D&D General The Secret Economics of D&D: The OGL, Candles, and More

I know, I know. I promised an essay last week. And I lied. What are you gonna do about it? I've been busy.

That said, I don't know that this has been shared, and I saw it a few nights ago, so I wanted to share it. It's a YOUTUBE VIDEO, and I didn't want to share it for a few reasons.

First, I generally hate posts that share youtube videos. Because I don't come here to watch videos. I come here to write too many words and hate on bards.

Second, most youtube videos aren't my bag. They're clickbait, or stupid, or just someone trying to generate outrage. HARD PASS.

Third, this forum is for reading, and I don't want to watch a video to argue with the OP's point. Honestly, I don't want to read what the OP said to argue with them, but that's a different issue.

Ahem. Here's the video, and then I will explain why I wanted to share it:


This is Phil Edwards. If you don't know who he is, he does really good videos about all sorts of topics. I highly recommend watching his output. While some of it might be a little populist (like explaining the beer and pizza histories in the US) a lot of it is niche and interesting (I happened to love the video on why the Soviet Union was obsessed with corn, but your mileage may vary).

The reason why I am recommending this video for y'all? Well-

1. Phil Edwards is an outsider. We are an insular lot, and this is what happens when someone from the outside tries to understand D&D's third party economy. So you might not think he's correct (I have some issues with a few things) but it lets you know what an intelligent person who is trying to understand the issues in good faith would come up with.

2. It has some really cool stuff about the economy around D&D. We are always focused on TTRPGs, but ... candles? That was a new one to me. Also the brewpub information (campaigns) was really cool. It's worth it just for some of that.

3. sigh The OGL. I am not gonna touch this trap with your 10' pole. But yes, issues of IP and the OGL are covered.


So I am putting this out there for you to watch, if you want. Not because it is correct on everything. But because it has a lot of cool stuff in it. And most importantly, because it shows what someone from the outside would think of all this if they tried to understand it.

Feel free to comment or not. If you want to argue with the OP, pretend my thesis statement is yo momma so stupid she thought Nickelback was a refund.

Nickelback? This is how yo momma reminds me, this is how she reminds me ... of what Bards really are.

Thus video turned up in my feed.

Hopefully watch it later and get back to you.

Snarf Zagyg said:

I know, I know. I promised an essay last week. And I lied. What are you gonna do about it? I've been busy.

That said, I don't know that this has been shared

Click to expand...

It has been.

Snarf Zagyg said:

1. Phil Edwards is an outsider. We are an insular lot, and this is what happens when someone from the outside tries to understand D&D's third party economy. So you might not think he's correct (I have some issues with a few things) but it lets you know what an intelligent person who is trying to understand the issues in good faith would come up with.

Click to expand...

I mean, I suppose it's good to know what the "normies" think of the hobby, but what I noticed most were the errors and omissions. I'm honestly not sure who this video is for, because anyone who's tuned into the community already knows most (if not all) of what he's going to say, and anyone who doesn't know anything about this topic is going to be lost when he starts talking about things like the OGL while giving almost no context. I guess that makes this for casual D&D fans?

Snarf Zagyg said:

2. It has some really cool stuff about the economy around D&D. We are always focused on TTRPGs, but ... candles? That was a new one to me. Also the brewpub information (campaigns) was really cool. It's worth it just for some of that.

Click to expand...

I'm going to disagree here too. I've seen a lot of gaming-related paraphernalia for quite a few years now (gaming candles, for instance, have been at Gen Con for several years), and while the idea of combining professional GMing with craft brewing is new to me, I'm not sure how it's more noteworthy than "dry" professional GMing (though to be fair, I have no use for professional GMs either way).

Snarf Zagyg said:

3. sigh The OGL. I am not gonna touch this trap with your 10' pole. But yes, issues of IP and the OGL are covered.

Click to expand...

Only barely. Don't go looking to this video for much in the way of insight or analysis. I mean, it's great that he gave some airtime to Bob Tarantino, the lawyer who wrote the truly excellent dissertation on the positive impact of the OGL on the gaming community, but otherwise there doesn't seem to be much of substance here.

Alzrius said:

It has been.

Click to expand...

Doh! I assumed it must have been, but I missed it. As I said, I have been busy. Shockingly, when lots of stuff happens, and then you take a trip to the outer planes for three weeks, things don't stop during your absence.

Even if you are the only real person and everything else is a hologram created to interact with you. Gotta keep the verisimilitude, or it might raise suspicions.

Alzrius said:

It has been.

but what I noticed most were the errors and omissions.

Click to expand...

What were some of the things you noticed incorrect/omitted?

Distracted DM said:

What were some of the things you noticed incorrect/omitted?

Click to expand...

Before anything else, I want to stress that none of these were particularly egregious, or even all that notable; certainly nothing which would make me concerned that this video is peddling bad information. It's just minor things which made me sigh (even then, I'm particularly plugged into this topic, so take my stance with a grain of salt). To name the ones that most readily come to mind:

• At around 13:16, when Bob Tarantino is talking about the debut of the OGL in 2000, the screen puts up the text "Open Game License Version 1.0a," which makes it sound like 2000 was when the OGL v1.0a debuted. But that's not correct; we got the OGL v1.0 in 2000, and the OGL v1.0a came out a few years later (which was almost identical; all that changed was that two instances of "Trademark" in the first license became "Trademark or Registered Trademark" in the second).
• He mentions at around 28:16 that in 2009, Paizo released Pathfinder, which was built on the OGL. That's true insofar as the first edition of the Pathfinder RPG goes, but Paizo had been releasing 3.5 material under the Pathfinder brand under the OGL since 2007.
• He says at about 30:48 that WotC "put the OGL in Creative Commons." They didn't; they put the 5.1 SRD into the CC, which isn't the same.

It's little things like that which I was referring to.

Alzrius said:

Before anything else, I want to stress that none of these were particularly egregious, or even all that notable; certainly nothing which would make me concerned that this video is peddling bad information. It's just minor things which made me sigh (even then, I'm particularly plugged into this topic, so take my stance with a grain of salt). To name the ones that most readily come to mind:

• At around 13:16, when Bob Tarantino is talking about the debut of the OGL in 2000, the screen puts up the text "Open Game License Version 1.0a," which makes it sound like 2000 was when the OGL v1.0a debuted. But that's not correct; we got the OGL v1.0 in 2000, and the OGL v1.0a came out a few years later (which was almost identical; all that changed was that two instances of "Trademark" in the first license became "Trademark or Registered Trademark" in the second).
• He mentions at around 28:16 that in 2009, Paizo released Pathfinder, which was built on the OGL. That's true insofar as the first edition of the Pathfinder RPG goes, but Paizo had been releasing 3.5 material under the Pathfinder brand under the OGL since 2007.
• He says at about 30:48 that WotC "put the OGL in Creative Commons." They didn't; they put the 5.1 SRD into the CC, which isn't the same.

It's little things like that which I was referring to.

Click to expand...

Appreciate the detailed reply