Quote from: honeydipperdavid on January 08, 2023, 02:03:43 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 08, 2023, 01:46:26 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on January 08, 2023, 01:34:17 PM

Quote from: Armchair Gamer on January 08, 2023, 01:16:25 PM

Quote from: Semaj Khan on January 08, 2023, 12:59:37 PM
Looking at the pdf I have of the core book, I'd say no. I haven't looked really hard at the mechanics, but just perusing the spell lists, I see so many spells that go back to OD&D and are definitely in the SRD.  That's from a 30 second glance, so anyone who thinks differently... I'd be happy to hear it.

  I think there are a lot of games out there that have baseline mechanics that are either generic enough or different from the SRD that they can maintain the skeleton, but that are going to have to deal with reworking the spells, monsters, and magic items, and possibly the classes.

I generally agree, and to be on the safe side I suggest not just renaming things, but a complete rewrite of the fluff as well.

Things I'd look out for; use of chromatic/metallic dragons (with Dragons in their name I expect OneD&D to be especially prickly about offbrand use of their dragon categories), use of Alignment-based anything (planes, spells, monsters), planar structure in general (particularly wheels/mirrored structures), Vancian/X slots per spell level style magic systems... also Halflings and Reptilian Kobolds.

This is correct, since WotC can't copyright Dragons, but the TYPE of Dragons and the fluff is IP therefore falls under the OGL and you could use it under it only.

I'm already working on a Bestiary that'll be placed under CC By SA. Mostly the fluff since I think it needs to be as system agnostic as possible.

Paizo could have Liquid Dragons (replacement for metalics) and Emotions (replacements for chromatics), Bahamut and Tiamat in for their dragons and there isn't a dang thing WotC could do to stop them (damn Zoroasterites coming up with Bahamut and Tiamat).

Their expression as a five-headed dragon and a platinum dragon respectively though is D&D specific IP however (the actual mythical Bahamit is a fish that supports the ox who supports the angel who supports the world... Tiamat is a primordial salt-water goddess who birthed a variety of demons and whose corpse became the world).

Quote from: Jaeger on January 07, 2023, 03:36:41 PM

Quote from: jeff37923 on January 07, 2023, 10:12:00 AM
GrimJim has created a petition on Change.org. Seeing how much traction it gets will be a good indication of interest amoung non-publishers.

https://www.change.org/p/wizards-hasbro-do-not-change-the-ogl-license?utm_content=cl_sharecopy_35422238_en-GB%3A4&recruiter=1291281390&recruited_by_id=b3941500-8e8e-11ed-b4fe-7bc71f42fde5&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink&utm_campaign=psf_combo_share_initial&share_bandit_exp=initial-35422238-en-GB

Why?

Nobody should sign this.

Let WotC melt down D&D.

It's time to leave the one true game behind.

Yes exactly. A lot of people seem eager to rush back to WotC as soon as they see the error in their ways.  Some serious Stockholm syndrome battered wife rationalizing going on here.

WotC makes bank on false scarcity pieces of cardboard and is owned by a multi-billion dollar toy company - they don't give a shit about us and long ago stopped giving a shit about making good RPGs.

Quote from: rytrasmi on January 08, 2023, 03:54:05 PM

Quote from: Jaeger on January 07, 2023, 03:36:41 PM

Quote from: jeff37923 on January 07, 2023, 10:12:00 AM
GrimJim has created a petition on Change.org. Seeing how much traction it gets will be a good indication of interest amoung non-publishers.

https://www.change.org/p/wizards-hasbro-do-not-change-the-ogl-license?utm_content=cl_sharecopy_35422238_en-GB%3A4&recruiter=1291281390&recruited_by_id=b3941500-8e8e-11ed-b4fe-7bc71f42fde5&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=copylink&utm_campaign=psf_combo_share_initial&share_bandit_exp=initial-35422238-en-GB

Why?

Nobody should sign this.

Let WotC melt down D&D.

It's time to leave the one true game behind.

Yes exactly. A lot of people seem eager to rush back to WotC as soon as they see the error in their ways.  Some serious Stockholm syndrome battered wife rationalizing going on here.

WotC makes bank on false scarcity pieces of cardboard and is owned by a multi-billion dollar toy company - they don't give a shit about us and long ago stopped giving a shit about making good RPGs.

