Pathfinder 1E Clark Peterson supporting Pathfinder?

[joela]

Hopefully he's finished off the Sword of Air and has reaquired the rights to publish Tengel Manor.

outside of that I can't see what unique elements he'd be bringing to Pathfinder that isn't already filled out by numerous other third party members years after their official partnership (2007?) started.

Personally, I hope he publishes a whole new campaign setting, fully supported with adventures and supps that nearly rival Paizo's Pathfinder's default Golarion setting.

 

[joela]

Hopefully he's finished off the Sword of Air and has reaquired the rights to publish Tengel Manor.

outside of that I can't see what unique elements he'd be bringing to Pathfinder that isn't already filled out by numerous other third party members years after their official partnership (2007?) started.

Oh! How about Pathfinder Modern? No one, not even Super Genius Games, has published such a supp. Same with Epic rules for Pathfinder. That'd be kewl. (Dreamscarred already has the psionics for Pathfinder market cornered.)

 

[rogueattorney]

So, it seems Mr. Peterson has revised his previously strongly held opinion with regard to the legality of using OGL games to support prior editions of D&D.

 

[billd91]

I don't know Byron...I mean isn't this the same guy who basically pledged his undying support for 4E right up until the GSL turned things sour? It seems pretty fair weather of him to support Pathfinder all of a sudden.

Not that I'm complaining *looks at plethora of Necromancer Games material of shelf*...

All of a sudden? This change has been years in the making.

 

[joela]

Suggestions for future products

Here are some suggestions found on Paizo's facebook page for future Peterson products for Pathfinder.

 

[BryonD]

I don't know Byron

It's Bryon.

...I mean isn't this the same guy who basically pledged his undying support for 4E right up until the GSL turned things sour? It seems pretty fair weather of him to support Pathfinder all of a sudden.

I don't think so.

He was VERY enthusiastic about 4E early on. But there were a lot of caveats on that all along. A statement that he made several times was that he wanted to support "the current edition of Dungeons and Dragons". Even when he still fully intended to support 4E his plan evolved into putting the old feeling into 4E. So I don't think this is a sudden change or that there was ever truly "undying" support.

Not that I'm complaining *looks at plethora of Necromancer Games material of shelf*...

Me too.

 

[Wicht]

So, it seems Mr. Peterson has revised his previously strongly held opinion with regard to the legality of using OGL games to support prior editions of D&D.

I think you are confusing two different positions.

 

[BryonD]

So, it seems Mr. Peterson has revised his previously strongly held opinion with regard to the legality of using OGL games to support prior editions of D&D.

Huh? I think he has made that comment about pre-3E versions. (Don't quote me on that, but I think so).

But the SRD is the SRD forever. "Prior editions" doesn't mean "anything prior to the current edition". It just means "editions before 3E, which were never released using the OGL". I'd suspect he would feel the exact same about doing 4E material under the OGL as he does about 2E material under the OGL. (Again, just my guess there)

 

[rogueattorney]

Huh? I think he has made that comment about pre-3E versions. (Don't quote me on that, but I think so).

But the SRD is the SRD forever. "Prior editions" doesn't mean "anything prior to the current edition". It just means "editions before 3E, which were never released using the OGL". I'd suspect he would feel the exact same about doing 4E material under the OGL as he does about 2E material under the OGL. (Again, just my guess there)

He did. I believe when addressing his opinion on OSRIC's legality, he said he "wouldn't touch OSRIC with a 10' pole."

OSRIC and the other OGL clones use the same SRD and operate under the same OGL as Pathfinder does, and just like Pathfinder, they operate to allow for the publication of reasonably compatible support products for editions no longer supported by WotC.

I fail to see any difference besides the fact that at the time Peterson made his original claim he had a number of "old school" style products (remember, "1st edition feel, 3rd edition rules") on the market. Was he actually stating his legal opinion at the time? If so, I'd love to know why his opinion has changed.

 

[BryonD]

OSIRIC does not use the SRD. It just uses the OGL.
They may have produced an "OSIRIC SRD", I have no idea. but even if they have, it is a completely different animal.

1E was never released by the authors/owners. The D20 rule set was.

I think you maybe simply don't understand the distinction.