# Which RPG games depend on the OGL 1.0a?



## Yaarel

Which RPG games depend on the OGL 1.0a?

There are myriad published and unpublished RPG games that depend on the OGL 1.0a. The list here is to get a sense of the games that we might be familiar with, that Hasbro-WotC now threatens with its new OGL 1.1.



*13th Age* by Fire Opal Media, published under license by Pelgrane Press (OGL)

*Castles & Crusades* by Troll Lord Games (OGL)

*Fate* by Fantastic Adventures in Tabletop Entertainment (OGL and CC-BY 3.0)

*Fudge System Reference Document* by Grey Ghost Games (OGL)

*Gumshoe System* by Pelgrane Press (CC-BY-3.0/OGL)

*Labyrinth Lord* by Goblinoid Games (OGL)

*OSRIC* by Stuart Marshall and Mathew Finch (OGL)

*Pathfinder* Roleplaying Game by Paizo (OGL)

*Pathfinder 2* Roleplaying Game by Paizo (OGL)



Please add more games to this list. Start going thru your own collections to confirm that the game depends on the OGL 1.0a.


----------



## MGibster

Time for me to eat crow, I had no idea FATE and Gumshoe used WotC's OGL.


----------



## mamba

Being licensed under is not the same as being dependent on. You only depend on it if your game uses parts of WotC’s Open Game Content (and/or third party OGC that relies on it).

At a minimum anything dual-licensed like Fate should be fine and can just drop the OGL if it no longer is convenient / beneficial to include it.


----------



## Greg K

I think both Everyday Heroes and Green Ronin's Mutants and Masterminds, but not certain.
Edit: I think Green Ronin's True20 as well.


----------



## GMforPowergamers

Yaarel said:


> Which RPG games depend on the OGL 1.0a?
> 
> There are myriad published and unpublished RPG games that depend on the OGL 1.0a. The list here is to get a sense of the games that we might be familiar with, that Hasbro-WotC now threatens with its new OGL 1.1.
> 
> 
> 
> *13th Age* by Fire Opal Media, published under license by Pelgrane Press (OGL)
> 
> *Castles & Crusades* by Troll Lord Games (OGL)
> 
> *Fate* by Fantastic Adventures in Tabletop Entertainment (OGL and CC-BY 3.0)
> 
> *Fudge System Reference Document* by Grey Ghost Games (OGL)
> 
> *Gumshoe System* by Pelgrane Press (CC-BY-3.0/OGL)
> 
> *Labyrinth Lord* by Goblinoid Games (OGL)
> 
> *OSRIC* by Stuart Marshall and Mathew Finch (OGL)
> 
> *Pathfinder* Roleplaying Game by Paizo (OGL)
> 
> *Pathfinder 2* Roleplaying Game by Paizo (OGL)
> 
> 
> 
> Please add more games to this list. Start going thru your own collections to confirm that the game depends on the OGL 1.0a.



first thank you, this is something we should have started hours maybe a day ago. Good on you for catching it.

second, I think it would be prudent to separate the list into "uses WotC base D&D roll d20 system" and "just uses the license for the game they made up on there own."

Fate Fudge and Gumshoe are not based on WotC mechanics at all they just use the license for there own game.

Also add Mutants and Masterminds.


----------



## GMforPowergamers

Greg K said:


> I think both Everyday Heroes and Green Ronin's Mutants and Masterminds, but not certain.
> Edit: I think Green Ronin's True20 as well.



True20 and the new Renegade games (Gi Joe, Power Rangers, and Transformers) Essence20

Essence20 I laugh the most "Wait, you asked us to do this, you licensed us to do this, now your subsidiary is trying to stop it"


----------



## Yaarel

MGibster said:


> Time for me to eat crow, I had no idea FATE and Gumshoe used WotC's OGL.



Some games have multiple licenses, and some change with edition. So doublecheck all of these.


----------



## Greg K

GMforPowergamers said:


> Essence20 I laugh the most "Wait, you asked us to do this, you licensed us to do this, now your subsidiary is trying to stop it"



 
Maybe, they have a special license as WOTC did with Lucas for Knights of the Old Republic


----------



## mhd

Mongoose's *Legend*, their Trademark-free version of RuneQuest/BRP

And thus some games based on it, like D101 Games' *OpenQuest*
Until now this list included *Delta Green*, but they just declared their independence.


----------



## JEB

GMforPowergamers said:


> True20 and the new Renegade games (Gi Joe, Power Rangers, and Transformers) Essence20
> 
> Essence20 I laugh the most "Wait, you asked us to do this, you licensed us to do this, now your subsidiary is trying to stop it"



I don't see any indication that the Transformers RPG is using the OGL, can you point me to the section in the book? (Dungeon Crawl Classics buries it, so I could have missed it.)

