Paizo (publishers of Pathfinder) react to rumors of Wizards of the Coast moving from the existing Open Game License to a new, predatory license and attempting to somehow retroactively revoke the old license: https://paizo.com/community/blog
The punchline: Paizo previously used the OGL to release their original content because it was there; now they feel it is no longer trustworthy so they're making their own license.
The name: The Open RPG Creative License (ORC).
If you haven't been following this: Around 2000 D&D 3e was released using OGL 1.0a, which Wizards created. After 23 years gobs of commercial work has been released depending on this license. About a week ago Wizards started privately sending creators a "OGL 1.1" with alarming terms. Originally it had a go-live date of *TODAY*. The new license immediately leaked, and there was uproar.
Today Wizards announced a livestream to discuss the controversy. Then cancelled it.
https://gizmodo.com/dungeons-dragons-ogl-announcement-wizards-of-the-coast-1849981365
Follow-up: So one week after canceling the launch of "OGL 1.1" aka "OGL 2.0", Wizards has launched "OGL 1.2". They brag they've addressed community concerns in various ways, but I don't think they have. For example they brag the new license contains the word "irrevocable" (although they define it to mean something special in the document so maybe it's still revocable). But the outrage was that Hasbro was trying to revoke the *old* OGL, 1.0a. And they're still doing that:
https://www.polygon.com/23562874/dnd-dungeons-dragons-ogl-1-2-release-download-feedback-survey
A new draft of the Dungeons & Dragons Open Gaming License (OGL) places the core rules of the seminal tabletop RPG in the Creative Commons. “We’re giving the core D&D mechanics to the community,” said the executive producer. Feedback is due by Feb. 3.
@http_error_418 @mcc they did but it's still nuts that they're revoking it. There's a post here too: https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/1428-a-working-conversation-about-the-open-game-license
This whole thing implies that the old version is "updated" based on the new version but I don't see how that's possible unless the old version says that you must always seek out the newest version. What if someone is living under a rock / offline only? How would the revocation clause in the new OGL actually apply without someone agreeing to it?
mcc
APT Ate My Homework
particles