Pathfinder 1E Paizo Licenses

[dmccoy1693]

I'm sorry and I am not trying to be dense. I think I need to direct my questions to the PF boards. But ...

...I like the 3.75/PF mechanics. But I also want a PF-themed dark future world. Without explicitly touching their IP, can't I use the mechanics + my new fluff/crunch, + the PF logo to create PF Futures Lost? (Of course, players and DMs would have to own the PF core book to use my world.)

Again, please understand that I am not trying to be a jerk/obtuse.

I don't think you can, but I am no lawyer. I mean the license doesn't expressly state that you cannot do future or modern settings. But the license does state "You agree to use your best efforts to ensure that the licensed products are fully compatible with the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game as published in August, 2009." Someone can argue that a future setting is not "fully compatible".

But that does not mean that someone cannot take Paizo's rules and modify them to fit a more future setting and make a future game and create their own compatability logo.

 

[czak]

What do you mean by pathfinder-themed? Based on the rule set, or based on the world (Golarion)?

You can't use their world for commercial stuff, you have to use the fan license for that.

You can use their rules and the OGL to create your own stand alone cyberpunk/dark future game. Calling it Pathfinder: Futures Lost is probably a no no (pathfinder is one of their trademarks). You could say "Compatible with the worlds most popular 3.75 based role playing game" (like people did with d&d 3.5) or "Compatible with 3.75"

If it is a non stand alone Dark Future supplement, you can use the mechanics, + your new fluff and crunch and the compatability logo, but you can't call it Pathfinder: Dark Futures because of Clause 4 paragraph 3 of the license. You can't use any of their fluff.

Clause 4 para 3
"The titles of your products may not include any Paizo trademarked terms (or marks confusingly similar thereto), including "Pathfinder" or "Pathfinder Roleplaying Game.""


As for the compatibility of a modern / future setting, Paizo has described compatibility as:

http://paizo.com/paizo/messageboard...ingGameCompatibilityLicenseReleased&page=1#46
"If you're asking about how much you can *modify* the rules, the answer is that your product needs to remain "compatible" with our system, in that a player of the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game should be able to pick up your product and use it without issues. If you're changing the system enough that they can't do that, then you may not use this license for your product. (You can still use the OGL to access our Open Gaming Content, of course... you just can't say it's compatible with the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game.)"

IANAL etc

 

[Hunter In Darkness]

I do not think you could do this.

Now you could make the rules with OGL then take the them about a privet license to make the dark setting.

The setting is not up for grabs with licenses. That's there own IP and I do not think they will allow anyone to have use of it.

 

[Maggan]

paizo.com - Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / Announcements / Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Compatibility License Released
"If you're asking about how much you can *modify* the rules, the answer is that your product needs to remain "compatible" with our system, in that a player of the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game should be able to pick up your product and use it without issues.

One question I find interesting is whether a product published under the 3.5 SRD rules is considered sufficiently compatible to qualify for the logo? That could be an interesting option for many companies with legacy material.

/M

 

[Filcher]

Thank you for the patience and insights.

World = No. (Though a fantasy dystopia is easy enough)

IP = No.

Logo = Yes.

Rules = Yes.

"Pathfinder" in the title = No.

And just for silly fun I submit PF 1: All Tomorrow's Parties

The real logo will need more work.

 

[dmccoy1693]

Even having PF in the title, I think, is a no no. IANAL.

 

[Filcher]

Even having PF in the title, I think, is a no no. IANAL.

To that I say,

Pffffff.

Teasing. I'll check with the good folks of Paizo before using PF as my product code.

Re: Themes. I believe that there is a tone and "feel" to Pathfinder products that can be replicated in the PF line without utilizing Paizo IP. It's a style thing, not a rules or world thing.

 

[Filcher]

Even having PF in the title, I think, is a no no. IANAL.

2. Copyrights and Trademarks
You acknowledge and agree that Paizo Publishing, LLC ("Paizo") owns all trademarks and copyrights in and to the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Compatibility Logo ("Compatibility Logo"). You agree not to contest Paizo's ownership of any intellectual property rights in or to the Compatibility Logo, during the term of this License or thereafter. You also agree not to create or use any names or trademarks similar enough to our trademarks that consumers could be confused about whether the item was produced by or on behalf of Paizo.

You are correct, per the last sentence above.

 

[Alzrius]

Strictly speaking, I don't see why you can't use the Pathfinder mechanics (presuming you aren't changing them) and an original setting - future-themed or not - and not be able to use the Compatibility Logo.

The clause "You agree to use your best efforts to ensure that the licensed products are fully compatible with the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game as published in August, 2009." seems to be regarding the rules mechanics only; if you try to interpret that as also counting things such as setting, then it's almost impossible to make an PF-compatible supplement, since if it had anything that conflicted with the Pathfinder IP (such as original gods, continents, etc.) then it wouldn't be "compatible."

Likewise, the clause regarding "You also agree not to create or use any names or trademarks similar enough to our trademarks that consumers could be confused about whether the item was produced by or on behalf of Paizo." would seem to rule out calling your book Pathfinding, but I don't see why you couldn't just use capital letters PF. That one may be iffy, but I think you might be able to get away with it...though you might want to talk to Paizo first.

 

[Piratecat]

Reminder, everyone: don't threadcrap - no one gives a damn what you think about tacos - and don't turn this into a discussion about Wot'C's license. Keep it focused on Paizo, please.

Many thanks to everyone who is already doing that.