Search results

Wait until she finds out that you’re buying a whole different series of game books and minis instead!

More than just helpful extras. The free SRD content on Roll20 makes it much much easier to play 5e. It would be too much work for me to do it without it.

Don’t mess with Necromancer games. They have a very good understanding of the OGL and the relevant law.

You can ignore them? Like we used to do with weapon vs. armor modifiers in AD&D. Only use the parts of the rules you like. The important thing is that if Level Up continues it will enable the development of more 5e/Level Up compatible support materials: adventures, monsters, etc.

Not really. Core game mechanics are not copyrightable. The aesthetics are what might be copyrightable—but that is OK, because they are different. See the recent article at the EFF for reference...

This is very true. I was one of those Dragon and Dungeon subscribers that switched over to their adventure paths—I had already been DMing their Shackled City and Age of Worms paths. I ended up DMing the Paizo adventure paths using the 4e rules (my players wanted to play 4e). The adventures...

Not to speak for Ryan, but WotC did not continue to pursue this strategy. So when they developed a significantly different product (4e), the network forces that had supported 3.0/3.5 D&D now supported Pathfinder, which was much closer to the game rules that built the network effects. 4e...

I think Pathfinder helped people stay in the hobby who might have otherwise left during the 4e era. When 5e came out, a lot of Pathfinder players returned. And this isn’t a knock against 4e. I played it. But it wasn’t everybody’s cup of tea.

I don’t. But they can still copyright their original work. And if they get permission from the original copyright holder, they don’t infringe. Exactly as it was with OGL 1.0(a)

The OP got it slightly wrong as well. If I wrote Harry Potter 8, I could copyright and sell it if I created original material and had the permission (a license) of the holder of the original works. If I did not have their permission, I would violate their copyright.

Better not tell that to anyone making a movie based on a novel! Seriously, you are wrong. Open game content derived from someone else’s open game content is copyrightable. It’s the new portions that are copyrightable.

It’s always a possibility that people won’t like Pathfinder after simplification, but at least it provides an option. It would allow people to play at the same table as other Pathfinder players. It would also be better for streaming—the last thing you want is a voice actor struggling with...

You can make a simplified, yet fully compatible version of Pathfinder by making feat and other features preselected in a small number of simplified classes. Choose those feats that provide a constant, static benefit if you want to make it even more user friendly. When people are comfortable...

Unfortunately the archive only goes back to 2004. There may be more complete archives somewhere.

In this case, potation is to transfer something into a different format. For example, transfer a text document to HTML for a website. This could, in fact, be a fairly important term to include in the OGL. It enables the creation of SRD-based content on VTTs.

The earliest version of the license I can find via the Wayback machine is version .02. https://web.archive.org/web/20000407064740/http://www.opengamingfoundation.org:80/ogl.html It was simpler than 1.0 which was the next version posted. The off-l list is archived at The Mail Archive...

Just a short note. OGL 1.0 is still an authorized version of the OGL. SRD v. 5.0 was released prior to 5.1 and theoretically could continue to be distributed under OGL 1.0.

There's a few interesting things that jumped out at me after my first read of the document. Forgive me if someone else has pointed out these issues--it's hard to keep up. If the intention of the document is to force creators to use the OGL 1.1 license to support OneD&D, they've left a few...

And doing a very poor job of it. He’s convinced himself that YouTubers can’t talk about Pathfinder because Pathfinder uses the OGL and WotC’s fan content policy applies to their IP and doesn’t allow sponsorship by competitors. This obviously isn’t true but it’s clear that WOTC has lost the...

It may be a good idea to make your Section 15 Copyright Notice as broad as possible so that you are not just licensing from WOTC, but are also sub-licensing from other contributors. The Level-Up license (Open Game License | Level Up) would be a good place to start, as it incorporates...