Different philosophies concerning Rules Heavy and Rule Light RPGs.

[1QD]

It's not even that. Derivative works are a different can of fish, and licensed as such. Certain things cannot be copyrighted. The courts have already ruled on that. So if I create a system that uses a d20 and 6 stats and hit points, that is not a derivative work. That is inspired. A derivative work would be taking the SRD and deriving a product from that. Totally different animal.

​

This exerpt was taken from wikipedia​

Originality requirement​

For copyright protection to attach to a later, allegedly derivative work, it must display some originality of its own. It cannot be a rote, uncreative variation on the earlier, underlying work. The latter work must contain sufficient new expression, over and above that embodied in the earlier work for the latter work to satisfy copyright law's requirement of originality.[<em><a href="Wikipedia:Citation needed - Wikipedia" title="Wikipedia:Citation needed"><span title="This claim needs references to reliable sources. (February 2025)">citation needed</span></a></em>]

Although serious emphasis on originality, at least so designated, began with the Supreme Court's 1991 decision in Feist v. Rural, some pre-Feist lower court decisions addressed this requirement in relation to derivative works. In Durham Industries, Inc. v. Tomy Corp.<a href="Derivative work - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>13<span>]</span></a> and earlier in L. Batlin & Son, Inc. v. Snyder.<a href="Derivative work - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>14<span>]</span></a> the Second Circuit held that a derivative work must be original relative to the underlying work on which it is based. Otherwise, it cannot enjoy copyright protection and copying it will not infringe any copyright of the derivative work itself (although copying it may infringe the copyright, if any, of the underlying work on which the derivative work was based).




By your description of how information/mechanics are taken it sounds as though you are creating works of your own by taking the work of others, and adapting them to your own system, which only the copyright holder is allowed to do, except if you have permission. While I agree mechanics are not inthemselves protected, the act of how you are acquiring them may still be enough to get you in trouble and call into question your work.

While I can understand that some may take my position to exclude all other systems in order to remain original as a negative, I feel that by not copying others, while mindful of what has worked or failed, I can move ahead of people who wish to do this only as a hobby.

Instead of drawing from the pool of, what everone else is doing, I want my product to stand out, and not be doing what everyone else is doing. The danger of taking from everyone elses ideas is that things become generic over time, and Joes RPG is just Siamon's RPG with different dice.

Now is the best time to mix with people on the site because I can look at what has failed, and what peoples main considerations are. I will say this tho, for every mechanic out there, there will almost always be someone who likes it and some one who will complain about it. It is impossible to please everyone, so I will not attempt to try and do so.

 

[aramis erak]

I would prefer a scale that matters to more people than just you.

No scale creator can create an unbiased scale. Risus substitutes the ocassional die roll for the say-yes of improv. Not significantly different in rules weight. Actually a bit less, when I compare to my notes from Theater class.

 

[TiQuinn]

On the post you made there is a comment about swiping with permission.

I don’t follow.

 

[aramis erak]

​

This exerpt was taken from wikipedia​

Originality requirement​

If you're relying upon wikipedia, you have bigger priority issues. Go read the US copyright circulars, or even decent law offices FAQs on it...
US Intellectual Property Law: Board Game Designers Guide II
17 U.S. Code § 102 - Subject matter of copyright: In general (cite as 17 USC §102(b) as quot at law.cornell.edu, accessed 10 September 2025 14:39 PST)
Court rules in favor of cloned tabletop game - No protection under US copyright law (Cite: Stribek, Zachary, 2016)
Are board games copyrighted? [2025 Legal Guide] (Stribek, Zachery, unknown date)

Those give you what you need to know for the US: the fluff is protectable, the rules EXACT WORDINGS alone are protectable, but a simple paraphrase pass is adequate to defeat the rules' protections.
The UK and Canada have similar systems, but not the same.

Information: Board Games - BCC

There are two possible ways of obtaining protection for board games, provided they are original works. These are not mutually exclusive; a game may be covered in both ways at the same time.

www.britishcopyright.org

Canadian law similarly protects exact wording but not process...
Innovative Script Clearance Experts | The Research House

The wikipedia article is unreliable and poorly written.

