--- "Ryan S. Dancey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: "Neal Rogers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > So you're saying that only the dice rolls and such
> are
> > the 'game rules' and that everything else like
> > classes, spells, and feats are so complex and
> creative
> > that the thing about game rules not being
> protected
> > doesn't apply to them?
>
> Exactly.
Yikes!!!! So if you don't release some subsystem into
the SRD, then anything that approximates it is, in
WOTC's view, an infringement? If, for some reason,
WOTC decided not to put Flame Strike into the SRD,
then any SRD add-ons produced under the OGL could not
use any spell called Flame Strike, regardless of how
it worked, and could not use any spell that worked
like Flame Strike but used a different name?
Sorry to be a downer, guys, but this kind of stuff
really alarms me. I honestly wish the OGL had been
written in such a way as to classify certain things as
'game elements' and the rest as story and setting
content. In my opinion, the parts of a module or
rulebook that describe the nuts and bolts of the
following should fall under the category of 'game
elements' and should always be Open:
a. a spell's name, parameters, and the basics of how
it works,
b. a creature's name, stats, basic physical
description, and behavior,
c. a magic item's name, stats, basic appearance, and
behavior,
d. a feat's name, basic description, and stats, and
e. a character class' name, requirements, and special
abilities.
Some examples of having mixed content: For a
creature, the above listed parameters would be Open,
but the setting-specific stuff that describes where
they can be found, their history in that setting, and
a story fragment describing an individual creature
could be Closed. For a spell, the nuts and bolts
would be open, but an enhanced description, a story
fragment, or an example of the spell's use could be
Closed.
I'm sad that WOTC is appearing to take a different
view of this, and it looks like it will never be
resolved unless someone actually goes to court over
it, which _nobody_ wants. [If I've misunderstood,
PLEASE CORRECT ME.] If they're taking the position
that the nuts and bolts of spells are too creative and
complex to be game rules [a position with which I
obviously disagree], then we can only add to whatever
spells come along in the SRD at our peril. If we
create a spell that we honestly believe to be original
but which comes too close to something WOTC has
already published somewhere or other in any of their
hundreds of products or that someone else has put into
Closed Content, we're screwed.
I've always heard it said that if you find a potential
problem with something you should be prepared to offer
a solution for it, and that is what my list above
attempts to do.
Neal
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/
_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
