tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post7661845316802060603..comments2024-03-18T20:22:06.331-04:00Comments on GROGNARDIA: REVIEW: Monsters of MythJames Maliszewskihttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comBlogger38125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-10716615866984570962008-05-29T08:06:00.000-04:002008-05-29T08:06:00.000-04:00Could you make a public domain game? I think you c...<I>Could you make a public domain game? I think you can, sure, but then you have a bunch of terms that will mess up compatibility. Also I'm not convinced you could have all the spells and magic items or present them in even a similar way.</I><BR/><BR/>Speaking only for myself, I've never contemplated a public domain <I>game</I>. Any <I>D&D</I>-derived game I might produce would be done under the auspices of the OGL. However, I think quite a few mechanical concepts from <I>D&D</I> are now public domain, such as hit points or armor class, so no one should fear using those terms without use of the OGL.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-82314445944412458472008-05-26T17:53:00.000-04:002008-05-26T17:53:00.000-04:00The issue isn't about one term or even a handful o...The issue isn't about one term or even a handful of terms. D&D isn't Armor Class or Hit Points. It's Armor Class, Hit Points, Saving Throws, the six attributes (and their names) and on and on.<BR/><BR/>So my point is that IMHO you could use some of these terms in a new public domain game, but you are going to have to change a lot of things. It is the whole, not any one piece individually, that would get you in trouble. Add all of the spells, their names, what they do, many of the monsters or even monsters with common names, but you use them how they are handled in D&D, and you're in trouble. That is the beauty of the OGL...so much of that is there with legal permission for a derivative work.<BR/><BR/>Could you make a public domain game? I think you can, sure, but then you have a bunch of terms that will mess up compatibility. Also I'm not convinced you could have all the spells and magic items or present them in even a similar way.<BR/><BR/>IMHO anyone who does this would need to hire a lawyer not just for consultation, but to go over your document with a fine toothed comb, because you are treading into dangerous territory.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-43187093884897152182008-05-26T17:52:00.000-04:002008-05-26T17:52:00.000-04:00Actually for short terminology you're on pretty sa...Actually for short terminology you're on pretty safe ground legally if WotC hasn't trademarked it. Beyond that, they'd have to object to presentation which is a pretty slippery concept. To be honest I think you'd be safe there if you just used standard terms but came up with your own statblock format.Kevin Brennanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05436497363925902795noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-8816666802098225952008-05-26T16:10:00.000-04:002008-05-26T16:10:00.000-04:00Is there any way of knowing if some terms are not?...<I>Is there any way of knowing if some terms are not?</I><BR/><BR/>With absolute certainty, probably not. However, a good rule of thumb is that, if the term in question can be found in another context without a license from WotC, then it's most likely public domain. My take on the OGL BTW is that WotC entered into it because most of <I>D&D</I> had already effectively entered into public domain anyway, due to its many imitators over the years, so why even bother to pretend otherwise? And I say again that one of the major reasons for 4e is to "reinvent" <I>D&D</I> as an IP so that it's once again filled with terms and concepts that are proprietary -- and you can be sure WotC will do a better job of policing them than TSR did in the early days of the hobby.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-51649122582993920222008-05-26T13:27:00.000-04:002008-05-26T13:27:00.000-04:00I agree that any terms (eg. the die notation; d4,d...I agree that any terms (eg. the die notation; d4,d6, etc.) that are public domain should be used. Is there any way of knowing if some terms are not?<BR/><BR/>I never studied law, but I'll be speaking with someone today who did - hopefully I can get some answers and I'll share any that I get.