#3rd party Pathfinder

[terrors-and-tables]

As a way to give this blog some purpose, and give myself something to do, I’ve decided to start writing out my RPG musings in my spare time. I’ve been slowly working on a campaign setting for several years now, and it’s become a little creative space for me to hammer out a hypothetical kitchen sink to throw my fantasy ideas in. I’ll probably end up using it for a Pathfinder game (where I’ll finally get to use Spheres of Power/Might, and maybe even Guile), but I’ve thought about running it with an OSR game as well. Who knows, maybe I’ll run it over several different systems. Without further ado, here’s the first installment!

Post #1: The Ottoguard

This idea was created using Ultimate Engineering, the most recent (and final) Pathfinder product for Spheres of Might from Drop Dead Studios. I contributed a bit to the playtesting and had a great time, and its author spent two years fine tuning it, so if you're interested, go support them and take a look. At the time of writing, it should also be on the SoP wiki any day now.

In the core of the setting, the city of Scalmoor treats scientific advancement like its own fom of magic. They build marvelous contraptions of steel and glass, whether powered by tightly wound clockworks or by burning coal and spewing black smoke. In this city, the law is kept by those with the most money to build the biggest toys, and one such toy is the Ottoguard.

Standing at eight feet tall, an Ottoguard is a hollow sort of mechanical construct, but bears no magic or animating consciousness like a golem. Instead, a trained fighter pilots it, wearing it as a sort of incredibly heavy armor that carries itself. Ottoguards don’t do all of the policing, usually accompanied by a few regular guards who can do things like fit into buildings, move obstacles aside, bully civilians up close and personal, and so on and so forth.

Ottoguard CR 1 XP 400 Human Warrior 3 LN Medium Humanoid (Human) Init +2; Perception +5

Defense

AC 17; Touch 12; Flat-Footed 15; (+2 Dex, +5 Chainmail) 21 HP (3d10+6) Fort +5 Ref +3; Will +3

Offense

Speed 20ft. Space 5ft; Reach 5ft Melee Sap +4 (1d6+1 nonlethal) Ranged Light Crossbow +5 (1d8/19-20) Special Attacks Snag (Swift action, render target battered as melee touch attack)

Statistics

Str 13, Dex 15, Con 14, Int 10, Wis 14, Cha 8 Base Atk ; CMB ; CMD ( vs. trip) Feats Extra Combat Feat Skills Craft (Technology) +6, Intimidate +5, Perception +5, Sense Motive +5; Racial Modifiers Languages Common SQ Gear: Mwk Chainmail, Light Crossbow, Longsword, Large Crossbow, MwK Large Sap, Potion of CLW, 8 gold pieces, 13 silver pieces. Martial Tradition: Mechaguard* Martial Talents (2 talents from progression, 1 talent from feat)

Equipment Sphere: Bounty Hunter’s Tools Armor Training Tinker Sphere: Transportation Package Mechanical Arsenal Transportation Mastery Wrestling Sphere: (Constrictor Drawback) Hammerlock Clinch Strike

Those stats above are for if our unlucky Ottoguard pilot is caught… off-guard. They’re there to represent what’s inside the fantastic mech and what he’s trained to do in a fight, particularly specializing in nonlethal capture- even when fully kitted out he’s here to apprehend criminals, not brain them. The crossbows are just for emergencies. So let’s break down what he’s capable of as a third level warrior, namely his talents:

His Equipment Sphere talents are there solely for proficiencies, for the Sap and for medium/heavy armor. The Athletics Sphere lets him run pretty quick (five times his speed in medium armor, at a hundred feet per round)- he won’t be able to outrun most people, but he won’t fall too far behind either. Tinker is much more complex, opening up an entire subsystem, but the bulk of why it’s there is to build and maintain his precious Ottoguard, with Mechanical Arsenal allowing him to outfit it with custom-crafted plate-mail for free, and Transportation Mastery allowing him to make an immersive cockpit that responds to his movements with a complicated array of levers and pulleys. Wrestling is there so that he can tackle a criminal and, if needed, beat them unconscious. It’s alright though, because even if it’s scaled up to be sized for an ogre, a lead rod wrapped in leather will still deal nonlethal damage.

Mechanoid Statistics: 4th level Mechanoid N Large Construct Init +2; Perception +5

Defense AC 24; Touch ; Flat-Footed ; (+9 Full Plate, +1 Dex, -1 size, +5 NA) 27 HP (3d10+12) Fort +5; Ref +3; Will +3 Defensive Abilities ; Immune Construct Traits

Offense

Speed 20ft. Space 10ft; Reach 10ft Melee MwK Large Sap +8 (1d8+5, Nonlethal) Ranged MwK Large Light Crossbow +5 (2d6/19-2) Special Attacks Snag (Swift action, render target battered as melee touch attack)

Statistics

Str 20, Dex 14, Con --, Int 10, Wis 14, Cha 8 Base Atk +3; CMB +9; CMD 21 Feats -- Skills Perception +5, Sense Motive +5, Intimidate +5; Racial Modifiers SQ 6 Upgrades (Arms, Legs, Cover*, Focused Design (+2 Str), Immersive Cockpit, Armor Slot, Alternate Size) *Free upgrade Gear MwK Large Sap, MwK Light Crossbow,

The Ottoguard, while piloted, can benefit from its pilot’s skills, feats, saving throw bonuses, base attack bonuses, et cetera, while keeping its own physical ability scores, armor class, and better weaponry, while also having its own pool of hit points. The pilot isn’t totally sequestered, however, and some parts of him are still visible, even if they’re behind hatches or a visor, and he may be attacked separately from the Ottoguard- though he benefits from Cover, gaining a +4 bonus to Armor Class.

An Ottoguard isn’t cheap, of course, but by the rules of Ultimate Engineering, Project Materials (for things such as mechanoids) may be acquired freely with time and successful crafting checks (DC 15 for 50 gold worth of material, +50 for each increase of 5, gathered over the course of 4 hours per check), meaning that by carefully sourcing and repurposing parts, the Ottoguard may be constructed from scratch by its pilot for free. This process of assembly and subsequent maintenance are drilled into pilots’ heads from day one. At a cost of 500gp for the average Ottoguard (100 per level, +200 for being large size), and about 100gp of Project Materials being acquired per day, this means an Ottoguard can be fully constructed in a week’s time (not counting the weekend of course). If in a proper settlement and in a real emergency, 500 gold pieces can be paid outright to acquire exactly what is needed almost immediately, after which construction of the Ottoguard takes 1 hour. All of this means that while Ottoguards are probably extremely similar on the outside (serving as somewhere between uniforms and police vehicles, they probably should), a pilot knows their machine inside and out, and there may be differences in the internal construction.

Ottoguard Adventure Hooks

1. A pilot’s Ottoguard has been stolen, likely to be reverse engineered by some enterprising criminals.

2. A pilot has been found guilty of illegally modifying his Ottoguard with blades, flame projectors, and stronger leg actuators. After causing several fires and deaths, he’s gone on the run with his new death machine.

3. A chaotic druid has caused trees and vines to grow over all of the city’s Ottoguards overnight, and has ruined the Ottoworks. With the city’s strongest defenders disabled, and Scalmoor’s stingy oligarchy unwilling to fund that many replacements immediately, the city is in shambles!

4. A mad tinker wizard has stolen the blueprints for the Ottoguards, creating one with an integrated Artificial Intelligence. It’s been going on its own patrols, blending in perfectly and disappearing before it can be apprehended. What is its purpose?

