Questions about Iron Heroes?

[Angel Tarragon]

Heres one: How well would the IH thematics (classes, feats, tokens, combat and whatever else) be ported into a different fantasy [d20] world? Like say using IH with the Forgotten Realms or Greyhawk setting info?

 

[JBowtie]

IANAL.

That only applies if you want to use the OGL.

You don't have to; you could use 'closed' stuff under 'fair use', or the like.

Under Australian law, I can't - according to the Australian Copyright Act 1968 (amended) fair dealing has a very limited scope. Although the Attorney General's office has circulated a proposal to add a statutory license that permits private copying of copyright material.

Under New Zealand law, sections 42 and 43 of the Copyright Act 1994 set out the types of copying that qualify as fair dealing. Incidental copying, while allowed, is not defined as "fair dealing" under the Act.

Printing stuff out for my players isn't going to be a big deal (except to some PDF publishers). Reproducing closed content on my campaign website is much more liekly to draw legal challenges from publishers since its defacto publishing without permission. Most of them are cool if you're reasonable - but all I need is one unhappy publisher.

So I always check to see if the content I want to use is Open before I buy a book. Haven't bought a WOTC book in years. I've picked up a fair amount of Green Ronin stuff lately; their declarations tend to be pretty good. I also pick up Ronin Arts material that catches my eye without a second thought since Phil is a generous soul.

 

[Gold Roger]

I've got a question on the arminger. In the ability "Tough as Nails" it says he can use his constitution plus his strength modifier for carrying capacity. Does that mean his full constitution score or only the constitution modifier? It looks the second way, but it doesn't really make sense even a Arminger with a Con of 22 wouldn't get anywhere near a appropiate carrying capacitiy.

 

[JBowtie]

Back on topic - thanks for the clarification. So I'm interpreting this to mean that the stunt and magic systems are not open.

Frukathka - from the previews and other info I've seen it looks like it's meant to drop right in. Just don't mix systems on a character (every character should one set of rules or the other).

The main thing is that the IH classes are meant to be powerful without magic items. Dropping them into the Realms is probably insane (massive amounts of magic). Dropping them into Greyhawk, Thieve's World, Midnight, or Conan probably gives you a better fit.

This coming from one who does not have the game, only the previews.

 

[JBowtie]

I've got a question on the arminger. In the ability "Tough as Nails" it says he can use his constitution plus his strength modifier for carrying capacity. Does that mean his full constitution score or only the constitution modifier? It looks the second way, but it doesn't really make sense even a Arminger with a Con of 22 wouldn't get anywhere near a appropiate carrying capacitiy.

I can answer this one, assuming you quoted it correctly. It's clearly meant to be your constituion score plus your Sterngth modifier. So Someone with STR 14, CON 16 would use an 18 (16 +2 ) to determine their carrying capacity.

 

[ThirdWizard]

Back on topic - thanks for the clarification. So I'm interpreting this to mean that the stunt and magic systems are not open.

Stunts are not Open, as they appear in the Combat section, none of which is Open.

The magic system is a bit funky. How to calculate mana and the roll needed to cast are Closed, but the Arcanist and all "spells" are Open. Take that as you will.

 

[glass]

Well, I do have delusions that I'll actually publish someday. However, as a GM I can't legally reproduce closed content on my campaign wiki - a far more pressing matter. Even if I only included rules by reference, any house rules would likely be considered derived content in some jurisdictions and therefore subject to publisher approval.

Wow, so you go reproduce the OGL with correctly filled in s.15 for your website too?


glass.

 

[glass]

Stunts are not Open, as they appear in the Combat section, none of which is Open.

Can they actually do that? Close whole chapters, I mean. Wouldn't that mean that there would have to be nothing in the combat chapter derived from the SRD, which seems unlikely.


glass.

 

[ThirdWizard]

Can they actually do that? Close whole chapters, I mean. Wouldn't that mean that there would have to be nothing in the combat chapter derived from the SRD, which seems unlikely.

They have a clause that basically states, paraphrased, "Anything that is already Open Game Content is still Open Game Content," which would catch, for example, their reprinting of how Disarm works, but not, as another example, Combat Challenges.

IANAL, so I really can't be sure on how derived work will be considered. But, tha'ts what it says.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

They have a clause that basically states, paraphrased, "Anything that is already Open Game Content is still Open Game Content," which would catch, for example, their reprinting of how Disarm works, but not, as another example, Combat Challenges.

For the life of me, I can't reach a common understanding on Monte's use of the OGL. He closes things that shouldn't or can't be closed, and Iron Heroes' Section 15 is incorrect, as well.

It's frustrating because I feel like Monte knows something about the OGL that other publishers don't, or maybe he's trying to push the issue somehow.

(Honest mistakes notwithstanding, which is what I think must have happened with the S.15.)

Monte just seems to have a completely different understanding of the OGL than the publishers' consensus, or he is trying to "shape it to his will."

I don't get it. But it fascinates me.


Wulf