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-21137079028399341912008-05-26T13:15:00.000-04:002008-05-26T13:15:00.000-04:00Why couldn't we use "Hit Points" like a million ot...Why couldn't we use "Hit Points" like a million other games unaffiliated with the OGL or TSR or Wizards of the Coast have for decades? There are a ton of little bits like this that D&D uses that *nobody owns* and it would be stupid to abandon them.JimLotFPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02992397707040836366noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-40974978681032249212008-05-26T12:54:00.000-04:002008-05-26T12:54:00.000-04:00As foolish as it would seem to "reinvent the wheel...As foolish as it would seem to "reinvent the wheel", I can't help but feel the need for a Public Domain version of the rules (the parts that can't be protected by law) using new terms (ie, Wound Points for <I>hit points</I>™).<BR/><BR/>Sure, there will be a lot of criticism - from who? Probably not the intended target audience. After all, we've all admitted that original players are already using their original books. If the material that comes out to support the public version is good enough, people will buy it anyway.<BR/><BR/>Also, I can't see the new terms being a hurdle for the "next generation". Personally, I've gone through a thousand and some rule systems in my years - it was like referencing a thesaurus and didn't slow me down at all.<BR/><BR/>If this "old school" <I>thing</I> has any hope of expanding, it needs to break free from the shackles of the license. YES, it'll be a rough start, but once the dirty part is dealt with, I think hindsight will show it being the turning point and the best move.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-33221460372121448412008-05-26T12:23:00.000-04:002008-05-26T12:23:00.000-04:00@people who want a different license than the OGL ...@people who want a different license than the OGL used:<BR/><BR/>The problem is that the OGL grants you permission to use copyrighted works only in the context of the OGL. It doesn't grant any actual ownership of the material outside of the OGL, so you wouldn't have the rights to release it under some other open license. At least that is how I understand it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-62851497407008706962008-05-26T09:54:00.000-04:002008-05-26T09:54:00.000-04:00OSRIC does not come directly from the OGL movement...<I>OSRIC does not come directly from the OGL movement, rather it comes from dissatisfaction with Castles & Crusades. That being the case, the OGL is viewed by the authors of OSRIC as an error to be exploited and not a movement to be supported (which was also, from what I understand, Gygax's own view).</I><BR/><BR/>Again, I think you're correct. At the same time, this represents a huge philosophical difference between the creators of OSRIC and myself. I don't see the OGL as an error but rather the best thing WotC has ever done. I also think it represents a huge opportunity for preserving the building blocks of old school gaming without the need for licensing fees or consultations with a third party. In short, I think the future of old school gaming will depend very heavily on the OGL, so I wish to support and strengthen its virtues rather than treat it as a necessary evil.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-19981809124134390652008-05-26T09:29:00.000-04:002008-05-26T09:29:00.000-04:00I see that I am getting ignored - I can imagine it...<I>I see that I am getting ignored - I can imagine it is because of my bad English skills why I cannot get my ideas explained - so I stop here my explanations why Free Software would help the Simulacrum initiative.</I><BR/><BR/>I don't think you are being ignored, I just don't think this is the best place to discuss the broader topic. A good place to post your ideas might be the simulacrum forum at Dragonsfoot: <BR/>http://www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewforum.php?f=48<BR/><BR/><I>Just so. I think the old community would be strengthened by a greater emphasis on such things. Given that the Open Game License makes it easier than ever to do just this, I guess I'm a bit baffled as to why someone wouldn't do so.</I><BR/><BR/>I think I can explain this, but bear in mind that these are only my observations and opinions, I could be totally wrong.<BR/><BR/>OSRIC does not come directly from the OGL movement, rather it comes from dissatisfaction with <I>Castles & Crusades</I>. That being the case, the OGL is viewed by the authors of OSRIC as an error to be exploited and not a movement to be supported (which was also, from what I understand, Gygax's own view).<BR/><BR/>That they made the OSRIC license as open as they did was a 'best move given the circumstances.' To put it another way, I doubt OSRIC would have been open if the means to legally support it with a fully fledged company existed. <BR/><BR/>On the other hand, I think motivations naturally fluctuate and sometimes one feels one way, and other times another.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05646247954542936623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-75442326622822988342008-05-26T09:12:00.000-04:002008-05-26T09:12:00.000-04:00The 'real' problem is the one you have identified ...