Quote from: mcbobbo on December 06, 2023, 02:42:21 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 06, 2023, 01:59:57 PM
This negates all inventions but a few like the simple machines (screw, inclined plane, etc), since EVERYTHING builds on stuff others made.

Yes and no.  D&D wasn't an innovation in the way you're implying.  It's more of a unique type of car.  They took parts from a Ford, a Chevy, a Volkswagen, etc, and used a welder to put them together.  The first iteration was pretty janky.  They improved it one version at a time, with varying degrees of success.

But make no mistake, some of those rules were just wholesale lifts from other things.

Wasn't an innovation you say?

So you could go buy a roleplaying game BEFORE D&D existed?

Yes, we all know from where HP & ST come from, we all know they (Arneson & Gygax) lifted other rules/mechanics from elsewhere.

But they put them together in a unique way, there wasn't ANYTHING like it before, so what if they pfiltered wargaming rules? They used those rules in a different AND innovative way, they also made up new rules or ways the old ones were to be used.

The same is true for EVERY other wargame back then and now, so are you saying that the first person to take the wargames from the military use into an entertainment one didn't contribute anything? Even if that person lifted wholecloth the rules he innovated, he creatted a NEW game OUTSIDE of it's military use.

What about the first person to stop using those rules to emmulate historical battles? Didn't contribute anything? The first one to addapt the game to Sci-Fi, Fantasy... Still contributed nothing?

Like I said: EVERY invention builds upon past inventions, with very few and rare exceptions.

So Arneson & Gygax took past inventions, changed them assembled the parts they wanted together and introduced NEW things not present in wargames (roleplaying), but you say that's not an invention... Okay.

Oh, before anyone accuses me of sperging out (again XD ) I'm out of this argument because I don't think you can be convinced of anything and I haven't seen any evidence or argument to change my mind either.

Gygax gets a lot of shit he doesn't deserve.

I will say this however, I like OD&D Gyax more than AD&D Gyax, and I count them as different people, clever in their own rights, but AD&D was in fact trying to sell a product, and was pandering more to convention play.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 06, 2023, 05:13:00 PM
Wasn't an innovation you say?

So you could go buy a roleplaying game BEFORE D&D existed?

I've already said that assembling and selling it was the innovation.  But that's hardly a genius idea.  It takes business savvy which is probably rare among Wisconsin war game nerds in the 70s.  But not exactly an innovation, per se, depending on what your standard for "creative" is.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 06, 2023, 05:13:00 PM
They used those rules in a different AND innovative way, they also made up new rules or ways the old ones were to be used.

Yep, I've said all that, too.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 06, 2023, 05:13:00 PM
The same is true for EVERY other wargame back then and now, so are you saying that the first person to take the wargames from the military use into an entertainment one didn't contribute anything? Even if that person lifted wholecloth the rules he innovated, he creatted a NEW game OUTSIDE of it's military use.

Incidentally, that happened as early as the 1800s.  Probably earlier.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 06, 2023, 05:13:00 PM
Didn't contribute anything? ... Still contributed nothing?

This isn't an all-or-nothing issue, as hopefully would be clear of any plain reading of what I'm saying.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 06, 2023, 05:13:00 PM
So Arneson & Gygax took past inventions, changed them assembled the parts they wanted together and introduced NEW things not present in wargames (roleplaying), but you say that's not an invention... Okay.

Note how that reply opens with "Yes and no".  It's something, yes.  Is it enough?  Maybe.  For example is it patentable?  Probably not, because I doubt it meets the New and Novel standard. 

My greatest gratitude comes from the bravado required to take all these things other people did and sell them on the open market.  Had that not happened the hobby would have taken a very different shape.  Hell, the world itself would largely be different.  The business activity is significant.

The game design activity, though?  Maybe.  Probably not.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 06, 2023, 05:13:00 PM
Oh, before anyone accuses me of sperging out (again XD ) I'm out of this argument because I don't think you can be convinced of anything and I haven't seen any evidence or argument to change my mind either.