EDIT: On that note, Dungeon Crawl Classics is an OGL game (if as minimally as possible).


----------



## MacDhomnuill

This is the wrong question. Open Game Content is the real issue. Companies that stupidly slapped the OGL into their books but don’t use OGC can just delete the OGL from the pdf and carry on, games that use OGC are screwed. The real kicker here is that OGC is not legally defined anywhere to the best of my knowledge so I expect WOTC to claim its anything in any of the SRDs.


----------



## CapnZapp

Every game that uses D&D concepts like Fighters, Clerics, Wizards, levels, classes, Elves, Orcs, are in the danger zone.

Don't kid yourself you're fine just because you think you will be able to use legalese to weasel yourself out of any formal definitions.

You are only safe* if your game demonstrably uses a different game engine than that of D&D. Or in other words, your game has never had the appeal of being similar to or like D&D (any version). Games like BRP/RQ, GURPS Fantasy or MERP/RoleMaster.

*) and no, contrary to what you might think, I am not a lawyer


----------



## CapnZapp

*Dungeon Crawl Classics* from Goodman Games ("DCC RPG is published under the Open Game License.")


----------



## Morrus

MGibster said:


> Time for me to eat crow, I had no idea FATE and Gumshoe used WotC's OGL.



They do not depend on the OGL and use none of WotC's OGC. They use it as a convenient tool to share their content to their 3PP communities, but can easily switch that license for another. They're not licensing content in, they're merely licensing their own content out.


----------



## Grendel_Khan

MGibster said:


> Time for me to eat crow, I had no idea FATE and Gumshoe used WotC's OGL.




Yeah this is making me realize, to my chagrin, that I have no idea why non-D&D-ish games ever used it.


----------



## Reynard

MacDhomnuill said:


> This is the wrong question. Open Game Content is the real issue. *Companies that stupidly slapped the OGL into their books* but don’t use OGC can just delete the OGL from the pdf and carry on, games that use OGC are screwed. The real kicker here is that OGC is not legally defined anywhere to the best of my knowledge so I expect WOTC to claim its anything in any of the SRDs.



What do you mean "stupidly." It was intentional. The idea was that they wanted their games open, too, to enjoy the benefits of what Open Gaming offers: innovation, support and community.


----------



## Cadence

Level Up/A5E by EN


----------



## Morrus

Grendel_Khan said:


> Yeah this is making me realize, to my chagrin, that I have no idea why non-D&D-ish games ever used it.



In order to easily license their games to their own creator communities. The OGL is the Open _Game _License not the Open D&D License.

The OGL is just a convenient ready made tool. They can easily just switch to another sharealike license.


----------



## Reynard

Grendel_Khan said:


> Yeah this is making me realize, to my chagrin, that I have no idea why non-D&D-ish games ever used it.



Because it was a movement built around a document. WotC being jerks now doesn't diminish the fact that it was an unqualified GOOD THING for 23 years.

It is kind of gross how folks are turning on the OGL instead of those trying to abuse and eliminate it.


----------



## MGibster

Morrus said:


> They do not depend on the OGL and use none of WotC's OGC. They use it as a convenient tool to share their content to their 3PP communities, but can easily switch that license for another. They're not licensing content in, they're merely licensing their own content out.



Got'cha.  Why reinvent the wheel if you've already got something you can use.


----------



## CapnZapp

Cadence said:


> Level Up/A5E by EN



I was wondering if there was a reason this wasn't on the list? (The only reason I can think of is "it's too obviously a OGL game")''

So thank you for that


----------



## doctorhook

CapnZapp said:


> I was wondering if there was a reason this wasn't on the list? (The only reason I can think of is "it's too obviously a OGL game")''
> 
> So thank you for that



I’m extremely curious about what will happen to Level Up: A5E now…


----------



## CapnZapp

doctorhook said:


> I’m extremely curious about what will happen to Level Up: A5E now…



Honestly I don't think Hasbro's first priority is to go after existing content. Their goal is to stop future content. So I would guess EN Publishing might get away with selling off their remaining stock of physical media.


----------



## Reynard

Also, some companies have released SRDs of their core systems without necessarily releasing an OGL game. Free Leagues Year Zero Engine, for example (which I want to use for a project).


----------



## GMforPowergamers

CapnZapp said:


> Every game that uses D&D concepts like Fighters, Clerics, Wizards, levels, classes, Elves, Orcs, are in the danger zone.
> 
> Don't kid yourself you're fine just because you think you will be able to use legalese to weasel yourself out of any formal definitions.
> 
> You are only safe* if your game demonstrably uses a different game engine than that of D&D. Or in other words, your game has never had the appeal of being similar to or like D&D (any version). Games like BRP/RQ, GURPS Fantasy or MERP/RoleMaster.
> 
> *) and no, contrary to what you might think, I am not a lawyer



Rifts and TORG (and I know there are others) both predate the OGL by a decade or more and use roll D20 and add modifier to hit target number. Both are more then different enough not to matter. 