 

[soviet]

​

This exerpt was taken from wikipedia​

Originality requirement​

For copyright protection to attach to a later, allegedly derivative work, it must display some originality of its own. It cannot be a rote, uncreative variation on the earlier, underlying work. The latter work must contain sufficient new expression, over and above that embodied in the earlier work for the latter work to satisfy copyright law's requirement of originality.[<em><a href="Wikipedia:Citation needed - Wikipedia" title="Wikipedia:Citation needed"><span title="This claim needs references to reliable sources. (February 2025)">citation needed</span></a></em>]

Although serious emphasis on originality, at least so designated, began with the Supreme Court's 1991 decision in Feist v. Rural, some pre-Feist lower court decisions addressed this requirement in relation to derivative works. In Durham Industries, Inc. v. Tomy Corp.<a href="Derivative work - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>13<span>]</span></a> and earlier in L. Batlin & Son, Inc. v. Snyder.<a href="Derivative work - Wikipedia"><span>[</span>14<span>]</span></a> the Second Circuit held that a derivative work must be original relative to the underlying work on which it is based. Otherwise, it cannot enjoy copyright protection and copying it will not infringe any copyright of the derivative work itself (although copying it may infringe the copyright, if any, of the underlying work on which the derivative work was based).




By your description of how information/mechanics are taken it sounds as though you are creating works of your own by taking the work of others, and adapting them to your own system, which only the copyright holder is allowed to do, except if you have permission. While I agree mechanics are not inthemselves protected, the act of how you are acquiring them may still be enough to get you in trouble and call into question your work.

While I can understand that some may take my position to exclude all other systems in order to remain original as a negative, I feel that by not copying others, while mindful of what has worked or failed, I can move ahead of people who wish to do this only as a hobby.

Instead of drawing from the pool of, what everone else is doing, I want my product to stand out, and not be doing what everyone else is doing. The danger of taking from everyone elses ideas is that things become generic over time, and Joes RPG is just Siamon's RPG with different dice.

Now is the best time to mix with people on the site because I can look at what has failed, and what peoples main considerations are. I will say this tho, for every mechanic out there, there will almost always be someone who likes it and some one who will complain about it. It is impossible to please everyone, so I will not attempt to try and do so.

You said you're an IP professional but your reference is wikipedia.

You say you haven't read any other games, so they don't influence your ideas. How then can you know how derivative they are, or how original they are? Presumably though you have read and played D&D, so I'm interested to know how you have avoided (or accounted for) D&D's influence. How do you know that other games, that have also been influenced by D&D and perhaps other games, haven't independently thought of all your ideas, and done them 10% better?

None of the best writers are people who do not read. None of the best directors are people who do not watch movies. None of the best musicians are people who do not listen to music. None of the best games designers are people who do not read and play other games.

Edit: Also, if being influenced by other games (and using elements adapted from other games) is actionable, why have we not seen any such legal action from the bigger companies? Are they just being nice?

 

[Autumnal]

Whether or not my product will fall flat remains to be seen.

A conceptual exercise, then: would you want to see a doctor who hasn’t paid any attention to medical research since the 1990s? Would you feel that person is in a good position to deal with COVID, bacterial ulcers, repetitive strain injuries, and the like? Would you have confidence in.an electronics salesman who hasn’t bought or used any device invented later than the ‘90s? Do you think that person would would give you good advice choosing a phone or computer or car radio?

Roleplaying game writing is partly an exercise in genre fiction. Not that we’re writing stories for others to consume, but we do provide tools our audience will use in making their own settings, characters, and events. So info about how storytellers work is often relevant to us, including info about things like inspiration.

Instead of looking to Wikipedia, which seeks a deliberately neutral and detached style, you’d benefit from deliberately personal, human, subjective accounts. I generally recommend Stephen King’s book On Writing and William Burroughs’ essay collection The Adding Machine, but there are lots more. (Anyone else want to add some? Is there an accessible starting point for Brandon Sanderson, for instance?)

We can’t catch you up on thirty years in the life of several overlapping communities, but perhaps can get you started. None of us wish to see anyone out out a lot of effort doomed to failure, but what you’ve been doing has not, to the best of my fairly well-informed knowledge, ever worked.

 

[1QD]

Both responces are pretty fair. I will keep them in mind going forward.

 

[chuckdee]

By your description of how information/mechanics are taken it sounds as though you are creating works of your own by taking the work of others, and adapting them to your own system, which only the copyright holder is allowed to do, except if you have permission. While I agree mechanics are not inthemselves protected, the act of how you are acquiring them may still be enough to get you in trouble and call into question your work.

Again this is not up for debate, has precedent, and is common practice. You can't plagiarize whole texts. Taking aspects of other works is perfectly permissable. I note that you didn't answer the part about Shakespeare as it totally throws your interpretation out of the water.

 

[1QD]

I think going forward I will only respond to people who have something constructive to add.

 

[soviet]

I think going forward I will only respond to people who have something constructive to add.

Quite right, don't let the others influence you.