*New Martial Tradition

Mechaguard Equipment Sphere: Bounty Hunter’s Tools Armor Training Tinker Sphere: Transportation Package Wrestling Sphere: (Constrictor Drawback) Hammerlock

Inspirations:

FantasyNameGenerators is a wonderful site, and I used it to come up with the name Scalmoor

Appleseed (the 1988 OVA) is what really inspired this idea, bringing that movie's Landmates into a technologically advanced fantasy setting

[lonesomechunk]

Showing off some of the design work I did for Minotaurs Unleashed on Pathfinder Infinite! This project was all done by me and with Howl of the Wild announcing their own official Minotaur Ancestry I figure now is a good time to plug my own content. When the official ancestry comes out I'll be remastering it to expand on the official stuff so it'll still have value! If you have any interest the link is here: https://www.pathfinderinfinite.com/product/422349/Minotaurs-Unleashed-A-Pathfinder-2nd-Edition-Ancestry?affiliate_id=1244547

[quinndae]

this probably doesn’t need to be said but fuck Wizards of the Coast and fuck Hasbro

Rot and burn you capitalist cunts <3 

[dailyadventureprompts]

Alright, guess it’s time to address the apocalyptic legal elephant in the room:

For those who might not know, WotC plans were leaked to “update” the OGL in what is basically a scorched earth policy with regards to 3rd party material/creators in the hopes of cutting out the competition and forcing people to use their new products. 

As someone who lived through the 4th edition/pathfinder schism, the situation is laughably similar:  D&D is flourishing more than it ever has (thanks primarily to the OGL) but the execs at Hasbro want more of the money spent on the hobby to wind up in their pockets. Oblivious to the fact that the opensource nature of the game is what draws people to it,  they task the design team with creating a proprietary virtual tabletop through which they can sell d&d content without having to worry about books or pdfs being pirated. This rightfully outrages the fandom and burns every scrap of good will they had towards WotC, resulting in a dead edition that’s maligned years afterword as folks hop to the newer, easier game system. 

The thing that’s different this time is that the d&d playerbase has grown exponentially since the days of the first OGL, with 5th edition being the easiest version of the game to run/pick up and so many resources online, there’s almost no barrier to entry besides finding a stable/accommodating group.   Hell, with the explosive popularity of liveplay series you don’t even need to be actively playing in order to be in the fandom.  All of these people are networked together in a fandom hivemind spread across twitter/reddit/youtube and WotC just made an enemy of every single one of them with its shameless and destructive cashgrab.  No streamer or 3rd party publisher wants to give Hasbro 25% of their revenue, to say nothing of having their project “cancelled” if WotC sees it as a threat to any of their current projects ( see the huge number of spelljammer materials published after the company dropped the ball). 

It took about two years after the announcement of 4th edition for Paizo to come out with pathfinder, and I have no doubt the OGL leak kickstarted every major 3rd party publisher brainstorming some legally distinct version of the 5e ruleset. In the coming months I expect to see a number of these surrogate systems floating around the internet in much the same way that the onednd playtest content, but spurred on with the added “fuck you Hasbro” energy. After that, it’s only a matter of time till one of the big streamers picks up one of these systems and popularizes it, not wanting to pay the 25%tithe to WotC. Personally my money’s on Critical Role: they were one of the major factors in popularizing 5th edition and they’ve got the fandom pull to legitimize any claimant to the throne. 

To step away from playing oracle for a bit, I’d like to finish up this post by dunking on WotC:  

*ahem*

HOW FUCKING DUMB TO YOU HAVE TO BE TO TURN YOUR ENTIRE CUSTOMER BASE AGAINST YOU IN ONE NIGHT? This is some new coke/Reynolds pamphlet/invading Russia in winter levels of shooting yourself in the foot. Wizards was on shaky ground to begin with given that they’re coming off a series of notably disappointing products AND trying to launch a new edition/virtual tabletop/battlepass system, but to follow that up with a retroactive rules change that lets them outright steal from or shut down creators? It’s laughable.  Maybe, MAYBE they could have made this work if they were knocking it out of the park with new releases every year and cultivating a base of diehard WotC loyalists, but the fact of the matter is that aside from the brand name, the hobby has largely passed them by. Everything that Wizards does, from player options to settings to monsters to rules modules, someone else does better because they’re willing to take risks and put in the effort. Aside from the elegant simplicity of 5e’s base system, I can count maybe two pieces of actual game design (piety from Theros, ship combat from Saltmash) that I consider usable at my table, which is SAYING SOMETHING considering we’re nearing the end of the game’s ten year golden age. 

I know we’ll weather this storm, we always have, and regardless of what happens I still know my friends and I will enjoy gathering around the table and slinging dice even though we might not be playing “dungeons and dragons” in a couple years time.  I’ll keep my eye on the horizon, and let you know where I find safe harbour.

[ncat]

The Conduit

So heres the conduit! I'm very happy with how this turned out.

The conduit as a class is best described as a "Con Based Martial with spellcaster aesthetics", since, mechanically, it fills a martial role, being a class that doesnt use resources, with a primary party focus on dealing damage, while flavor wise, it goes around slinging blasts of energy at people.

This class mechanically is very much based on the warlock of 3rd edition, with flavour and some mechanical inspiration from the Kineticist of Pathfinder 2e.

The two core design elements that I tried to stick to with making this were 1. Being resourceless and 2. Customizability.

For the first point, none of the class features are limited in uses per day. No feature adds an additional resource for the player to track, nor uses spell slots nor etc. The closest it comes to a resource is its Exertion mechanic, where certain things tire out your conduit character. Though, this serves less as a resource, and more as a temporary debuff, reducing your damage output whilst its in effect, before being easily removed.

The second point is customizability. The first element of this is subclasses. Of course, theres the variety of subclasses to pick from, but notably, is that unlike other classes, you aren't bound to picking just one subclass. From 7th level onwards, whenever you reach your subclass feature level, you can choose to continue advancing in your subclass, or you can take the initial features of a different subclass. This means while you can do a more traditional route of going "I'm the lightning guy, I'm taking lightning every level", you can also do an avatar style "Master of 4 elements" and have 4 different subclasses by level 20. Mix and match them as you like, be the "Fire and Lightning" person, be the "I control water mostly, but also a little bit of ice", combine your elements and so forth.

The next part of customizability is in talents. Talents are very much your classic invocation style feature, of which there are... like. 60 of them at this point. But! Theres a lot of variety in what they do. While you have your choices of ones that give additional powers, like flight or teleportation or whatnot, a large bulk of them are dedicated to one thing: Reshaping your elemental blast. Go out there as a fire guy and blast people with fire, then turn around and literally explode everything around you in flames, then focus your blast into a roaring line of fire that pushes everything within it towards you, and then rush the last man standing with a spear made of literal fire.

The talents are designed around not just being able to reshape and modify your blast in a bunch of different ways, but you can combine them together and do cool stuff.

Because at its core, I wanted to design this class to fill a very specific style of fantasy, and thats of the type of magic you see in some settings where its just "I control this one element", and then from that the mage turns that into a billion different things.

A fire wizard will say "I can cast fire bolt, fire ball, and scorching ray". A fire conduit instead just has an elemental blast, but they can turn that elemental blast into a bolt that is hurled at one person, or have it explode into a ball of flame, or split it into multiple beams.

Its very much a creativity first subclass, and thats whats behind its capstone! The capstone is all of this at its epitomy, the ability to freely reshape your elemental power (By freely, temporarily learning talents) into whatever form you imagine.

Hell, customizability is built even into the very core of its flavour

Yeah <3

I hope you guys enjoyed reading this class as much as I enjoyed writing it and as much as I enjoy talking about it <3

[daarka]

For those late to the party who want to know what the hell is going on with #OpenDnD, #StoptheSub, #DnDBegone etc, and why everyone is cancelling DnDBeyond subscriptions, I tried to do a crash course as succinctly as possible. OpenDnD.Games is a great resource for more in-depth details, and if you wish to do so, you can cancel your DnDBeyond subscription through this direct link (as there have been many reporting trouble in locating where to do so). Edit: Tweaked the very first detail below, as someone reminded me it was not a wholly accurate statement as I had initially written it. Apologies to everyone who already reblogged the first version of this :')

Hasbro acquired Wizards of the Coast (WotC) some time ago, but recently they got new leadership who said in an interview that they see D&D as "under-monetized". Hasbro is on the decline with finances, and WotC is its biggest cash cow. Why milk that cash cow through producing more content when you can instead revoke a legally irrevocable license that makes it impossible for 3rd party content creators to exist?

