Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Bendris Noulg" data-source="post: 1502516" data-attributes="member: 6398">Actually, Nell, I think you are focusing on part of a definition; One that supports your views when taken out of context. For instance, consider Section 1g of the OGL which states: "Use", "Used", or "Using" means to use, Distribute, copy, edit, format, modify, translate and otherwise create Derivative Material of Open Game Content. Relevant Opinion: "Copy" is considered a form of OGC use. Compare that with the full listing of Section 1d: "Open Game Content" means the game mechanic and includes the methods, procedures, processes and routines to the extent such content does not embody Product Identity and is in enhancement over the prior art and any additional content clearly identified as Open Game Content by the Contributor, and means any work covered by this License, including translations and derivative works under copyright law, but specifically excludes Product Identity. Relevant Opinion: Everything after "game mechanic" is in reference to conditions that may or may not apply to a specific piece of OGC. Then we look at Section 2: The License: This License applies to any Open Game Content that contains a notice indicating that the Open Game Content may only be Used under and in terms of this License.  You must affix such a notice to any Open Game Content that you Use.  No terms may be added to or subtracted from this License except as described by the License itself.  No other terms or conditions may be applied to any Open Game Content distributed to this License. Relevant Opinion: The bolded sentance is in direct relation to the "use" of OGC by the end-user, with "use" being defined in 1g and includes the act of "copying" the OGC. I would argue that the inclusion of the term "copy" within the definition of "Use" would qualify a project such as an UA-SRD as legal and justified.  It's also necessary, else things such as the Prometheus SRD, the BESM SRD, d20Exchange, and other SRD-formating projects (such as those handy pdfs!) would be in violation of the license*.  Also consider products like Necromancer's Necropolis which contains spells from Relics & Rituals.  Because these spells have not in any way or manner been altered, their inclusion would not qualify as an "enhancement" and would therefore be an OGL violation.  Following your reasoning, it becomes impossible to re-use any OGC without making some sort of alteration to the material which, in my view, makes it impossible to the "hope" of Open Gaming (that the best of the best will float to the top of the barrel) to ever become a reality because the best must be changed in order to be re-used. * I don't include the Action! SRD because it's a different system than d20 and as such would be considered the "originating" distribution.  However, anything created based off of the Action! system would equally qualify in the above list.</blockquote>

Verification