Quote:
Originally Posted by Lefayindustries Thanks for the response I just want to clarify and make sure I understand. If for example I want to create my own little ogl for my setting MAD! (as an example) I could make a MAD! Fighter by inserting the name of my setting before the word fighter I am identifying the class as separate from previously established definitions. Same would go for races I am guessing, so I could make a MAD! Elf or MAD! Kobold. Sincerely, Seth |
If you are talking
GSL - yes, they (Scott Rouse and even the
GSL FAQ) have specifically said that is ok for races. Classes, they haven't addressed, so that's up to you and how comfortable you are with the license and their FAQ. It is, however, just fine to have a Warrior, Soldier, whatever.
However, you need to be clear and careful with your licenses if you are going to actually publish this material (as opposed to just being a fan site). For one thing you mention the
OGL, which is an entirely different license than the
GSL. They CAN play nice together, but it is something this is very tricky. Tricky enough that I've been following these licenses since Ryan Dancey first started posting drafts to industry email lists and I'm not comfortable using the
GSL and
OGL in the same product.
For example, if you make a
4e GSL product with a MAD! Kobold and use any
4e style material (like, say giving them an At Will power), and release that race under the
OGL - well, you have just opened up material as Open Gaming Content that you probably did not have the right to do so.
Of course, you could just saw "Forget all of this nonsense, 3.5 wasn't bad!" and just use the
OGL. As long as you are clear about your Section 15 attribution, you are free to pretty much do whatever the heck you want with the material. You can redefine fighters and kobolds to your heart's content. You can write novels about them. On and on. The
OGL is a pretty easy license to work with. The
GSL, however, is pretty tricky as you can already tell.