America loves a good monopoly. The old license that permitted the community to grow to what it is today was OGL1.0a, and without it, D&D would not be what it is right now, nor even close. They tried to shift to OGL1.1, a new license that is, in a word, PREDATORY. Horrific, nasty shit.

OGL1.1 was quietly sent to large creators to sign. It then got leaked. The community erupted. The backlash was loud and unanimous. WotC was radio silent for like two weeks. They finally gave a single-sentence "we'll explain soon" tweet on DnDBeyond's account. Then more silence.

A WotC employee reached out to large creators to blow the whistle on WotC. The source was verified, and they shared that WotC sees the community as an obstacle between them and their money, all they care about is bottom line, and they're delaying in hopes we forget and move on.

And also that they are mainly looking at DnDBeyond subscription cancelations to gauge the financial impact; they don't care about our sentiments, only our money. So everyone erupted into signal boosting for others to unsubscribe as the single and best way to make ourselves heard. Cue the mass unsubscribing.

Today (January 13th 2023), a shitty PR piece was posted on DnDBeyond full of blatant lies and, in my opinion, barely-contained saltiness. Right before that, though, OGL2.0 leaks came out; the tweaks they'd begrudgingly made following the backlash. 2.0 is basically just as bad as 1.1; they just spoke of it as being more changed than it was.

In other words, they keep bold-faced lying to a community of rules-lawyers who recreationally read fine print :)

Meanwhile, Paizo (creators of Pathfinder) has come to the rescue, vowing to release a truly open license that will allow everyone to continue pursuing the livelihoods they're passionate about; this is the Open RPG Creative License, or "ORC".

Canceling subscriptions immediately sends a potent message, even if you may have to resubscribe later for functionality in your games. You'll still have the remainder of your billing cycle to enjoy paid perks.

Everything's a little on fire, but I think we'll be okay ♥️

OGL1.0a was never meant to be revocable, as loudly stated in the past couple days by the very people who authored it. It is very likely that WotC is actually just bluffing and bullying, and is actually powerless to revoke it--something many lawyers more knowledgeable than myself seem to be suggesting. In which case, it is my greatest hope in all of this that 3rd party creators are able to continue doing what they love, with no further interruptions.

Remember: the majority of WotC and DnDBeyond employees feel the exact same way we do, but they don't have a choice. Hasbro is the enemy here. Be kind to each other, and know where blame should and should not be placed. If you want to stay up to speed, the account of @.DnD_Shorts seems to be a very active and informed voice, largely responsible for sharing the first leak. If Twitter makes you want to puke, I completely understand; DnD_Shorts also has a YouTube channel with frequent updates on the situation posted in video format.

It's cathartic to me to try to signal boost this stuff, and provide summaries that might help others stay informed. It helps me feel like I'm somehow able to affect these nasty things that are otherwise just inflicted onto lil guys in the community like myself.

However, this has been beyond exhausting and stressful. I'm going to start untangling myself and stepping back from posting about this issue so I can hopefully restore some of my own sanity.

It's been really crazy--in a good way--to see the power this community has when rallied together under a common threat. It makes me proud to be in that community.

At the end of the day, all TTRPGs are really just exercises in creativity and fun. The golden rule has always been and should always be that there is no right or wrong way to play, other than what suits you and those you play with. Likewise, no one should ever feel guilty or judged by others for playing one system over another. It's okay to like D&D5e despite all this. No matter how much they've tried, Wizards of the Coast cannot claim jurisdiction over the invaluable memories you've made, and what has become a creative outlet for countless people. Myself included.

Boycotting is a great way to be heard, since they only care about money. But continuing to use the content you have to play D&D5e is your prerogative, and hurts no one. Furthermore, it's also okay if you can't cancel your DnDBeyond subscription because you rely on it too heavily for your games. That doesn't make you a traitor. That doesn't estrange you from the community. DnDBeyond, at its core, is a great tool that is popular for a reason; it's the new leadership that is forcing it to become something it wasn't meant to be. One day, I hope to be able to resubscribe in good conscious, and I hope that day is soon.

To reiterate, if anyone's even read down this far... be kind to one another. Keep in mind that big enemies win when the party is divided. You can love or hate anything you want in the TTRPG sphere, but how you feel about it does not invalidate someone else feeling the opposite.

Be kind. Be patient. Be empathetic. We're already coming out on top.

[baronfulmen]

Here’s the secret about D&D 5th Edition...

Honestly it’s not that great.

I’m not saying it’s bad - not at all!  It’s actually a very good system in a lot of ways.  But the thing it’s best at is being fairly simple for new players (while still having enough complexity to feel like a serious game) and so once you’ve played it for a while or you get to higher levels... well...

Look, I ran multiple 5e games, one of which went for 103 sessions.  I’m not a hater.  But I’ve played a LOT of other systems, so I know when something is not working properly.  Combat is BORING in D&D, unless the DM goes to great lengths to make it exciting.  You attack, or eldritch blast, or whatever.  Then you do that again.

I’m not an idiot, I know that’s not literally all that you do.  But it’s what the system encourages.  And that’s not how it has to be.  There are better systems.  Pathfinder 2e is amazing so far (I’m still learning it) if you’re okay with the rules being a little more crunchy.  FATE is a great system if you abhor the crunch.  Savage Worlds is a little in-between and has multiple settings.  There’s Blades in the Dark for a gritty heist kinda game.  There’s Monster of the Week if you want to have a simple game that still has some character growth.

5th edition is good to learn about what role playing games are, but I’m begging you to branch out.  Not just because of this OGL thing, (though that does mean WotC is losing a lot of 3rd party developers and let me tell you the official 5e adventures and source books are... not great) but because different systems are good for different things and different people and chances are there’s one out there that you’ll love SO MUCH MORE.

[gaysheep]

promo crosspost for my friend marcy! she doesn't use this site anymore, but please give her work a peek, especially if you're a ttrpg enthusiast. trihex is super promising!

[bunchofwetsnakes]

LFG among Otherkin

Hello, everybody. I happen to be making a dnd campaign (not really dnd, its pathfinder 2e but same basic idea just better) and i want to run it for a bunch of otherkin. The game system by default has playable fairies, vampires, leshies, cat people, hyena people, etc, BUT I also have a 3rd party books for us DRAGONS. Its also gonna get awakened animals soon-ish. Wanna play your kintype? because i'd like to, but i'll be the one GM-ing. PM me if interested. <3

[sprintingowl]

Writing 3rd Party Content For TTRPGs

I've written, uh, a few tabletop rpgs from the ground up, building the entire system to fit the game's themes and subject matter, but that always feels like heavy lifting.

So when I want to relax but I still want to write something, I write 3rd party content.

Every game system treats 3rd party content a little differently, and some of the AAs have restrictions on whether you can sell the content you write, but the biggest publisher (D&D), a lot of the single As, and most of the indie is not just cool with but encourages it.

Some publishers put restrictions on what you can do with your 3rd party material. Paizo's Pathfinder 2nd ed license requires you to send a copy of your work to them. Mork Borg's license requires you to add a text block clarifying that your game isn't an official Mork Borg product and it also disallows racist or homophobic content. Mausritter requires you to add a text blurb and disallows translations.

These restrictions are more common in the single As. As you get into the indies, you're more likely to see a Creative Commons Attribution license (CC BY, which lets you go wild as long as you credit the original author), or just the phrase "Licensing - Go nuts."

The advantage of writing for someone else's system is that it gives my brain a break. I don't have to first create the universe. It's already created and I can fill out a little part of it.

