The OGL, The SRD, and a "New Breed" of Games...

[Mark]

A glut serves to dilute the brand name so that no one buys the products anymore unless it's from a well known source.

That's part of the bar that gets raised.

 

[Voadam]

The games are open. It is just not as easy to extract OGC from them as from the srd.

 

[JoeGKushner]

That's part of the bar that gets raised.

I guess we have different definitions of what raises the bar.

WoTC products? Still bought on site.

3rd party products potentially as good if not better? Left rotting on the shelves.

My point is really that these seem to be an entirely new breed of game design. Games based on one game system that is popular, that don't have to "reinvent the dwarf" in order to exist.

And I think that's already finished. Like I said, people weren't talking about the cool d20 variants at Gen Con. They were talking about pure d20 high priced supplements and non-d20, non-open games. At least in my experience.

 

[ColonelHardisson]

Conan, from what I've heard, will be Runequest, not d20 based OGL, upon it's second edition.

Maybe I misunderstood, but I thought a RuneQuest version of the game would be released, but that the d20-based OGL game would remain. It struck me as being more like how Dragonlords of Melnibone was a d20 version of Stormbringer.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Maybe I misunderstood, but I thought a RuneQuest version of the game would be released, but that the d20-based OGL game would remain. It struck me as being more like how Dragonlords of Melnibone was a d20 version of Stormbringer.

You might be right. Just going off what was said over at RPG.net. However, I don't know if the brand is strong enough to support dual systems. Almost every game that's done that has gone back to it's original system or died such as Deadlands, Fading Suns, Legend of the Five Rings, and Swashbuckling Adventurers.

 

[Mark]

I guess we have different definitions of what raises the bar.

I think we just have different opinions about what makes for a good product that will find or has a market that will buy it. I don't believe that everything I like should automatically be successful. I don't believe that if I like a product the market is an idiot for not agreeing with me and the company that produces it should magically be able to stay in business despite market forces, less than adequate business decisions, or whatever else brought it to the point that it was felt the company was no longer viable. That's what determines the bar and I think that's where we actually differ.

 

[Pramas]

My issue now, is with the new concept, which seems to be SRD based, OGL based, but not D20 games.

And again, I'm wondering if they opened those up, would they "grow out" even more.

If a game uses the OGL, it's already open. What you seem to be talking about is companies giving away their rules and trademarks for free. That is something else entirely. People often get confused on this point, thinking that companies that want to control their own trademarks are somehow not working in the spirit of the OGL. It is good to remind them then of the following terms from the Open Game License itself:


"7. Use of Product Identity: You agree not to Use any Product Identity, including as an indication as to compatibility, except as expressly licensed in another, independent Agreement with the owner of each element of that Product Identity. You agree not to indicate compatibility or co-adaptability with any Trademark or Registered Trademark in conjunction with a work containing Open Game Content except as expressly licensed in another, independent Agreement with the owner of such Trademark or Registered Trademark. The use of any Product Identity in Open Game Content does not constitute a challenge to the ownership of that Product Identity. The owner of any Product Identity used in Open Game Content shall retain all rights, title and interest in and to that Product Identity."

This is not an optional clause, this is a major point of the OGL. This means that if you want to publish something compatible with Arcana Unearthed, you can just using the OGL, but if you want to advertise as AU compatible you MUST get Malhavoc's permission. No one is stopping you from being as creative as you want with the rules, but if you want to benefit from the brand that Malhavoc has created, you need their OK.

Green Ronin has dealt with this issue in a couple of different ways. For Mutants & Masterminds we created the M&M Superlink logo. This is free but you do have to go through an approvals process so we can make sure you are using the OGL correctly and not violating our trademarks or Product Identity. For True20 we are licensing out the actual True20 logo but it's going to be a paid license (except for the winners of our setting search). Terms of that will be going up shortly on www.true20.com. Both of these arrangements are fully in keeping with the terms of the OGL.

 

[JoeGKushner]

I think we just have different opinions about what makes for a good product that will find or has a market that will buy it. I don't believe that everything I like should automatically be successful. I don't believe that if I like a product the market is an idiot for not agreeing with me and the company that produces it should magically be able to stay in business despite market forces, less than adequate business decisions, or whatever else brought it to the point that it was felt the company was no longer viable. That's what determines the bar and I think that's where we actually differ.

But then really, the bar in in essence WoTC and some niche products no?

 

[Scribble]

If a game uses the OGL, it's already open. What you seem to be talking about is companies giving away their rules and trademarks for free. That is something else entirely. People often get confused on this point, thinking that companies that want to control their own trademarks are somehow not working in the spirit of the OGL. It is good to remind them then of the following terms from the Open Game License itself:

Well, yes and no.

I realize (as I said earlier in the thread) that by virtue of the OGL and use of the SRD it is in fact open. So yes, what I was saying was other companies opening up their rules and trademarks, with their own SRDs and d20 logo type things.

Please don't confuse this as an attempt by me to say companies that don't are somehow behaving improperly. That is not in any way what I'm saying. (If it seemed to be implied in some way I appologize as I'm doing other things while posting so maybe I said something in a bad way.) Like you said, you are well within your rights to control your trademark. The question was more of a WHAT IF, rather then a what should be. (does that make sense?)

My question was, what IF they did. Would, as we seem to have seen with the d20 system, the transformations eventually morph into a new direction, outside of the original system? And if so, what bearing would that have on the game? (and on gaming in general)

To me, at least, it seems a lot of the current Variants could only exist because of the ease of the original use of the d20 logo.

In the scenario above would we see a new "new breed" of variants based on variants?

With something like the M&M superlogo, and the Tru20 Logo the change in in your hands really (And I'm not arguing it shouldn't be, as you are well within your rights to hold it there. I'm simply saying that because you maintain a level of control, the change wouldn't be as organic.)

 

[Mark]

(snip)

If any non-WotC company can survive the so-called glut, and many have, then it proves that it is possible and therefore there are other factors at play that are more responsible to the demise of a company than said so-called glut.