Search results

Creative Mountain Games has marked all of their products 50% off! There was no notice how long this sale will last, so hurry and take advantage of it before it ends! Please note my use of affiliate links in this post.

That was the determination that I came to also.

Ah, that makes more sense, though I don't know if there's any easy way to check who's using which license (or why they chose the one(s) that they did). I'm not sure there's any easy way to tabulate that (short of going on a spending spree) let alone verifying what their motivation was.

It's too bad the publisher isn't here on these boards so we could ask them. :P

In the order they were asked: yes, yes, and yes. ;) I was under the impression those used all three of them.

I don't agree to that. :P Again, over ten thousand products made under the OGL, easily. You can't really count the number of products that weren't made because of it. Which leaves open a scenario where they decide that something that's derivative from open content shouldn't itself be open...

If you use open material to create derivative material, said derivative material should itself be open; one fish being able to choose not to do that is not a good reason why everyone else should be able to. I'm not sure what you mean by "carve-outs," but if they're in violation of the OGL then...

I suspect it'd be easier/simpler/better to just retool the 5.1 material (possibly with other OGC) to more closely resemble what's in the 5.2 SRD, though we'll have to see the latter to determine how feasible that is.

My goal is for there to be a healthy and vibrant open gaming community; more open content is the direct way in which this is abetted, and so a license which requires that material derived from open content be itself open is therefore a good thing.

So long as it's their own content, and not derivative, sure. That part isn't really germane to what's being discussed, though, and so goes without saying. Well over ten thousand products created under the OGL to date suggest that this "stifling" effect is minuscule at best, and is most likely...

I disagree that it's not a great license; the fact that it mandates that content derived from open content be itself open makes it superior to the CC BY. That's why I'm sad that WotC won't be releasing the 5.2 SRD under the OGL. Well, I'd prefer to know if I'd be supporting someone who doesn't...

Right, but isn't that what WotC did? They put out an SRD under the OGL that was a subset of their own material (otherwise not released under any license), forcing everyone downstream of them (i.e. using the SRD) to release everything derived from that even though they themselves did not. Just...

I've never been a fan of "I got mine, so nuts to you all" standpoints, which is why I think that making derivative content necessarily open is a good thing. That way, you can not only help folks navigate this, but also provide them with content they can use to make a richer and more vibrant...

The little fish cannot decide what's open and what's not, insofar as derivative content goes. And that's to the benefit of all the other little fish, who can use that content which might otherwise not have been released if the publisher had instead elected to keep it closed. More open content...

The little fish benefit too, since even if the big fish don't make their derivative content open, everyone else does. That's far and away better than everyone else doing like the big fish, and making large amounts of their derivative content not be open. I completely agree with you that all the...

It's only asymmetrical in that WotC doesn't need to make derivative content open. I agree that's unfortunate (and even said so above), which is why I don't think making it so that everyone else can do the same thing is a good thing.

A symmetrical application of a lack of openness just results in a greater lack of openness. "Being available for players" isn't really what we're talking about, which is how things are for publishers using open content. Players can use whatever they want in the course of their own game...

I disagree with you here; that helps the people at the bottom of the food chain more than anyone, because it gives them a variety of open content that's not only massive, but ever-expanding. Literally, each new release is that much more for the community to freely use, alter, and remix in ways...

No, but it emphasizes how we got there, which is important.

The salience of that sentence is found in its last six words. Honestly, this highlights the issue with the (lack of) enforcement mechanism more than anything; in that regard, WotC's having lost interest in that role was a sign of things to come.