Some of my favorite systems to write for have been Mork Borg (https://morkborg.com/), FIST (https://claymorerpgs.itch.io/fist), and No Nut November: Squirrels Of The Post Apocalypse (https://mitchelldaily.itch.io/nut). However, the best system to write for is whichever one *you're* most psyched about.

As an example of all this, I've added a link to Fisk Borg below. Fisk Borg is 62 pages of me stuffing fishing into the gloomy, pre-apocalyptic fantasy world of Mork Borg. I think it took me three days to draft, and a couple weeks to playtest and edit.

Of course, I am not an expert in 3rd party publishing, and there's lots of systems I'm not familiar with, but if anyone has any questions or is looking for resources, I'm happy to give advice to the best of my ability.

[monstersdownthepath]

Been on a binge of rereading one of my favorite shonen manga series, and got inspired to ask this because it's actually related to a thing I'm writing: How would you say characters from that kind of battle media would compare *physically* in Pathfinder? I specify *physically* because magic makes things go weird, even if we put the reality-altering power of Wish off the table. Greater Teleport, Plane Shift, Dominate Person... most of that power isn't in direct confrontation, but rather ending the fight the moment, or before it even begins. On the other hand, d20 systems struggle from giving martials supremely world-altering power through raw might. A +47 to hit on eleven attacks every six seconds is nuts to be sure and can absolutely end a fight the moment the enemy gets in range, but it doesn't have the flair of 'I'm going to punch you so hard into the ground the entire city is going to be folded around you like a sandwich'. Or 'I am going to swing my sword, and proceed to cut this glacier in half from a quarter of a kilometre away'. Even at 30, 40 Str you just can't pull off those sorts of stunts. A Level 20 Barbarian is strong, to be sure, and with Mythic can do whack things like throw people into orbit (Limitless Range + Body Bludgeon my beloved), but overall there's not much 'spectacle' baked into combat in Pathfinder. You're usually limited to theatre of the mind or 3rd-party like Path of War. Which is, admittedly, excellent. but that's neither here nor there.

Bonus points if you know which series I'm talking about.

Pathfinder is, unfortunately, quite limited in what insane nonsense martial characters can do. Sure, when you're standing right next to someone, absolutely blending them with TWF is impressive... on paper. In practice, it relies a lot on the DM going full theater of the mind to make it match the spectacle of what Wizards can do.

I suppose that's the horrible price Pathfinder pays for being a relatively grounded and gritty fantasy setting instead of the off-the-wall shounen. A 20th level or, hell, even a 12th Fighter in Pathfinder is downright superhuman, but they're superhuman in a "medieval live-action fantasy" way, not a "logic-defying cartoon physics" way. I'm certain if a DM was willing to work with the player, they could pull off the same wacky/awe-inspiring stunts! But sadly, base Pathfinder has no feats that allow you to slash your sword so hard you can bisect an entire 300-foot long dreadnought. Yet.

[lonesomechunk]

more work I've done for Pathfinder Infinite, this time its Cooking Unleashed, a supplement I made to add player options for all the fun cooking items released in treasure vaults. Drawing the gelatinous gummies and making them look slimy was a lot of fun! If you're interested you can find it here: https://www.pathfinderinfinite.com/product/425794/Cooking-Unleashed?affiliate_id=1244547

[theabstruseone]

Wizards of the Coast, Dungeons & Dragons, and the Open Gaming License (OGL)

So this story has broken out of the tabletop roleplaying community and gotten into the mainstream and, due to outlets covering the story who aren't well-versed in the RPG industry, there's a LOT of misinformation going around. So I'm going to try to clear up what's going on. Short version: The new OGL is a shitshow, but people are treating speculation and rumor as fact and a lot of people are focusing on the wrong problems.

Oh, and if anyone wants to know why they should listen to me about this: I've been covering the tabletop roleplaying game industry for almost a decade and it's been my primary job for over six years. I've also done extensive research on the history of tabletop roleplaying and made several videos about small aspects of it.

First a bit of history.

Side note: Pretty much every sentence in this part is an entire whole-ass Story on its own, so I'm glossing over a lot of stuff to stay focused on the Open Gaming License.

In 1974, Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson wrote a new game based on the Chainmail miniature wargame called Dungeons & Dragons. This is widely considered the start of the tabletop roleplaying game genre. The game was published by a company called TSR Inc., which was taken over by the heir to the Buck Rogers publishing fortune, Lorraine Williams. By the 1990s, TSR dug itself into a deep financial hole. It was on the verge of bankruptcy before being purchased by Wizards of the Coast, the makers of Magic: The Gathering.

Wizards of the Coast launched a new Third Edition of Dungeons & Dragons in 2000 and, as part of the launch, released the Open Gaming License (OGL). This license allowed third-party publishers to create their own products based off of D&D 3rd Edition with some restrictions (they couldn't use specific intellectual property of Wizards of the Coast like the Forgotten Realms setting or some monsters created specifically for Dungeons & Dragons rather than based on myth or folklore). This launched a boom of third-party publishers creating their own products under the "D20 System" label.

The primary reason for creating the Open Gaming License was that we almost lost Dungeons & Dragons altogether. If TSR had fallen into bankruptcy, the assets of the company would be divvied up by creditors and likely auctioned off. Meaning the rights could be scattered to the wind or picked up by a company with no intention of developing a new game or keeping old material in print. Or worse, the rights could have been chopped up so that it became a confusing quagmire to figure out who owns what precisely. This actually has happened in many cases in tabletop roleplaying over the decades with several games currently (and likely permanently) out of print because nobody knows who owns the rights to them.

With the OGL, it was ensured that, at least in some capacity, Dungeons & Dragons would survive.

When Wizards of the Coast decided to update the game to the 4th Edition, they decided not to release 4th Edition rules under the OGL, but offered publishers an alternate but more restrictive license called the Game System License (GSL). This license was so unpopular it's difficult to even find a copy of the license online anymore.

As part of this move to 4th Edition, Wizards of the Coast canceled their contract with a company called Paizo to create the official D&D magazines Dragon and Dungeon. Paizo, who were also publishing campaign collections called Adventure Paths under the OGL, decided they wanted to keep making material for D&D 3rd Edition. So they created their own version of D&D called Pathfinder. Pathfinder became very popular in the gaming community as an alternative to D&D 4e. For modern fans, the home campaign that eventually became Critical Role started out as a Pathfinder campaign.

Due to a combination of factors, Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition was not as successful as Wizards of the Coast's new owner, Hasbro, hoped it would be. It was not a "failure" in terms of a tabletop roleplaying game as it sold very well for a TTRPG and maintained its spot as the highest-selling RPG in the industry through mass-market channels throughout its lifetime (even if Pathfinder did spend a year out-selling it in hobby channels like comic book and game stores). But Hasbro is a multibillion-dollar corporation and they expected D&D to perform as well as their other large brands and it underperformed to that expectation.

So when Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition was in development in 2014 under the name "D&D Next", expectations from Hasbro were lowered and far more realistic. They were more hands-off and less focused on aggressive monetization of the brand. This meant that D&D 5e was released under the OGL. A new boom of third-party content resulted. Several companies ran Kickstarter campaigns for D&D 5e-compatible material, some raising hundreds of thousands and even millions of dollars.

Then, thanks to huge gains in the audience from live streaming, YouTube, and podcasting, Dungeons & Dragons became a major hit again under 5e. The game experienced a revitalization and managed to meet the high expectations that Hasbro had for 4e.

The New Open Gaming License

In 2022, Wizards of the Coast announced they were "refreshing" D&D 5e with a new product codenamed "OneD&D". This would not be a new edition, just an update to the previous edition. All 5e material would still be compatible with the new "OneD&D".

