"Quality Standards" in the d20 System Guide

[Wulf Ratbane]

Here is the link to the document I created discussing and parsing the changes.

I created this not as legal advice but rather as a starting point to discuss the changes.

I hope this helps educate people on the changes and helps any future discussion on the topic. I have sent a copy to Ryan. He reviewed a draft of this document yesterday with approval.

http://www.necromancergames.com/pdf/d20stlreview.pdf

Clark

Clark--

In reading your analysis of the Prejudice sections, it occurs to me that "Human" is a real world group. Thus, among all the races of D&D, they can never be enslaved or portrayed as inferior.

First the extra feat and skill points, and now this!

Wulf

 

[tensen]

Clark--

In reading your analysis of the Prejudice sections, it occurs to me that "Human" is a real world group. Thus, among all the races of D&D, they can never be enslaved or portrayed as inferior.

First the extra feat and skill points, and now this!

Wulf

Yes, but note, they can't do the enslaving either.
But still, not being enslaved... that is a really good bonus.

 

[Orcus]

I tried to stay away from opinion in the document, but if you want it here it is in all its "non-binding on WotC" glory:

1. if they give you prior approval of a work they cant rescind it later. The corporation acts through its agents. An authorized agent binds the company as if the company itself acted. They cant come to a new conclusion simply by changing staff.

2. Humans and enslavement. Thats rediculous. The humans in D&D are not an existing real world group. Wulf, I think you are just goofing around.

3. Beggars. Are you just trying to come up with goofy examples? Of course you can have beggars for goodness sake!

4. Just because you deal with a real world setting doesnt mean you will violate the license. So dont just reject using the license because you deal with those topics. You must, however, be more careful than others for whom the issue never would arise.

Clark

 

[KDLadage]

I tried to stay away from opinion in the document, but if you want it here it is in all its "non-binding on WotC" glory:

1. if they give you prior approval of a work they cant rescind it later. The corporation acts through its agents. An authorized agent binds the company as if the company itself acted. They cant come to a new conclusion simply by changing staff.

Thank you for your time (and skills).

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

2. Humans and enslavement. Thats rediculous. The humans in D&D are not an existing real world group. Wulf, I think you are just goofing around.

Of course! =)

Gee, a guy spends a couple days in lawyer mode and his sense of humor goes right out the window...


Wulf

 

[KDLadage]

I just read the front page letter from Mr. Peterson as well (1). Let me say that having you around, sir, is an absolute delight. Thanks for getting the straight dope.

(1) This is the letter in which he explains that this whole thing is a matter of WotC not seeing things from both sides of the fence, and a couple of simple misunderstandings.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

This is the letter in which he explains that this whole thing is a matter of WotC not seeing things from both sides of the fence.

Not to mention the significant number of publishers and fans who can't see this thing from WOTC's side of the fence... neh?

Wulf

 

[DaveMage]

Of course! =)

Gee, a guy spends a couple days in lawyer mode and his sense of humor goes right out the window...

Wulf

I think I've seen/read more from Clark in the last week than in the last 3 years. He's got to be exhausted!

Still, his thoughts are always a good read. To Clark and folks like him, a big "thank you" from this gamer. You make our hobby better by your efforts.

 

[tensen]

3. Beggars. Are you just trying to come up with goofy examples? Of course you can have beggars for goodness sake!

Yes. Yes, I was. However it is putting a possible real world handicap in possibly a wrong light. The problem with it is... I don't think there is a problem with displaying the beggar.. you don't think there is a problem with it. But someone may at some point find a problem with it. Should I create a product having to second guess some unknown person? I hope they devote a good staff to the process, because I can't imagine 1 or 2 individuals being enough to cover all the d20 material that is coming out.

 

[Conaill]

And just to stop the "can't portray beggars or human slaves" camp, let me just quote a paragraph out of Clark's document, which those people seem to have missed:

Depict a group as inferior : The license does not restrict reference to groups that are or have been subject to prejudice. The prohibition is against depicting one such group as inferior to any other group, not against the concept of prejudice. This is an interesting provision. My reading is that discrimination and prejudice may be mentioned and included, simply not advocated. What is prohibited is the depiction that, in truth, one of the listed existing real-word groups is in fact inferior to another group. It appears that mentioning real world group racial slavery, so long as it is indicated to be wrong, is not a violation of the restriction of the license.

In other words, it should be fine to portray real-world groups (including beggars and humans) as being treated as inferior, as long as it is clear that your product does not depict those groups as being inferior. I.e. a product including trade of african slaves should be ok, as long as the author doesn't justify to the reader why that slave trade is fine and dandy.