As the title says.
https://www.chaosium.com/blogannouncing-the-basic-roleplaying-system-reference-document-and-open-game-license/ (https://www.chaosium.com/blogannouncing-the-basic-roleplaying-system-reference-document-and-open-game-license/)
Personally, I like the idea they have finally (officially) made their rule system "open" to be used by indie game creators. But they also have a listed of prohibited mechanics (such as passions and all of their magic systems). Their reasoning seems to stem from not wanting people to just make a retro clone of Call of Cthulhu or King Arthur Pendragon. But the wording of it seems to be confusing people or even making them worried that if it's too close to one of their products they might get handed a lawsuit.
I'm kind of on the fence. I understand protecting their IP, but their OGL could use a second pass. While they mention all the magic systems from Runequest being prohibited, there is no mention of Call of Cthulhu. And while the SRD is a stripped down version of their rules, it also makes no mention of whether anything from the BRP rulebook 4th edition can be used.
I have been working on a homebrew fantasy campaign that uses BRP as well as a list of ideas from the OSR. I was never going to publish it, but this announcement of the license has me intrigued, at the very least.
I always assumed that Jeff's vague-posting about the Mongoose RQ SRD being illegal was just intentional scaremongering to put off people from cloning their game, but this new hybrid OGL/ SRD/ logo licence of theirs is swinging me toward the opinion that they really don't understand how the real OGL works or what it was for. This thing is mostly a set of restrictions publishers need to follow in order to use the BRP logo - a logo they just made up, for a "system" which has never been clearly defined, and which only exists under that name in a rules encyclopedia stuffed with rules variants either stripped from or outright prohibited in the SRD.
Quote(e) The following items are hereby identified as "Prohibited Content":
All trademarks, registered trademarks, proper names (characters,
deities, place names, etc.), plots, story elements, locations, characters,
artwork, or trade dress from any of the following: any releases from the
product lines of Call of Cthulhu, Dragn Lords of Melniboné, ElfQuest,
Elric!, Hawkmoon, HeroQuest, Hero Wars, King Arthur Pendragon,
Magic World, Nephilim, Prince Valiant, Ringworld, RuneQuest, 7th Sea,
Stormbringer, Superworld, Thieves' World, Worlds of Wonder, and any
related sublines; the world and mythology of Glorantha; all works
related to the Cthulhu Mythos, including those that are otherwise
public domain; and all works related to Le Morte d'Arthur. This list
may be updated in future versions of the License.
And instead of answering questions they are mostly going on about not wanting people to clone their games.
If anyone wants the BRP logo on their book it's useful, I guess. They just need to learn a whole bunch of Chaosium games inside-out to make sure nothing in their book is "substantially similar". Otherwise, it's a straightjacket.
Yeah, I was really confused by how they set it up.
I'm not here to tell them how to run their company. But if they were seriously worried about people combining X + Y + Z together to retro clone one of their IP's, then maybe they should instead just release the entire Big Golden Book, and then just have in their license that you can create anything you want, but one thing must be missing. Like, if you want to do a Lovecraftian game, then you can't have the current settings/time periods or use the title 'Call of Cthulhu' or the actual entities (maybe you want to use the CoC rules to create that Victorian-set Dracula game that feels more like the Hammer films). Or, you can use the Pendragon rules, but it must be an original setting (no Arthur or Charlemagne). Or maybe you can use the Runequest rules, minus the Runes, stuff that is original IP, etc.
That, I think, would allow more freedom to TPP's, as well as give Chaosium more peace of mind. Maybe its a little more complex. I don't know. But I feel like there could be a more 'open' way of doing things without so many restrictions that seem vague at best.
It looks like an attempt at damage control over the recent proliferation of D100 systems rather than a real desire to open the BRP system. By not going with the WotC OGL v1.0a and introducing their vague "In addition, game mechanics that are substantially similar to the following unique or characteristic features of other Chaosium games are Prohibited Content" clause they are basically saying here's an open gaming licence, but we can shut you down any time we like. The total opposite of what an OGL is meant to be: a secure and simple licence that requires no further contact with the owner. Reminds me a bit of the WotC 4E SRD, and look how that went down.
