Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="lrsach01" data-source="post: 3769258" data-attributes="member: 18397">First off, let me make sure my tone is clear here. I'm not trying to be argumentative or plain old grumpy and contrary. Not being a game materials producer, I'm not "in the know" on some of these topics. I've also got just enough knowledge about open source material to be a true danger to myself. So, if I ask a question that seems argumentative or antagonistic, please take it for the truly clueless question it is. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />That being said:1. How is anyone producing 3.5e material going to market it as such?     a.  Right now, if someone makes a module, they can slap on the D20 logo (yeah...I'm glossing over the logistics but work with me) and the buyer can safely know that it will work with their 3.5 core books. In a few short months, that won't be possible. IF the D20 logo is still around (not something I'm certain of after WotC's "OGL/D20" panel at GenCon <a href="http://media.libsyn.com/media/thegamertraveler/The_Digital_Front_Episode_02_-_OGL-d20_Panel.MP3" target="_blank">Digital Front Podcast</a>), WotC won't let anyone NOT making 4e material use the logo. I don't know if WotC has come out and said this specifically, but I don't think I'm going out on a limb by suggesting it.      b.  What about just publishing under the OGL? That would be fine, I suppose. But the OGL is written in such a nebulous fashion, that the game system is never defined. Furthermore, you could not even say your game content is compatible with a WotC product without their consent. This is in section 7 of the <a href="http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/ogl.html" target="_blank">Open Gaming License</a>:Use of Product Identity: You agree not to Use any Product Identity, including as an indication as to compatibility, except as expressly licensed in another, independent Agreement with the owner of each element of that Product Identity. You agree not to indicate compatibility or co-adaptability with any Trademark or Registered Trademark in conjunction with a work containing Open Game Content except as expressly licensed in another, independent Agreement with the owner of such Trademark or Registered Trademark. The use of any Product Identity in Open Game Content does not constitute a challenge to the ownership of that Product Identity. The owner of any Product Identity used in Open Game Content shall retain all rights, title and interest in and to that Product Identity.I'm not a lawyer, but that looks to me like "you can't claim compatibility without our say so."     2. The examples posted (Arcana Unleashed, Iron Heroes, True 20) all change the way 3.0 or 3.5 are played. They are not 3.5e materials such as modules (which I  guess is what I really am dreading the loss of) but rather alter/expand/extend the game rules/races/classes. Like I said, I have just enough   knowledge to be a danger to myself. Please tell me where I'm wrong. Maybe its a case of "we haven't heard yet so we don't know."</blockquote>

Verification