D&D 5E I'll make my own Fifth Edition.

[Dungeonosophy]

1.) The term you are looking for is not "Public Domain." Its "Open Licensed". Public Domain means nobody owns the trademark to the material and you can do what you want with it. (For example: the character of Sherlock Holmes or Count Dracula). "Open Licensed" means the rules are free to use, but you can't claim ownership of them. Every 3pp book from 2000 to today has needed to put the OGL in the book, and WotC CAN and WILL sue today if you don't.

The term I'm looking for is Public Domain. I suggest doing away with even the OGL legalese. If the Basic Game text is formally released into the Public Domain, then no one can claim ownership of the rules either.

2.) You're thinking too small man. Blue Rose? Here's all of True20. Beginners Box? How about ALL of Pathfinder. How about some d20 Modern? Big Eyes Small Mouth? Mutants & Masterminds? Don't forget their granddaddy: 3.5 D&D

Exactly. And if, come springtime, 5E is released as an Open Game (and it doesn't get anymore open than Public Domain), then in ten years from now, you could give me an even bigger list of all the games which spawned from 5.0 D&D.

And if the D&D Worlds IPs were released into Free Culture domain, then in ten years, you could name the hundreds of parallel worlds which sprouted from them, all published with their own line of hardcopy books and novels: "Grodog's World of Greyhawk", "Bruce Heard's D&D World of Mystara" (nixed by Hasbro here), "Eric Mona's D&D World of Greyhawk", "Chris Pramas' D&D World of the Sundered Empire", "Monte Cook's D&D Worlds of the Planescape", "Remathilis' D&D World of ...?"...all of which fueled the continual reprinting of Hasbro's D&D 5e Core Rules and Worldbooks...making for the longest print-run of any edition of D&D.

3.) Beyond that, I wish you luck. I'm broke too, but since I don't plan on following the APs (and I'm getting my books via Amazon) the cost is acceptable to me. So enjoy and good gaming.

Thanks...I really appreciate the good wishes from you and others in this thread. And I am also grateful for the challenges and questioning. I respect and admire the quality of the EN World community, and so when sharing on this new idea, I want to respond thoughtfully to each concern.

 

[drjones]

Your view of history seems a little off there. Biologicaly modern humans have existed for hundreds of thousands of years. Some culture must have existed for a long time but the reason history seems to start with the agricultural revolution is that for the first time in history there was enough excess food for populations to grow large enough that individuals could specialize in creating culture and the technology to record that culture. Because artists could make a living at their work as specialists, we suddenly had much more art.

A call for art to be free is a call to return to the time when artists spent their days picking berries like everyone else.

 

[Blackwarder]

Good luck on making your own version of domain free D&D, how would we get our hardback books? Should we just PM you a mailing address or are you planing on having some sort of a survey system? And when can we expect it?

Warder

 

[Dungeonosophy]

The existence of completely free basic makes this a strange complaint.

There are two different meanings of the word "free".

You are talking about monetarily free.

I'm talking about both kinds of free. The second kind of free means "free to kit-bash, modify, share, publish in hardcopy, and even free to receive bread in support of my contribution"

Just run it forever, problem solved

Exactly. That's one reason why, combined with my existing game library, I am resolved to make my own Fifth Edition. I have all the core rules I need to make my own limitless, complete RPG.

But unless 5E is made an open game (and, again, it doesn't get anymore open than Public Domain) the political state (the national law) would hinder me from sharing this except for with my local gaming group, and maybe posted as a PDF at my website (though only at the pleasure of Hasbro's legal team). What if I wanted to make a hardcopy available through print-on-demand? The national law would be against me. And so 5E is not yet "free" in that regard. Therefore I do not want to invest too much of my interest and finite economic means into the 5E system yet.

Don't you all remember how the promises around the GSL slipped and slided? I suppose there is an open gaming "cultural creative" faction in WotC/Hasbro, and also a more hard-nosed/legalist/corporate faction. There's no telling how "open" 5E will actually be come springtime.

 

[variant]

Not just ZRN, but we're starting to throw around the word "communist" a bit too much in this thread as a derogatory word . . . can we remember ENWorld's "no politics" rules please? Tanks.

