like going to the web page

D&D 4th Edition System Reference Document and OGL Designer’s Kit

Wizards of the Coast has developed a new, two-phased release structure for the Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition System Reference Document (SRD) and Open Gaming License (OGL).
Phase One

The first phase of the 4th Edition developer materials release will be marked by the January 2008 availability of the OGL Designer’s Kit. This kit is designed for independent publishers looking to obtain early access to 4th Edition rules in order to develop compatible products to release just after the 4th Edition launch. These publishers will pay a one-time fee of $5,000.00 USD for access to the OGL Designer’s Kit, which includes first looks at the 4th Edition rulebooks, the SRD, final galleys and more.

The OGL Designer’s kit includes:

* Pre-publication versions of the 4th Edition rulebooks:

# 4th Edition Player’s Handbook
# 4th Edition Dungeon Master’s Guide
# 4th Edition Monster Manual

* Pre-publication version of the System Reference Document (SRD)
* Open Gaming License (OGL)
* License Guide
* FAQ
* Registration Card
* Updated documents as the rules are finessed and finalized
* Final galleys including typeset text and artwork
* Advanced copies of the finished core rulebooks

Developers purchasing the OGL Designer’s Kit will receive updated pre-publication versions of the 4th Edition Dungeons & Dragons core rules through the time of launch. They will also receive the right to publish OGL products on August 1, 2008, five months earlier than the general public.

Parties interested in the OGL Designer’s Kit must possess a business license and execute a Non-Disclosure Agreement prior to contract communications.
Phase Two

Wizards of the Coast will release the second phase of the developer materials on June 6th, 2008 with the free, public availability of the Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition SRD and OGL. The SRD will be live immediately upon release. The OGL will go-live on January 1, 2009.

For further information contact [email protected].
FAQ

Q: Why are you charging for the OGL Designer’s Kit?
A: We want to encourage publishers who are serious about the business of OGL publishing to create compelling, quality products to complement the hard work we’ve put into creating 4th Edition material.

In that spirit, the OGL Designer’s Kit helps to establish a minimum bar for early entry into the OGL publishing world. We feel that publishers and developers with a proven track record of creating quality products will be able to cover the cost of the OGL Designer’s Kit and continue to create new material for 4th Edition.

Q: What about new publishers that can’t afford to pay for the kit? Won’t they be left out?
A: All of the material included in the OGL Designer’s Kit will be available for free starting on June 6, 2008. Parties who find the cost prohibitive can begin developing their products at that time.

Q: Can anyone purchase an OGL Designer’s Kit?
A: Interested parties are required to possess a business license. Wizards of the Coast reserves the right to limit participation in this program as appropriate to the business.

Q: When can I start publishing OGL products?
A: Purchasers of the OGL Designer’s Kit can begin publishing their OGL products on August 1, 2008. Other publishers may begin publishing their OGL products on January 01, 2009.

Q: Why do I have to pay to publish an OGL product for 4th Edition?
A: You don’t. Starting in June, the core rulebooks will be available on shelves everywhere, and you can use those books to craft your OGL product for sale on January 01, 2009.

Q. What about the d20 license? Will that still exist in 4th Edition?
A: We are making the OGL stronger by better defining it. We’re rolling certain elements that used to be in the d20 license into the OGL, things like community standards and other tangible elements of the d20 license.

I thought some of you may be interested, any thoughts on what this means for the future of the game?

Cybren
2008-01-09, 03:30 AM
It doesn't seem like a smart idea because 1) Who will pay money when they are told the material will become free later on? and 2) early-releases = leaks

tyckspoon
2008-01-09, 03:35 AM
It doesn't seem like a smart idea because 1) Who will pay money when they are told the material will become free later on? and 2) early-releases = leaks

1) There is value in being first to market. People who pay for the kit get to develop things for the 4th Ed rules before people who don't; that is potentially worth far more than a $5,000 early access fee. This isn't aimed at the general public.

