From: "Matt Thomason (DancingDryad.com)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2006 10:22 AM
Hi everyone, popping out from lurking here.
Thanks for delurking. This was an interesting post.
As others have said here, the biggest problem with the use of an "OGL Logo" is the use of the letters "OGL", which refer to the license and not the system. Indeed, other non-d20 systems are being released under the OGL (most notably RuneQuest). Relying on the letters "OGL" can only lead to confusion in the future as other OGLed games come out - just because your product is OGL, it does not automatically follow that it was written to work with d20.
Even the d20 System logo isn't entirely useful for customers as it gets used for both fantasy and futuristic games. A product with the d20 System logo might be compatible with Dungeons and Dragons or d20 Modern. The only way to really tell if something is compatible, with the type of game rules you prefer to use, is to flick through the book (or download a preview).
BTW: Talking of RuneQuest - How is the RuneQuest Development Kit is going to work? Will there be a RQSRD that has got all of the Glorantha material removed from it or will people have to sift through the RuneQuest books and hunt for PI themselves?
OGL has indeed become synonymous with "d20" due to the fact that there's been far more d20 material released under it than anything else (to the point that some people are completely unaware of said non-d20 material), but to the name to intend it solely to mean "d20 compatible" is completely the wrong way to go. OGL means far more than that, and using it's name in such a way diminishes the point of the whole thing.
I generally don't trust books that say "OGL Compatible" as they may or may be compatible with the SRD, the MRSD or something else entirely. If I can't download a preview and the books are shrink-wrapped, I won't buy them. Many UK RPG shops shrink wrap everything now (something that was only done with boxed sets in the 1980s) so it is much harder to make a purchasing decision.
It is sometimes even hard to tell the difference between a stand-alone product and an add on book. Some publishers provide this sort of information inside the book, but with shops shrink-wrapping the books this message doesn't get to me.
I think that the Promethus logo helps a bit, as it can only be used for documents that are compatible with the SRD or MRSD. However it still has the two system problem that the d20 System logo has.
I think I'd like to see publishers of OGL systems (that are alternatives to the SRD or MSRD) all providing their own compatiblity logo. And I'd also like to see all publishers of OGL books that are based on the SRD or MSRD finding a better way to show that they are compatible.
Aside from the arguments that such a logo may not even work in the first place (and reading the arguments against it I'm leaning towards agreeing with them, but still going to put in my own two pennies worth), it would be wrong to "steal" the name OGL to intend solely d20-compatible material. In fact, as we're working on something at the moment to go with the newly OGLed RuneQuest rules by Mongoose, there's nothing to stop us sticking an OGL logo of our own design on the cover - OGL does not mean d20 compatible (or indicate compatibility any system), and the name should not be usurped for that purpose.
I know that it is against the OGL to claim compatibility, but is it legal to claim that you are *not* compatible? (i.e. if Mongoose wanted to, could they put "The RuneQuest fantasy role playing system is a role playing system created by Mongoose. It is released under the OGL, but is not compatible with Dungeons and Dragons or d20 Modern" onto the back cover of a book?)
If such a logo is required by some for the terms of indicating compatibility, then it really ought to refer to "the d20 implementation under the OGL" rather than OGL as a whole - otherwise it's not really indicating compatibility with anything. Therefore doesn't it follow that what's really needed here is a new term for "d20 compatible" before thinking about a logo to represent it? While the letters "OGL" could be a component of such a logo, there should be something else to show it means OGL d20 and not OGL RuneQuest or OGL anything else. Or to put it far more simply, OGL > d20.
Surely SRD (and MSRD) are the things that should be included in a logo (or better still 2 logos). Because System Reference Docment is a bit non-descript it would be good to add something that indicates that it is a fantasy role playing system.
If I saw a book that claimed "This OGL product is compatible with the SRD Fantasy Role Playing Rules", I'd be far more likely to buy it than a product that just claimed "OGL compatible" or "Open Content".
I wish I could say the same thing for books claiming "This OGL product is compatible with the MSRD Modern Role Playing Rules", but I was extremely disapointed with the d20 Modern Role Playing game. d20 Modern is also an ambigous name as it can also be used to run games in the past and future. WotC should really have provided d20 System type logos for the different time periods where the MSRD might be used.
David "Big Mac" Shepheard Webmaster Virtual Eclipse Science Fiction Role Playing Club http://virtualeclipse.aboho.com/ http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/virtualeclipselrp/ _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list Ogf-l@mail.opengamingfoundation.org http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
