Search results

Aasimar 15 Dragonborn, Chromatic 11 Dragonborn, Gem 13 Dwarf, Duergar 12 Dwarf, Hill 7 Dwarf, Mark of Warding 5 Dwarf, Mountain 13 Elf, High 3 Elf, Wood 12 Genasi, Air 10 Genasi, Earth 10 Genasi, Fire 11 Genasi, Water 10 Gith, Githyanki 12 Gith, Githzerai 12 Gnome, Forest 13 Gnome, Mark of...

The Palm VII (1999) was for all practical purposes a smartphone. A primitive one by even eight-years-later standards (2007's the year the original iPhone was introduced), but it was clearly the future, and we all expected them to get better. (Though not to be called "phones", any more than we'd...

That above is apparently the second version of the FAQ. The original version read: The Open Game License: Frequently Asked Questions Version 1.0 - February 9, 2001 The questions and answers below refer to sections of the Open...

Aasimar 16 Bugbear 7 Dragonborn, Chromatic 13 Dragonborn, Gem 13 Dwarf, Duergar 12 Dwarf, Hill 9 Dwarf, Mark of Warding 7 Dwarf, Mountain 14 Elf, High 10 Elf, Wood 11 Firbolg 3 Genasi, Air 10 Genasi, Earth 10 Genasi, Fire 11 Genasi, Water 10 Gith, Githyanki 12 Gith, Githzerai 12 Gnome, Deep 2...

I mean, yes and no? Yes, the 1.0 FAQ responded to what was literally a Frequently Asked Question. No, the OGL 1.0a was not intended to cover software, and its terms certainly have no accommodations for making it easy to avoid the whole program winding up under the OGL, which is why the [EDIT...

I really don't pay enough attention to the art to manage to care, but then, I imprinted on RPGs in the 1980s. As far as the social and economic effects of AI, I'm mostly expecting some idiot AI researchers to manage to get us all turned into paperclips, given the blatant differential in the...

No, there's no time limit. Open Game Content released under the Open Game License 1.0a can always be used under the Open Game License 1.0a. Now, any given publisher might enter into an agreement that limits its right to do so, but that doesn't affect anyone else's ability to sit down in the...

Unfortunately, what constitutes an infringing derivative work and when you're making one, and how that interacts with a license to make derivative works for similar-but-not-identical source material, doesn't lend itself to bright-line rules that can be rattled off by forum posters (or, at least...

Yes -- but WotC is perfectly free to name the new license the Open Game License 1.1. WotC can then have the having the OGL 1.1 discuss several classes of content -- including the existing "Product Identity" and "Open Game Content" classes, and adding, just to invent a random term, "Speculative...

Literally, no, the OGL is not able to use every SRD; the "4th Edition System Reference Document", for example, was only usable with the Game System License. The interesting question becomes if the new SRD is designated "Open Game Content" under the OGL 1.1. The question then becomes, does the...

My TOTAL SPECULATION HERE. 1) The new SRD released under the OGL 1.1 will not itself be called "Open Game Content", to avoid all question of whether you can use the new SRD content under older versions of the OGL. There'll be some new designation, and rules on combining Open Game Content with...

Really, you didn't have games reach 7th level? Man, there was a lot of sweet gameplay there!

As a factual matter, let's note that the OGL 1.0a was introduced no later than 2002, before even 3.5 was released. (My 2000 print copy of the original Creature Collection has the OGL 1.0, but the 2002 original print Tome of Horrors has the OGL 1.0a). You need to go check Section 9 of the OGL...

Well, yep, that would explain our differential rates of seeing dwarves and elves. A 20% chance of a potion going entirely to waste was a big deal, as was needing to find and pay a 14th-level cleric instead of a 9th to bring back a dead 7th-level PC.

In fact, the 1st edition explanation (in Deities & Demigods) literally was that elves, half-orcs, and intelligent monsters didn't have "souls", they had something similar-but-distinct called "spirits", and that's why raise dead and resurrection didn't work on them. In 2nd, that explanation...

Huh. I generally found that elves were quite effectively discouraged by the fact that raise dead didn't work on them, and dwarves by the magical item malfunction rules.

Well, looking back at previous editions, shield was originally an evocation, back when what are now "schools" were called "types of magic" -- that is, in the AD&D (1st edition) Player's Handbook. It wasn't swapped to abjuration until 3rd edition. Which is probably a pure gamist effect of them...

Yeah, there was a tweet or something by someone at WotC to that effect back in 2016, not that I know where to find it right now. (IIRC, it mentioned how WotC was surprised the Mongoose Pocket Player's Handbook in 2003, though I don't think they mentioned Mongoose by name. And they definitely...

Well, yes, there is a problem with making pregens compatible with the new edition if there's no new SRD for the new edition. But it isn't really that much more of a problem than people already have had with making 5th edition-compatible pregens under the System Reference Document 5.1. After...

His basic premise is that game mechanics are not protected by copyright. This is not unreasonable. Game rules are procedures, procedures per se are not subject to copyright, and the simplest way of describing a procedure in English often has no particular creative expressive content beyond the...