2.) Does the phrase 'Non-Disclosure Agreement' mean anything to you? It won't guarantee there aren't leaks, but whoever makes the leak will be in a world of pain.

Talic
2008-01-09, 03:47 AM
Agreed. If I'm developing a campaign setting, I want to have the first well-developed setting out there. If I'm making a splatbook, I want it to mesh within a couple months of launch.

Why? Two reasons. First, if I have the only game in town as far as bonus material, then I get the business, so long as my product is competent.

Second, I can, to an extent, shape how the game develops, and pioneer new ideas. Also, with Copyright laws as they are, the first person to publish a concept is the owner of that concept. Early publication can assist in defining ownership of work.

Kurald Galain
2008-01-09, 06:17 AM
Besides, for any company serious about making money off RPG books, $5k isn't at all prohibitive.

Peregrine
2008-01-09, 06:37 AM
Q. What about the d20 license? Will that still exist in 4th Edition?
A: We are making the OGL stronger by better defining it. We’re rolling certain elements that used to be in the d20 license into the OGL, things like community standards and other tangible elements of the d20 license.

Yeeargh! I kind of liked the existing system: a lot of stuff that was antithetical to the idea of free, open use, like "community standards" (which I expect means WotC-approved material, as in the current d20 licence), was put in a separate licence where it made sense: you got to use WotC's trademarks by abiding by their rules, but you didn't have to abide by their rules.

Putting them together... no thanks...

Project_Mayhem
2008-01-09, 06:40 AM
So basically, for someone not so hot at legalese; the free online srd, like the 3.5 one that exists now, is going to be available to Joe Public who couldn't be arsed to buy the core books on June 6 2008?

Thiel
2008-01-09, 07:00 AM
So basically, for someone not so hot at legalese; the free online srd, like the 3.5 one that exists now, is going to be available to Joe Public who couldn't be arsed to buy the core books on June 6 2008?

Looks that way to me.

paigeoliver
2008-01-09, 07:23 AM
There is a ton of value in being first to market. When 4th edition was announced I dropped all work on my 3.5 SRD products and started work on 4th edition stuff (all fluff, no crunch) with the plans on grocking the rules as quickly as possible after release and then getting my books out there early.

Once word got out about a license fee I gave up. I am not paying $5000 in order to sell a couple hundred copies of something at a $2 per unit profit.

I imagine there will be a HUGE glut of independent material all coming out next January, which is of course right AFTER Christmas, and lets face it, when you are trying to get people to buy "Compleat Riding Dog" then Christmas is the time to do it!!!

AKA_Bait
2008-01-09, 10:07 AM
I imagine there will be a HUGE glut of independent material all coming out next January, which is of course right AFTER Christmas, and lets face it, when you are trying to get people to buy "Compleat Riding Dog" then Christmas is the time to do it!!!

Which is why one of the perks of the 5k expenditure is being allowed to publish in August.

All in all though, I don't really see the point. The books do come out in June but past the first month the next largest spending period for people buying the CORE set will be December. Given the built in delay bettween when WotC can publish and when other folks who did shell out the 5k can, I don't really expect there to be too much of an advantage to publishing in August rather than January.

Also, I'm just on the face of it unwilling to pay 5k for a look at an unfinished system that's subject to change up until the day of release and may or may not be any good. Shelling out money only to discover the mechanics are awful and that I should just keep designing for 3x is a real possiblity.

Kurald Galain
2008-01-09, 10:23 AM
started work on 4th edition stuff (all fluff, no crunch) with the plans on grocking the rules as quickly as possible after release and then getting my books out there early.
Please, if you quote Heinlein do it correctly. G-R-O-K.

However, if your book is all fluff, why does it matter to you what the actual 4E ruleset is?


Shelling out money only to discover the mechanics are awful and that I should just keep designing for 3x is a real possiblity.
Oh, definitely. Based on ambivalent forum reactions, I suspect there'll be a market for 3.5 stuff for quite a while longer.