Inaccurate ad hominem.  I love, love, LOVE being shown that I'm incorrect.  It's how we learn.

Quote from: mcbobbo on December 06, 2023, 06:48:21 PM
Note how that reply opens with "Yes and no".  It's something, yes.  Is it enough?  Maybe.  For example is it patentable?  Probably not, because I doubt it meets the New and Novel standard. 

Speaking as someone with 10 patents and a lot of experience with the issue, I'm quite certain that that it meets with the new and novel standard.  Everything "new" is assembled and modified from existing things.  Taking the opposite view leads to absurdities like saying that no one invented the automobile because it uses wheels, which were probably invented by a caveman.

Quote from: Mishihari on December 07, 2023, 05:05:57 AM
Speaking as someone with 10 patents and a lot of experience with the issue, I'm quite certain that that it meets with the new and novel standard.  Everything "new" is assembled and modified from existing things.  Taking the opposite view leads to absurdities like saying that no one invented the automobile because it uses wheels, which were probably invented by a caveman.

You're probably right, but there surely is some limit.  I can't take the SRD word for word, strap it to Settlers of Catan and call that new, can I?

I mean if I can, hold my beer.

Quote from: Mishihari on December 07, 2023, 05:05:57 AM

Quote from: mcbobbo on December 06, 2023, 06:48:21 PM
Note how that reply opens with "Yes and no".  It's something, yes.  Is it enough?  Maybe.  For example is it patentable?  Probably not, because I doubt it meets the New and Novel standard.

Speaking as someone with 10 patents and a lot of experience with the issue, I'm quite certain that that it meets with the new and novel standard.  Everything "new" is assembled and modified from existing things.  Taking the opposite view leads to absurdities like saying that no one invented the automobile because it uses wheels, which were probably invented by a caveman.

I'm not sure everyone is talking about the same thing.

David Wesely started running his Braunstein games in 1969, using wargame rules but where each player had a role and there was a referee adjudicating what happened when different players each took their actions. Could Wesely have patented his Braunstein games? Would that have interfered with Arneson and later Gygax developing their own RPGs?

Arneson played in Wesely's Braunstein games and then later ran his own Braunstein-style games in the fantasy setting of Blackmoor that he created. He and David Megarry then talked to Gygax about writing up publishable rules for anyone to play Braunstein games in a fantasy setting.

Given that people like Wesely were already playing RPGs using wargame rules, I don't think that it should count as a patentable invention of Gygax. There are D&D-specific innovations that he created. (I don't remember how advancement worked in Wesely's games, but I suspect it was quite different from D&D.)

Quote from: jhkim on December 07, 2023, 01:33:49 PM

Quote from: Mishihari on December 07, 2023, 05:05:57 AM

Quote from: mcbobbo on December 06, 2023, 06:48:21 PM
Note how that reply opens with "Yes and no".  It's something, yes.  Is it enough?  Maybe.  For example is it patentable?  Probably not, because I doubt it meets the New and Novel standard.

Speaking as someone with 10 patents and a lot of experience with the issue, I'm quite certain that that it meets with the new and novel standard.  Everything "new" is assembled and modified from existing things.  Taking the opposite view leads to absurdities like saying that no one invented the automobile because it uses wheels, which were probably invented by a caveman.

I'm not sure everyone is talking about the same thing.

David Wesely started running his Braunstein games in 1969, using wargame rules but where each player had a role and there was a referee adjudicating what happened when different players each took their actions. Could Wesely have patented his Braunstein games? Would that have interfered with Arneson and later Gygax developing their own RPGs?

Arneson played in Wesely's Braunstein games and then later ran his own Braunstein-style games in the fantasy setting of Blackmoor that he created. He and David Megarry then talked to Gygax about writing up publishable rules for anyone to play Braunstein games in a fantasy setting.

