Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Gez" data-source="post: 3643072" data-attributes="member: 1328">I would have thought that the copyrightable part wouldn't be so much the table as the choice of bonus progression types (good, median, or bad). Because the save and attack bonuses are quite straightforwardly formulaic: full, three-quarters, one-half for BAB, third or half+2 for saves. Sometimes, even class features are, depending on which class we're talking about.For example, if I look at a table like this one, I only see formulaic application (just conflate &quot;level 0&quot; with level 1 to get the Fighter's table):[code]level&nbsp; &nbsp; attack&nbsp; &nbsp; fortitude reflex will&nbsp; &nbsp; class feature&nbsp;&nbsp; 0&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +0&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +2&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +0&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +0&nbsp; &nbsp; bonus feat&nbsp;&nbsp; 1&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +1&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +2&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +0&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +0&nbsp;&nbsp; 2&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +2&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +3&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +0&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +0&nbsp; &nbsp; bonus feat&nbsp;&nbsp; 3&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +3&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +3&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +1&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +1&nbsp;&nbsp; 4&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +4&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +4&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +1&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +1&nbsp; &nbsp; bonus feat&nbsp;&nbsp; 5&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +5&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +4&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +1&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +1&nbsp;&nbsp; 6&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +6&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +5&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +2&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +2&nbsp; &nbsp; bonus feat&nbsp;&nbsp; 7&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +7&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +5&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +2&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +2&nbsp;&nbsp; 8&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +8&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +6&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +2&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +2&nbsp; &nbsp; bonus feat&nbsp;&nbsp; 9&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +9&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +6&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +3&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +3&nbsp; 10&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +10&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +7&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +3&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +3&nbsp; &nbsp; bonus feat&nbsp; 11&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +11&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +7&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +3&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +3&nbsp; 12&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +12&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +8&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +4&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +4&nbsp; &nbsp; bonus feat&nbsp; 13&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +13&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +8&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +4&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +4&nbsp; 14&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +14&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +9&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +4&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +4&nbsp; &nbsp; bonus feat&nbsp; 15&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +15&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +9&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +5&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +5&nbsp; 16&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +16&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +10&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +5&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +5&nbsp; &nbsp; bonus feat&nbsp; 17&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +17&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +10&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +5&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +5&nbsp; 18&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +18&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +11&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +6&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +6&nbsp; &nbsp; bonus feat&nbsp; 19&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +19&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +11&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +6&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +6&nbsp; 20&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +20&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +12&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; +6&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; +6&nbsp; &nbsp; bonus feat[/code]When looking at the Druid or the Monk, I see at least clear fiat for class features. But for the Fighter, the only fiat was in deciding they had good attack, good fort, bad ref and will, and the list of their bonus feat (plus weapon specialization, but this doesn't appear on the table in the revised edition). The NPC classes of warrior, noble, and commoner are even more clearly formulaic in that they don't have any class feature on their table.If someone were to make a (non-OGLed) game with a gameplay similar to D&amp;D's, but using different formulaic progression for the attack, fortitude, reflex and will equivalent. The table would be different (since the numbers wouldn't be the same), but it would still be clearly a clone of the fighter. Would that be copyright infringement?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Gez, post: 3643072, member: 1328"] I would have thought that the copyrightable part wouldn't be so much the table as the choice of bonus progression types (good, median, or bad). Because the save and attack bonuses are quite straightforwardly formulaic: full, three-quarters, one-half for BAB, third or half+2 for saves. Sometimes, even class features are, depending on which class we're talking about. For example, if I look at a table like this one, I only see formulaic application (just conflate "level 0" with level 1 to get the Fighter's table): [code] level attack fortitude reflex will class feature 0 +0 +2 +0 +0 bonus feat 1 +1 +2 +0 +0 2 +2 +3 +0 +0 bonus feat 3 +3 +3 +1 +1 4 +4 +4 +1 +1 bonus feat 5 +5 +4 +1 +1 6 +6 +5 +2 +2 bonus feat 7 +7 +5 +2 +2 8 +8 +6 +2 +2 bonus feat 9 +9 +6 +3 +3 10 +10 +7 +3 +3 bonus feat 11 +11 +7 +3 +3 12 +12 +8 +4 +4 bonus feat 13 +13 +8 +4 +4 14 +14 +9 +4 +4 bonus feat 15 +15 +9 +5 +5 16 +16 +10 +5 +5 bonus feat 17 +17 +10 +5 +5 18 +18 +11 +6 +6 bonus feat 19 +19 +11 +6 +6 20 +20 +12 +6 +6 bonus feat[/code] When looking at the Druid or the Monk, I see at least clear fiat for class features. But for the Fighter, the only fiat was in deciding they had good attack, good fort, bad ref and will, and the list of their bonus feat (plus weapon specialization, but this doesn't appear on the table in the revised edition). The NPC classes of warrior, noble, and commoner are even more clearly formulaic in that they don't have any class feature on their table. If someone were to make a (non-OGLed) game with a gameplay similar to D&D's, but using different formulaic progression for the attack, fortitude, reflex and will equivalent. The table would be different (since the numbers wouldn't be the same), but it would still be clearly a clone of the fighter. Would that be copyright infringement? [/QUOTE]

Verification