Game definitions?

[Cergorach]

Hi,

I'm a bit confused, but when publishers talk about:
1.) game mechanics
2.) statistics
3.) material
in relation to OGC, what exactly do they mean?

Is casting a spell a game mechanic?
Is Humanoid a statictic, is a monster name?
Is the word "the" material, is the word combination "the Orc"?

I find the above terms a bit vague and i'm researching what content they exactly contain, any help would be greatly appreciated.

 

[der_kluge]

1. Anything derivitive of the SRD.

2. No idea on this one. Use it in a sentence.

3. Again, no idea. Would have to see it used. Material probably just means any other text from any other source, most likely open content.

 

[Cergorach]

1. Anything derivitive of the SRD.

2. No idea on this one. Use it in a sentence.

3. Again, no idea. Would have to see it used. Material probably just means any other text from any other source, most likely open content.

1. And any other OGC source?

2. "game mechanics and statistics derivative of OGC and the SRD".

3. "material that also appears in the SRD".

 

[kingpaul]

I'm a bit confused, but when publishers talk about:
1.) game mechanics
2.) statistics
3.) material
in relation to OGC, what exactly do they mean?

My interpretation:

1. I can't put it into words, but I can offer exaples
   • feat x grants a bonus of y to skill z
   • a spell's duration
   • class ability
2. the actual numbers; i.e.; stat numbers, skill ranks, attack bonus, etc.
3. everything

That help?

 

[rpgHQ]

The way the OGL works you can PI a monster name and other things you would expect to be non-copyrightable. Some publishers make the monster name open content and some PI the monster name. Technically statistical information is non-copyrightable but as you say, the wording in the OGL has loopholes in it and I think the definitions in it allow for publishers to PI certain types of statblocks.

Casting a spell is part of the mechanics and methods of a game system. However the descriptive text describing a spell and how it is cast and its effects would fall under copyright and with the OGL you can PI it. Again some publishers leave this open, while others PI it.

Humaniod would be a race type and is a function of the games methods and mechanics. A monster name is not copyrightable but could be trademarked under certain situations, but like I said above the way the OGL defines PI you can make a monster name closed content.

When you say material I assume you mean descriptive text? That is the text that describes a campaign setting, or feat, spell, race or what not outside the statistical information? That all is copyrightable and falls under the PI definition in the OGL.

Though you could argue things like under feats where you have that one liner that sums up the feat before going ito the full description of the feat. That little one-liner could fall under the terms of copyright law talking about short phrases(when not under context of the OGL), but probably you could still go to court over it and it could go either way. Of course under the OGL its covered by the definition of PI and a publisher can make it open or closed content.

Not sure if that rambled way I responded to your questions helped any or not.

Also the way the OGL talks about derivative work doesnt change the way copyright laws effect derivative works. The way they placed it and worded it in the OGL just leads to a bit of confusion. Copyright laws on derivative works doesnt apply to game mechanics or methods, but to the descriptive text. That is campaign setting, storylines, plots, the 'fluff' text and text describing thngs like races, feats, spells. That type of material. And the statement on deriviative works in the OGL doesnt change that, even though the way they placed and worded it in there might seem otherwise.

 

[jmucchiello]

Is casting a spell a game mechanic?

The process where a spellcaster casts a prepared spell or uses a spell slot to bring a spell effect in play is a game mechanic. Me (not my character, Me) saying "Hocus Pocus" and waving my hand over an empty hat, is not. The SRD describes a method of spell casting as used in the d20 system.

Is Humanoid a statictic, is a monster name?

There is no mention of the term statistic in the OGL.

Is the word "the" material,

"the", when written, is written material (in standard English). The term material in the OGL refers to anything set in a fixed medium: writing, sound recording, illustration, etc. This is the same as stuff that can be copyrighted except that copyrighting something has additional requirements.

Why do you ask? rpgHQ's response is not fully correct. However, I will not point out how in this forum. This is not the proper forum for discussing the estorica found in the OGL. Join the ogl-l@opengamingfoundation.org mailing list if you have a serious question about the OGL. Far better legal minds exist on that forum and they don't ever agree with one another on important issues. So don't think anything you read here will fair any better.

 

[Vigilance]

Cergorach, if you have a desire to use someone's OGL material, the easiest way to find out what you can and cannot use is to fire off an email to that person and ask them.

This is not only the most accurate and fastest way to get the information you're seeking, but is also polite, *and* will usually gain you access to material that is PI or not OGL.