Given that people like Wesely were already playing RPGs using wargame rules, I don't think that it should count as a patentable invention of Gygax. There are D&D-specific innovations that he created. (I don't remember how advancement worked in Wesely's games, but I suspect it was quite different from D&D.)

I was commenting more on applying ideas from the patent world, as that's something I'm familiar with.  There's a great big grey area between "new and novel," and "obvious to a practitioner of the art," and I've spent years and many tens of thousands of dollars arguing with patent examiners over this issue.

It really comes down to the details and one's subjective view on what is new versus what is derivative.  I'm not familiar with that bit of RPG history, but based on what I've read in this thread it sounds like Gary's work was more of a new synthesis than a simple derivative of prior work.  If I researched the full story I might think differently, but that's more work than I care to do unless I'm getting paid for it.

Quote from: Brad on December 06, 2023, 05:00:59 AM

Quote from: Omega on December 06, 2023, 04:56:19 AM
Actually according to others there at the time. Gygax combined his ideas and Arnesons oft sketchy notes and filled in the blanks to get OD&D.

This is actually not uncommon in board gaming for example.

No, look, there's a difference between making a car and merely assembling it. If you MAKE A CAR it means you literally have to smelt the iron and pour it into moulds and cool it to form an engine block. Assembling a car means you use a crate 350 SBC and just jam it into an old Nova that you pieced together from the junkyard. You didn't MAKE anything, you just took existing parts and assembled it into a car then sold it! The guy who created an engine but had no marketing skills nor any ability to sell the engine alone is the real creator! You owe him everything!

Taking a bunch of ideas and forming a coherent game from them is just as much "making" as coming up with an idea yourself. Further, Arneson was just doing a new form of Braunstein, wasn't he? Further, by all accounts he fucking sucked as a writer, so there was zero way he could have ever published D&D, much less wrote it in the first place.

uhhh... the fuck?

Thats pretty much what I meant. Its standard practice in gaming. Someone sends in a submission and the publisher hammers that into something that can actually be played because half the time it just wont work as it is.

Quote from: Omega on December 07, 2023, 09:12:56 PM

uhhh... the fuck?

Thats pretty much what I meant. Its standard practice in gaming. Someone sends in a submission and the publisher hammers that into something that can actually be played because half the time it just wont work as it is.

Is there consent implied when you send an item to your publisher that's not present when you take someone else's ideas without their knowledge?

Quote from: mcbobbo on December 07, 2023, 09:45:59 PM

Quote from: Omega on December 07, 2023, 09:12:56 PM

uhhh... the fuck?

Thats pretty much what I meant. Its standard practice in gaming. Someone sends in a submission and the publisher hammers that into something that can actually be played because half the time it just wont work as it is.

Is there consent implied when you send an item to your publisher that's not present when you take someone else's ideas without their knowledge?

Ideas can't be copyrighted, mechanics can't be patented (it's mostly settled law).

So, did ERB plagiarize Otis Adelbert Kline when he published Pirates of Venus?

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 07, 2023, 10:26:44 PM
Ideas can't be copyrighted, mechanics can't be patented (it's mostly settled law).

The patent example was to bring some objective measure of 'enough creativity' into the conversation.  The exact, current layout of the law isn't relevant, especially when there are international issues in play.

But...

That word 'mostly' is pretty key.

Code can be both copy written and parented, and the law is pretty muddy on what constitutes code.  Checkers (or whatever game the court had in mind) was held to be too obvious, but RPGs are more complex.  Google shows me cases as recent as 2016 and 2018.  I disagree that this is comfortably settled.

And even if it were didn't SCOTUS rather famously overturn one of its other decisions recently?

WotC holds a patent on a game mechanic.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 07, 2023, 10:26:44 PM
So, did ERB plagiarize Otis Adelbert Kline when he published Pirates of Venus?

That's not the right context.  I'd frame it as:

"So, did ERB create the stranger in a strange land genre, or did Otis Adelbert Kline when he published Pirates of Venus, or did someone else?"