Valairn
2008-01-09, 10:29 AM
Also, I'm just on the face of it unwilling to pay 5k for a look at an unfinished system that's subject to change up until the day of release and may or may not be any good. Shelling out money only to discover the mechanics are awful and that I should just keep designing for 3x is a real possiblity.

Well for some publishers 5000 dollars to get a look at something and go it sucks, and to be able to continue producing 3.5 compatible material rather than spending six months gearing up for 4.0 only to be let down. Also you get updates to the system right until its normal release.

I'm sure there are other benefits for a buyer of the early access license as well, that aren't discussed here. After all its a business incentive, not a joe gamer just learned that his 40 dollars was wasted on a crappy system incentive. 5k now, could end up saving you a year of development work for a system that sucks.

The 3rd party publisher coughs up, wizards gives them up to the minute info on 4.0, both benefit either from backing down from new production because it sucks, or having 6 months or so of time on a shelf that the other publishers don't have. 6 months is a long time, 6 months is in fact long enough to completely shape a developing market, and that can be worth far more than 5000 dollars.

Dizlag
2008-01-09, 01:37 PM
Don't forget that GenCon is in August. All those publishers willing to shellout the $5,000 will be able to have their products available to the public at one of the largest gaming conventions of the year. Not to mention, the Christmas season as well. Those who don't shell out the bucks will effectively be one year behind those who do.

I as a customer will look at who's got stuff out then (i.e. who can afford the $5,000) and use that to filter out the crap getting published. Granted, there will be a diamond in the rough somewhere after January 2009, but few and far between.

Then again, that's just my opinion. =)

Dizlag

Darrin
2008-01-09, 04:28 PM
Looks that way to me.

Looks can be deceiving:



The 4e SRD will be a "reference document" for publishers working under the 4e OGL to know what content can be used in their own products. It will reference sections and passages from 4e D&D books and will also contain table/formating guidelines like the monster stat block to allow for consistency among products.

It will not be a stripped down core rulebook (PHB) that largely allows you to play D&D.


Which is puzzling. The WotC 4E OGL FAQ says absolutely nothing about the
SRD being available online. And what Rouse is saying is that the SRD will just be a list of references to which sections are OGL rather than an actual "system" document with rules. Which seems inconsistent with the statement that the entire contents of the development kits, including pre-print galleys and last-minute edits, will be available for free after Jan 1st 2009. It could be WotC may attempt to verify the "business license" of anyone requesting even the free kits (boy, does that sound like an exciting job for an intern).

The impression I'm getting is that for the amateur wannabe publisher (and the casual player who'd rather google the rules online than buy a book), WotC is trying to say "Buy the core books and we'll tell you which paragraphs you can use in fan/amateur/online material".

And that will probably last up until someone at www.systemreferencedocuments.org or www.d20srd.org scrapes up something that looks like a business license, gets the free dev kit, and "publishes" the OGL portions online.

Iku Rex
2008-01-09, 07:29 PM
Here's one interesting tidbit from the QnAs:

"We’re rolling certain elements that used to be in the d20 license into the OGL, things like community standards and other tangible elements of the d20 license."

Community Standards:

Quality Standards

In determining whether a product complies with community standards of decency, Wizards of the Coast uses, but is not limited to the following. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Wizards of the Coast reserves the right to determine, in its sole discretion, whether a product complies with community standards of decency.

Violence and Gore – Descriptions of combat are acceptable in a Covered Product. However art or text depicting excessively graphic violence or gore is not acceptable.

Sexual Themes - Sexual situations—including abuse and pornography—may not appear graphically in art or text. When depicting the human form—or creatures possessing humaniform features—gratuitous nudity, the depiction of genitalia, bare female nipples, and sexual or bathroom activity is not acceptable. While sensuality and sexuality may appear in a Covered Product, it must not be the focus nor can it be salacious in nature.