In December of 2022, rumors started floating around that Wizards of the Coast was going to "abolish" the Open Gaming License. These rumors were based on pure speculation and "insider information" which turned out to be only partially accurate. Just before Christmas, Wizards of the Coast made a blog post on D&D Beyond (their online portal for D&D) explaining that OneD&D would still use the Open Gaming License, but an updated version of the license.

This new version of the license would function less like the GNU Public License for open-source software on which the OGL was based on, but more like the license that Epic uses for its Unreal Engine for video games. Companies could still use the OGL, but would have to register their sales if they make more than $50,000. If a company makes more than $750,000 a year in gross sales, it will have to pay a royalty to Wizards of the Coast.

In January, "leaks" of this new OGL appeared online via YouTube channels reading select pieces of it. Speculation and rumors ran rampant once again that Wizards of the Coast is "revoking" the OGL.

After almost a week of this, the actual Open Gaming License v1.1 document was also leaked. This was sent to some third-party publishers to get feedback and make them aware of the changes in advance of a public announcement under NDA. The document was split into two sections, the actual License itself which was written as a legal document and a commentary section that is not-legally-binding explanations of the intent of the legalese in that section.

Much of the speculation was based on early leaks, which focused on the not-legally-binding commentary section rather than the actual legal terms of the license. The one that caused the most concern was a statement "de-authorizing" all prior versions of the Open Gaming License.

This story broke out of the tabletop roleplaying news outlets and online community, who began to cover the story as well including outlets like Gizmodo, iO9, Polygon, and Forbes. In many cases, these outlets do not normally cover TTRPGs and Wizards of the Coast had yet to comment, so they ran the story with the version full of speculation and rumor framed by people who had a long history of criticizing Wizards of the Coast (for reasons justified and less so) because it was the only story they had.

Legal experts began to weigh in as well, with a decided split between those who believe that Wizards of the Coast COULD revoke the OGL and those who believe that Wizards of the Coast could only do so for those who agree to the new OGL v1.1 but NOT for people who did not agree to this license.

In the fallout of these events, several tabletop roleplaying companies began making announcements to stop producing third-party material for Dungeons & Dragons. Some announced a new focus on their own original systems, and others stated they planned to develop a version of D&D that they could legally publish without using the OGL.

And, as of January 11, 2023, this is where we're at. Wizards of the Coast only released a "We're working on a statement, please be patient" style statement only posted as a tweet, but no other comment since December.

So...CAN They Revoke the OGL? AKA I, Someone Who Is Not a Lawyer, Explains Legal Issues

When the rumors started in December, I spoke with a couple of lawyers I know, one of whom works in the TTRPG industry as a side-gig and one who works often with open software licenses. Other legal experts have weighed in as well. And the answer to that question is "...maybe?"

The entire case for revoking the OGL is based on a single clause in the original Open Gaming License that allows for the updating of the license. This cause states that, if the license is updated, creators may use any "authorized version" of the license.

However, the license itself does not state who authorizes the license or a process for making a different version of the license no longer authorized. Also, the OGL v1.0a (the older version) only has a process for revoking the license if one party violates the license. There are no other conditions for revoking the license listed in the OGL v1.0a. Also, case law exists for companies attempting to revoke rights under the GPL and other open-source software licenses where they were not legally allowed to.

However (again), the OGL states that the license is "perpetual", meaning it does not have an expiration date. It does NOT state that it is "irrevocable". Meaning that some legal experts believe that it CAN be revoked.

However (again again), when dealing with lawsuits over licenses and contracts, there are two things to keep in mind. In general (and varying on jurisdiction), ambiguity in a contract is generally interpreted as the fault of the side who drafted the contract and so, if the terms of a contract are unclear, the courts will generally side in favor of the one who did NOT write the contract. Yes, I said "generally" a lot because it all comes down to details and we won't know for sure how this will play out unless it goes to court.

Secondly, courts will examine things like industry standards when determining the validity of an interpretation of a contract, and the established industry standard within the TTRPG industry is that the OGL could not be revoked, a standard established by Wizards of the Coast themselves in 2006 when they stated so clearly in a FAQ about the license (formerly on their website, now only available via the Wayback machine...and this isn't because they're trying to hide it, but because they revamped their entire website several years ago and a whole lot of posts and documents from the 2000s were removed).

Finally, the Open Gaming License is used by companies beyond Wizards of the Coast. I don't even mean like Paizo (Pathfinder/Starfinder), Pelgrane Press (13th Age), and EN Publishing (Level Up) who made D&D derivative games, but systems like Basic Roleplay from Chaosium that powers Call of Cthulhu and RuneQuest, FATE which powers the licensed Dresden Files RPG, D6 System used by West End Games before that company collapsed for Ghostbusters and Star Wars, and several others. The systems released by these companies have NOTHING to do with Wizards of the Coast or Dungeons & Dragons, so "revoking" the OGL would directly affect them despite not interacting with Wizards of the Coast's IP in any way.

So CAN Wizards of the Coast revoke the Open Gaming License? Maybe, but probably not. But the bigger question is...do they actually WANT to do it? I mean, yeah, they probably WANT to, but what I mean is do I think it is their actual plan to revoke the OGL?

What I Think Wizards of the Coast is Actually Doing AKA It's Bad in a Different Way

Wizards of the Coast purchased D&D Beyond, a website that acted as a character builder and digital storefront for official Dungeons & Dragons material, last year for several million dollars. They also announced their own virtual tabletop (VTT) is in the works, a system that allows people to play RPGs remotely by simulating the tabletop experience on a computer or tablet. They also have a licensing deal with OneBookShelf (the company that owns the VTT Roll20 and the digital storefront DriveThruRPG) for Dungeonmasters Guild, a site that allows community content creators to make their own D&D products under a license more permissive than the OGL in content (you can set your adventures in Forgotten Realms or Ravenloft and use characters like Drizzt and Raistlin) but that requires payment of royalties to Wizards of the Coast.

I believe that Wizards of the Coast wants to encourage third-parties to sign the OGL v1.1 in order to gain access to their walled garden digital storefronts. Because D&D Beyond and the VTT are first-party products and Wizards of the Coast has a far larger marketing budget, they can easily create an environment where the vast majority of the tabletop gaming customer base uses their marketplaces. Meaning if you want access to millions of customers, you HAVE to go through Wizards of the Coast and agree to their royalty terms.

After a few years, this would give Wizards of the Coast the same dominance in the online tabletop gaming space as they have in the mass market space through Amazon, Barnes & Noble, Target, and other mainstream retail stores. And when the eventual Sixth Edition is released that is no longer compatible with 5e, they can release that document under the OGL v1.1 and cut off anyone from creating products without agreeing to the terms.

However, I don't think they want to eliminate the OGL v1.0a for ALL creations. It would be an iffy legal case and, as you've likely seen, would be a public relations nightmare. It would also be a bad move for Wizards of the Coast as the company (like all TTRPG companies) relies heavily on freelancers. Freelancers who typically get experience by writing and publishing on OGL material. I'd be utterly shocked if there was anyone working at Wizards of the Coast right now in a game design capacity who did NOT, if not getting their start in OGL material, at least published something under the OGL for D&D 3rd Ed, 3.5, Pathfinder, or 5e.

Not only would revoking the OGL v1.0a entirely be a costly endeavor, it would be a fruitless one. You may have seen in the various discussions the phrase, "You can't copyright game rules". This is true - game mechanics are covered in intellectual property law by patents, not copyright. You cannot copyright a set of game rules, you can only copyright the expression of those rules.

Side note: This is also the reason why every online recipe starts with an overly-long blog post about the recipe's role in the author's life - they can't copyright the actual recipe because it's just a list of ingredients and a description of the steps. They CAN copyright the story surrounding the recipe though, so if some bot steals their blog post and reposts it, they'll know because the story that IS protected under copyright was likely stolen as well.

