Purchasing and OGL/OGC Awareness

[The Sigil]

Just out of curiosity, I would like to know how many people even look at the OGL/OGC declaration in the books they purchase... assume for a moment you had two identical books - one published with minimal to no sections declared OGC and one with nearly the entirety of the book declared OGC. Does it make a difference in your decision to purchase the book?

I ask because I have grown very OGC-conscious in the last few months and if a book does not contain substantial amounts of usable OGC (defined by me as, "stuff I can pull and drop into my own publications with no extra effort" and further excluding "any spell/monster/item etc. where the name of that spell/monster/item is NOT declared as OGC or at a bare minimum provided with a license for my re-use (a la R&R I but not R&R II)"), I will not buy it, no matter how good the book.

Perhaps it is my bias as a part-time writer, who would like to include a few things I really like in my own works and gets frustrated with stuff that is "protected" by specifically declaring the name of such things as Product Identity (so I can't, for instance, include a monster from product X in my adventure Y under the terms of the OGL without renaming it - at which point I ask, why reference product X at all, since no one will be able to find the re-named monster anyway).

This means I haven't bought WotC material in quite some time. It also means I will not be picking up R&RII (what happened for the license for re-use of the spell names like we saw in R&RI?).

Why? Well, at some point many years in the future, I want to put together my own "d20 Bible" to hand out to my players, comprised of everything worthy I have found in the d20 system. And I want to make it available via the web... so I would need to publish under the OGL to avoid possible legal troubles (I'll have a tough time arguing for fair use at this point). But if something's not OGC, I can't put it in there... so why bother spending money on it in the first place?

It's my own personal crusade with my wallet, and won't make much of a dent, but I want to know if anyone else looks at things this way. Basically, I want stuff I know I can re-use in any way I want at any time I want with no legal ramifications (assuming of course I follow the OGL).

Thoughts?

--The Sigil

 

[Dragongirl]

I don't look at the OGC/OGL section at all. If I see a book that looks good to me I want to, no matter how much is "drag and drop". It is not that hard to make your own versions (and probably more suitable to you) of things you want in your own world, book, etc.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

Having an online setting, what's OGC and not OGC is very important to me. However, I've found that the "minimalist" contributers (like Chaosium) are almost entirely a thing of the past as publishers like S&S Studios, Bastion, Atlas and Malhavoc (running average 50%-100% OGC) have taken the lead in popularity both with fans as well as within the publisher community itself.

 

[Crothian]

I pay no attention to ogl/ogc. My only concern is quality of work and how well it covers the topic.

 

[Jeremy Ackerman-Yost]

That would probably be a big concern if I were an author myself, and entertaining any thoughts of publication. But, that hasn't been an issue for me so far.

As it stands, the space used up by declaration could be empty space for all the notice I take of it.

 

[Nightfall]

Having an online setting, what's OGC and not OGC is very important to me. However, I've found that the "minimalist" contributers (like Chaosium) are almost entirely a thing of the past as publishers like S&S Studios, Bastion, Atlas and Malhavoc (running average 50%-100% OGC) have taken the lead in popularity both with fans as well as within the publisher community itself.

Which even with R&R2, you still get a good 50/60 percent.

And no, I don't. BUT when I write, I DO make sure my stuff is VERY different from what's already out there.

 

[The Sigil]

I realized the tone of my first post could be read as, "only buy stuff that's OGC!" It's not. While I may try to do it, I am curious mostly to see what kind of awareness, if any, exists among the "casual d20 buyer." Of course, I suppose those on this board are more of the "fanatical d20 buyer" bent, but oh well.

I would agree that there has been considerable progress to this point, but (and this is a sore spot for me) I am still a bit frustrated at SSS's recent work on this regard... I thought they took a huge step forward with the "goodie license" for spell names in R&R I, but was grossly disappointed when that license was not present in CCII and R&RII (I thought not including it in their later works was a step backwards).

Yes, a book of spells may be 50% OGC but if that 50% is the spells and there is no provision for use of the spell names (either by declaring them OGC or including a "goodie license") that is equivalent to 0% OGC for me.

Note also, that I don't doubt that Clark would grant me permission to use a few of the spell names should I ask - and in fact, I would probably ask anyway for any use much beyond letting a PC in my campaign use a spell, but I am a bit put off by the fact that I basically HAVE to ask to use what is ostensibly OGC.

As always, YMMV.

--The Sigil

 

[Grazzt]

All I can say, is the Tome of Horrors will be 100% OGC (next month). The only closed part is the Credits section where Clark and I cite the first appearance of the converted monsters (it contains a lot of WotC IP stuff).

 

[The Sigil]

All I can say, is the Tome of Horrors will be 100% OGC (next month). The only closed part is the Credits section where Clark and I cite the first appearance of the converted monsters (it contains a lot of WotC IP stuff).

Having seen the preview, let me assure you that it - along with its OGC/PI designation - is high on my Christmas list.

--The Sigil

 

[Nightfall]

Just like to point out that you STILL can't use the names in CC1.

*cheers for another plug for one of the best books in November*