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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JohnRTroy" data-source="post: 4033784" data-attributes="member: 2732">The problem is, your analogy is a little flawed.  WordPerfect and Word, while doing similar things, had differences.  Different interfaces, different methodologies, etc.  Lots of little and sometimes big differences.  Word had style sheets, WP had codes.  Software manufacturers try to add their own distinctions and own methodologies.Before the d20/OGL glut, people did this.  We had other RPGs.  DragonQuest, RuneQuest, Shadowrun, GURPS, Deadlands, RIFTS, etc.  Most publishers really try to make themselves distinctive, and not derivative.  (Heck, with games like Traveller and Gamma World you had whole different systems each revision!) You rarely had people making things too similar to D&D.  You either asked their permission or some did it anyway, sometimes risking lawsuits, othertimes being ignored.  But for the most part, people competed by doing similar things--statistics for hit points, armor, resistance rolls, etc.Most people don't want to be known as a cheap knock-off, the types of products that are knock-offs from third-world countries that look like another product, with a vague name that is similar to another trademark, such as the time I saw in the 80's a couple of cheap action-figured named "Dynacats", which looked like Thundercats, in a drugstore.  They want to create on their own.  Especially when it comes to creative works (as opposed to functional products like drugs where you can have "generics", for instance), you make your move by being distinctive.  Even the professional publishers are doing this.  Stuff like True20 and Spycraft are trying to make themselves as different from the other publishers as possible.  I can see a strategy over the last several years...the publishers are actually making their products as different so it will be a distinct game from D&D.  Maybe they might abandon the OGL rules that are based on D&D and create a new game system after it becomes distinctively difference, so they can control their own properties after that.I think Vigilance and I are targeting those specific individuals who want to copy 4e completely, making an OGL version of the game rules, when the publisher is actually making so many radical changes that it's a completely different system, to get "99%" of the rules.  I think he and I would agree if you did that with GURPS, Storyteller, and any other game and tried to make it an OGL game--which you could do, since as you say, you can't copyright game rules--it wouldn't go over well, either with the publishers or the public.  How come people aren't asking to do that?When I say "stick with 3e", I see it as this.  Wizards gave you the 3e rules under the OGL.  The OGL is still a license, graciously given to you by WoTC.  This is more than any other publisher of games systems ever did in the past (to my knowledge).  But they've decided for their own purposes, they don't want to use it with their new iteration.  Which I respect, it's their right.  If they tried to say all released products are invalid, I'd complain, but they aren't doing that.Since they are giving a new license, you have an option to create 4e compatible products.  If you don't like the terms of the license, you can still use the non-revocable 3e license.  I'm sure we'll see some guys do the one, other guys do the others.It's not that you can't take any ideas from 4e once it's out, but I think a wholesale creation of a 100% clone would be frowned on.  Professional publishers wouldn't touch it with a 10' pole, fans of WoTC would denounce it, and people like myself would likely see it as akin to a "cheap Mexican/Chinese knockoff".  (I also have a feeling it's gonna be somewhat difficult to do).When I say "stick with 3e", I'm saying that if you really want to send a message about open gaming, using the game system that is under the OGL "as is", without changing it to 4e, would send a message--along with not buying D&D 4e.  It would say--"here, WoTC, we would rather play the older version of D&D because of the OGL.  We care about the more open system, so we will support it than your new system"  But if you decide to "end run" the new license, you'd be spitting in WoTC's face, saying "doesn't matter, we'll take your game anyway, you can't stop us".  It will look more like you just want a game system "for free", or are trying to say Wizards has no right to set the terms of their licenses to people.  3e and 4e are different animals.</blockquote>

Verification