<I>The 'real' problem is the one you have identified and that is the creation of a community spirit and direct sharing of material.</I><BR/><BR/>Just so. I think the old community would be strengthened by a greater emphasis on such things. Given that the Open Game License makes it easier than ever to do just this, I guess I'm a bit baffled as to why someone wouldn't do so.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-91385927753376110112008-05-26T08:37:00.000-04:002008-05-26T08:37:00.000-04:00And to make an ending point to my two postings abo...And to make an ending point to my two postings above:<BR/><BR/>Think about that soon the medium of RPG distribution will be an online format.<BR/>I mean - don't matter if you like it or not - but WotC has some point in trying to get the people to play by their online tools.<BR/><BR/>And just like these tools the future format of RPGs is in web-based programs which can give you nicely formatted printings if you want but also gives you everywhere you are with every hardware you can connect to the net - from mobile phones to mainframes ;-)) - a database of rule and world and monster knowledge.<BR/><BR/>To implement these online tools a free license would also help.<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>I see that I am getting ignored - I can imagine it is because of my bad English skills why I cannot get my ideas explained - so I stop here my explanations why Free Software would help the Simulacrum initiative.<BR/><BR/><BR/>But kudos to you all, continue the great work, the great blog postings and so onAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-42313459877578978702008-05-26T08:32:00.000-04:002008-05-26T08:32:00.000-04:00I would broadly agree with that, but I am not a bi...I would broadly agree with that, but I am not a big believer in the evolving game model. When it comes down to it, what would the practical uses of a truly open <I>Monsters of Myth</I> for OSRIC publishers?<BR/><BR/>Direct inclusion in a module or inspiration for the production of a derivative monster book are the only possibilities that spring to my mind, both of which remain possibilities.<BR/><BR/>The 'real' problem is the one you have identified and that is the creation of a community spirit and direct sharing of material. If we recognise that this should be a voluntary decision, then all we can really complain about is that the authors of <I>Monsters of Myth</I> did not volunteer. Let us see what the authors of the next OSRIC monster book choose to do (assuming that one appears, which to my mind is entirely possible, especially in the form of small digests, but enough of my thoughts!).Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05646247954542936623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-26415670638173702522008-05-26T07:45:00.000-04:002008-05-26T07:45:00.000-04:00To be blunt, it is not a resource for publishers, ...<I>To be blunt, it is not a resource for publishers, but for game masters. It is not OSRIC, but a publication that makes use of that license. It can be turned to the use of publishers by agreement with the copyright holder(s), but that is not its primary purpose (from what can be observed).</I><BR/><BR/>I think you're very likely correct. It's still a bit of a disappointment to me nonetheless, because I think one of the strengths of the Open Gaming movement was the free sharing of ideas, which not only helped improve the overall quality of products over time but also helped create a certain sense of shared purpose that I think is sadly missing from the old school community. Right now, we're mostly united by our gripes and complaints and that's no basis for a successful revival of old school RPGs.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-45845942904291174492008-05-26T07:39:00.000-04:002008-05-26T07:39:00.000-04:00By not making their content open without the need ...<I>By not making their content open without the need for a special license above and beyond the OGL itself, I think these products will remain marginalized and that's a pity.</I><BR/><BR/>That may well turn out to be the case, but let's not forget that much of this is an experiment and, dare I say, 'adventure'. One of the strengths of the OGL D20 movement was also a major problem, that anybody could take what was released and put it to any purpose, including crappy ones (obviously this is subjective).<BR/><BR/>One of the things that I have seen indirectly stated by the authors of OSRIC is that they want some form of quality control to exist, and I think that <I>Monsters of Myth</I> is an attempt to retain some measure of just that.