Battlezoo Shares The OGL v1.1

Battlezoo, the YouTube channel which shared the initial leak of the new Open Game License, has shared the PDF of the OGL v1.1 draft which is currently circulating. This draft is, presumably, the same document obtained by Gizmodo last week. It's not currently known if this is the final version of the license.

​

 

[Charlaquin]

Sexism is a major reason why Lorraine Williams is/has been so reviled.

We don’t yet know who is driving this new campaign, beyond Hasbro/WOTC writ large.

For some reason my notifications are insisting that you quotes me in this post…?

 

[kenada]

The feats reference was more about how it might not be possible to streamline PF2 too much given how intricate it's design is.

This argument doesn’t make sense to me. The point of using a base system like PF2 in this case is it provides a safe harbor for certain terms and mechanics. It’s open content, so you can adapt that content to your needs without worrying about whether that violates someone’s copyright. Look at retroclones. They adapt 3e to classic editions without using its feat or skill systems. Why would a game that built on PF2 to recreate something simpler like 5e have to use its class customization or feat progression? The goal isn’t to make something compatible with PF2; it’s to recreate that (or create a new) experience.

 

[Reynard]

This argument doesn’t make sense to me. The point of using a base system like PF2 in this case is it provides a safe harbor for certain terms and mechanics. It’s open content, so you can adapt that content to your needs without worrying about whether that violates someone’s copyright. Look at retroclones. They adapt 3e to classic editions without using its feat or skill systems. Why would a game that built on PF2 to recreate something simpler like 5e have to use its class customization or feat progression? The goal isn’t to make something compatible with PF2; it’s to recreate that (or create a new) experience.

Why would you need PF2's SRD for that?

 

[kenada]

Why would you need PF2's SRD for that?

For the safe harbor. It provides protection that you don’t get from doing it on your own (and having to potentially argue that the mechanics you are copying are not expressive enough to be copyrighted). I believe that’s why @S'mon has been suggesting still using the OGL 1.0a even though the situation is pretty uncertain right now.

Edit: I should add that I am assuming Paizo is able to disentangle PF2 from the OGL and WotC’s SRD. There have been a few posts here suggesting PF2 was released under the OGL to make Paizo’s relationship with 3PP easier, so maybe.

 

[Haplo781]

But Baskin-Robbins always finds out.

Coldstone knows not to ask questions it doesn't want the answers to.

 

[Riley]

For some reason my notifications are insisting that you quotes me in this post…?

I think I may have accidentally added you to a “multi quote” while scrolling with my thumb, then edited my reply to remove you after discovering the extra quote at the top of my post?

I don’t remember doing that to you specifically, but I do remember editing messages in that manner, for that reason twice today.



Apologies for that, or whatever caused such an unintentional error on my part.

 

[Reynard]

For the safe harbor. It provides protection that you don’t get from doing it on your own (and having to potentially argue that the mechanics you are copying are not expressive enough to be copyrighted). I believe that’s why @S'mon has been suggesting still using the OGL 1.0a even though the situation is pretty uncertain right now.

But a new core SRD would be an even safer harbor, since PF2 was released under the OGL 1.0a with the 3.5 SRD in its section 15, a tacit admission it is derived from WotC's copyrighted property.

 

[Yaarel]

Why would you need PF2's SRD for that?

In this scenario, the gaming community abandons all things Hasbro-WotC, including the OGL that has turned into a headache.

"PF3" creates a new "OGL". Lets call it the "POGL".

The gaming community will now use the POGL, instead of the OGL.

Because no one wants the OGL, they reject the SRDs that come with OGL.

Therefore, the PF3 PRD is the new go-to for common gaming terms and mechanics.

The gaming community can borrow from this PRD in any way the want, but it still serves as a common reference point.

 

[kenada]

But a new core SRD would be an even safer harbor, since PF2 was released under the OGL 1.0a with the 3.5 SRD in its section 15, a tacit admission it is derived from WotC's copyrighted property.

I added something to address that in an edit because I didn’t see your post at the time. I agree that it’s risky, and I think including the 3e SRD unnecessarily was a mistake.

 

[Tazawa]

This argument doesn’t make sense to me. The point of using a base system like PF2 in this case is it provides a safe harbor for certain terms and mechanics. It’s open content, so you can adapt that content to your needs without worrying about whether that violates someone’s copyright. Look at retroclones. They adapt 3e to classic editions without using its feat or skill systems. Why would a game that built on PF2 to recreate something simpler like 5e have to use its class customization or feat progression? The goal isn’t to make something compatible with PF2; it’s to recreate that (or create a new) experience.

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 with the system and ready for something more complex, they can switch to the full version of Pathfinder.