While it isn't necessarily an easy process because it requires interpreting what is and is not a "creative expression" of describing the rules, it IS possible to recreate pretty much any game's core system in a way that is perfectly legal under copyright law. Kit Walsh wrote about this for the Electronic Frontier Foundation (though I disagree with some of her other conclusions here, that part is a pretty accurate explanation).

Side note: The EFF formed thanks to tabletop roleplaying games. The US Secret Service raided Steve Jackson Games, the publishers of GURPS who eventually went on to create the card game Munchkin. A group of lawyers represented SJG in their lawsuit against the government, and those lawyers decided to form the EFF as an organization to continue defending digital rights. I did a video about it a few years ago.

The OGL's primary value is that it addresses this hole in intellectual property law. While it's possible to publish compatible material for a game system without a license or even recreate the entire game system, it's not exactly easy. There are many ways that creators can accidentally violate copyright without realizing it.

For example, many Old School Rennaissance systems attempt to re-create the rules from older editions of Dungeons & Dragons which were NOT released under the OGL by using the material that IS in the OGL. However, they are limited in using some terms because they are too descriptive rather than functional, therefore falling under a creative expression. Like in previous editions, each level of a character class had its own title. Like Thieves in Advanced Dungeons & Dragons 1st Edition went from 1st level Rogue to 2nd level Footpad to 3rd level Cutpurse and so on. Those cannot be reproduced, but most other aspects of level advancement can.

The OGL solved the problem by giving clear guidance on what could and could not be used. Meaning Wizards of the Coast didn't have to worry about a dozen different versions of the 5th Edition of the D20 System popping up under different names -- completely bypassing their core rulebooks -- because it was unnecessary.

So I don't think Wizards of the Coast plans to announce a complete unilateral revoking of the OGL v1.0a nor never intended to do so. I think the plan was to introduce the royalty-based license first, using access to their walled garden as the benefit, then eventually switch entirely to the new license for Sixth Edition a few years down the line.

So What IS So Bad About the License?

The Unreal Engine license from Epic is a godsend for independent developers. The number of patents, copyrights, sublicenses, and so on involved in a video game engine make it necessary to obtain a license. A license with no up-front cost that only charges royalties after a certain level of gross sales is AMAZING for small developers because they can start working on a game and take risks because of lowered start-up costs of obtaining a license. It also means that, if the game isn't a big hit, the company isn't still on the hook for royalty payments off the paltry sum they make in sales.

None of that is the case in tabletop roleplaying games.

All this license does is allow Wizards of the Coast to start skimming profits off of other companies. If a creator's product makes more than $750,000 in gross sales, they have to start paying royalties on amounts over that. So say my Kickstarter takes off and funds for $800,000, I only owe royalties on $50,000 not the full $800,000.

However, part of the license makes clear that ALL FUNDS RAISED through a Kickstarter have the license applied. The thing is that most of the TTRPG Kickstarters that make over $750,000 do so through selling things other than the game product itself. Miniatures, sculptures, t-shirts, art books, personalized videos, creators running the game for backers, stuff like that which are products that ARE NOT licensed under the OGL. They don't include any material from the game so are not OGL material. BUT under this license, Wizards of the Coast gets to skim money off of those unrelated products.

On top of that, the license includes a sweetheart deal for Kickstarter. If you use Kickstarter to crowdfund your game, you only have to pay 20% royalties rather than the normal 25%. This comes on the heels of multiple competitors to Kickstarter gaining traction, such as BackerKit and GameFound. This is anti-competitive behavior.

Finally, if you don't pay royalties on time, you have to pay interest. Okay, sure...but the rate is 1.5% PER MONTH. That is a 19.56% per year interest rate which would be shitty for a credit card, let alone just for late fees on a royalty payment. If you screw up and underpay by 10% or more (easy to do when there's two royalty rates for different outlets between Kickstarter and all other sales), you're responsible for paying the costs of Wizards of the Coast auditing the account to determine the amount. How much these costs will be is not stated.

The OGL v1.1 also changes how material is used. While the OGL always had a share-a-like aspect to it so that, if you created an awesome class or feat or whatever, Wizards of the Coast could use it as well in their products...so could anyone else. For example, if I made a really cool Pirate class in my OGL book, you could use that Pirate class in your own book. Under the OGL v1.1, this is no longer the case. The flow of content is one-way ONLY to Wizards of the Coast. THEY can use any material created under the OGL, but no one else can.

This specific clause also causes problems for companies making licensed work. For example, Cubicle 7 released an OGL 5th Edition version of their Doctor Who roleplaying game, while Free League Publishing came out with a 5e Lord of the Rings RPG. Because of this clause in the license, those products would be impossible to make because Cubicle 7 doesn't own Doctor Who. The BBC does. Free League doesn't own Lord of the Rings, the Tolkien Estate does (technically, Embracer Group bought them, but that's a whole other mess). Cubicle 7 and Free League does not have the right to give Wizards of the Coast access to that intellectual property, but the OGL v1.1 REQUIRES that they do so.

OGL games using licensed properties have been a staple of the OGL since it came out. In the 3rd Ed era, there were D20 System RPGs for Babylon 5, Farscape, Warcraft, Stargate SG-1, Conan the Barbarian, and a lot more. It was a good way for smaller companies to grab licenses that weren't used and make a big splash as well as to allow customers access to games set in their favorite fictional settings without hoping Wizards of the Coast would show interest (as they did, making D20 versions of Wheel of Time, Star Wars, and a few other licensed properties during this era).

Further, there's a clause that allows Wizards of the Coast the right to revoke the OGL at their discretion. This is framed as allowing them to revoke the OGL from anyone publishing offensive material that's racist, sexist, homophobic, transphobic, etc. but that is NOT spelled out in the legally-binding section of the document. Meaning that if someone at Wizards of the Coast doesn't like something a creator has posted on social media, they can pull the license. This clause also eliminates all rights to challenge this: You cannot sue and there is no arbitration. Wizards of the Coast decides what material is and is not offensive.

And even if it WAS enforced as stated, there have been recent controversies with "ethics clauses" like this being enforced against women, BIPOC, LGBTQ+ people, disabled people, and other marginalized groups describing the bigotry, prejudice, and oppression they suffer under claims it violates the terms of the license. I'm not saying Wizards of the Coast WOULD do that, but at the same time, they don't have the best track record in these matters...

Then there's a new Indemnity clause. This means that if a creator publishes something under the OGL that gets them sued, Wizards of the Coast can decide the creator isn't defending the lawsuit well enough, take it over, and then bill the creator for all legal fees. It would be a rare situation (someone would have to work hard to get a claim that would involve the OGL itself in court), but the fact that Wizards reserves the right to take over a lawsuit and stick the creator with the bill isn't a good thing.

Then there's the "Other Products" section that expressly forbids the use of the OGL in the creation of any product other than a tabletop roleplaying game product. The comments section (the "not legally binding" bit) clarifies a list of products this covers including "videos, virtual tabletops or VTT campaigns, computer games, novels, apps, graphics novels, music, songs, dances, and pantomimes."

Of all of these, the only ones in which the OGL would even remotely apply would be virtual tabletops, apps, and computer games. And even that would be very specific cases where they recreate game rules from D&D. A novel doesn't include game rules. A video doesn't include game rules. A song doesn't include game rules. NONE of this stuff requires using the OGL in the first place so I have no idea why any of this is included (or rather, excluded) unless there are some further legal shenanigans planned for the future that affects Twitch, YouTube, and TikTok.

So yeah, this license is a garbage fire that's not good for creators and not good for the long-term health of Dungeons & Dragons as a game. Even if I don't believe that Wizards of the Coast plans to eliminate the OGL v1.0a and destroy a large portion of the tabletop roleplaying industry in the process, I do think their plan is detrimental to the hobby and reflects long-term plans for further anti-competitive behavior.

What Happens Now?

