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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="kenada" data-source="post: 8885558" data-attributes="member: 70468">This is something I wanted to post after I <a href="https://www.enworld.org/threads/the-ogl-just-whats-going-on.694193/post-8884737" target="_blank">questioned</a> the desire to replace D&D with another (universal, etc) game. My apologies for using your post as a jumping off point [USER=6789094]@martinlochsen[/USER] instead of responding to you in particular.I’d not want to replace one RPG monoculture with another. I fear that could kill innovation by putting pressure on designers to remain compatible with the omni-base, new game, or whatever form it takes. I don’t think a game has to precede the license. We’ve been doing open gaming for several decades now, so I think there’s a good understanding of what a new open gaming license should look like (addressing the revocation issue, ownership of the license, abusing PI to prevent mechanics being OGC, etc).In particular, I think the following steps would result in a diverse and flourishing hobby:<ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Draft a true-OGL and assign to the Open Gaming Foundation (or some other nonprofit whose charter is involves the promotion of open gaming);</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Relicense non-SRD OGL games under the true-OGL with permission of their publishers (yielding an immediate base of true-OGL games to use as a base for other games);</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Determine whether Pathfinder 2e is truly independent of the SRD and relicense it under the true-OGL (adding a D&D-like to the pool);</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Assuming yes for #3, rework SRD-derived games (Mutants and Masterminds, retroclones, etc) to be based off PF2 (adding simpler D&D-likes to the pool); and</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Reach out to Creative Commons licensed games to see if they would be willing to contribute their games under the true-OGL (adding BitD and other games to the pool).</li> </ol>The effect of this approach is to bring a large swath of the hobby under a true open gaming license, but it also gives designers a wide variety of mechanics they can use in their games. Instead of the true-OGL being a marketing tool to reinforce the dominant position of one game, it provides a rich selection of options designers can use as a starting point for building their games. It would make the hobby be more like the open source software community that originally inspired the OGL.As an added benefit, places where games have clumsily recloned other mechanics, they could just use those mechanics directly. I’m looking at PF2’s VP subsystem in particular. It’s basically clocks, but it’s not actually clocks. If it could be clocks, it would be much simpler to understand because you could draw on the body of experience using clocks in FitD games with the added advice (provided by PF2) on how to use them with its resolution system.</blockquote>

Verification