[OGL Questions] Is Dungeons and Dragons a game?

[diaglo]

That might be the most uninformed, yet hilarious thing I've ever read on this board.

ditto.

 

[barsoomcore]

-Mechanics for ability scores going over 100

:\

-A standard character level system which is balanced and compatible with D&D but goes up to 300+

:\

-it lists 90 skills (with new names)

:\

 

[Miar]

If you're posting it on the Wizards' messageboards, all original content posted is now property of WotC.

There a link to this somewhere? Going through things on Wizard's site I couldn't find it.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

I don't want to threadjack, but really, this thread is interesting only because Ryan and Scott stooped to post in it.

On the spectrum of intellect on display here-- from spelling, to game design, to matters of law-- I have never seen a troll so unworthy so quickly and thoroughly legitimized before.

Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty, and the pig likes it.

 

[Halivar]

Do you use the terms "fighter", "wizard", "cleric" or "rogue"? Do you use the SRD size terms?

I get where you're going, and I agree with you. But I believe your examples are non-protectable. "Red Wizard of Thay" is protectable, but "rogue" is not. Likewise with size names. "Monkey grip" could be protectable, but I'm pretty sure "Dodge" is not.

Do you use the SRD wording for the various skills and feats? Or have you re-written everything?

Here's what I was saying earlier: even if you re-write everything, if you use the same exact mechanics, it's almost given that part of your work is going to inadvertently infringe. They don't even have to show literal copying; the fact that Chaos Disciple is advertising his intent here to "embrace and extend" D&D makes it a simple matter for WotC to claim the whole shebang as non-literal copying.

Chaos Disciple, I strongly urge you either to accept the OGL, or abandon your project. You may think you're copying game mechanincs, but you're not. Because you admit that what you're doing is non-literal copying, you are opening yourself up to a lawsuit. AND you attracted three WotC bigwigs to the case.

Be smart. Drop it.

 

[Terraism]

I don't want to threadjack, but really, this thread is interesting only because Ryan and Scott stooped to post in it.

Really? I thought watching a train wreck in progress was worth it, regardless. Of course, it was Scott who went so far as to display that. Hrm...

 

[RFisher]

Please forgive me for not having time to read the whole thread. My comments may be needlessly redundant.

If Dungeons and Dragons is a game and has no copyright protection then what is the purpose of an Open Gaming License?

• Say you're writing an adventure intended for use with D&D. It might be nice to copy the actual text of a specific rule into the description of an encounter area so the DM will be able to reference it without searching through his books. You could rewrite the rule in your own words, but it's easier & less error-prone to just copy the rule itself out of the SRD.
• Say you have a good idea for a game. Likely, your idea isn't for a complete game, it's just one new wrinkle. One new subsystem. Something like that. So, you can start with the SRD, add your changes, & not have to rewrite the whole thing or even create a whole new system just to implement your idea.
• It provides a safe-haven. While law remains somewhat fuzzy until a court decides specific cases, the OGL gives you some clearer guidelines about some things you are now explicitly allowed to do without Wizards suing you as long as you abide by its terms.

I think the question of whether D&D is a "game" or not is much more interesting topic.

(Though even if it were not a game, that doesn't really change any of the legal issues. Copyright still only covers the fixed expression of an idea, not the idea itself. Be it a game or not.)

 

[Contrarian]

Chaos Disciple, I strongly urge you either to accept the OGL, or abandon your project.

I'd suggest he skip straight to the "abandon your project" part, because frankly, it doesn't sound that interesting.

 

[Qualidar]

I'd suggest he skip straight to the "abandon your project" part, because frankly, it doesn't sound that interesting.

What are you talking about? He already told you: it improves the game.

 

[Chaos Disciple]

This made me laugh, thank you. Yes, it's out of context but any time those words are used together it's amusing.




You keep going back to this. Have you considered that maybe you cannot copyright the idea for a game (you imagine you're in a fantasy world, magic is real, you use swords to kill orcs and take their stuff), but that an actual game based on that idea might be (such as D&D, or the d20 mechanics) copyrightable.

Of course, the name or title given to the game can be trademarked, which it is in this case.

Copyright law is *not* simple by any stretch of the imagination.

But since you refuse to heed the advice you requested, I wish you well in the future. If I knew your name, I would look out for it in the news, when the lawsuit comes.

Well if WotC pursued any lawsuit aginst me for trying sharing my ideas on D&D it would not only be a big waste of their time and money it could also be seen as depriving the RPG community of a potentially major improvment to the game which the OGL was meant to encourage.

I just dont see them doing somthing like that, ofcourse I could be wrong