As of right now (early afternoon in North America on January 11, 2023), we're still waiting on an official statement from Wizards of the Coast. Until they make some official move, everyone in the industry is in a bit of a holding pattern or making plans for the worst.

For the vast majority of Dungeons & Dragons players, none of this means anything. There are millions of people who just play their regular game, use material from the core books, and that's it. They don't follow the industry, they likely don't even know that dedicated tabletop game stores exist let alone ever been to their local store because they bought their books from Amazon or Barnes & Noble and their dice from Target or Dollar General. They've never been on DriveThruRPG, aren't aware Pathfinder exists, and have put exactly as much consideration into following Wizards of the Coast accounts on social media as they have in following Starbucks.

However, the online tabletop RPG community has made a LOT of noise about this. Like I said earlier, more mainstream outlets have picked up this story. Hashtags related to it have been trending off and on all week on Twitter. People like @wilwheaton and Gail Simone are talking about the controversy. Some of these players, who make up the vast majority of the customer base for Dungeons & Dragons, might get curious. They won't understand what the OGL is or why it matters, but they'll come away with the impression that Wizards of the Coast did something that hurt small publishers and people don't like it.

Whatever happens, keep your friendly game designers in mind. Even the ones working for Wizards of the Coast. Many publishers have serious questions about their ability to continue as a business, and many creators are facing stress and burnout seeking off-ramps out of tabletop RPGs. Some other independent creators and their fans are taking the opportunity to be assholes by gloating over the situation, something which helps nobody. Designers who work for Wizards are being harassed even though this is very obviously a corporate-level decision that the people writing the game have absolutely no control over.

In short, the future is uncertain and it costs nothing to be kind to the people suffering right now.

Edit for a Post-Script: I've seen a post floating around Tumblr about this situation that tries to play off this situation as Good Ackshually because the OGL always involved signing away rights to gain access to something you already had. I want to reiterate a point I made above: "You can't copyright game mechanics" is far more complicated than a simple statement. Even the post itself explains all the legal pitfalls with that assumption by pointing out issues of mingling and other ways rules can be protected under copyright law. What the OGL did was allow independent creators with no budget - which is every single tabletop roleplaying game company outside of WotC, Paizo, and maybe a handful of others owned by large companies like Edge Studios (Azmodee/Embracer Group), White Wolf (Paradox Interactive), and a few others and even THOSE are tiny subsidiaries in a larger corporate umbrella. Pretty much every other roleplaying game company on the planet is under 10 total employees (often just one or two) and a bunch of freelancers.

This industry does not have the capital to hire a lawyer every time they want to release a new product to ensure the IP doesn't violate the law. The OGL allows those companies a clear framework to publish compatible material with the game system used by at LEAST 80% of the customer base of the industry without fear of legal threats. This is the difference between theory and practice. In theory, publishing without a license is better but in practice, it's a money sink and legal minefield. And telling publishers and professionals who have been working under the license for two decades now they should be thankful the entire industry is under threat of being upended is condescending at best.

Edit Part 2: I knew I'd forget some things that are terrible about the OGL v1.1

First, there are now two licenses, a Commercial and a Non-Commercial one. I still haven't figured out the purpose since it's the same license only the Commercial one has all the bits about royalties. It seems redundant because if someone's not making money, they wouldn't meet the threshold for reporting gross sales anyway since they don't make money.

Anyway, to the actual issue I forgot: Information gathering!

You have to register every single product you release under the OGL v1.1 with Wizards of the Coast. You must describe the product, state where you will offer it for sale, what price you will charge, provide contact information, and "filling out a form" (they don't state what other information will be on this form). There are no restrictions whatsoever placed on how Wizards of the Coast can use this information. Even the most benign version of how this information can be used is anti-competitive as it would give Wizards of the Coast free market research - if all products have to be registered but only products that make $50,000 in gross sales must have their sales reported, then Wizards of the Coast knows what products are selling and which ones are not.

The RPG industry has horrible market research information. There are only a handful of places to track what people are actually buying or playing. Few companies release sales information. All you can do is check Kickstarter yourself for what products are crowdfunding well, use ICv2's reporting which is limited to physical sales only at participating hobby game stores in North America (leaving out any store that doesn't participate, mass market outlets like Amazon, direct sales through a publisher's website, digital or print-on-demand sales from DriveThruRPG, etc.), and quarterly user reports from virtal tabletops Roll20 and Fantasy Grounds. That's ALL we have to judge where the market is. Having access to that kind of information would give Wizards of the Coast an even larger edge in the RPG market, which they already dominate.

And that's the benign reading. For example, there are no restrictions in the OGL v1.1 against selling that information to third parties. Granted, the European Union would have some things to say about that. Also, remember that the OGL v1.1 flows one-way. Wizards of the Coast can republish anything they like with no compensation or even credit provided to the previous author. If they see a particular product is selling well, they can just republish it themselves.

Edit 3: Wizards of the Coast FINALLY released a statement and...fuck me, I did NOT expect them to give up on the royalties. I figured that was the primary motivation for the license update. They're also changing the terms to make clear that Wizards of the Coast does not have the ability to publish material from third-parties (that part of the license was meant to protect them in case of convergent design, where somebody's third-party published adventure or sourcebook coincidentally has the same elements as a new sourcebook or one of the new big-budget TV/film/video game projects and just overreached according to the statement).

They still don't address the actual "open" part of the open license that would allow third-party publishers to share their material with other third-party publishers. There have also stated that content already released under the OGL v1.0a will not be affected by the change to a new OGL license (rumors are they're changing it from "OGL v1.1" to "OGL v2.0" but that's not in the statement), but have NOT stated whether they believe they have the right to unilaterally prevent anyone from continuing to use the OGL v1.0a if they do not agree to the new OGL. Both of these are major concerns with the new license.

However, we DO have a good update: Paizo is spearheading a new open license called the Open RPG Creative License or the ORC License. You can read about it in the link, but the primary points are that Paizo will NOT own this license nor will anyone else who makes money publishing RPGs - it will be managed by a non-profit to ensure that no company in the future can exact unilateral changes that affect the entire industry. The license will be perpetual and irrevocable. So far, major TTRPG companies participating include Paizo (Pathfinder, Starfinder), Chaosium (Call of Cthulhu, RuneQuest), Kobold Press (prolific 5e OGL publisher), Green Ronin (Dragon Age, The Expanse, Modern AGE), Atlas Games (Ars Magica, Over the Edge), Legendary Games (third-party OGL publisher of 5e, Pathfinder, Starfinder, and Savage Worlds), Pinnacle Entertainment Group (Savage Worlds, Deadlands), Rogue Genius Games (Owen K.C. Stephens' company), and I don't know how many others since the announcement was made.

We won't know for sure how this will shake out for the industry until the terms of the new OGL and the terms of the ORC License are made public, but either way, a trust has been broken as a multibillion dollar corporation came after small publishers trying to scrape together enough to make any money at all off their games, and the industry won't forget that easily.

EDIT FINALE

It's now January 29, 2023, and there's been a huge update that should close out this entire saga.

A couple weeks ago, Wizards of the Coast released a draft of the OGL v1.2 along with a survey for public feedback. The new version dropped the royalties entirely along with any claims of ownership to content created under the license and the registration requirements. It did keep the "morality clause" that was vaguely worded and overly broad allowing them to revoke the license from any company producing a product they considered "harmful", "obscene", or "illegal" without defining those terms. Meaning they could revoke the license from a company if LGBTQ+ content is deemed as "obscene" (which has happened before with licensed D&D content), or "illegal" if it includes queer content in some countries or "Critical Race Theory" in some American states, or "harmful" as "this is harmful to our profits because it's selling too well". The new version of the OGL also maintained that the OGL v1.0a would be "de-authorized".