I'm not telling nuChaosium how to run their business, either, but this is such a missed opportunity it's not funny. If their only concern is to stop retroclones they should take Mongoose to court and see if they can get the original MRQ1 SRD declared in breach of the OGL (good luck with that).
Quote from: Vile;1125145It looks like an attempt at damage control over the recent proliferation of D100 systems
I can agree with that. In fact, that was my initial thought. That the wave of products using OpenQuest as well as OpenCthulhu and Raiders of Rleyh (which from the rumblings on forums, seems Chaosium was rather pissed about). After reading the announcement, I thought about how all these products must have forced their hand after having a topic called "Just a Reminder: BRP is not Open Gaming Content."
I am not sure how I feel about Chaosium (what's this 'NuChaosium' thing?). I mean, after the Kickstarter disaster, they seemed to have brought the company into the modern age, with a steady stream of products (I think they are out-producting WOTC with amount of content released), their own 'Adventurer League' type system, their own version of the DMGuild, and have even gotten live streams of gameplay. While it feels like the company is healthier than ever, I cannot feel like it is becoming more corporate. More like WOTC. And this OGL they released seems like a half-measure.
I'm still interested in using it for any potential future products, but until there is clarification in the contract, anything I create is going to remain personal use.
I was never a fan of their system for their own games. I have zero interest in converting other materials to it.
1. It's 23 pages and is very light on useful info. You could go with tons of other Open Content and combine with Legend to get a better game.
2. It's WAY too restrictive. There's nothing left besides the resistance table (which Mythras/Legend does better anyways). EDIT to add: no sanity, no passions, etc. All restricted IP...
Frankly it was a terrible approach and somewhat useless. It's kind of insulting to be honest. I'm trying to figure out what they hope to gain from it? If you are a publisher, you are going to have to fill in a ton of blanks.
Quote from: Vile;1125145I'm not telling nuChaosium how to run their business, either, but this is such a missed opportunity it's not funny. If their only concern is to stop retroclones they should take Mongoose to court and see if they can get the original MRQ1 SRD declared in breach of the OGL (good luck with that).
It looks to me like they just want to protect what little value they can inject into such a logo. Logically, if they were going to sell third party products through their own little walled gardens, they would insist on only selling those with the logos.
Quote from: trechriron;1125155Frankly it was a terrible approach and somewhat useless. It's kind of insulting to be honest. I'm trying to figure out what they hope to gain from it? If you are a publisher, you are going to have to fill in a ton of blanks.
Exactly my thoughts.
There's no compelling reason for publishers to use their BuRP, especially with the restrictions. Every D100 fan knows you're making stuff for them by just putting listing your game as "D100 OGL"
Even if their BuRP wasn't made of suck, NuChaosium is such a craptastic company of imbecilic wokeness there's no way I'd support or promote them.
But I've dabbled with the idea of a classic Magic World / Stormbringer retroclone using the OGL.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1125167But I've dabbled with the idea of a classic Magic World / Stormbringer retroclone using the OGL.
You should dabble with the idea
without using the OGL. Easier and less restrictive.
And then make a Toon clone with d20 mechanics and slap the BRP logo on it, just for fun.
Okay, there's so much wrong with the first page that I only now noticed this gem on page 2:
Quote12. Reputation: You must not copy, modify, or distribute Open Game
Content connected to this License in a way that would be prejudicial
or harmful to the honor or reputation of the Contributors.
What? :confused:
It is worse than that
Quote10. Updating the License: Chaosium or its designated Agents may publish updated versions of the BRP Open Game License, including updates to the Prohibited Content list. Material published under any version of the License can continue to be published Using the terms of that version, but You agree to Use the most recent authorized version of this License for any new Open Game Content You publish or for revised or updated works with thirty percent (30%) or more revised or new content.
So while you can continue to release your older work under the previous license they can blow up your product line by arbitrarily altering the Prohibited list.
Quote from: estar;1125203So while you can continue to release your older work under the previous license they can blow up your product line by arbitrarily altering the Prohibited list.
