> lizard
>
> Let me make sure we're talking about the same thing here. When you say
> 'that is OGC', do you mean something like
>
> strcpy(monster.name,"Orc\0");
> monster.hitdie=8;
> monster.damagedie=6;
>
> Which is something which could be store in data files that are all named
> something like 'OGCMonsters.dat' and 'OGCSpells.dat', and the program
> would simply read them in. The program, on startup, could say "All files
> beginning with 'OGC' contain information derived from open gaming
> content".
>
> OR
>
> Do you mean a line like
>
> if(player->roll+player->mods>monster->armorclass)
> {
> printf("You whack the orc!\n");
> }
Both of these. Plus you must identify them in the binary as well. The
objects "player", "monster", and "armorclass" were in fact derived from the
OGC. It isn't the terms themselves that are at issue, it is the fact that
you built those objects based on the OGC rules. That makes them derivative
by definition.
In some cases one could argue that because they are just rules and ideas
they cannot be derivative. In such cases the code would not have to be OGC,
but at that point you aren't getting any benefit from the Safe Harbor, and
we're back where we were before the OGL.
-Brad
_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
