Legal Changes and Implications

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I'm interested in seeing what will happen when someone tries to re-create 4e using OGL and the 3.5e base.

Calling it 3.75e or something. Maybe in a commercial or community project.

If they are careful they can avoid any copyright infringement and restructure 3.5e to be more 4e.

I wonder if anyone is doing (or at least seriously considering to do) that? I don't think any of the big publishers will do so, but I can see a fan project (which might have a lot less legal problems if it remains non-commercial.)

The big question is: Why do it all? If the 4E mechanics are sound enough to be worth incorporating in 3.5, why not just switch to 4E? It might be easier to change the things you don't like in 4E then to rebuild 3.5 with 4E mechanics.
The answer to this question probably depends on how many mechanics you want to incorporate and how many you don't like. (And wether the OGL is permissive enough)

 

[ruemere]

[...]It lets the designers clearly indicate modified versions of abilities by making them the printed option, rather than including an "errata" section, it allows the designers to more easily show which classes and races are (and via omission, are not) available for selection, and create a setting that's more tailored to its material than just designed as a straight addon to core D&D.[...]

Not to mention bringing one book less to the game. It may seem insignificant to some, GMing outside of one's abode sometimes produces severe strain one one's back.

That's why I consider offline software game generators (like PC Gen) of paramount importance. Also, 3rd party fan-created software is superior to any WotC-produced tools in one respect - devout fans care about 3rd party product support.

3E and 3.5E prove that.

regards,
Ruemere

 

[pemerton]

I'm looking over my collection of third-party books for 3e

<snip>

The EverQuest RPG, the World of Warcraft RPG, Arcana Evolved, Iron Heroes, A Game of Thrones, Conan. All of those reprint a good deal of PHB material when appropriate, and this works to their advantage (**) instead of their detriment.

I think that WoTC is concerned that it works to their detriment, because (unlike the original intent of the OGL) it doesn't fuel sales of PHBs. The intent of the new OGL would seem to be that a game like Conan or Arcana Evolved would express itself as a set of rules modifications or exceptions to the D&D core rules.

This has obvious implications for the playability of these 3rd party games, with respect both to ease of use and practical matters. Of course it's more convenient for players not to carry around multiple books, but WoTC want to sell as many as possible.

From WoTC's point of view, the only concern might be that if they discourage sale of those somewhat parasitic d20 games, they discourage the proliferation of RPGs overall, which might in turn, over the medium to long term, hurt their own sales.

I assume they've crunched some numbers and decided that this is a risk worth taking.

 

[pemerton]

I'm interested in seeing what will happen when someone tries to re-create 4e using OGL and the 3.5e base.

Calling it 3.75e or something. Maybe in a commercial or community project.

If they are careful they can avoid any copyright infringement and restructure 3.5e to be more 4e.

In principal, this might be viable. It would have the same relationship to 4e as OSRIC has to 1st ed AD&D. But unlike OSRIC (which I assume has negligible impact on WoTC's revenue stream) I imagine that WoTC would look much less favourably on such a project, so before it was distributed (commercially or otherwise) you'd want some good legal advice in relation to a very carefully drafted text. To the extent that I understand it, I gather that the notion of "derivative use" in copyright law is a fairly complex one.

 

[The Little Raven]

World of Warcraft RPG... All of those reprint a good deal of PHB material when appropriate, and this works to their advantage instead of their detriment.

In your opinion.

In my opinion, opening up my copy of the WoW RPG and seeing more than 100 pages of content just reprinted without any real change from a book I already own is totally effin' lame. Yeah, they wanted to do a "complete game" and have all the rules they needed in one book, but that doesn't change the fact that I'm looking at content I already own. So the book is like 400 pages, and 1/4 of that is reprints? Ugh. I'd prefer to have a full 400 pages of NEW STUFF.

And since the intention of the OGL was to drive the sales of the core books, allowing this kinda undermines that intention, since you don't need to buy the core books.

 

[Imban]

In your opinion.

In my opinion, opening up my copy of the WoW RPG and seeing more than 100 pages of content just reprinted without any real change from a book I already own is totally effin' lame. Yeah, they wanted to do a "complete game" and have all the rules they needed in one book, but that doesn't change the fact that I'm looking at content I already own. So the book is like 400 pages, and 1/4 of that is reprints? Ugh. I'd prefer to have a full 400 pages of NEW STUFF.

On one hand, the only way I've ever used the WoW RPG in my gaming would agree with you, since I used material from it as a supplement to a standard D&D game. However, I will maintain that it can be difficult to rely on the PHB and present a setting significantly different from the PHB baseline, and that copy-and-paste is a much better way of presenting altered classes - see WoW's Arcanist - versus errata lines that state "In this setting, Wizards gain w abilities at x level, but not y abilities at z level", which requires you to reference between books just to level up your character.

Basically, there's a lot more potential in 3rd-party books than just off-brand versions of Complete Warrior, and a lot more potential in settings than just If It's In D&D, It's In (Setting) settings like the Forgotten Realms and Eberron.

