Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="slaughterj" data-source="post: 3982484" data-attributes="member: 5341">It seems to me that if anyone is interested in using the 4e rules system (but not the other PHB content), then they should just go ahead and use it but not enter into the OGL at all.  (The system itself is unlikely to be subject to patent protection, which only leaves trademarks and copyrights to be concerned about.)  They of course need to avoid improper use of WOTC's trademarks and copyrights, but as a practical matter, it seems that the copyrighted content isn't as usable anyway under the 4e OGL and rules would need to be rewritten anyway, given the following statement:The ability to use rote copying of rules under 3.0/3.5 OGL seemed to be one of the most significant benefits of even being under the OGL, since (1) you didn't have to rewrite the same rules in your own books (e.g., Conan RPG, MnM, etc.), but instead could just copy them and move on, and (2) "everyone" understood the rules from one game to another (which a rewrite of the rules, even if intended to be the same result, could end up creating differing interpretations).  Removal of this ability would seem to not affect module creation, etc. particularly, but it would make products that are alternative rule systems to be virtually unworkable (see, e.g., Gamma World which was tied in like this, and required jumping back and forth between d20 Modern and the Gamma World texts, to the point that it was nearly impossible to make a character, much less play the game).  Therefore, if the rules system can't be rote copied under the OGL, then those who want to use the rules in different ways may be better off to just skip the OGL entirely and use the (presumably unpatented) system with their own rewritten rules (to avoid the copyright issues), since they would have to rewrite the rules in equivalent terms anyway (per the above quote).</blockquote>

Verification