Well, when one of the leaders of the Free Culture 'movement' says, "the United States should follow the example of the Soviet Union: it should eliminate copyrights and nationalize the production of speech." I am not sure you can separate it from communism.

 

[Dungeonosophy]

Yeah, the essay is more political manifesto than gaming manifesto.

The essay is a gaming manifesto (can't you tell by looking at my website that I genuinely like D&D?)...and it also a threefold societal manifesto: an economic manifesto, a political manifesto, and a cultural manifesto.

I got three words for him: Ain't Gonna Happen.

Maybe not for 5E...which means I'll be glad that I didn't invest much sentiment and coin in 5E. As Elrond says though: "Never" is a long word.

What really defeats the author's intent in the One Ring RPG on his list. Cubicle 7 is a great company, but they deal in licensed works.

You expected me to already be the perfect exemplar of the Free Culture future? You write off my concerns and aspirations because there are some cultural works in my house which I paid for in some time during my life? You're disappointed my Free Culture resolve didn't spring fully formed like Athena from the head of Zeus?

Tolkien's estate has the copyright on LotR/Hobbit/Expanded and I don't really expect them to give THAT cash cow up. I guaranteed the OP if he wrote a story about Legolas and Gimli the way he could about Dracula and Holmes, he'd meet Christopher Tolkien's lawyers in short order.

I'd say the same thing to Cubicle 7 and the Tolkien Estate. I feel it is unjust for non-tangible cultural ideas and works to be cash cows for blood lineages (and immortal economic corporations) who had no hand in that work. The extension of the copyright from 14 years to 120 years was purchased by monied interests. Tolkien expressed his wish that "other minds and hands" could contribute to his mythology.

So neither the source material nor the ruleset is even Open, much less Public.

That list of my game library wasn't offered as a directory of Open Games...that was only a list showing that I have plenty of good games already, without needing to buy into 5E yet.

(Paizo and Green Ronin are both half-a-step further; the rules are open but don't use a Paizo goblin on the cover of your work).

Yes, that's a fitting way to describe Pathfinder and MnM: "half-free culture". The OGL is halfway to Free Culture, which contributes to the liveliness of the PF and MnM cultural communities.

Though my essay gives the philosophical background (which people might stumble over), basically I'm suggesting that Hasbro go two steps further than Paizo and Green Ronin:

1) Make the 5E SRD even more open than the 3E OGL, as fuel for the 5E core rulebook sales. It doesn't get any more open than Public Domain. Make it a big deal. Put the Free Culture logo on the 5E SRD.
2) Open up the out-of-print world-specific IP, as fuel for Hasbro's 5E worldbook and novel sales.

Which cycles back to my original sentiment: Good luck. D&D is WELL within the 75 years after the life of the author(s), and I don't reckon they see any point in giving away the IP anymore than Warner Brothers, Disney, or Tolkien does. Enjoy the Basic PDF and the linked SRDs.

The same could be said by a 1980s AD&D fan: "I don't see any point in TSR giving away their rules system IP."

I accept the gift of luck though.

 

[pming]

Hiya.

EDIT: Deleted post. I re-read and realize there is no point to even commenting about this. Read up on copyright law as it pertains to game rules.

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[Dungeonosophy]

But where I sense a bit of contradiction (although not duplicity), is that while you want everything to be free, you still want the freedom to make money off of it. In other words, you already have the kind of creative freedom that you want - you can tinker with, improve, kit-bash etc to your heart's content - up to the point of charging money for it.

Mercurius, this is an insightful perception. Yes, that is a contradiction in my essay. It's not a contradiction in my thought and aims--it's just that the essay would be too long if I went further into the idea of all cultural works (including my own) being supported only through freely-given monies.

Actually, to get into the details, I'd be just as happy, if instead of Public Domain, 5E were to be released under a specific license which bars money from being charged for the content...which would permanently de-commoditize the contents...as long as the license still allowed for money to be freely gifted. Free Culture has to have monetary support, it's just that the receiving of the thing is clearly separated from whether that particular person donated or not. This is the way cultural services, such as traditional wisdom traditions and recovery meetings, are funded. RPG Now would need a Donate button.