<BR/><BR/>Neither let us forget that the adventure modules released so far do not contain a lot of truly open material either; if I were to write a campaign setting and introduce a campaign specific foe, say 'Raconians,' 'Bithyanki' or 'Prow', I do not think it would be expected that I release them as Open Game Content (well okay, assume these new creatures aren't the rip offs their names imply). Still less any of the other campaign setting contents.<BR/><BR/>The question then becomes, 'of what use is <I>Monsters of Myth</I> and who is it primarily intended for? To be blunt, it is not a resource for publishers, but for game masters. It is not OSRIC, but a publication that makes use of that license. It can be turned to the use of publishers by agreement with the copyright holder(s), but that is not its primary purpose (from what can be observed).<BR/><BR/>Still, we shall see what we shall see.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05646247954542936623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-48611561727653599662008-05-26T07:27:00.000-04:002008-05-26T07:27:00.000-04:00Monsters of Myth had something those books don't u...<I>Monsters of Myth had something those books don't usually have - imaginative, interesting concepts.</I><BR/><BR/>Very much agreed. It's a terrific book. My only real complaint about it is that too much of its content is closed, to the point that I think it's unnecessarily limiting its potential recognition and influence as a leading light of the old school revival.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-14291888468852973942008-05-26T07:23:00.000-04:002008-05-26T07:23:00.000-04:00"Go ahead and use it, please give credit to us."I ...<I>"Go ahead and use it, please give credit to us."</I><BR/><BR/>I suspect (though I haven't confirmed this) that an individual or publisher probably <I>could</I> get permission from the First Edition Society to re-use the closed content of <I>Monsters of Myth</I> and perhaps even at no cost. However, they would have to approach them and ask permission to do so. <BR/><BR/>Philosophically, I don't much like this approach, as it runs counter to the spirit of the very Open Game License <I>Monsters of Myth</I> (and OSRIC) relies upon to exist at all. By not making their content open without the need for a special license above and beyond the OGL itself, I think these products will remain marginalized and that's a pity.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-75968813886505023012008-05-26T05:13:00.000-04:002008-05-26T05:13:00.000-04:00Not everything in the book is gold, but there is e...<I>Not everything in the book is gold, but there is enough of it to make it worth the money. Writing monster books is hard work - so the good reviews are well deserved.</I><BR/><BR/>Indeed. It is an excellent work, with plenty to recommend it, even if just in terms of inspirational reading. I particularly like the full page illustrations by P. Mullen on pages 5, 34, and 108, but there are many other very cool drawings in the work. The Sand Giant on page 41 by (I believe) Mark Ahmed, particularly put me in mind of a cross between the various Sinbad movies and the Al-Qadim setting.<BR/><BR/>Many of the freakier drawings bring to life monsters like the Thorn Creeper and the Spiny Horror; great fodder for adventures!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05646247954542936623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-71735172086790844212008-05-26T04:53:00.000-04:002008-05-26T04:53:00.000-04:00I want to add a point to the number 2. in my above...I want to add a point to the number 2. in my above posting<BR/><BR/>One of the FUN things the old-school gamers have in playing _with_ (O/A/ETC.)D&D is to play _with_ Rules. You know what I mean, to alter and test and alter again the Rules of the game and to look in which directions a game - and the actual adventure - is going with altered Rules.<BR/><BR/>If the texts of the rules are Free - in the sense of Free Software - than you can maybe imagine what this would mean to building a community which plays _with_ Rules.<BR/><BR/>Because you can copy, edit, distribute every Rule and every Rules section of such a free RPG text (rulebook) the most favorite printed form of rule books of old-schools games will be in short time the ringbinder(I hope I have used here the right word).<BR/><BR/>Can you just imagine to patch rules to BFRPG to make out of it a tabletop like game. <BR/>"RPGs are going back to their first forms:Wargames".<BR/><BR/>The _legal_ (<- and this is the whole important point of this) possibilities are endless.<BR/><BR/><BR/>PLEASE, please I don't know what it takes but look into making the rulebooks of Simulacrum really free.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Thank you for reading my thoughts.