The other attempt to placate critics was releasing 58 pages of the SRD 5.1 (the document that outlines what parts of the rules for Dungeons & Dragons were considered Open Gaming Content under the OGL v1.0a) would be released under a Creative Commons license. The pages included rules for combat, ability checks, monster abilities, and a few other aspects of the game but would NOT include races/species, classes, backgrounds, spells, magic items, or monster stat blocks. Basically, these 58 pages were functionally useless on their own as they referenced rules that were not included in the CC-licensed content. It would be impossible to create adventures (no monsters or treasure) or sourcebooks (no classes, races/species, or spells) under this license, which makes up the vast majority of third-party OGL content for 5e. I should also note the SRD 5.1 is over 400 pages long, meaning they released just over 10% of the already-stripped-down rules.

The survey went out about a week ago and, on Thursday, D&D Beyond announced on Twitter the results were pretty obvious the OGL v1.2 wasn't helping matters. And on Friday, January 27, the company announced that the survey would be closed early (it was originally scheduled to run until February 7) because between 85% to over 90% of people participating responded negatively to the questions posed in the survey. In response, Wizards of the Coast stated:

The Open Gaming License v1.0a would be left in place completely untouched as it has been since 2000.

The SRD 5.1 would be released under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International.

This is not a "we will do it at some point in the future pinkie swear" thing. As of that posting, the SRD 5.1 is now available under the Creative Commons license.

So the situation is resolved. Not only did Wizards of the Coast back down from their plans, they released more of the game to the public than was originally released.

This won't stop Wizards of the Coast from trying something similar in the future, but they'll have to do it with an entirely new and incompatible edition of the game. Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition is now freed as the rules are permanently and irrevocably part of the Creative Commons with no legal method for Wizards of the Coast to take it back.

[forthegothicheroine]

Other people have already laid out all the legal problems with WOTC’s war against the Open Game License, but as someone sort of in the industry, I want to briefly state how completely wrongheaded this move is, and how it’s based on a fundamental misunderstanding of roleplaying games. Presumably some higher-up was screaming “We own D&D and Magic, the two biggest fantasy gaming brands, why aren’t we as big as Disney?” but that’s just not how this works. D&D has players who, by the nature of the very game they are playing, like to create and adapt and most importantly, have control of their own stories. You just can’t own the concepts you’ve already put out in the world. What’s more, D&D is not the only game in town (literally)- people who still want that same experience will just switch to Pathfinder, and others may start to explore indie systems and settings. Podcasts will switch game systems, local game stores will have less D&D focus in their stock, Pathfinder will almost certainly become the new #1 game. These things are already out in the world, you can’t walk it back.

This is evil, yes, and this is foolish, yes, but it’s also going against the fact that every single D&D game I’ve ever played in has used homebrew and/or 3rd party stuff, because we like to create original stories. That’s the whole point of the hobby!

As, again, someone sort of in the industry, I’m not going to tell potential buyers what to play, that preference has nothing to do with me. I haven’t played strict D&D (as opposed to D&D-alikes like OSR or Pathfinder) myself for quite some time, so I won’t be specifically boycotting them. This is just a really, really bad decision, and even though I think it will prove ultimately unenforceable, the drop in good will may be hard to recover from.

[lootgoblinmarketplace]

You Don't Have to Play D&D

I'm not saying that you have to stop playing D&D, but its important to remember that no TTRPG deserves your undying brand loyalty.

Don't let any system restrict what you want to play at your table.

Homebrew and supplement the game like its your 100th playthrough of Skyrim and keep adding mods until it breaks!

If everyone is enjoying the game, it isn't because of "the brand".

Given all the 3rd party and system neutral content that exists out there nowadays, you don't ever need to buy an official book and still have an "authentic D&D experience".

Delving Dungeons and getting fantasy loot is what they wanted!

All my friends that wanted to "try D&D" didn't mind Pathfinder.

[paperanddice]

Berstuc look like hulking, moss-haired humanoids, usually muscular but universally broad-shouldered and muscular. Their head is covered in moss, wrapping around in the appearance of hair, usually hanging down to almost its waist from both head and chin. Despite their great size and imposing looks, they have a serene, almost soothing presence, and are immediately loved by plants and animals. This is a cover for the fact that they are one of the most insidious and dangerous kinds of demons, stalking woodlands and jungles to lure victims to their deaths.

Often a berstuc will pose as a benevolent forest spirit, politely greeting travellers through the forest it has chosen to hunt and allowing itself to be persuaded into providing directions or even acting as a guide for them. It will suggest secret locations deep within the forest, or find rapid shortcuts through dangerous terrain, only to turn its victims around and get them hopelessly lost before betraying them. Some berstuc simply strike the instant they've led their prey deep enough, while others will disappear suddenly and stalk the now lost party with glee. Wildlife seem to bend to the berstuc's whim, attacking the outsiders at its direction and harrying foes while the false forest spirit prepares for its battle.

Inspired by the Tome of Beasts 1. This post came out a week ago on my Patreon. If you want to get access to all my monster conversions early, as well as access to my premade adventures and other material I’m working on, consider backing me there!

Pathfinder 2e

Berstuc (Plant Demon) Creature 11 Large, Demon, Fiend, Plant, Unholy Perception +19; darkvision Languages Abyssal, Common, Sylvan, telepathy 100 feet, speak with animals, speak with plants Skills Athletics +23, Deception +21, Stealth +15 (+21 in forests), Survival +25 Str +6, Dex +0, Con +5, Int +1, Wis +2, Cha +4 Twisted Path (divine) The berstuc always gains the benefits of Cover Tracks in natural surroundings, even when moving at full speed. Creatures that travel with the berstuc for 1 hour become lost; for 24 hours, the DC for such creatures to Sense Direction is the berstuc's Survival DC if that's higher than the normal DC. AC 31; Fort +24, Ref +18, Will +21; +1 status to all saves vs. magic HP 232; Immunities poison; Weaknesses cold iron 10, holy 10 False Presence Animals and plants with an Intelligence below -3 do not attack the berstuc unless attacked first or ordered to by Command an Animal. Attempts to Command an Animal to attack the berstuc use the berstuc's Will DC instead of the animal's. Forest Survival Vulnerability A berstuc revels in allowing natural environments to kill travelers. If the berstuc ends its turn within 60 feet of a creature under the effects of the show the way spell or similar magic, or a creature within 60 feet of it succeeds on a Sense Direction or Command an Animal check, the berstuc takes 10d6 mental damage. Speed 35 feet, burrow 20 feet Melee claw +23 (magical, reach 10 feet, unholy), Damage 2d10+12 slashing plus Grab Divine Innate Spells DC 29, attack +21 ; 6th florishing flora, nature's pathway, tangling creepers; 5th dehydrate, translocate; 4th translocate (at will); 3rd putrefy food and drink (at will); 2nd entangling flora (at will), one with plants (at will), shape wood (at will); 1st lose the path (at will); cantrips (6th) tangle vine, timber Constant speak with animals, speak with plants Divine Rituals DC 29; demonic pact Swallow Whole [1 action] Medium 2d8+8 bludgeoning, Rupture 28

13th Age

Berstuc  Large 7th level blocker [demon]  Initiative: +9 Floral Fist +12 vs. AC (2 attacks) - 22 damage and the berstuc can grab the target. When the berstuc starts its turn grabbing an enemy, it can make an absorb attack against that target as a standard action that turn. [Special Trigger] Absorb +16 vs. PD (includes +4 grab bonus) - 45 damage and the berstuc absorbs the target into its body (hard save ends, 16+). While absorbed, it takes 4d8 damage at the start of its turn and is stuck, hampered, and unable to attack or effect anything outside of the berstuc (and vice-versa). If an absorbed creature deals at least 25 damage to the berstuc on its turn, it gains a +10 bonus to its save to escape. Burrower. False Presence: Nature icons cannot provide any assistance against the berstuc, as it can disguise itself from their gaze perfectly. Resist Lightning 16+. AC 24 PD 23 MD 17 HP 172