Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

OGL 1.1 and the future of MonkeyDM (Patreon)

Published:
2023-01-06 13:58:12
Imported:
2026-06

Content

Hello everyone,

As you may have heard that the upcoming OGL 1.1 update has leaked. You can read the details here:


I will be as honest with you as I was with my family.

It's bad.

I had some sources informing me of what was coming, but refused to believe it.

Yet here we are.

This is the worst case scenario.


Specifics:

  • WotC plans to terminate the OGL 1.0a with the release of OGL 1.1.
  • WotC owns all content you publish under the OGL 1.1.
  • WotC can change the license at any time with 30 day notification.
  • WotC will disallow content that is not a PDF or book (this would target FoundryVTT for example).
  • WotC can end your use of the license whenever they see fit.


To drive the point home, here's what WotC can do with this new license:

They can take a book that I created, sell it themselves with their much bigger marketing team, and then tell me to stop publishing it or they will put me out of business.


This is not a license that a 3rd party publisher can sign. I cannot run a business with a Sword of Damocles above my head at all times.

The bigger projects take multiple months if not years to create. Having to stop at a moment's notice, because my overlords order me to, is simply not sustainable.

I - and many other creators - will not be signing this OGL 1.1.


What does this mean?

I'm not sure.


Hopefully, WotC wakes up, and realize this is not the direction they want to go. They leave the OGL 1.0a in place, and me, and all other creators can go one with our life.

After all, a major reason why D&D is so big today is because anyone can make content for it.

If WotC chooses the most destructive path, things get worse for everyone involved. I have back-up plans, notably a 3rd party 5e-compatible system with a truly open license, but it will still affect a lot of areas of the business for the worse. 

5e is what I play, and is what you play as well. This means that I plan to continue making 5e adjacent content as the primary focus, at least for this year. If WotC lawyers don't come knocking that is.

For the time being, I will publish a lot of unfinished content in the coming days, to cover me for the rest of the year, in case WotC decides to move forward with the OGL 1.1 as is.

I truly hope that Wizards of the Coast will make the right call for the community.


WotC said it themselves in the leak:

“We will receive community pushback and bad PR, and We’re more than open to being convinced that We made a wrong decision.”

Now everyone is telling them they made the wrong decision, let's hope they listen.

Take Care

-Evan | MonkeyDM

#OpenDnD

Comments

Johann Weise

Companies like you are liquidating their stock of books just to make sure they don't need to pulp them when WOTC drives the license home. This is a terrible business move on WOTC's part and it I both hate that you are going through it and hoping for the fact another product/license comes out just like Paizo did with Pathfinder that will bring us new games to play. The legal storm that will come from major publisher's, hell even Critical Role has to pay a 25% tithe, will be ugly and glorious at the same time. I'm sorry you are going through this and you are not alone.

monkeydm
>>99036340

Thank you for the kind words :) Critical Role has been a sponsor of DnDbeyond for multiple years, I would be very surprised if WotC didn't extend them a custom deal. I was considering Pathfinder as well, but they also function under the OGL. My gut instinct tells me that the 25% is there specifically for Paizo, to put them under. 25% for them means that they'd have to raise the cost of their books AND shipping by that amount to be able to keep running, which is unsustainable. Once again thank you for the words of support, this is not the end, but it certainly means that big changes will have to happen.

Axel Stengel

I'm with you all the way, these changes are scary for creators like you. I really hope they understand the errors they're making but coming from the W40k fandom, I have my doubts.... Do you have any informations about how your Kickstarter will be treated as it will ship after the OGL is published ? Whatever happens, we are with you and I'm not planning on stopping supporting you !

Empty

Thank you for your post. You are the first creator I have seen directly respond and it's with a line in the sand. I respect that so much. I'm still relatively new to TTRPGs and 5e is the first and only system I've played so far, so obviously it's what I'm familiar with. That said I hope some creators can build something that's easy to transition to but not in any way connected to Hasbro's IP. If they are willing to present this sort of highway robbery as a reasonable path there is no reason to trust them going forward, even if they walk this back.

david raistrick

Evan, thanks for pushing your comment out. Mike Shea has a good take on this, https://mikeshea.net/thoughts_on_the_ogl_1_1.html and it reflects my own reading and understanding of the license issue. Basically, as long as you don't try to use the One D&D SRD (and thereby agree to 1.1), there's no reason you can't continue to public 1.0 or 1.0a material. Accepting the 1.1 agreement, if it continues to retain the language about replacing 1.0, would be the _only_ thing that can replace the 1.0 or 1.0a OGL. Even if they stop publishing it, the published it _with_ the SRD. Plus, it should honestly not be difficult to just drop the SRD references and not need to worry about the OGL at all.

James Klinect

Pigs get fat, hogs get slaughtered. Hasbro/WOTC marked D&D for death the second they called it "undermonetized" and, given what they're doing with MTG, this isn't too shocking. It is sad nonetheless. Huge fan of your content, hoping things work out here. I submitted feedback as a consumer to WOTC via their forms to explain my thoughts in no uncertain terms, but I really don't think they care. A $9 billion entity (Hasbro) isn't really concerned about the fallout of their capitalistic actions if they can extract a few more cents out of the property they're milking to death in the process. Their customers = major shareholders who want an ROI, not us, and those folks are down 40% from this point last year. We, the consumer with a wallet, are the product, and we're not spending enough on them apparently, lol. It'll take a significant activist investor/ player in the space (thinking a Critical Role type entity) protesting this change, or some threat of litigation against them (i.e. is what they're doing 100% legal? are they just gambling on people not challenging it?) to have any sway.

Slightly_Degenerate

Having flashbacks to the pre-ogl days of products labeled "compatible with popular fantasy roleplaying games."

Andrew McFaul

My take is that it feels dishonest for WotC to revoke the old agreement... they should have at least had changes only apply to content moving forward... I'm not a lawyer, but the wording seems suspicious to me.

Licia

I'll continue to support your content no matter the system. If I have to convert I do, nbd. I hope you can continue to do what you love and are so talented at. I'm worried about the kick-starter book too.

Licia

I won't rehash all the arguments I made previously elsewhere, but WotC has lost me for good.