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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Alzrius" data-source="post: 4027592" data-attributes="member: 8461">Respectfully, Mystaros, I don't think that was what the poster you were responding to meant. The 4E materials in the GSL won't be part of the OGL in any way; we know that. However, it's perfectly legal to take the existing materials in the OGL and reconstruct them to mimic the GSL materials as closely as they can (including by writing similarly new material).The 4E pit fiend is a good example of how that'd work. It's called a "Large immortal humanoid (devil)." Now, that's part of the GSL - there's no reason I couldn't write an OGL product introducing the "immortal" creature Type, with "humanoid" as a subtype, and "(devil)" as a secondary subtype, or descriptor, etc. So long as I don't reprint any text from the GSL word-for-word, or use any original intellectual property in the GSL (e.g. the names of brand new monsters), there's nothing I couldn't use the OGL to replicate.While such a system wouldn't be perfect, I'm guessing it could get upwards of 90% compatibility with 4E (if not closer to 99%). This was the same thing that OSRIC did to basically replicate OD&D using the OGL, and it worked great (especially since they were copying a system that was very different from the base OGL materials). With such a system, companies can then make products that are, for all intents and purposes, 4E-compatible, while avoiding the tighter restrictions of the GSL, since they're publishing them under the OGL instead. At some point, someone is going to make an OGL-replication of the GSL (and if someone else doesn't, I will  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> ).</blockquote>

Verification