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-46685147655672722452008-05-26T04:19:00.000-04:002008-05-26T04:19:00.000-04:00> Honestly, if the OSRIC fellows > would RILLY be ...> Honestly, if the OSRIC fellows <BR/>> would RILLY be interested in a <BR/>> vibrant community, they´d say: "Go > ahead and use it, please give <BR/>> credit to us."<BR/><BR/>THIS ^^^<BR/><BR/>A BSD like license to do what the fuck you want with your texts.<BR/>Not everyone is interested in "WOLRD-DOMINATION" (TM)(C) (PATENTED). <BR/><BR/>Look at it this way,<BR/><BR/>Here you can read 5 reasons why OD&D is not embraced :<BR/>http://shamsgrog.blogspot.com/2008/05/why-od-part-3.html<BR/>1. Lack of Availability<BR/>2. Lack of Support<BR/>3. Difficulty of Play<BR/>4. Time Investment Demands<BR/>5. Amateurish Publication<BR/><BR/>Every one of them can be fulfilled if the "new" texts on "old-school" gaming were released under a free license.<BR/>1. Lack of Availability<BR/>If the texts were under a free license than all the books could be distributed in a super-modern way - with the so called Linux distributions -. Availability to hundred of thousand of users and readers - most them more nerds than even you old-grognards can imagine -.<BR/>2. Lack of Support<BR/>If the texts were under a free license than everyone could "patch" them - speak make corrections - AND every one of these corrections could also be distributed in a freely manner. So that "patch" for "patch" every rulebook would become more "perfect" than any industry supprtted game out there.<BR/>3. Difficulty of Play<BR/>If the texts were under a free license and with this the texts would be distributed with the Linux distributions than everyone of the hundred thousand person community of Free Software could just "install" the texts on the side of Voip programs and Texts editors and can play at the moment of lust of playing. (What WotC is trying with millions of $ one can reach without any Cent but with strong support of community)<BR/>4. Time investment demands<BR/>Okay, free licenses cannot alter here something. For every RPG you have to invest time. But with the strong text editing tools that came with every UNIX system in the history of mankind it is unbelievable easy to store the entire history of your characters and watch them grow XP for XP.<BR/>5. Amateurish Publication<BR/>You know, with LaTeX in your hand WotC has not more tools to get a good looking book than you.<BR/>If a strong community comes together and someone with strong nglish skills edits the texts, someone with LaTeX skills sets the layout and someone other is testing the rendering in various formats (XHTML, PDF, UTF8-Text (the modern version of ASCII) , etc.) you will get modern and good looking books in 0 seconds.<BR/><BR/><BR/>But __everything__ hangs and starts and begins with true ... ah, no ...<BR/>with TRV3 Free Software licenses for these books , all of them OSRIC, LL, BFRPG and all the modules and other things for them.<BR/>Give them free and you shall get a community that you need and that you want...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-76663759009350792272008-05-26T03:58:00.000-04:002008-05-26T03:58:00.000-04:00Setting license strangeness aside -- Monsters of M...Setting license strangeness aside -- Monsters of Myth is one of the few monster books which actually proved useful. Most of the time, what we get is a boring list of new demons, new humanoids that are really just purple orcs, and the obligatory new dragons. Monsters of Myth had something those books don't usually have - imaginative, interesting concepts. I particularly like the various mollusks and crawling horrors of Matt Finch (who again proves that he has a good eye for weird fantasy, in addition to being an excellent illustrator) and the works of Mark Ahmed. <BR/><BR/>Not everything in the book is gold, but there is enough of it to make it worth the money. Writing monster books is hard work - even Gary only got it right once (MMII., for instance, is pretty uninspired) - so the good reviews are well deserved.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-11785782918456460692008-05-26T02:45:00.000-04:002008-05-26T02:45:00.000-04:00I think the whole License nerdity is idiotic. Hone...I think the whole License nerdity is idiotic. Honestly, if the OSRIC fellows would RILLY be interested in a vibrant community, they´d say: "Go ahead and use it, please give credit to us."<BR/><BR/>But it seems that the lower the stakes get, the more convuluted peoples minds get and the pissier the fighting.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-76755990964796421412008-05-25T21:15:00.000-04:002008-05-25T21:15:00.000-04:00Bottom line is that you aren't going to find answe...<I>Bottom line is that you aren't going to find answers to these questions here.