Dumb Newbie's dumb question

[kingpaul]

I'd stick with the OGL and skip the d20 branding.

Ah, but using the d20 requires you to state compatibility ("Requires the use of the Dungeons & Dragons Player's Handbook, Third Edition, published by Wizards of the Coast, Inc" for example). WotC spent marketing capital to associate the d20 logo with D&D, so using the d20 logo on your product allows you tap into that.

 

[HellHound]

The irony here is that his specific example is, IIRC, available in almost identical form in open content.

I recall AEG's Rokugan Campaign Setting book having a nearly identical version of the samurai from OA that is Open Content (AEG and WotC had an unusual relationship on the OA and Rokugan releases because of license issues about the setting). Unless the Rokugan samurai is one of the few things in that book not OGL.

The Rokugan setting book specifically exempts all material that previously appeared in one form or another in Oriental Adventures from being OGC. This includes the modified version of the Samurai in the book. The declaration is fairly vauge, so you have to have both books side by side to see what is and is not OGC.

I don't have my books with me right now (I'm supposedly cleaning the house for a weekend-long party right now, so my books are all packed up in the back room right now), so I can't give the exact phrasing used, but this was something they learned from their mistakes with Spycraft - that certain sections of the rules are not OGC as they appeared in non-OGC Wizards sources.

 

[wingsandsword]

Ah, but using the d20 requires you to state compatibility ("Requires the use of the Dungeons & Dragons Player's Handbook, Third Edition, published by Wizards of the Coast, Inc" for example). WotC spent marketing capital to associate the d20 logo with D&D, so using the d20 logo on your product allows you tap into that.

But it gives WotC the ability to just say "we don't like your product, destroy it". The market who buys 3rd party d20 products knows it's compatible, and there is a big market chunk who considers only "official" WotC D&D products acceptable, d20 statement of compatibility or not. Even if it has the "D&D" name, many people I know consider the D&D branded non-WotC Kalamar and Warcraft books to not be "official" and acceptable for most games.

Using the OGL alone also lets you make a standalone game. I always found it kind of amusing that my licensed d20 Babylon 5 RPG is all but complete, except the experience tables and the explicit instructions on character creation/levelling as required by the STL. I'd imagine that to somebody who is an outsider to gaming and only interested in the licensed product, seeing a requirement that they have to buy a $35 core book for a game in an unrelated genre that they'll only use a few pages from is something of a nuisance.

It's ultimately the publisher's choice, but I'd go with NOT using the d20 STL, like Mongoose has with their OGL series, since it has a lot fewer shackles.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

The Rokugan setting book specifically exempts all material that previously appeared in one form or another in Oriental Adventures from being OGC. This includes the modified version of the Samurai in the book. The declaration is fairly vauge, so you have to have both books side by side to see what is and is not OGC.

I don't have my books with me right now (I'm supposedly cleaning the house for a weekend-long party right now, so my books are all packed up in the back room right now), so I can't give the exact phrasing used, but this was something they learned from their mistakes with Spycraft - that certain sections of the rules are not OGC as they appeared in non-OGC Wizards sources.

Ah, didn't notice that. Sorry for any confusion generated.

 

[thompgc]

Dungeon/Dragon Magazine

I think if you get an adventure/article published in Dungeon/Dragon that you don't have such restrictions against using all the non-open material from WotC.

 

[MoogleEmpMog]

I think if you get an adventure/article published in Dungeon/Dragon that you don't have such restrictions against using all the non-open material from WotC.

Very true.

However, the present Dungeon and Dragon crew do try to keep as much of the magazines Core-only as is humanly possible. Unless you're writing, say, an Eberron or Forgotten Realms adventure (in which case the Eberron or FRCS books would be acceptable, but their campaign-specific sourcebooks would be questionable), they strongly encourage the use of the PHB, DMG and MM only.

Also, remember that Dungeon and Dragon can't use any non-WotC open content, so they're as limited in their own way as OGL products.

 

[JimAde]

Also, remember that Dungeon and Dragon can't use any non-WotC open content, so they're as limited in their own way as OGL products.

They can't? Why not? Do they just not want to take the space to print the OGL?

 

[Committed Hero]

But to me, WotC having veto power on the content (regardless of the details) is problematic.

Sure, especially since they added that part of license right after Valar announced the Book of Erotic Fantasy. I would make a bannable book just for the sake of creating an instant collector's item!

 

[Committed Hero]

If you are just publishing something on a web site for free distribution, you should be fine as long as you only use Open Content and include a proper copy of the Open Game License. If you are planning to publish anything for sale, I strongly suggest you hire a lawyer to make sure you're doing everything right.

If you are worried about a partiuclar idea, email Wizards. They have helpful people on their staff who can answer most questions