OGL, d20 limitations

[HellHound]

yup.

Worked for Veiled Masters: The Essential Guide to Mind Flayers. (phew... I'm counting on the sale of that manuscript, thank-you-very-much!)

That's exactly why I asked Fourecks in my first response if he had even contacted WotC about this yet.

 

[arwink]

Re: This might just be a culture and upbringing thing...

After reading this it just occured to me that I may well think differently from most other people here due to both cultural reasons and upbringing.

Er, bad arguement dude, because I'm ditto on both your main points, but I don't see the gist of your arguement. My parents weren't in arbitration, but they've both been very involved in their various unions and I've got several friends that later went on to become various union reps etc.

Basically, you can talk about unions and lobby groups all you want. As far as I can see, this isn't a work issue, it's copywrite. And wizards has already gone far beyond what's necessary when it comes to sharing their property.

 

[Ranger REG]

Well, now that the core rules and the psionic rules part of the System Rules Document (or System Reference Document, depending on which Wizards employee you talk to ... yeah they gotta get bogged down to one title) is complete, Andy Smith can focus on his next project.

The Epic Level Handbook and/or Deities & Demigods material.

BTW, what content of the Forgotten Realms Campaign Sourcebook do you want Wizards to declare OGC, besides the feats and equipment stat?

 

[Gez]

BTW, what content of the Forgotten Realms Campaign Sourcebook do you want Wizards to declare OGC, besides the feats and equipment stat?

This question wasn't asked at me, but I'll answer it nonetheless.

The spells (sans "Elminster's", "Khelben's", "Grimwald's" in their names, of course) and "generic" prestige classes (archmage, hierophant, arcane devotee, divine disciple, divine champion, divine seeker).

The spells especially. I like spells.

But, more than FR material, which is fine but pretty "standard", I'd like to see the OA material (class, feats, equipment and spells, even if sans the Shadowland Oni and the rule material from the Rokugan & Shadowland chapters). I'd like to find some third-party support for sohei, shaman and wu-jen; AEG pretty much ignore them.

 

[Hardhead]

I hardly think Spellcasting Prodigy is a "gimme" feat, BTW. It raises your primary spellcasing ability for the purposes of DC and bonus spells. That's not something fairly obvious, at least to me (and IMO, it's too powerful - it's one of the few banned feats in my campaign, after a little incident where three different players that didn't consult all showed up at the talbe with the feat).

If you want to create a character with "magic in the blood," why don't you create a new feat with a similar flavor, but a completly different effect? Like, maybe they choose an element, and get a +2 to save DCs for their spells with that element (like spell focus, but different) due to being descended from dragons/genies/whathaveyou.


- Z a c h

 

[Orcus]

DDK-

Have I taken this to WotC? No... ok, that's a point... but so far, any dealings I've had with WotC staff has been... ugh, to say the least. The liklihood of me, an unpublished writer with no degrees or provable experience, no contacts in this industry that I can call on, no money for a licence (hell, no money for anything), no agent or knowledge of how or who to approach, getting any sort of legitimate response is unlikely at best.

You can add to that fine list "no clue how to appropriately handle an issue, no clue how to professionally raise an issue and no clue how to enter a discussion without stepping on your dick and preventing anyone from taking you seriously."

Well done.

Let's see, to sum up you say you dont know jack but you are apparently convinced that WotC wont give you the time of day. Let me tell you that in my experience and I believe the experience of everyone here WotC has been nothing but helpful and willing to work with people.

Oh, an good work busting on Hell Hound and impugning his credibility. That was particularly good thinking on your part. Great way to get people to reach out to you and help. Call them out on boards and insinuate they are two faced liars. Good call.

What a way to start. He's pissed off Hell Hound and me--perhaps two of the most newbie-frendly publishers out there...

Clark

 

[Mindcrime]

DDK hath writ:
I mean, to me it seems silly that I can't merely REFERENCE something in another product. It's not stealing and, in fact, would only help to sell the other product if the person doesn't already have it.

Dude, no offense or anything but if your whole product depends on one feat from an off-limits book and you can't think your way around it or come up with a completely different alternative, perhaps you should consider another line of work.

You cannot be afraid to "kill your babies" in writing, and especially in D&D writing. Some things work, some things don't. Even if you got permission to use the FRCS feat for your character, some editor might come along and say "this character doesn't work; do me a favor and give me another one." Lord knows I've had to do that plenty (you should have seen the NPC I murdered last month for an upcoming Atlas product. What a doozy. But, the editor was right and I think the piece is stronger without that character.)

Chris

 

[DDK]

Here's a wacky thought. Instead of posting to ENWorld about this issue why not contact me. I'm neither hard to find nor hard to contact.

Well, I've approached WotC on other matters and have never gotten any reply whatsoever. The only time you've ever responded to anything I've mailed you, was two years ago when you defended Angelsboi. So from my experience with you, you only reply to personal emails, not business ones.

Oh, and Mr. Orcus, you have never conducted any business with me whatsoever so where you get off telling me how unprofessional I am I don't know. This is a messageboard, a public forum, a laymans Q&A area, a hangout for SOME publishers and writers; it is not, however, as I see it, a place where professional business negotiations are handled. Since no-one here has ever (with the exception of two people who don't actually post here very much anyway so they don't really count) conducted any business with me on anything remotely approaching a professional level, you can, quite frankly, do rude things with that opinion of yours, Mr. Orcus.

 

[Bagpuss]

I am curious as to why referencing of WotC products isn't allowed, surely it would promote sales of that WotC product. Although probably not that significantly as I doubt many D20 products will have sold any where neaver as well as the FR hardback or the splatbooks for example.

I assume its a legal issue, could it put IP at risk legally for just referencing it in another book? If so its probably not worth allowing it for the small increase you might see in sales.

 

[Alzrius]

I think things are, in general, getting better across the board as far as OGC WotC stuff goes.

We just recently got the finalized draft of the SRD for the three Core Rulebooks and the Psionics Handbook (there is still some wrangling going on there, but like they say, three steps forward two steps back).

d20 Modern was promptly and completely released into its own SRD when it hit the shelves, and 3.5E is going to be the same.

We know that the SRD will eventually be updated to include The Epic Level Handbook and Deities & Demigods, so that's something to look forward to there.

Two monsters were released as OGC in every respect (save for their artwork, natch) in the MM2.

And finally, we just recently had the first OGC article in Dragon magazine, which IMO is a very good sign. I know Dragon isn't part of WotC directly anymore, but its still a good indicator for which way the wind is blowing (btw, was that entire article OGC? I didn't see a blurb saying what parts of it were and weren't Open Content).

WotC is slowly moving towards releasing more and more of their stuff as Open Content, and that's encouraging for people who want to use more of their excellent material.