Search results

Then those "plenty" were in violation of the license's terms (which makes it all the more unfortunate that WotC did nothing about it). Leaving aside that I don't recall that being a major point of the OGL debacle (things like the "morality clause" and WotC wanting a cut of the profits for...

To be clear, they can't keep "everything" to themselves with the OGL; derivative Open Game Content must itself be Open Game Content. Now, they can keep things like the names of new monsters to themselves, but the stat block and other mechanics are still OGC.

To be fair, WotC did release a conversion guide (although they called it an "update booklet") for the 3.0 to 3.5 changeover as well.

You've misunderstood my point (which is probably my fault for not explaining it sufficiently). Pathfinder Infinite (and Starfinder Infinite) allows for someone to write PF/SF material and post it for sale, all while using both the mechanics of the game and the lore which was otherwise never...

I'm given to understand (with the caveat that I'm not very familiar with the SA license) that it mandates that everything be made open, including stuff that was routinely declared Product Identity under the OGL. This includes proper names, storylines, potentially even artwork and maps. I'm of...

I remember a lot of the "crippled content" that Monte Cook released; while he withheld everything he reasonably could (e.g. the names of monsters), you could at least use things like stat blocks, so it wasn't a total loss...even if it seemed needlessly petty. As far as the ORC License goes, I...

On the other hand, if a publisher uses CC BY material to create derivative work, they're under no obligation to release that work as being itself open. If they don't, that means that producers further downstream aren't allowed to use said derivative work, even though they would have been if the...

This strikes me as the biggest reason not to use the CC BY; the "virtuous circle" created by the OGL's viral nature was an excellent way of encouraging the remix culture that's part-and-parcel of RPGs. Going with a license which doesn't necessitate that (it's still an option, but it's an...

Minor correction here, but using the OGL in and of itself does not forbid that. You can see the full text of the OGL v1.0a over here and it doesn't disallow any such terms. Now, the 3.5 SRD (in its "Legal" file) does declare several names to be Product Identity, which include places such as...

It did. Check out pages 186-191 of the Orcus Heroes' Handbook; there's a long Section 15 that does cite the 3E SRD (and a lot more).

Insofar as "withdrawing permission" goes...not really. They tried to put forward that theory a few years ago, and almost everyone was of the opinion that was bunk; while it would take a ruling from a judge to definitively answer, there's widespread agreement that threat was smoke and mirrors...

I believe that and the Book of Experimental Might (by Monte Cook) are the additional material (besides the 3.5 SRD) cited in the Section 15 of the PF1 Core Rulebook. That said, I've never quite understood what material from the Tome of Horrors is used in the Core Rulebook, since the former is a...

I'd say that's a big part of it, yes. Even if you add the 3.5 SRD to the CC, you can't use (for example) any PF1-compatible Open Game Content with it unless Paizo releases that under the CC as well (and even the PF1 Core Rulebook has OGC from material besides the 3.5 SRD, which would have to be...

I could ask you the same thing about your username. ;) In all seriousness though, I didn't see it as confrontational.

It's really not; there have been far, far worse classes in the history of D&D. Just look at AD&D 2E's DMGR8 Sages & Specialists.

I just picked up Far Distant Future's latest publication (released earlier today), Awesome Ancestries: Two-to-One, Vol. 4 - Athamaru (affiliate link) for PF1, and I'm rather intrigued by what's going on here. Now, as the product's title makes clear, this is a back-conversion, taking PF2's...

4E got started even earlier than that. Page 8 of Wizards Presents: Races and Classes (affiliate link) says: Despite ending on a joke, the next entry notes that the first instances of "design workshop" began in May of 2005.

Penny Arcade has posted their take on the situation:

No worries, I wasn't expecting an immediate answer. Also, happy belated birthday! :) I'm just happy the answer isn't a hard "no." I'll hang onto hope for now!