Why not convert the best for use with OGL?

[ashockney]

So, the OGL is open, right? Why not take all the best of 4e and convert it for use with the OGL for people who want the best of both 3e and 4e?

There's even a template to work from with the Bo9S.

Thoughts?

 

[WhatGravitas]

There's even a template to work from with the Bo9S.

The Bo9S isn't OGC.

Cheers, LT.

 

[ashockney]

Ok, so Bo9S is not OGL, however, there is an OGL and we can use the Bo9S as a template.

Would there be any interest in taking all the best of 4e and converting it to 3e? There might have to be a few sweeping changes, but they could be for the better.

I'm reminded of Mike Mearls' blog-post about how an OGL should constantly tweak to take the best of every designer's content to make them universally true. If you took the best of 3e and the best of 4e and put them together, what would you have?

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

I'm reminded of Mike Mearls' blog-post about how an OGL should constantly tweak to take the best of every designer's content to make them universally true. If you took the best of 3e and the best of 4e and put them together, what would you have?

A copyright violation if you aren't very careful how you convert things.

 

[delericho]

Would there be any interest in taking all the best of 4e and converting it to 3e?

The problem is, if you ask 10 people what the best parts of 4e are, you'll get 12 different answers.

 

[Lizard]

High legal risk, very little gain.

Your safest bet would be to scour the masses of existing OGC for 'prior art' which is close to 4e -- for example, fixed skill bonuses from Unearthed Arcana, the fact that barbarians a re fatigued "until the end of the current encounter" (establishing the concept of 'the encounter' as a game-mechanical-meaningful term), and so on. I'll bet somewhere in the mountain of OGC there are 'special moves' for fighters which can be done N times per day, or whatever -- hell, we already have smites as a good example there.

Even so, setting out to 'reverse engineer' 4e into an OGL document is just asking for trouble. WOTC will look for any hint of violation of the terms of the OGL, and given how many minor violations creep into even professional products, they're likely to find at least one or two to hit you with.

 

[Scurvy_Platypus]

I think folks get a bit confused...

There's really nothing stopping you from converting 4E stuff over to OGL/3.x stuff.

If you're a fan.

It's when you start talking about doing some sort of "conversion" and then offering it up in a manner that's beyond, "Here's a webpage with my house rules, converting some of the cool stuff from 4E to be used in a 3.5 game..." that you start running into problems.

The OGL itself is open, sure. But the GSL really isn't and is pretty explicit about what's being allowed and not allowed. If you're grabbing 4E stuff, you're automatically basically agreeing to abide by the license. Since that's the only way you'd be allowed to use the stuff in the first place.

Certain things I've heard about in 4E, I can see earlier and related things in OGL games. Evolving those OGL mechanics to mimic some of the effects you're seeing it 4E? I think that's a lot more likely.

Of course, anything that looks too much like the "conversion" or back-porting that people like to suggest, is likely going to get a company into some serious trouble unless they can show a pretty clear progression of the mechanics.

 

[Aus_Snow]

Change the terms and phrasing, certainly. Shift some numbers around, of course. Don't use anything like the same kind of presentation, ever. Use the OGL properly, for example by putting the relevant stuff into section 15.

And you're probably good to go. Just don't overdo it. If you're thinking of selling this thing, it might be a little bit more risky. Not to mention pointless.

But if it's free - which is what you had in mind, right? - I can't see any real issues, provided you follow at least the spirit of the advice I've given here (i.e., don't be daft.)

 

[Lizard]

Change the terms and phrasing, certainly. Shift some numbers around, of course. Don't use anything like the same kind of presentation, ever. Use the OGL properly, for example by putting the relevant stuff into section 15.

And you're probably good to go. Just don't overdo it. If you're thinking of selling this thing, it might be a little bit more risky. Not to mention pointless.

But if it's free - which is what you had in mind, right? - I can't see any real issues, provided you follow at least the spirit of the advice I've given here (i.e., don't be daft.)

The thing is, that when you declare content open under the OGL, you're asserting your right to that content -- and others, down the line, are trusting in that assertion. Just because YOU have no commercial intent doesn't mean someone else WON'T, and if you put something under the OGL, you are saying "I say I have every right to this content and you can use it in your OGL products freely and safely." If there's ANY doubt as to where you are -- forget the OGL and put it up on a fan site. Otherwise, even if WOTC doesn't sue you, someone 'downstream' might when WOTC sues *them*.

There are moral and ethical obligations to releasing open content.

 

[dmccoy1693]

I thought Monte Cook's BoXM and BoXM2 did some of that, more or less by accident.