One other detail though, is that the license allow for hardcopies to be printed and sold at-cost (with no royalty for the author), as long as a digital version is freely available, and as long as the URL for that download is printed on the front page of the book along with a statement saying that a free digital version is available.

Otherwise, the license would hinder the free cultural flow of hardcopy books.

Under these conditions, I could write my "Shane Henry's D&D rpg game" and "Shane Henry's D&D World of Mystara" and upload them to print-on-demand; receiving no royalties, but listing my mailing address and website address (with a PayPal donate button) for people to freely contribute if they wish.

why do you want the freedom to make money off of someone else's intellectual property?

I don't want to make money off of cultural services (even though, for simplicity's sake it sounded like that in my essay). I do want to be free to receive gift monies in unforced appreciation for my work. I want that for all cultural practitioners...which includes game designers.

I would suggest that you continue to write your own versions of Mystara and other D&D worlds, and then offer them for free,

I wonder how much flack I'd get if I put a donate button next to a Mystara aficionado-produced item? Maybe it would work. I'm glad to offer things completely free (and I do), yet it's better to also have the option of materially supporting each other freely for these cultural offerings.

but if you want to get into the economic side of things, create your own world.

Of course it's not a bad idea to invent my own world. Yet copyright law, as it has been extended, hinders humanity by making us have to re-invent the wheel over and over again. Copyright law lays minefields in the mind, to block anyone from following the path one cleared. An 18 year copyright (the length of one generation) is long enough for the creator to be materially supported while they bring forth another creative fruit.

I invested decades of interest in Mystara. Yes, that may be misplaced time and sentiment. My essay is an expression of hope that my time and sentiment will not have been misplaced in a corporate box.

As an aside, with regards to your "five hindrances" to the "Second Golden Age" of D&D, I think you missed one: the deluge of mediocrity that the OGL inspired. Don't get me wrong, I loved the OGL, but more in principle than in practice; by opening the door for anyone to publish, a whole truckload of mediocrity ensued, and it became increasingly difficult to wade through the chaff to get to the golden kernels.

That did happen, yet Hasbro overreacted and killed the golden goose. The cream would eventually rise to the top. Better for Hasbro to have initiated a sort of "WotC seal of quality" in association with Green Ronin, Malhavoc, and other top-notch companies, and to educate the game stores and distributors, than to try to clear the market through the 3.5 rupture (and then kill and split the market through 4E).

I would just consider some flexibility, that it doesn't have to be either/or (completely free or corporate oligarchy), and that there is a path of gradual unfolding that can occur, and perhaps is occurring.

I am resolved to hold off at least until the Open Game arrives (or doesn't arrive) in early 2015.

Thanks for your thoughtful and inspiring response. I may take up some of your suggestions.

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

Not just ZRN, but we're starting to throw around the word "communist" a bit too much in this thread as a derogatory word . . . can we remember ENWorld's "no politics" rules please? Tanks.

No, Benjamin was a for-real Marxist. Very smart guy. He pointed out that all that "art for art's sake" stuff that got bandied about in the nineteenth century masqueraded as a reaction against or "above" the vagaries of nascent capitalism, but in reality the movement and those taking part in it were living entirely and inescapably within the logic of that same capitalism.

 

[Dire Bare]

A call for art to be free is a call to return to the time when artists spent their days picking berries like everyone else.

Art, and artistic genius, did not begin with agriculture, city livin', and full-time artists. Yes, if art is free and artist's need to pick berries to support themselves, they will have less time and energy to devote to their art, that's fairly obvious.

Professional artists, a community of professional artists, certainly create art at a greater volume. They can create art that is more complex. But is the professionalization of art necessary for creative genius to flourish? No. At least, not in my opinion.

I do think that our current model, that artists' generally get to control their own work (or hand that control over to someone else) and get to profit and hopefully even work full-time as artists, allows D&D as we know it to exist. Berry pickin' artists might have created D&D in the first place, but the wonderful hobby, lifestyle, and phenomenon that it has become wouldn't have been possible.

I'm not personally advocating for a return to art for art's sake only . . . although I see the appeal. Without pro-artists, I wouldn't be perusing the new PHB tonight, and I wouldn't have seen Guardians of the Galaxy last week, so, I'm good. And DnDPhil wouldn't have a 5th-edition to dream of turning into a free culture D&D!