General RPG DiscussionDiscussion of all RPGs and non-system-specific topics. DM/GM/player issues, settings, etc. Rules discussion belongs in one the forums below.
If I could I'd post the damn thing right now I would. The big issue I need to tackle is the SRD. As confusing as the OGL SRD is, I know the GSL SRD it massively more confusing. Unlike the OGL SRD, that said you can use x,y, & z free, clear, no questions asked, the GSL SRD presents alot of ambiguity.
Our intention was to let you use a term like Dragonborn and add to it through creative design and devlopment. We wanted to avoid copy and past publishing. So we add rules of use but we didn't do a good job of explaining how you can (or can't) use it.
As an example:
Maybe in your campaign world dragonborn live underground. Does this redefine dragonborn? Probably not. What if they also get darkvison? OK. What if they have albinio skin and can walk through solid stone once per day? Well not this likely crosses a line, but then again maybe not.
Are elves with green skin OK? What about flying Trolls? What about all Dawrves get a +3 to Wis?
This needs to be fixed and it is not easy given the solutions at my disposal.
So to answer your question I don't know an ETA but my desire is not soon enough. I hate have to regularly post these lame excuse, tail between my legs responses
As an aside, is there any news about the fan guidelines?
The fansite policy is not my bailiwick anymore. We will be consulted to make sure that the proposal meets Brand's vision for the fansites but the actual implementation is being handled by someone in our web studio.
When it was in our court we had a pretty good overall policy but it tried to serve all the WOTC brands and this didn't necessarily address our specific needs. So we are using that draft plan as a base and will tailor it to suit D&Ds specific needs.
__________________ Scott Rouse
Last edited by Scott_Rouse; 17th October 2008 at 10:26 PM..
Good to know Scott, sounds like they need more people involved in this. To help you get it done. i won't make any personal comments on it, as those don't really matter. But i am getting the feeling that the GSL might not see the light of day in 2008.
__________________ Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
__________________ "There are few problems a well-placed fireball cannot solve. Now, tell us more about this... orphanage?" - Balfour Grimstaff
----------
If I could I'd post the damn thing right now I would. The big issue I need to tackle is the SRD. As confusing as the OGL SRD is, I know the GSL SRD it massively more confusing. Unlike the OGL SRD, that said you can use x,y, & z free, clear, no questions asked, the GSL SRD presents alot of ambiguity.
Our intention was to let you use a term like Dragonborn and add to it through creative design and devlopment. We wanted to avoid copy and past publishing. So we add rules of use but we didn't do a good job of explaining how you can (or can't) use it.
As an example:
Maybe in your campaign world dragonborn live underground. Does this redefine dragonborn? Probably not. What if they also get darkvison? OK. What if they have albinio skin and can walk through solid stone once per day? Well not this likely crosses a line, but then again maybe not.
Are elves with green skin OK? What about flying Trolls? What about all Dawrves get a +3 to Wis?
This needs to be fixed and it is not easy given the solutions at my disposal.
So to answer your question I don't know an ETA but my desire is not soon enough. I hate have to regularly post these lame excuse, tail between my legs responses
This is something VERY important to fix, and glad someone is looking at it from a new perspective, or at least after having some time from the initial bomb it seemed to cause to see how to fix it.
I do not envy you that, this is ONE thing I was looking forward to the GSL correcting or at least giving a bit more explanation of!
(And flying trolls may decide to return the favor of the red dragon back unto him. Maybe a new cartoon idea for the DDI when the GSL comes out. j/k)
Thanks for the update and attempts to clarify some of the SRD that legal allows you to do.....
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott_Rouse
The fansite policy is not my bailiwick anymore. We will be consulted to make sure that the proposal meets Brand's vision for the fansites but the actual implementation is being handled by someone in our web studio.
When it was in our court we had a pretty good overall policy but it tried to serve all the WOTC brands and this didn't necessarily address our specific needs. So we are using that draft plan as a base and will tailor it to suit D&Ds specific needs.
Doesn't dsound favorable having the web studio decide the fansite policy, unless they are making a fansite kit you must use, and not everyone will want all those AIM icons and such.
Also not a good idea to have a WotC fansite policy, but the independant brands need to have their own wouldn't they since WotC would be giving rights to imagery they may not fully own, but have rights to make games for the product? Either way, there needs to be specific brand fansite policies so one does not get trapped into having to have all WotC brands on a site about just D&D, and not have to have D&D on a sight about Axis & Allies.
But it isn't up to you, and those are just my thoughts on that matter.
Last edited by justanobody; 17th October 2008 at 11:28 PM..
__________________ "You want to play "Semantics and Lawyers"? Go ahead. We'll be busy kickin' ass and chewing Stygian Black Lotus- the best!" - Predavolk
Location: “Over the Hills and Far Away” - (TDY in Florida - "Home" is Michigan)
Posts: 1,546
Quote:
Originally Posted by Darkwolf71
IANAL, but as I understand it the GSL applies to publishers only. Fans should be able to do pretty much what ever they want, as long as they don't sell it. Now, I know there is supposed to be a 'fan web-site' document in the works, but I'm not sure how they can restrict what goes on 'behind closed doors', so to speak.
Yeah, "Behind closed doors" they can't do anything about it, and I think you can legally do pretty much anything you want. However, once things start being posted on fan sites, then WoTC can have a say in it. They can very well have their lawyers send a cease and desist letter, and unless you have the resources to pay for lawyers and fight it, you pretty much don't have an option. In all fairness though, I don't think I've heard of any real incidents where WoTC has sent cease and desist letters to fansites although I may be wrong (now TSR was another matter entirely). The OGL was really open however, and could be interpreted very loosely (as can be seen by the plethora of 3pp that basically broke the spirit of what WoTC was trying to do with the OGL), so it probably would have been rather hard to enforce violations on fansites. Although if WoTC had wanted to, I doubt there are too many fan sites that could afford to go head to head with WoTC lawyers.