 

[kenada]

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 with the system and ready for something more complex, they can switch to the full version of Pathfinder.

Sure, but maybe they don’t want to play PF2, and no amount of simplification or hand-holding will change that. I’m suggesting just use it to build the game people want to play instead of waiting for an open core SRD that doesn’t exist and may be challenging to create. Of course, this is all assuming that PF2 can be disentangled from the 3e SRD and OGL.

 

[Tazawa]

Sure, but maybe they don’t want to play PF2, and no amount of simplification or hand-holding will change that. I’m suggesting just use it to build the game people want to play instead of waiting for an open core SRD that doesn’t exist and may be challenging to create. Of course, this is all assuming that PF2 can be disentangled from the 3e SRD and OGL.

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 analysis paralysis.

Level Up would be my choice for a more 5e-like game. If Pathfinder can be disentangled and remains open, Level Up could be re-built off that base.

 

[ilgatto]

There's nothing about the name in the meme. And the meme probably wouldn't have been made and definitely wouldn't have been the sexist "hold my chardonnay" (because women don't drink beer, amirite? Thingsnerdsbelieve.com) tag. So come off it.

Just out of curiosity @Ruin Explorer: Would you have considered the meme below sexist if it had been about, say, Brian Blume and, say, Chris Cocks or Dan Rawson, and read "Hold my beer!" instead of "Hold my chardonnay!"?

Fitting...

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Just out of curiosity @Ruin Explorer: Would you have considered the meme below sexist if it had been about, say, Brian Blume and, say, Chris Cocks or Dan Rawson, and read "Hold my beer!" instead of "Hold my chardonnay!"?

Hold my beer is the stand meme formulation.

Hold My Beer

Hold My Beer is an catchphrase said before attempting a dangerous and/or ill-advised stunt. Online, it is frequently used to categorize "Fail" videos, as well as to joke about concurrent and similar negative news stories.

knowyourmeme.com

So obviously not.

Only Boomer-ish (in the internet behaviour sense, not the age-cohort sense) behaviour of the worst kind would cause an individual to stop and change that to "chardonnay".

It this is an attempt at a "gotcha" is particularly amateurish lol.

 

[ilgatto]

Hold my beer is the stand meme formulation.

Hold My Beer

Hold My Beer is an catchphrase said before attempting a dangerous and/or ill-advised stunt. Online, it is frequently used to categorize "Fail" videos, as well as to joke about concurrent and similar negative news stories.

knowyourmeme.com

So obviously not.

Only Boomer-ish (in the internet behaviour sense, not the age-cohort sense) behaviour of the worst kind would cause an individual to stop and change that to "chardonnay".

It this is an attempt at a "gotcha" is particularly amateurish lol.

I see. So you're arguing that "Hold my beer!" isn't connected to "men" in any way?

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I see. So you're arguing that "Hold my beer!" isn't connected to "men" in any way?

As part of a meme? No, not connected. You could absolutely argue that when it originated in the 1990s (before 95% of people who use it in memes were even born lol), it was connected specifically to male rednecks - Jeff Foxworthy is one of the first people who wrote it down. But by the 2010s when it became fashionable it had spread more widely hence stuff like:


It's often applied in memes with female subjects. I won't link any because all the ones I can easily find are indisputably partisan political, but there are plenty. And it's still "Hold my beer", even when the subject is a "fancy lady" or whatever, because the entire thing is a callback to the idea of having someone hold your beer for you whilst you try to ramp-jump an ATV over a swimming pool or something.

Changing it to chardonnay is Boomer-ish (again in the internet sense) and thus cringe and also weirdly sexist. I do agree with whoever pointed out there's also an element of classism being introduced, but that too is cringe.

I think this is my final post on the subject lol. It has been given too much time already!

 

[ilgatto]

I think this is my final post on the subject lol. It has been given too much time already!

LOL. That, and you seem to be engaged in a bit of a kerfuffle with one of my fellow countrydragons!

I get that you're new here, but I think you need to loosen up a little bud if you're going to make a career out of this.

 

[ngenius]

Are memes allowed, or this is just for serious discussions? Being a player, I have less skin in the game.
The stages of denialism when confronted by the dreadful OGL 1.1 that Hasbro is still silent about.

 

[Lidgar]

Are memes allowed, or this is just for serious discussions?

By the way, this would also work for their response...

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Are memes allowed, or this is just for serious discussions? Being a player, I have less skin in the game.
The stages of denialism when confronted by the dreadful OGL 1.1 that Hasbro is still silent about.
View attachment 271988

I don't think anyone objects to memes so long as we're not all just spamming them 24-7. This is pretty great.