Prejudice - Covered Products can not depict existing real-world minorities, nationalities, social castes, religious groups, genders, lifestyle preferences, or people with disabilities as a group inferior to any other group. Current, real-world religions and religious groups and/or practices will not be portrayed in any way that promotes disrespect for these religions or their participants. A Covered Product can not endorse or promote any specific religion or religious practice.
What this means is that if you publish under the current d20 System License, Wizards of the Coast has the right to make you destroy every unsold book you every published with a d20 logo if "in its sole discretion" it decides you're in breach of the License. (See the Trademark FAQ (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/srdfaq/20040123b).)

If I was a publisher I would never agree to a deal where my main competitor basically has the legal right to put me out of business at any time.

They'll probably also put in the clause in the Guide about not including character generation rules in your product and having to put "Requires the use of ..." on the cover.

All this can currently be avoided by not using any of WotC's "Product Identity"/Trademarks in any way (the OGL prohibits it, even when the law doesn't). The Conan RPG is one example of a "OGL only" product. But it looks like that option will go away in 4.0.

Darrin
2008-01-10, 12:32 AM
All this can currently be avoided by not using any of WotC's "Product Identity"/Trademarks in any way (the OGL prohibits it, even when the law doesn't). The Conan RPG is one example of a "OGL only" product. But it looks like that option will go away in 4.0.

No, I think that option will still be there, even in the 4E OGL. Or even if it isn't, you can just use the previous version of the OGL with any of your 4E products. You just won't be able to use any of the WotC-approved logos and trademarks, nor mention anything on the cover about compatable rules systems.

The real problem with OGL is d20 has such a "stink" associated with it among distributors, retailers, and customers is that darned near everything without a "Official D&D" logo has stopped selling. The carrot in the new OGL will essentially be that: the D&D brand and the positive effect it has in the market. If a smaller publisher wants to tap into that brand as an "official" product, then they have to sign on to the "community standards" stuff.

Granted, there are other publishers out there that have managed to make some money on d20 and OGL, like Green Ronin, Mongoose, Necromancer, etc., but they've done so by accomplishing the very difficult task of developing their own brand identity and building up their own reputation for quality products. Smaller and newer publishers aren't in the same position to do that, and their only hope to get any of the shrinking shelf space in retail may be to agree to the logo/trademark license restrictions.

What this would do (and I haven't seen the new OGL so I'm just guessing) is continue to build on the perception that non-WotC OGL products are generally crap, and if the smaller publishers that sign on to the
whole devkit/logo/trademark start to sell a lot of products, then WotC can leverage its core rulebook sales.

RandomFellow
2008-01-10, 12:53 AM
No, I think that option will still be there, even in the 4E OGL. Or even if it isn't, you can just use the previous version of the OGL with any of your 4E products. You just won't be able to use any of the WotC-approved logos and trademarks, nor mention anything on the cover about compatable rules systems.

....

What this would do (and I haven't seen the new OGL so I'm just guessing) is continue to build on the perception that non-WotC OGL products are generally crap, and if the smaller publishers that sign on to the
whole devkit/logo/trademark start to sell a lot of products, then WotC can leverage its core rulebook sales.

The problem with that logic is:
What your describing is virtually identical to the existing system (use the OGL if you want or play by our rules and use our trademarks). Why would they mention changes if it was virtually identical?

Darrin
2008-01-10, 08:50 AM
The problem with that logic is:
What your describing is virtually identical to the existing system (use the OGL if you want or play by our rules and use our trademarks). Why would they mention changes if it was virtually identical?

I don't know. Apparently you have to sign a NDA to find out. But the language in the previous OGL pretty much guarantees that it has to be functionally intact in the future versions, or you can just revert back to an older version.

My guess would be the "community standards" and enforcement language they brought over from the STL may look a bit scary in the new OGL.