</I><BR/><BR/>Correct. I don't mind questions about OSRIC or any other game being discussed here, since I did raise some questions of my own in the review. However, I'd much rather that we discussed the book itself, which I say again is a very, very fine piece of work and in the best tradition of Gygaxian fantasy.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-63051423498297589532008-05-25T12:45:00.000-04:002008-05-25T12:45:00.000-04:00This sort of question is best put to Stuart by peo...This sort of question is best put to Stuart by people who desire to publish OSRIC compatable material. He is very approachable and wants more quality OSRIC compatable material to be made available. If you still have questions or doubts after that, then it will be necessary to either consult a lawyer or take a risk (and all business involves risk, both legal and fiscal, as I am sure you are aware).<BR/><BR/>Bottom line is that you aren't going to find answers to these questions here.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05646247954542936623noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7487871339000666216.post-64458907535639931482008-05-25T12:32:00.000-04:002008-05-25T12:32:00.000-04:00How do you actually use OSRIC™ Open Game Content?S...How do you actually use OSRIC™ Open Game Content?<BR/><BR/>Seriously. "[A]s if it were Open Game Content" is what it says. Well, Open Game Content may <I>only</I> be used under the terms of the Open Game License. One of the strictures of the Open Game License is that "No terms may be added to or subtracted from this License except as described by the License itself. No other terms or conditions may be applied to any Open Game Content distributed using this License."<BR/><BR/>So, in order to use the content "as if it were Open Game Content", you must use it under the terms of the OGL, no more and no less. No other terms or conditions may apply (such as the text-on-cover-page clause of the OSRIC™ Open License); otherwise you aren't using it as if it were Open Game Content. That directly contradicts the terms and conditions that the OSRIC™ Open Game License adds to the use. How do these reconcile?<BR/><BR/>Well, the "license" (yes, those are scare quotes) says that "any term that violates the Open Game License is to be construed as closely as possible to the original intent within the terms of the Open Game License." That's nice. Is it closer to the intent of the OSRIC™ Open Game License that the contradiction means you can use OSRIC™ Open Content under the exact same terms as Open Game Content, or that you can't use OSRIC™ Open Content at all because you can't oblige people to meet the terms of the OSRIC™ Open License? Or is the OGL implicitly amended by the OOL in the case of OSRIC™ Open Content to include the terms of the OSRIC™ Open License?<BR/><BR/>More importantly, will a judge agree with that answer when you're sued by the widow of the author of the content you used?<BR/><BR/>What's worse, why do you think you have any right to use OSRIC™ Open Content at all? Only an "OSRIC™ publisher" does. Who is an "OSRIC™ publisher"? The license doesn't say. <BR/><BR/>The standard plain English meaning would be the people authorized to publish OSRIC itself -- that is Knights & Knaves, and no one else. In which case, nobody else can use any OSRIC™ Open Content. Except that it refers to "other" OSRIC™ publishers. Does that mean it applies to anyone publishing stuff compatible with OSRIC™? Or anyone using the OSRIC™ Open License? Or some other group?<BR/><BR/>And again, will a judge agree with that answer?<BR/><BR/>If you use OSRIC™ Open Content, you are gambling real cash money, basically, that no one will ever file a lawsuit. Because the OSRIC™ Open License is so badly worded – lays such a poor legal goundwork – that it offers no protection from one.<BR/><BR/>I'm not a lawyer, I'm not an IP expert, I'm not anybody who can give legal advice. But I wouldn't publish anything under this "license", because I have no idea how a federal magistrate in Randomtown, USA (the closest federal circuit to J. Random Heir) is going to construe these ambiguities. And I think anybody who does publish under it is a fool.<BR/><BR/>Now, it might be that Phil Reed had a lawyer vet the thing, and the lawyer told him it actually wasn't a problem. Like I said, I'm not a lawyer. But my lay opinion is that the OSRIC™ Open license is as airtight as a fishing net.<BR/><BR/>(And note that <I>none</I> of my objections are in any way related to any possible Wizards of the Coast claims. They are entirely internal to the <I>license</I>, not OSRIC the system. I am assuming that OSRIC itself is absolutely, 100% legal, free and clear.)Stevenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05138730966226244399noreply@blogger.com