It's not about who can win a lawsuit to me.  It's about what type of credit is appropriate.

"All the credit" is clearly not.

And again it gets to the original point about the rule zero inconsistency.  Was that a cash grab?  No.  But it's certainly possible that one expression is Gary's and the contradictory one was lifted from someone else.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 07, 2023, 10:26:44 PM

Quote from: mcbobbo on December 07, 2023, 09:45:59 PM

Quote from: Omega on December 07, 2023, 09:12:56 PM

uhhh... the fuck?

Thats pretty much what I meant. Its standard practice in gaming. Someone sends in a submission and the publisher hammers that into something that can actually be played because half the time it just wont work as it is.

Is there consent implied when you send an item to your publisher that's not present when you take someone else's ideas without their knowledge?

Ideas can't be copyrighted, mechanics can't be patented (it's mostly settled law).

So, did ERB plagiarize Otis Adelbert Kline when he published Pirates of Venus?

Of course he did! This is indisputable.

Now for a serious bit - thanks for mentioning this dude. I never heard of him until now. Time to do some reading.

Quote from: Jason Coplen on December 08, 2023, 09:38:34 AM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on December 07, 2023, 10:26:44 PM

Quote from: mcbobbo on December 07, 2023, 09:45:59 PM

Quote from: Omega on December 07, 2023, 09:12:56 PM

uhhh... the fuck?

Thats pretty much what I meant. Its standard practice in gaming. Someone sends in a submission and the publisher hammers that into something that can actually be played because half the time it just wont work as it is.

Is there consent implied when you send an item to your publisher that's not present when you take someone else's ideas without their knowledge?

Ideas can't be copyrighted, mechanics can't be patented (it's mostly settled law).

So, did ERB plagiarize Otis Adelbert Kline when he published Pirates of Venus?

Of course he did! This is indisputable.

Now for a serious bit - thanks for mentioning this dude. I never heard of him until now. Time to do some reading.

His stuff is on the public domain, you can find it for free on project guttenberg dot au

Quote from: Omega on December 07, 2023, 09:12:56 PM

Quote from: Brad on December 06, 2023, 05:00:59 AM

Quote from: Omega on December 06, 2023, 04:56:19 AM
Actually according to others there at the time. Gygax combined his ideas and Arnesons oft sketchy notes and filled in the blanks to get OD&D.

This is actually not uncommon in board gaming for example.

No, look, there's a difference between making a car and merely assembling it. If you MAKE A CAR it means you literally have to smelt the iron and pour it into moulds and cool it to form an engine block. Assembling a car means you use a crate 350 SBC and just jam it into an old Nova that you pieced together from the junkyard. You didn't MAKE anything, you just took existing parts and assembled it into a car then sold it! The guy who created an engine but had no marketing skills nor any ability to sell the engine alone is the real creator! You owe him everything!

Taking a bunch of ideas and forming a coherent game from them is just as much "making" as coming up with an idea yourself. Further, Arneson was just doing a new form of Braunstein, wasn't he? Further, by all accounts he fucking sucked as a writer, so there was zero way he could have ever published D&D, much less wrote it in the first place.

uhhh... the fuck?

Thats pretty much what I meant. Its standard practice in gaming. Someone sends in a submission and the publisher hammers that into something that can actually be played because half the time it just wont work as it is.

Of course that's what you meant, I was mocking the individuals who think what you said was wrong.

Quote from: mcbobbo on December 07, 2023, 09:45:59 PM

Quote from: Omega on December 07, 2023, 09:12:56 PM

uhhh... the fuck?

Thats pretty much what I meant. Its standard practice in gaming. Someone sends in a submission and the publisher hammers that into something that can actually be played because half the time it just wont work as it is.

Is there consent implied when you send an item to your publisher that's not present when you take someone else's ideas without their knowledge?

What does that have to do with Gygax doing the heavy lifting for Arneson?