"Quality Standards" in the d20 System Guide

[Khur]

So, I was reading all of this stuff, and I had to laugh at this:

"While sensuality and sexuality may appear in a Covered Product, it must not be the focus nor can it be salacious in nature."

While the actual definition of salacious is "bawdy" or "appealing to or stimulating sexual desire", some synonyms include spicy, exciting, scandalous, and even interesting. Just be sure the sex stuff in your works isn't interesting, and you'll be okay. Got it?

That "...bare female nipples...." thing is just too funny. Who wrote this (or suggested it be added to the license)? Certainly not a lawyer, one hopes.

The prejudice section can actually prevent one from making, say, an adventure or setting in which real-world prejudice is taken into account—like conflicts in India between Muslims and Hindus. So, if you want a Tom Clancy type scenario, just rename the religions, I suppose. Or use Church of the Sub-Genius! Or Neo-Nazis, because its okay to hate them ... everyone knows they're evil. Ooops, Sum of All Fears beat you to it. We all know that the movie worked out fine, even though it changed the villains from the Islamic radicals presented in the book. Or did it?

Technically, the prejudice section also prevents you from writing a supplement or game that focuses on Wicca or Christianity. For example, writing a game wherein the "good" characters are all Christian is right out. That's a shame, because a well-designed RPG can be a great learning tool in a religious context.

Apparently prejudice among fantasy religions, groups, races, and such is kosher.

 

[Mouseferatu]

My personal fear is this - you can't trademark or copyright ideas or principles. All you can do is copyright the expressions of ideas. Now WotC doesn't have to do this.

Why is this important, to me at least? Art of Magic is heavily inspired by Magic: The Gathering and a stated goal of the book is to transfer the feel of the color pie to d20. We've been careful to stay well within legality - so much so that if WotC's sharks (er, lawyers) file a case, it will be dismissed without a hearing. But now, WotC doesn't even have to file a suit. They can claim it doesn't meet "quality standards" and shut it down.

My day just got worse...

Well, if it makes you feel any better...

It really isn't hard, as I understand it, to convert a pre-publication work from the D20 License to the OGL. I believe it's just a question of changing out logos and removing the "Requires the use of the Dungeons and Dragons 3.5 Player's Handbook" notation. I could be wrong, of course, but I'm fairly certain those are the only two main factors involved, and both of those can be worked around with a bit of creative thought.

Hopefully, you won't have to do it, but even in a worst-case scenario, your project isn't dead; it's just renamed a bit.

(As always, IANAL.)

 

[TheAuldGrump]

My suspicion is that they are taking aim at a few (or even 'one') publisher of D20 products, but phrased the license in such a way as to prevent that one (or 'few') publisher(s) from saying that they were being singled out. And to make it known that they could do something about it if similar things are done in the future.

Frankly, after the announcement of the BoEF I was expecting something like this. Again frankly, Valtera is very much like TSR's nightmare dreamchild come to life... [Pat Robertson]Hmm, into the occult, and does a book of D20 eroticism... Just what the 700 Club wanted![/Pat Robertson]

The changes to the D20 License may go away, but I don't expect them to, but I also don't expect to see them all that heavily enforced. Given that Texas just had a case about a comic book store getting into deep kimchee for selling an adult comic book to an adult, and that decision being upheld by the Supreme Court, I can't really blame WotC for being cautious. Let us be honest people, for good or ill the country is currently sliding toward conservatism. (Just to put in my 2 cps worth, I think that it is for 'ill', but that is only my opinion, I am a liberal.)

Like I said, I've been expecting this, sometimes the pessimists and paranoics are correct.

The Auld Grump

 

[Michael Morris]

::snip::

Let us be honest people, for good or ill the country is currently sliding toward conservatism. (Just to put in my 2 cps worth, I think that it is for 'ill', but that is only my opinion, I am a liberal.)

Like I said, I've been expecting this, sometimes the pessimists and paranoics are correct.

The Auld Grump

Take that polical stuff to Nutkinland! Go Nuts!!

 

[MrJamela]

I can do without nipples on my d20 books, but the part about prejudice is really scary.

What about games like Testament? Or Pinnacles Wierd War 2?