THis is important... as you said 


> You are only safe* if your game demonstrably uses a different game engine than that of D&D.



and I hope that is not lost on all the companies trying to push forward.


----------



## GMforPowergamers

MGibster said:


> Got'cha.  Why reinvent the wheel if you've already got something you can use.



I hope that they get a desent lawyer and have them rewrite the OGL with irrevocable and then just put out stuff again... I still need to try FATE


----------



## CapnZapp

GMforPowergamers said:


> Rifts and TORG (and I know there are others) both predate the OGL by a decade or more and use roll D20 and add modifier to hit target number. Both are more then different enough not to matter.



More to the point, there's no money in those games. So they're safe because Hasbro won't care, not because they're using their d20's differently...



GMforPowergamers said:


> that is not lost on all the companies trying to push forward.



Personally though I am of the opinion there are already more than enough (fantasy) rulesets to go around.

I realize we're in front of a wave of new game systems because it's much easier to sell complete new game systems, but I would have loved it if at least some of the current 3PPs would look around for existing fantasy rulesets and base their not-D&D products around them...


----------



## Reynard

CapnZapp said:


> More to the point, there's no money in those games. So they're safe because Hasbro won't care, not because they're using their d20's differently...



WotC isn't claiming copyright on "roll a d20."


----------



## CapnZapp

Reynard said:


> WotC isn't claiming copyright on "roll a d20."



No.

But even if they were, you'd be fine if you made no money. Is the point I was making.


----------



## mhd

CapnZapp said:


> More to the point, there's no money in those games.



No money in Torg or Rifts?


----------



## Micah Sweet

CapnZapp said:


> Honestly I don't think Hasbro's first priority is to go after existing content. Their goal is to stop future content. So I would guess EN Publishing might get away with selling off their remaining stock of physical media.



You realize that would still kill the game right?  Not being able to produce new product is kinda a big deal.


----------



## Umbran

MacDhomnuill said:


> The real kicker here is that OGC is not legally defined anywhere to the best of my knowledge so I expect WOTC to claim its anything in any of the SRDs.




The best of your knowledge... could use a bit of buffing up.

OGLv1.0a
"_1.(d)"Open Game Content" means the game mechanic and includes the methods, procedures, processes and routines to the extent such content does not embody the Product Identity and is an enhancement over the prior art and any additional content clearly identified as Open Game Content by the Contributor, and means any work covered by this License, including translations and derivative works under copyright law, but specifically excludes Product Identity."

"8. Identification: If you distribute Open Game Content You must clearly indicate which portions of the work that you are distributing are Open Game Content._"

So, in every document that is published under the SRD, what counts as OGC is supposed to be clearly indicated.

For example, the 5e srd says:

"_The following items are designated Product Identity, as defined in Section 1(e) of the Open Game License Version 1.0a, and are subject to the conditions set forth in Section 7 of the OGL, and are not Open Content:_ "


Spoiler: long list of PI terms



_Dungeons & Dragons, D&D, Player’s Handbook, Dungeon Master, Monster Manual, d20 System, Wizards of the Coast, d20 (when used as a trademark), Forgotten Realms, Faerûn, proper names (including those used in the names of spells or items), places, Underdark, Red Wizard of Thay, the City of Union, Heroic Domains of Ysgard, EverChanging Chaos of Limbo, Windswept Depths of Pandemonium, Infinite Layers of the Abyss, Tarterian Depths of Carceri, Gray Waste of Hades, Bleak Eternity of Gehenna, Nine Hells of Baator, Infernal Battlefield of Acheron, Clockwork Nirvana of Mechanus, Peaceable Kingdoms of Arcadia, Seven Mounting Heavens of Celestia, Twin Paradises of Bytopia, Blessed Fields of Elysium, Wilderness of the Beastlands, Olympian Glades of Arborea, Concordant Domain of the Outlands, Sigil, Lady of Pain, Book of Exalted Deeds, Book of Vile Darkness, beholder, gauth, carrion crawler, tanar’ri, baatezu, displacer beast, githyanki, githzerai, mind flayer, illithid, umber hulk, yuan-ti._



"_All of the rest of the SRD5 is Open Game Content as described in Section 1(d) of the License._"

So, what is, and isn't, OGC is quite clearly defined. In the 5e SRD, if it isn't one of the protected terms it is OGC.


----------



## CapnZapp

Micah Sweet said:


> You realize that would still kill the game right?  Not being able to produce new product is kinda a big deal.



Absolutely. But "killing the game" is not "killing the company". 

Sitting on surplus stock you can't or daren't move is a company killer. Having to shut down a game line can kill companies too, sure, but isn't nearly as likely to do so.


----------