But I think with the restrictiveness of the GSL, people may be afraid they will be that much stricter with fan sites also. But who really knows until we see their guidelines.
__________________ Mark "El Mahdi" Armstrong - Semper Operor Verus
". . . after all, that is why we're here. Kill the last bad guy and then there's cake." - Major General Jack O'Neal
"Don't Just Do It, Just Do It Right!"
"Right, without Reason, is unmitigated Foolishness."
"If you make a mistake, Acknowledge It, then make it Right."
If I could I'd post the damn thing right now I would. The big issue I need to tackle is the SRD. As confusing as the OGL SRD is, I know the GSL SRD it massively more confusing. Unlike the OGL SRD, that said you can use x,y, & z free, clear, no questions asked, the GSL SRD presents alot of ambiguity.
Our intention was to let you use a term like Dragonborn and add to it through creative design and devlopment. We wanted to avoid copy and past publishing. So we add rules of use but we didn't do a good job of explaining how you can (or can't) use it.
Perhaps you need two lists: One that lists things you may reference and make changes to. And one that lists things that must not be redefined. I'm guessing by the examples that dragonborn, elves and trolls would go on the first list, but AC, hit points and level would go on the latter list.
Of course, I'm guessing that determining which terms belong on which list could cause debate among the various departments that would last for years. So perhaps this isn't such a good idea.
__________________ Joe Mucchiello, Head Honcho at Throwing Dice Games
Priority One: Fatherhood.
Priority Two: Sanity.
Down on the list: seemingly real close to releasing a notebook essential. It's in layout! Has been for months now. (Just nod politely so I won't cry about this.)
"I've never heard of the term Flavor lawyer..." -- Scribble
So to answer your question I don't know an ETA but my desire is not soon enough. I hate have to regularly post these lame excuse, tail between my legs responses
Thanks for the response. It sounds just a slight bit complicated.
RC
__________________ [A]ny good dungeon will have undiscovered treasures in areas that have been explored by the players, simply because it is impossible to expect that they will find every one of them.
RCFG - My free mostly-OGC OGL game! RCFG is intended to be a fusion between OS & NS playstyles, giving the advantages of SRD-based gaming coupled with quick character and adventure generation and an Old School feel.
IANAL, but as I understand it the GSL applies to publishers only. Fans should be able to do pretty much what ever they want, as long as they don't sell it. Now, I know there is supposed to be a 'fan web-site' document in the works, but I'm not sure how they can restrict what goes on 'behind closed doors', so to speak.
Absolutely. What consenting gamers do in the privacy of their bedchambers is no one's business but their own!
They can very well have their lawyers send a cease and desist letter, and unless you have the resources to pay for lawyers and fight it, you pretty much don't have an option. In all fairness though, I don't think I've heard of any real incidents where WoTC has sent cease and desist letters to fansites although I may be wrong (now TSR was another matter entirely).
Never heard it brought up on the boards, and this is the sort of thing that would be brought forth every single time if it did happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by El Mahdi
Oh, so you read that book too; In the Bedroom: 101 Uses for a D20.
__________________
355 hours played
Gnoguh, human fighter/cleric (kensei->adamantine soldier)
Carric, elf cleric/ranger (radiant servant->saint)
Torn, tiefling wizard/cleric (divine oracle->sages of ages)
Truxas, human feylock/bard (feytouched->feyliege)
Tagron, human rogue (daggermaster->deadly trickster) 21th level Musings of an Epic Virgin
I hope Hasbro announces some real WotC management shake ups. I don't mean another round of cost-cutting terminations, but rather an installation of folks who can set expectations, release product on time and with quality, and communicate this effectively. Scotty, that means sayonara to you and your band of misfits.
Nothing personal, dude...
The ideas "you suck at your job so bad you should lose your means of financial support" and "nothing personal" are mutually exclusive.
Mr. Rouse and WotC are not beyond critique, but we expect you to conduct that critique politely, and with respect for the fact that there's a real live person at the other end.
Personally, trying to avoid "copy & paste publishing," while an admirable goal on the surface, seems to be more trouble than it's worth.
I mean, where's the competition, here? There were a few 3e products that did the copy-and-paste thing extensively, but they either did very new things as well (like Arcana Unearthed), or were mere format shifts (the Pocket SRD), both of which weren't products anyone at Wizards seemed to have much of an interest in making. They filled a void, and I'd be more than a little surprised to hear the people who bought those products not already owning a PHB/DMG/MM or at least using the online SRD extensively.
I dunno. I'm sure WotC has better information than me, so perhaps I'm just skeptical. It seems to me that a lot of hassle over what, exactly, constitutes "redefinition," is something no one really has to go through, unless AU or the Pocket SRD was some huge looming threat during 3e that I was totally unaware of.
Then again, maybe this is designed to protect the online side of the business...so that if someone could copy/paste, someone could put the text of the books online, for free, with rules, and this would eat into the appeal for things like the D&D Compendium (even moreso if the GSL allows for future products to be used). So it's less about the threat that occurred in the past, and more about ensuring that WotC is the only place you can get this information...
...hm...that raises my personal "Corporate Feudalism" gag reflex, and it disappoints me, but I grudgingly grant that it's not unreasonable. Just sort of against the philosophy of the SRD/OGL, which is sad.
Anyway, good to hear that progress is being made, reagardless of what it pans out to be.
Maybe a new cartoon idea for the DDI when the GSL comes out. j/k)
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
