So..um..how's that GSL coming along?

[Henrix]

Thanks, Scott! Great to hear that it is in willing, if overworked, hands!


As an aside, is there any news about the fan guidelines?

 

[Scott_Rouse]

Good answer, Scott. Any chance for an ETA?


RC

If I could I'd post the damn thing right now I would. The big issue I need to tackle is the SRD. As confusing as the OGL SRD is, I know the GSL SRD it massively more confusing. Unlike the OGL SRD, that said you can use x,y, & z free, clear, no questions asked, the GSL SRD presents alot of ambiguity.

Our intention was to let you use a term like Dragonborn and add to it through creative design and devlopment. We wanted to avoid copy and past publishing. So we add rules of use but we didn't do a good job of explaining how you can (or can't) use it.

As an example:

Maybe in your campaign world dragonborn live underground. Does this redefine dragonborn? Probably not. What if they also get darkvison? OK. What if they have albinio skin and can walk through solid stone once per day? Well not this likely crosses a line, but then again maybe not.

Are elves with green skin OK? What about flying Trolls? What about all Dawrves get a +3 to Wis?

This needs to be fixed and it is not easy given the solutions at my disposal.

So to answer your question I don't know an ETA but my desire is not soon enough. I hate have to regularly post these lame excuse, tail between my legs responses

 

[Scott_Rouse]

As an aside, is there any news about the fan guidelines?

The fansite policy is not my bailiwick anymore. We will be consulted to make sure that the proposal meets Brand's vision for the fansites but the actual implementation is being handled by someone in our web studio.

When it was in our court we had a pretty good overall policy but it tried to serve all the WOTC brands and this didn't necessarily address our specific needs. So we are using that draft plan as a base and will tailor it to suit D&Ds specific needs.

 

[Henrix]

Thanks again, Scott!

 

[Dark Mistress]

Good to know Scott, sounds like they need more people involved in this. To help you get it done. i won't make any personal comments on it, as those don't really matter. But i am getting the feeling that the GSL might not see the light of day in 2008.

 

[Grimstaff]

Thanks for the timely response, Mr. Rouse!

 

[justanobody]

If I could I'd post the damn thing right now I would. The big issue I need to tackle is the SRD. As confusing as the OGL SRD is, I know the GSL SRD it massively more confusing. Unlike the OGL SRD, that said you can use x,y, & z free, clear, no questions asked, the GSL SRD presents alot of ambiguity.

Our intention was to let you use a term like Dragonborn and add to it through creative design and devlopment. We wanted to avoid copy and past publishing. So we add rules of use but we didn't do a good job of explaining how you can (or can't) use it.

As an example:

Maybe in your campaign world dragonborn live underground. Does this redefine dragonborn? Probably not. What if they also get darkvison? OK. What if they have albinio skin and can walk through solid stone once per day? Well not this likely crosses a line, but then again maybe not.

Are elves with green skin OK? What about flying Trolls? What about all Dawrves get a +3 to Wis?

This needs to be fixed and it is not easy given the solutions at my disposal.

So to answer your question I don't know an ETA but my desire is not soon enough. I hate have to regularly post these lame excuse, tail between my legs responses

This is something VERY important to fix, and glad someone is looking at it from a new perspective, or at least after having some time from the initial bomb it seemed to cause to see how to fix it.

I do not envy you that, this is ONE thing I was looking forward to the GSL correcting or at least giving a bit more explanation of!

(And flying trolls may decide to return the favor of the red dragon back unto him. Maybe a new cartoon idea for the DDI when the GSL comes out. j/k)

Thanks for the update and attempts to clarify some of the SRD that legal allows you to do.....

The fansite policy is not my bailiwick anymore. We will be consulted to make sure that the proposal meets Brand's vision for the fansites but the actual implementation is being handled by someone in our web studio.

When it was in our court we had a pretty good overall policy but it tried to serve all the WOTC brands and this didn't necessarily address our specific needs. So we are using that draft plan as a base and will tailor it to suit D&Ds specific needs.

Doesn't dsound favorable having the web studio decide the fansite policy, unless they are making a fansite kit you must use, and not everyone will want all those AIM icons and such.

Also not a good idea to have a WotC fansite policy, but the independant brands need to have their own wouldn't they since WotC would be giving rights to imagery they may not fully own, but have rights to make games for the product? Either way, there needs to be specific brand fansite policies so one does not get trapped into having to have all WotC brands on a site about just D&D, and not have to have D&D on a sight about Axis & Allies.

But it isn't up to you, and those are just my thoughts on that matter.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

We wanted to avoid copy and past publishing.

Freudian slip?

 

[El Mahdi]

IANAL, but as I understand it the GSL applies to publishers only. Fans should be able to do pretty much what ever they want, as long as they don't sell it. Now, I know there is supposed to be a 'fan web-site' document in the works, but I'm not sure how they can restrict what goes on 'behind closed doors', so to speak.

Yeah, "Behind closed doors" they can't do anything about it, and I think you can legally do pretty much anything you want. However, once things start being posted on fan sites, then WoTC can have a say in it. They can very well have their lawyers send a cease and desist letter, and unless you have the resources to pay for lawyers and fight it, you pretty much don't have an option. In all fairness though, I don't think I've heard of any real incidents where WoTC has sent cease and desist letters to fansites although I may be wrong (now TSR was another matter entirely). The OGL was really open however, and could be interpreted very loosely (as can be seen by the plethora of 3pp that basically broke the spirit of what WoTC was trying to do with the OGL), so it probably would have been rather hard to enforce violations on fansites. Although if WoTC had wanted to, I doubt there are too many fan sites that could afford to go head to head with WoTC lawyers.

But I think with the restrictiveness of the GSL, people may be afraid they will be that much stricter with fan sites also. But who really knows until we see their guidelines.

 

[jmucchiello]

If I could I'd post the damn thing right now I would. The big issue I need to tackle is the SRD. As confusing as the OGL SRD is, I know the GSL SRD it massively more confusing. Unlike the OGL SRD, that said you can use x,y, & z free, clear, no questions asked, the GSL SRD presents alot of ambiguity.

Our intention was to let you use a term like Dragonborn and add to it through creative design and devlopment. We wanted to avoid copy and past publishing. So we add rules of use but we didn't do a good job of explaining how you can (or can't) use it.

Perhaps you need two lists: One that lists things you may reference and make changes to. And one that lists things that must not be redefined. I'm guessing by the examples that dragonborn, elves and trolls would go on the first list, but AC, hit points and level would go on the latter list.

Of course, I'm guessing that determining which terms belong on which list could cause debate among the various departments that would last for years. So perhaps this isn't such a good idea.