Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Nellisir" data-source="post: 6382040" data-attributes="member: 70">"...and anything else contained herein which is already Open Game Content by virtue of appearing in the System Reference Document or some other Open Game Content source."This means literally any piece of text, anywhere in the product, could be OGC. Or not. That's not clarity. It was once proposed as a tongue-in-cheek litmus test that OGC could only be considered clearly identified, as required by the license, if an elementary school child with a highlighter could mark all the OGC content. Quick, pop quiz! Are the spell templates in Arcana Evolved OGC? They use and modify mechanics that are Open Game Content. What about the concept and format of spell templates?*We've got no common frame of reference. You think "all text" is confusing, and "anything which is, is, and anything which isn't, isn't" a model of clarity. It's certainly a unique perspective. I don't know what you've got for a library, but Malhavoc was considered vague, and Mongoose was well-meaning but often confused as all heck. They actually withdrew and destroyed one product (printed. hardcover. destroyed. I kinda regret selling my copy now. It was soooooo terrible) because the OGC abuse (and general editing) was so abysmal. You're pulling from the bottom of the bin and comparing two rotted apples. There are a lot of other companies with better and clearer declarations than either of those. For instance, this is an actual "master of clarity and openness", from 2004 (probably 2002, actually, but it was revised in 2004 so I can't be certain). This was standard for Bastion Press.That's how you do it.*Answer: No, and yes. I actually had to email Mr Cook to clarify this. AE fails the schoolkid test.</blockquote>

Verification