----- Original Message ----- From: "EricDorsett" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 4:36 PM Subject: RE: [Ogf-l] Re: Draft HOWTO
> I wonder if it wouldn't be easiest just to include a note that says > something like: > > "All characters, plot, storylines, and thematic items included in this work > constitue Product Identity unless otherwise noted. All rules, mechanics, > systems, and stats are Open Game Content unless otherwise noted." > > Since those are the basic definitions found in the OGL anyway, then only > marking exceptions to the rules if there are any. This would simplify the > process and still (possibly) clearly mark all OGC. It would also free the > writer to have more control over style, layout, and format. > > What do you think of that idea? > > __________________________________ > Eric > I think the answer lies in the application. If I released the following using the above designation what would another publisher feel comfortable using? I suppose more importantly, what part of this could a publisher use as open content without getting into legal trouble? Check Pockets Feat [Background] Growing up with the irchins you learn a thing or two, like how to pick someone�s pockets and put the stuff back the way you found it. Benefit: With a single pick pockets check you can both remove the contents of someone�s pockets and then later replace the contents. If you fail the check there�s a 50% chance it happened when you were putting the items back. Normal: You would usually have to make two checks, one for taking the items and one for replacing them. Remember also that this is actually a pretty simple example. Steven Palmer Peterson www.Second-World-Simulations.com _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