If nothing else it COULD accomplish one very important thing:

Buy time so people can divest their games from all WotC owned IP. Since I like several OSR games that do use the SRD I think this would be a net possitive for the hobby.

Provided people DO divest from ALL D&D ADN.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 08, 2023, 11:39:38 AM
Plus you CAN'T patent something that everybody is already using. For instance go and try to patent the process of brewing beer.

Sir Walter Raleigh would like to have a word.

Quote from: S'mon on January 08, 2023, 06:18:32 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 08, 2023, 11:39:38 AM
Plus you CAN'T patent something that everybody is already using. For instance go and try to patent the process of brewing beer.

Sir Walter Raleigh would like to have a word.

Besides a "patent" to settle in Virginia I can't find anything else regarding him, is that which you're talking about? If so I bet those are two very different types of patent and it has shit to do with the current conversation.

Quote from: Chris24601 on January 08, 2023, 03:17:21 PM
Their expression as a five-headed dragon and a platinum dragon respectively though is D&D specific IP however (the actual mythical Bahamit is a fish that supports the ox who supports the angel who supports the world... Tiamat is a primordial salt-water goddess who birthed a variety of demons and whose corpse became the world).

Keep in mind this stuff doesn't exist in a vacuum. There's a huge amount of cultural references you can make without pointing at D&D. For example Final Fantasy uses Tiamut and Bahamut and depicts them as dragons, with many similarities to D&D presentations as well.

e.g.
Tiamat
Bahamut

Honestly I don't think including depictions of existing mythological figures is at all likely to trigger a lawsuit.

Deleted

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 08, 2023, 06:45:57 PM

Quote from: S'mon on January 08, 2023, 06:18:32 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 08, 2023, 11:39:38 AM
Plus you CAN'T patent something that everybody is already using. For instance go and try to patent the process of brewing beer.

Sir Walter Raleigh would like to have a word.

Besides a "patent" to settle in Virginia I can't find anything else regarding him, is that which you're talking about? If so I bet those are two very different types of patent and it has shit to do with the current conversation.

https://suiter.com/a-brief-history-of-beer-and-patents/

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 08, 2023, 06:45:57 PM
Besides a "patent" to settle in Virginia I can't find anything else regarding him, is that which you're talking about? If so I bet those are two very different types of patent and it has shit to do with the current conversation.

Elizabeth I granted Raleigh a 'letter of patent' (monopoly) on all beer sales within the City of London. This was before modern Patent law, and like the patent to settle Virginia it did not concern an invention, though.

Sorry, stupid IP law lecturer joke. 

Quote from: Semaj Khan on January 08, 2023, 07:38:49 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 08, 2023, 06:45:57 PM

Quote from: S'mon on January 08, 2023, 06:18:32 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 08, 2023, 11:39:38 AM
Plus you CAN'T patent something that everybody is already using. For instance go and try to patent the process of brewing beer.

Sir Walter Raleigh would like to have a word.

Besides a "patent" to settle in Virginia I can't find anything else regarding him, is that which you're talking about? If so I bet those are two very different types of patent and it has shit to do with the current conversation.

https://suiter.com/a-brief-history-of-beer-and-patents/

So patents for processes or materials that don't prevent ANYONE from  brewing beer, you just couldn't use their stuff while the patent lasted...

And that doesn't prove me wrong.

Quote from: S'mon on January 08, 2023, 07:45:48 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 08, 2023, 06:45:57 PM
Besides a "patent" to settle in Virginia I can't find anything else regarding him, is that which you're talking about? If so I bet those are two very different types of patent and it has shit to do with the current conversation.

Elizabeth I granted Raleigh a 'letter of patent' (monopoly) on all beer sales within the City of London. This was before modern Patent law, and like the patent to settle Virginia it did not concern an invention, though.

Sorry, stupid IP law lecturer joke. 

Yeah, figured it was some type of joke on the different meaning of the word patent, after all there were also patents to be a corsair (pirate) but with the blessings of your country grantinjg you a safe harbor in return for hurting the other countries and some small taxation.

None of this is likely to affect the OSR in a big way. A lot of OSR products (including some of mine, because of my publishers) used the OGL, but most of them never really had to.

My own games use basically NOTHING that originated with the SRD as proprietary material of Wizards of the Coast.  The only people WotC might have a claim against are the creators of clone products, products that have made use of specific vancian spell names for example, could be caught out.

