Opinions and advice.

[Lefayindustries]

I previously e-mailed wizards about a question I had regarding the creation of original classes and monsters, but thought I would throw it up here also. I was wondering if it would be breaching the GSL to create my own class named “Fighter” which was completely different from the core material fighter given that fighter, wizard, extra are all common every day terms and descriptions and not really copyrightable.
I was also curious if they can stop us from printing our own Elf, or Kobold species which again shares no common bonds due to the fact that these are historical myths and again can not be copy written.
I have not gotten an answer yet I was told my question was being forwarded but that if I heard nothing back I should assume that I am not allowed.

I wanted the opinion of some other people on the boards as far as their take on the matter.

I personally don’t think wotc could do anything at all as far as taking legal action, on historical and commonplace things.
Sincerely, Seth

 

[Urizen]

The sticking point, is that you can't define or redefine any terms in the SRD, as per section 4.1 of the GSL.

This means, if you release a "fighter" character class, with your own powers/class abilities, etc.. you are redefining what they have already defined and consequently, are in breach of contract.

The same applies to races

That said, there's nothing to stop you from creating a "super-duper Fighter" character class, or a "Nifty forest elf". That isn't a breach of section 4.1.

I hope this helps.

 

[Lefayindustries]

Thanks for the response I just want to clarify and make sure I understand. If for example I want to create my own little ogl for my setting MAD! (as an example) I could make a MAD! Fighter by inserting the name of my setting before the word fighter I am identifying the class as separate from previously established definitions. Same would go for races I am guessing, so I could make a MAD! Elf or MAD! Kobold.
Sincerely, Seth

 

[kenmarable]

Thanks for the response I just want to clarify and make sure I understand. If for example I want to create my own little ogl for my setting MAD! (as an example) I could make a MAD! Fighter by inserting the name of my setting before the word fighter I am identifying the class as separate from previously established definitions. Same would go for races I am guessing, so I could make a MAD! Elf or MAD! Kobold.
Sincerely, Seth

If you are talking GSL - yes, they (Scott Rouse and even the GSL FAQ) have specifically said that is ok for races. Classes, they haven't addressed, so that's up to you and how comfortable you are with the license and their FAQ. It is, however, just fine to have a Warrior, Soldier, whatever.

However, you need to be clear and careful with your licenses if you are going to actually publish this material (as opposed to just being a fan site). For one thing you mention the OGL, which is an entirely different license than the GSL. They CAN play nice together, but it is something this is very tricky. Tricky enough that I've been following these licenses since Ryan Dancey first started posting drafts to industry email lists and I'm not comfortable using the GSL and OGL in the same product.

For example, if you make a 4e GSL product with a MAD! Kobold and use any 4e style material (like, say giving them an At Will power), and release that race under the OGL - well, you have just opened up material as Open Gaming Content that you probably did not have the right to do so.

Of course, you could just saw "Forget all of this nonsense, 3.5 wasn't bad!" and just use the OGL. As long as you are clear about your Section 15 attribution, you are free to pretty much do whatever the heck you want with the material. You can redefine fighters and kobolds to your heart's content. You can write novels about them. On and on. The OGL is a pretty easy license to work with. The GSL, however, is pretty tricky as you can already tell.