The other issue is *which* trademarks you'll be allowed to use, and that's probably why the NDA is necessary. Rather than use the current d20 trademark (which has problems with market saturation and public perception), they may be trying to introduce something new that looks closer to the WotC trademarks. If someone were to find out what that trademark was and start selling it in the market before WotC, then that complicates things from a legal standpoint (trademarks are generally awarded to whoever uses it first).

Again, all guesswork on my part, but it looks like to me this whole hullabaloo is all about "brand identity". WotC has a positive brand identity. D20 is negative. OGL has no brand identity of its own, and is unlikely to get any. A new brand identity could help smaller publishers get a slice of that shrinking shelf space, but I can't imagine WotC's primary concerns straying too far from protecting their own brand identity and leveraging rulebook sales.

Iku Rex
2008-01-10, 09:21 AM
I don't know. Apparently you have to sign a NDA to find out. But the language in the previous OGL pretty much guarantees that it has to be functionally intact in the future versions, or you can just revert back to an older version.Good point. "You may use any authorized version of [the OGL] to copy, modify and distribute any Open Game Content originally distributed under any version of [the OGL]."


If I'm reading that right (?) it means that in order for a change to the OGL to be meaningful, 4.0 will not be "Open Game Content" as such.

Jayabalard
2008-01-10, 09:25 AM
1) There is value in being first to market. People who pay for the kit get to develop things for the 4th Ed rules before people who don't; that is potentially worth far more than a $5,000 early access fee. This isn't aimed at the general public.both can develop much of that content at the same time, it's just that the people who pay can do it with official kit release rather than leaked info... and they'll be able to release earlier.


2.) Does the phrase 'Non-Disclosure Agreement' mean anything to you? It won't guarantee there aren't leaks, but whoever makes the leak will be in a world of pain.NDA... Isn't that the thing that means that is meant for someone to ignore and leak to the internet? That's how they seem to work in practice.

Trog
2008-01-10, 09:51 AM
Prejudice - Covered Products can not depict existing real-world minorities, nationalities, social castes, religious groups, genders, lifestyle preferences, or people with disabilities as a group inferior to any other group. Current, real-world religions and religious groups and/or practices will not be portrayed in any way that promotes disrespect for these religions or their participants. A Covered Product can not endorse or promote any specific religion or religious practice.
Hmm... I find this idea intriguing... especially since the halflings (*cough*kenders*cough*) who can't help but "steal" and live out of their transportation are the only race that they portray as having darker skin.

Way to trip up there with your own standards Wizards of the Coast. :smallfurious:

kamikasei
2008-01-10, 09:59 AM
Hmm... I find this idea intriguing... especially since the halflings (*cough*kenders*cough*) who can't help but "steal" and live out of their transportation are the only race that they portray as having darker skin.

That strikes me as pretty baseless. I haven't noticed any trend for halflings to be darker-skinned than other races. Of the PHB iconics, Lidda was among the palest, while the darkest-skinned was Ember, a human.

RandomFellow
2008-01-10, 10:06 AM
I don't know. Apparently you have to sign a NDA to find out. But the language in the previous OGL pretty much guarantees that it has to be functionally intact in the future versions, or you can just revert back to an older version.


Except it is only applicable on things WotC says so, when it comes to their content.


The License: This License applies to any Open Game Content that contains a notice indicating that the Open Game Content may only be Used under and in terms of this License. You must affix such a notice to any Open Game Content that you Use. No terms may be added to or subtracted from this License except as described by the License itself. No other terms or conditions may be applied to any Open Game Content distributed using this License.

Trog
2008-01-10, 10:58 AM
That strikes me as pretty baseless. I haven't noticed any trend for halflings to be darker-skinned than other races. Of the PHB iconics, Lidda was among the palest, while the darkest-skinned was Ember, a human.

You misunderstand. I'm not referring to the trends and the old art. I'm talking about the brand new version of what halflings are supposed to be as shown in the Races and Classes preview book.

It may have been unintentional. But it's still crappy. And should be changed IMHO.