Whatever. WOTC lost my business the moment they released 3.5 so soon after 3.0. Its obvious that the brains of this operation have left the building and the bean counters are now running the show. D&D was brought back to life by people like Ryan, Sean, Monte, etc. It won't survive indefinately without them. I for one remember TSR in the lonely years.

Games are not widgets. What exactly is Hasbro afraid of? Waldenbooks is not carrying the Slayers Guide to Boobies. Any gamer walking into a real hobby store is not going to be more than perplexed (and perhaps mildly ashamed) by the more childish works. And they will rot on the stands. Or be modestly successful.

You know where we're really heading with all this? RATINGS! Its time for a WOTC imposed rating system. Why not? They require its use, not necessarily its enforcement.

Hey Ryan, who is in charge of this beast now that you are long gone? Does anybody at WOTC really care what we think about these issues?

Jaime

 

[galaga88]

So what does this mean for the Chaosium dual stat BRP/D20 Call of Cthulhu modules? Do they have a seperate license for those, or will they have to make some changes, considering how 'obscene' the sex or violence can be in some CoC modules?

Also, does this mean any future re-prints of Rappan Athuk 1 will require the removal of the Dung Monster?

 

[ES2]

Hey Ryan, who is in charge of this beast now that you are long gone? Does anybody at WOTC really care what we think about these issues?

Jaime

I highly doubt it as long as the corporates of Hasbro are in charge who have no concept or real knowledge of gaming and the hobby we enjoy so much. I could be wrong, but as long as money and public opinion are all they are looking at, this decision could just be a bump in the road, and it could lead to their downfall as we see them put out more products that are anti what the license they created dont' allow us to do.

 

[Kichwas]

So does this applyt to product already on the shelf?

About 80% of my mongoose books have bare female nipples in them somewhere or another...

I assume they can only prevent reprints of that material at the most, and stop future product from using the same style of art at the least.

A shame really, because while I felt the BoEF was a foolish idea, I happen to believe in the ideals my country pretends to stand for:

Freedom of Speech and Religion.

While they can't stop what people say (you can just slide over to another license), I find their ethics deplorable in trying to stop that expression.

Also, they're just going way too far with the wording on that license. Somebody over there is forgetting that there is always a valid time and place for anything. Extreme solutions are never good, moderation is the key.

 

[alaric]

If you feel really strongly about this then I urge you to talk in the language that companies listen in....money. Don't send off an email saying you don't like this, and then go buy the latest WotC book. If you want to make an impact on a company then don't buy their products, tell your friends not to buy their products, inform them why you aren't buying their products anymore. While people may have gotten boycott crazy, it's still the surest way to get a company to change it's point of view on a topic.

I had thought that with BoVD we we're moving away from the PG rated TSR books. Some campaigns deal with adult content (sex, slavery, racism, murder, torture, rape, etc) and blacklisting those products that deal with them isn't an acceptable solution IMO. While you can say that WotC's intention is a very loose selective enforcement (i sure hope that was the intent, although who can tell what guys in suits and an overinflated sense of selfworth will do in any given meeting), that doesn't change the fact that people may not develop these kinds of material for fear of being targeted. Personally I think community standards should be decided by the community, not WotC. If a book is overly gorey, or too sexual themed, or filled with racism, or whatever, then people won't buy it, and by extension if a book is selling well then it apparenly wasn't too whatever for the community. WotC has no business playing morality police with the D20 license, and furthermore has gone about this all wrong. Would we have even heard of Book of Erotic Fantasy if WotC hadn't of made a big deal out of it? Would anyone have had the urge (or for that matter, does anyone really plan now) to buy a book like this? They could have avoided the problem by letting it die quietly, but they want to take the moral high ground on something, and do so in draconian style, by retroactively altering contracts and attempt to destroy all copies of books that don't meet there image of decency. [Some was bound to do it so I might as well say it now. Book burning Nazies! ah...much better]. Ok less ranting, and more changing bad policy decisions.

alaric

 

[Kichwas]

Despite everything I've said against the BoEF in past, if that book comes out in some OGL or other format now...

I will buy it.

I'll need to think on how I feel about a boycott of WotC though. I'm not sure it would impact Hasbro enough. You'd need a boycott of Hasbro, that reached beyond the gamer community -at which point you will hit a community that is more likely to side with WotC than with free expression and living up to being American.