But Armor Class, Hit Points, or Saving Throws are not something that they can make a claim over, because all of these predate the existence of D&D.

The only real effect this will have for most OSR writers is that they won't put the little OGL notice at the back of their books anymore.

Quote from: RPGPundit on January 10, 2023, 10:48:38 PM
None of this is likely to affect the OSR in a big way. A lot of OSR products (including some of mine, because of my publishers) used the OGL, but most of them never really had to.

My own games use basically NOTHING that originated with the SRD as proprietary material of Wizards of the Coast.  The only people WotC might have a claim against are the creators of clone products, products that have made use of specific vancian spell names for example, could be caught out.

But Armor Class, Hit Points, or Saving Throws are not something that they can make a claim over, because all of these predate the existence of D&D.

The only real effect this will have for most OSR writers is that they won't put the little OGL notice at the back of their books anymore.

The history of Hit Points: https://www.pcgamer.com/the-history-of-hit-points/

Armor Class and Saving Throws: https://dmdavid.com/tag/the-tangled-origins-of-dds-armor-class-hit-points-and-twenty-sided-die-rolls-to-hit/

Edited to add: Chainmail WASN'T created by TSR but the first Edition had the input of several wargamers until it became a thing first published in 1971 by Guidon Games and a second edition (same publisher) in 1972. The publisher went under and then Gygax bought or reclaimed Chainmail for TSR and did the 3rd edition under that imprint.

Quote from: hedgehobbit on January 06, 2023, 06:56:48 PM
The real question is whether or not the D&D player base can maintain this current level of outrage for an entire year. Maybe it was smart for WotC to leak this document right now, a year before it is officially released. By 2024, how many people will be burned out on the whole affair and no longer care enough to stay away but, instead, just accept the situation for what it is and go along as best they can.

The biggest issue with a huge player walk out is that most casual D&D players probably don't even know what the OGL is nor would they care if WotC takes a percentage cut of the revenue (or whatever issues that game designers have with the new OGL).

And, of course, there is also the narrative that the new OGL guarantees that a product will be free of bigotry. So the only people who still want to use the 1.0 version are people that want to be able to make bigoted content.

If there isn't an alternative, player outrage doesn't matter. If there is an alternative, they don't even need to be angry, they just need to weigh their options.

3PP are spooked, whether or not Hasbro goes through with the leaked version, or if they go with an opt-in one for OneD&D, 3PP will probably continue with making games that are largely 5e (or whatever edition) compatible but without OGL content, and that will be offered to consumers.

Then it's just a matter for the players to decide if the changes to the play experience with OneD&D are too different for them to be palatable, and they would rather go to a mechanically similar system that isn't D&D, or if playing Dungeons & Dragons(tm) outweighs any drawbacks of the new form.

They can try painting the bigotry narrative, but the big problem for anyone is that if you make anything with the OGL, you give Hasbro irrevocable, perpetual, royalty-free license to do what they like with your content, but they can terminate the license for any reason. So you produce something good, they terminate your license, you can't sell it anymore, and they can turn around and sell your work without giving you any money.

Nobody is going to take that deal. It's only worth it if you're trying to write material for Forgotten Realms. Either you play ball with their licensing and payment model, or you're not allowed to create content for it at all.

Quote from: RPGPundit on January 10, 2023, 10:48:38 PM
None of this is likely to affect the OSR in a big way. A lot of OSR products (including some of mine, because of my publishers) used the OGL, but most of them never really had to.

My own games use basically NOTHING that originated with the SRD as proprietary material of Wizards of the Coast.  The only people WotC might have a claim against are the creators of clone products, products that have made use of specific vancian spell names for example, could be caught out.

But Armor Class, Hit Points, or Saving Throws are not something that they can make a claim over, because all of these predate the existence of D&D.

The only real effect this will have for most OSR writers is that they won't put the little OGL notice at the back of their books anymore.

I agree. It is a huge problem for the makers of retro-clones though. My view is that relying on the validity of OGL 1.0, as eg Stuart Marshall says he's doing with OSRIC, is a lot safer than trying to rejig a retro-clone to not need a licence, as Basic Fantasy RPG is attempting. Though in the latter case the author says he'll simply fold anyway if he gets a C&D, so *shrug*.