And since the intention of the OGL was to drive the sales of the core books, allowing this kinda undermines that intention, since you don't need to buy the core books.

I don't care. This is a perfectly valid guess as to why they may have wanted to make this change, but it seems entirely negative for me, so I am perfectly entitled to have an entirely negative opinion of it. All this is saying is that I should be happy that they're screwing me for money, rather than for fun, which is just silly.

 

[The Little Raven]

On one hand, the only way I've ever used the WoW RPG in my gaming would agree with you, since I used material from it as a supplement to a standard D&D game. However, I will maintain that it can be difficult to rely on the PHB and present a setting significantly different from the PHB baseline, and that copy-and-paste is a much better way of presenting altered classes - see WoW's Arcanist - versus errata lines that state "In this setting, Wizards gain w abilities at x level, but not y abilities at z level", which requires you to reference between books just to level up your character.

There's a difference between inventing a new class to fill a role that an old class filled (but you removed the old one), and reprinting the entire combat chapter, or reprinting all those spells. If you're making a 400 page book, I have a right to be pissed when 100 of those pages are spent reprinting stuff.

Basically, there's a lot more potential in 3rd-party books than just off-brand versions of Complete Warrior, and a lot more potential in settings than just If It's In D&D, It's In (Setting) settings like the Forgotten Realms and Eberron.

You seem to be misunderstanding the difference between inventing new content to replace old content and reprinting old content, wholesale, simply to make your game a "stand-alone" one. Instead of using those pages for more new content, you're just copying and pasting from the PHB. Arcanist is different enough to be okay, since it offers options not available in the original PHB as well. Warrior being a complete reprint of fighter, on the other hand? Trash. Maybe I'm crazy, but I don't like people padding their page count by 100 pages by simply copying and pasting. I prefer they bring me new stuff.

That's the funny thing about opinion. You can be satisfied with buying the same content a second time, and I can be dissatisfied with it.

I don't care. This is a perfectly valid guess as to why they may have wanted to make this change, but it seems entirely negative for me, so I am perfectly entitled to have an entirely negative opinion of it. All this is saying is that I should be happy that they're screwing me for money, rather than for fun, which is just silly.

Accusing them of "screwing you" is ridiculous. It makes you sound a little nutty.

 

[Imban]

There's a difference between inventing a new class to fill a role that an old class filled (but you removed the old one), and reprinting the entire combat chapter, or reprinting all those spells. If you're making a 400 page book, I have a right to be pissed when 100 of those pages are spent reprinting stuff.

You seem to be misunderstanding the difference between inventing new content to replace old content and reprinting old content, wholesale, simply to make your game a "stand-alone" one. Instead of using those pages for more new content, you're just copying and pasting from the PHB. Arcanist is different enough to be okay, since it offers options not available in the original PHB as well. Warrior being a complete reprint of fighter, on the other hand? Trash. Maybe I'm crazy, but I don't like people padding their page count by 100 pages by simply copying and pasting. I prefer they bring me new stuff.

I maintain that we'll see far less in the way of setting material that's truly distinct rather than If It's In D&D, It's In (Setting) kitchen-sink blends. If every book has to reference the PHB, it can be a pain to even communicate that you have removed classes. I hope I'm wrong, though, so hey.

Accusing them of "screwing you" is ridiculous. It makes you sound a little nutty.

I intended it in hyperbole - regardless, financial success for businesses I am not a stockholder of, beyond the level of success that guarantees they continue producing what I like instead of going out of business, is not even on my list of reasons I should be happy for a change in anything.

 

[The Little Raven]

I maintain that we'll see far less in the way of setting material that's truly distinct rather than If It's In D&D, It's In (Setting) kitchen-sink blends.

This has nothing to do with anything I've been talking about. At all. Where does "I want publishers to make books with new content, because I want them to earn my dollars with real work instead of just reprinting huge chunks of someone else's books" translate into "Every book they put out has to pull an Eberron and put everything in the core in the game?"

If every book has to reference the PHB, it can be a pain to even communicate that you have removed classes. I hope I'm wrong, though, so hey.

I think you are wrong.

Having a classes section/chapter that says "We don't use the Sorcerer or Wizard" isn't exactly challenging in any definition of the word. Nor is stating "The Warrior uses the class traits of the Fighter," instead of reprinting the fighter, word for word, and simply changing "fighter" to "warrior."

I'm sorry, but if that's a "pain," then maybe they shouldn't be publishing books.

I intended it in hyperbole - regardless, financial success for businesses I am not a stockholder of, beyond the level of success that guarantees they continue producing what I like instead of going out of business, is not even on my list of reasons I should be happy for a change in anything.

I'm happy because it means that publishers will actually have to provide new content, and won't have to option to do the lazy cut-and-paste. When I'm spending $40 on a book, having 1/4 of it being reprinted content from another $30 book I own is simply a travesty.

The only way the "reprint some stuff" excuse would fly is if they were doing things to make the game distinctly different from core D&D, and the WoW RPG doesn't do that in the slightest. In fact, it fits the definition of a fantasy heartbreaker, since it's not different enough to justify being it's own game (as opposed to just a D&D setting).