dave2008
Legend
I have seen that acronym, but I don't know what it means.OSRIC
I have seen that acronym, but I don't know what it means.OSRIC
I have seen that acronym, but I don't know what it means.
I don't know how I would even begin to try to explain this to a jury of non-gamers.This, I think, is the most interesting bit:
So, the spell is called invisibility. But it's on the Wizard spell list as just "invisibility", and it's in several monster, NPC, and magic item entries. So the name merges into a game mechanic, because the game uses it as a game term. The same is true for "advantage" and "armor class" and "Strength" so on. Names used as game terms become game mechanics when they're used by other game mechanics. They do that everywhere.
Good lord. I used to think the SRD was 90% unprotected by copyright, but now I think the SRD is basically 99% unprotected by copyright, and the only parts of it that are... are the parts we probably don't care about. Like if you look at the spell description for Invisibility, the most copyrightable element is the description of the material component as an eyelash stuck in gum.
So this should be totally uncopyrightable:
Everything there merges because all the terms used are used as mechanics: Invisibility, 2nd level spell, illusion, spell, casting time, action, range, area, touch, components, verbal, somatic, material, duration, concentration, cast, invisible, target, attack, spell slot, 3rd level spell slot. All you've got left are adverbs, prepositions, and conjunctions.
The argument you linked makes a distinction between contributors and the original licensor. The problem is that the distinction they make means the GPL 2 is revocable by the original licensor.No. The rule isn't "without this magic word, it's revokable". It's "without some terms limiting the ability to revoke, it's probably revokable." The GPL v2 doesn't use the word "irrevokable" like GPL v3 does, but there's significant other text that effectively makes any attempt to do so unlikely to succeed. That language or something similar to it is not present in the OGL. The OGL has basically no text to it at all, especially compared to the GPL v2.
OSRIC didn't use the OGL?There are wars, and then there are wars.
Some feel the transition to 3e to 4e was a WAR, but those people never saw the War that preceded it, the one where AD&D died and D&D was slain and it's corpse buried as another called itself it's name.
It was by far the largest and most virulent war ever to occur among editions. Emotions ran high. There were many offshoots and outcroppings from it.
One response by one small group was to make a system document that recreated all the rules of AD&D 1e, but without using the copyright stuff from TSR or WotC. They used the mechanics are not copyrighted idea and made a system document so that others could make adventures to run with AD&D without referring it specifically to AD&D per se.
Thus was born OSRIC.
The logic "X is composed of uncopyrightable pieces, therefore the whole is also uncopyrightable" is absolutely not sound. Literally every copyrightable thing is composed of uncopyrightable pieces.Everything there merges because all the terms used are used as mechanics: Invisibility, 2nd level spell, illusion, spell, casting time, action, range, area, touch, components, verbal, somatic, material, duration, concentration, cast, invisible, target, attack, spell slot, 3rd level spell slot. All you've got left are adverbs, prepositions, and conjunctions.
Based on their wiki, they sure did.OSRIC didn't use the OGL?
This, I think, is the most interesting bit:
......
Good lord. I used to think the SRD was 90% unprotected by copyright, but now I think the SRD is basically 99% unprotected by copyright, and the only parts of it that are... are the parts we probably don't care about. ...