Chuck

 

[rpgHQ]

hey joe why bring it up then? If this isnt the proper place to discuss it then why even mention it? Just point the guy to the mailing list and hold your tongue. If I am wrong some where in my post then correct it or dont evenbring it up, its that simple. Your being a jackarse in the way your posting. If you had identified what is or isnt correct in my post and explained yourself would be the proper way to respond.

Next time either point out what you have issue with and explain or simply keep your mouth shut and simply point whoever to the ogf website and/or their mailing list for concerns about the definitions of the OGL. No need for the jackarsyness.

I edited this post because I am not going to get into the back and forth with joe again. He simply takes exception when someone talks about what can be done without the OGL. Its ogl or nothing with joe. So I will make this longer comment and leave it at that.

Lets see what I said about what is doable with the OGL in my post above:

Monster name can be PI, a publisher can declare a monster name open or closed. Sounds correct to me.

next I mention statblocks and say I think its possible to PI some types of statsblocks, keyword is 'think' not saying yes it is or no it isnt.

Next I reply to his question about casting spells, well casting a spell is part of the game mechanics, but the spell name and descriptive text falls under PI, and once again a publisher can declare it open or close. Seems correct to me

Next was Humanoid, its a type or subtype, its game mechanics and not covered by the definition of PI in and of itself. Seems correct to me.

Then I address 'material' and explain what I assume he is talking about and state its PI. Seems correct to me.

Then I went on to talk about other things and make sure to mention I was talking outside the context of the OGL. That is WITHOUT the OGL.

Then I talked about derivative works and as defined in the OGL it doesnt include game mechanics in and of itself as defined in 1b. Though in 1d when defining Open Game Content it mentions game mechanics and then goes on to include derivative works in that definition. Saying that a publisher can take their derivative work as defined by copyright law and declare it open game content if they want to. Derivative Material/Works has nothing to do with game mechanics.

But whenever someone mentions OGL and someone mentions even in side comment how such and such can be done if not using the OGL ol' joe pipes up in jackarse mode.

How does talking about stuff that is outside the OGL get a response of this isnt the place to talk about the ambiguities of the OGL, go to the ogf mailing list? Why would I want to talk about things that have NOTHING to do with the OGL on a mailing list that deals WITH the OGL?

Nothing I made comment on to the originators post within the context of the use of the OGL was incorrect, or disputable, the stuff I made comment on was all pretty cut and dry with the exception of certain statblocks and I said so, that part where I said "I think', it implies one is not completely sure if their answer is correct or not.

Joe, you just have some weird fetish about people talking about things inside the bounds of the OGL and outside the bounds of the OGL all in the same post. Must be something to do with the bigger minds bit of yours, all that unused space needing filled.

Next time just respond to the person with the OGL question by directing them to OGF website and/or their OGL mailing list and leave others out of it. By saying "....However, I will not point out how in this forum. This is not the proper forum for discussing..." you have already made comment and remark on something in a forum you yourself declare as not a proper place to talk about it.

 

[Cergorach]

Cergorach, if you have a desire to use someone's OGL material, the easiest way to find out what you can and cannot use is to fire off an email to that person and ask them.

This is not only the most accurate and fastest way to get the information you're seeking, but is also polite, *and* will usually gain you access to material that is PI or not OGL.

Yup that's the easiest way, but is that the 'right' way? You shouldn't have to, the OGL requires you to clearly designate OGC and IP. The OGL gives us certain 'rights', but also certain responsibilities, when i look at certain IP/OGC designations i find that some publishers fall short on their responsibilities. The OGL does not require me to be polite (that's something my momma teached me), it requires me to correctly apply the OGL. How do i handle material that's IP or not OGC, should it then be OGC? Do you really think that a company would reply to seriously reply to an e-mail that asks for all the OGC in a 300 page book?

There is no mention of the term statistic in the OGL.

I know, but the term is used in the designation of OGC.

"the", when written, is written material (in standard English). The term material in the OGL refers to anything set in a fixed medium: writing, sound recording, illustration, etc. This is the same as stuff that can be copyrighted except that copyrighting something has additional requirements.

So all the words in the SRD are material, no matter how they are further constructed in a sentence?

I'll join the OGL list, thanks for pointing me there. Personally i find a bullitin board a far 'better' medium to communicate...

@rpgHQ & jmucchiello:
Could you guys please leave the baggage at the door?

 

[rpgHQ]

baggage? I thought there was straight jackets involved not luggage