OGL Cloning 4e?

[Ruis]

I was going to start a topic like this, but was alittle intimidated. I am alittle intimidated right now.

I am interested in starting a ogl project, but I am alittle weary. I think i could be done in a few weeks, but I would need some advice about what would be appropriate for a ogl 4e compatible game, and the direction it would take. I don't want to rob the people of wotc of their hard spend time on 4e which i think is a great game, but no so great license (with my limited knowledge, I blame Hasbro)

Theirs also some sticky subjects that a 4e ogl would cause that I don't think should be discussed here. and theirs also the matter of, is it even possible? I am looking for someone experienced with this kind of thing that would be willing to give me console.

If anyone wish to talk more about this, Please email me at ruisfiore@gmail.com. my icq is 69020138, my aim is Devlancer7

Thanks.

 

[GoodKingJayIII]

See, when I read this thread at first I saw "ostricizing 4e" and thought "aren't people already doing this?"

 

[Alzrius]

I think 4esque wouldn't sell because the buying public would go for 4e over 4esque. (The Coke effect: it's the real thing!)

I think anyone who produced it would be more motivated by trying to free publishers from the constraints of the GSL than by making direct profit now.

I honestly thought that went without saying. My thought was that, if someone did produce a "4Esque" set of rules via the OGL, that of course the thing to do would be put it up for free download/viewing (possibly with a print option). In essence, what you did with OSRIC (though I know you want to keep your distance from such a project).

Calling it "4Esque" isn't meant to connote that it's better than 4E; just that it's compatible. The name makes it have at-a-glance recognition in regards to 4E.

 

[jmucchiello]

No, the object would be to create an SRD type document against which other products could reference in the OGL. This document would contain the OGCification of 4e concepts and be targeted by WotC lawyers.

As an intellectual exercise, it is a tantalizing idea. Track down pre-4e OGC that you could use to mimic (heck the clone spell, mimics are monsters) 4e in a manner that compatible products could be produced.

Problem is there are some things that would require the reader to just understand. For example, there are no OGC minor actions that I'm aware of yet the swift action is functionally identical. So such a product might have to call "minor" actions "swift" actions to stay legal.

It is the number of those kinds of things that would affect sales levels.

The grayer areas are more fun. M&M and True20 give you Fort, Ref and Will as defenses. But where do you get "Str vs Fort" from? Worst case you'd put "Attack: d20+Str+1/2level, Defense: Fort" in its place. Far less elegant but entirely legal.

Skills are interesting. You could just leave the "knowledge" skill in 3.x format and hope no one minds. Stealth, Thievery, Insight and Perception exist in hundreds of different places. But finding a good OGC source for them might be a chore. Endurance is simple though since I created an Endurance skill in 2002 and it is similar to the 4e implementation.

The last issue then is the length of the section 15. Could be long.

 

[Najo]

Now I am not a lawyer, nor am I condoning someone do this. From my understanding, techincally by the wording in the OGL, you can make something that is a 4e clone but you could not do the following:

1) Use the D20 Trademark Liscense (which is being discontinued).

2) Reference compatiblity with Dungeons and Dragons 4e or any of its materials.

3) Use copyrighted materials (which the GSL doesn't seem to be allowing much of this either).


What someone could do is:

1) Print a OGL variant classes, feats, skills and powers that uses the same game mechanics, though word for word usage might be considered a copyright infrignment.

2) Publish modules and supplements that say they are compatible with the 4th edition fantasy roleplaying game. I don't think these products can use the same layout or presentation as those are trade dress elements and protected as graphics/ artwork that WOTC owns. I think the modules have to say they are not official Dungeons and Dragons products, similiar to the Mayfair Games AD&D/ AD&D 2e products done back in the late 80s early 90s.

Anyrate, I be curious what a lawyer up on their gaming industry know-how would say about this.

 

[Obryn]

I think this sounds like a potential legal nightmare for anyone dumb enough to embark upon it. You may arguably be within your rights, but unlike rules-lawyering, law-lawyering costs money. Hasbro has it. You don't.

I would also foresee an even stronger cracking-down on third party licensing for 4e and future editions, should this happen.

What would be the point really? Just to spit in WotC's eye? You don't need a license to create your own setting & rules for the game. You do need a license to sell those supplements if you use WotC's IP and the D&D logo.

-O

 

[Moon-Lancer]

At the moment I on the fence so to speak.

However I can answer your question to the best of my ability.

What would be the point really?

dvd protection was broken because a guy in sweeden wanted to play a dvd in lenox.

mp3's happened because people wanted backups of their cds.

I think piracy has its origins rooted in good intentions, but you know what they say about good intentions right?

Its about control.

At least if someone does make a ogl 4e, it will be because people want the freedom to tinker and be recognized for it. Its hard to tinker when you cant change the core aspects of the game. I realize my argument is not entirely legitimate, as people can make all the house rules they want, so I imagine 4e would exist if people want to change the core mechanics of 4e and publish a world that goes along with those mechanics, and not have to deal with godplate silliness. For people who like most of 4e, but really despise other parts, and want to change those parts.

 

[Fifth Element]

1) Print a OGL variant classes, feats, skills and powers that uses the same game mechanics, though word for word usage might be considered a copyright infrignment.

Now there's an understatement if I ever heard one.

 

[Fifth Element]

dvd protection was broken because a guy in sweeden wanted to play a dvd in lenox.

mp3's happened because people wanted backups of their cds.

I think piracy has its origins rooted in good intentions, but you know what they say about good intentions right?

Its about control.

No, your argument doesn't fly. Control of what? This isn't about being allowed to make copies of the 4E PHB you bought for your own personal use. This is about publishing 4E-compatible material, for profit, while avoiding the terms of the GSL which WotC specifically designed for use with their 4E IP.

 

[Moon-Lancer]

No, your argument doesn't fly. Control of what? This isn't about being allowed to make copies of the 4E PHB you bought for your own personal use. This is about publishing 4E-compatible material, for profit, while avoiding the terms of the GSL which WotC specifically designed for use with their 4E IP.

control of the core rules. Wizards has all the rights in the world to have control of these rules, but Obryn wanted to know why, and i think its because of control

If ogl 4e happens, its because people want to be able to change the core rules for their published settings.

my examples are not a 1:1. they are just examples of people who felt like they wanted more control over this or that.