Search results

I know the people that took the program from the back of the PHB and made eTools from it. They have said that the original program was in NO WAY ready for public release.

That is the Open Gaming Foundation that Ryan started. But it never really went anywhere. Maybe it will now. :)

And the tie in that the OGL is modeled after quite a few other Open Source licenses, which themselves haven't really been tested in court, these are indeed "interesting times".

Quite possibly the best result of this whole issue is that the OGL may be actually be tested in court.

I'd be interested to her Ryan's and David Kenzer's takes on this. AFAIK we haven't seen anything from David, Ryan did update the https://opengamingfoundation.org/ though.

Except mechanic's can neither be copyrighted nor OGC, the expression of them can (which is where the OGL cam into play) But the mechanic's themselves can't

It's a bit about trademarks and trade dress IIRC.

Here's the problem I have with them attempting to "deauthorize" v1.0 or v1.0a. IF they thought they could do this, why didn't they attempt it with the 4e GSL debacle? Once they saw where Pathfinder was going they would have had no issue doing that then. And plus the "leak" is, badly worded is a...

<Insert shocked face here>

There's a group I haven't heard of in a LONG time. :)

I haven't paid that close attention to the Hypertext SRD, but aren't they using the Unearthed Arcana that is strictly released as OGC?

They are attempting to retcon what the OGL was "intended" for, and attempting to create confusion between what the OGL is, and what the d20 STL was. With software it's kinda dicey because you have to know what license all of the libraries you are using is under (several are incompatible with the...

That logic made me do a Sanity check.

Have you met the Internet, rampant unfounded speculation is what we do, lol. :D

Yes, I don't want ANYONE to get the confused as to what the original license said, or has been used as. It's the whole "accept their arguement premise and it becomes fact" issue. :)

That was the STL, the OGL doesn't get into any type of processing.

OpenRPG was in beta in 2000's, & Fantasy Grounds was launched in 2004. So it WAS coming. And it was kinda baffling that Hasbro didn't see it coming and want to capitalize on it. Of course there is also their track record (or lack there of) with any type of inhouse controlled software attempt.

I'll also note that they are wildly misstating, and in my opinion attempting to retcon, the OGL. NOTHING in the OGL v1.0 or v1.0a attempted to exclude the items they are saying it didn't cover. The d20 STL did, and this needs to be made clear every time this is brought up so it doesn't fall by...

The same as placing a barrier to do something that was previously unimpeded, or even placing a "perceived" barrier. Yes, the vast majority of publishers won't have issues with the possibility of paying royalties, because they will never come close. But it is still a "theoretical" barrier and a...

The d20 STL restriction on randomly generated results that could be used to determine a positive or negative result absolutely excluded quite a lot of software. PCGen stripped out the files that allowed using rolling dice to generate ability scores for a couple of versions to attempt to stay...