Good summary of the problems with Clause 10 on this Twitter thread: https://twitter.com/hexcrawl/status/1244345075116707844 - You can't even remove the licence once you release your product under it, it seems. They couldn't have written a worse trap for users if they'd tried - but then again, maybe they did try and just didn't expect to get caught out.
Wow, I finally read the license end to end. There are so many 'related' or 'related to' traps or worse that I can't imagine anyone accepting it.
Quote from: Vile;1125222Good summary of the problems with Clause 10 on this Twitter thread: https://twitter.com/hexcrawl/status/1244345075116707844 - You can't even remove the licence once you release your product under it, it seems. They couldn't have written a worse trap for users if they'd tried - but then again, maybe they did try and just didn't expect to get caught out.
Given how well that worked for the 4E GSL for Wotc, banking on gamers being stupid was well a stupid move on Nuchaosium.
Quote from: sureshot;1125228Given how well that worked for the 4E GSL for Wotc, banking on gamers being stupid was well a stupid move on Nuchaosium.
Well, they think their fans are all thieves out to steal their IP, as MOB is at pains to remind them at the end of every one of his posts:
Quote[...] But if you want to make a thinly veiled retroclone of Call of Cthulhu, RuneQuest, Pendragon, etc., we didn't open that door.
Quote from: Vile;1125179You should dabble with the idea without using the OGL. Easier and less restrictive.
Sine Nomine doesn't use any OGL for his games. That's something I always think about.
I've also dabbled with replacing the D100 roll-under with D20 roll-under since (+5% = +1), but I need to see how it plays out on the table. In fact, I might flip the math and keep the concepts, but use D20 roll-high. AKA, if you had Sword 60%, that would be Sword 8+ on D20.
AKA, introduce cool bits of D100 systems to the D20 rolling fans.
Quote from: Vile;1125179And then make a Toon clone with d20 mechanics and slap the BRP logo on it, just for fun.
Toon is such a great game! Really great fun. It deserves a reboot and introduction to a new audience.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1125234I've also dabbled with replacing the D100 roll-under with D20 roll-under since (+5% = +1), but I need to see how it plays out on the table. In fact, I might flip the math and keep the concepts, but use D20 roll-high.
I did a quick test of this many years ago, and it seemed to work okay. Allows unlimited progression which I haven't seen a good version for in roll-under D100 or D20.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1125234Toon is such a great game! Really great fun. It deserves a reboot and introduction to a new audience.
It would quickly become the hottest item in the BRP stable.
Seems the general consensus is the same everywhere: don't touch this even with a long stick and plenty of alcohol wipes: https://mdhughes.tech/2020/03/27/chaosiums-system-reference-document/
Such a pity, too, after they went to all the trouble of getting that new logo wrong and setting up an online reference (https://brp.chaosium.com/) (for 18 pages of rules and a bear stat block).
Quote from: Vile;1125229Well, they think their fans are all thieves out to steal their IP, as MOB is at pains to remind them at the end of every one of his posts:
They are doing what August Derleth did to the Ctulhu Mythos - basically trying to keep everyone from using it without his permission, even though he didn't have the rights to most of it (other than his own work, and the original stuff Arkham House published). Which is kinda fitting, since CoC is really more based on Derleth's idea of a mythos story than HPL's (ignoring the elemental theory stuff, his short novel The Lurker at the Threshold is basically the outline of most CoC scenarios)
It goes a while back though. They threw a fit when WOTC released the Sanity system as open content in Unearthed Arcana 3.5
If you don't want people to adapt and develop your ideas, keep them to yourself. :rolleyes:
Quote from: JeremyR;1125241It goes a while back though. They threw a fit when WOTC released the Sanity system as open content in Unearthed Arcana 3.5
I'm assuming that Wotc paid a licensing fee to Chaosium to use CoC then became angry when Wotc used the sanity system in UA.
If they put as much effort as they do in being SJWs as they would learning copyright law they would come across less as complete and utter idiots.
What they did expect that Wotc or anyone else would pay them a licensing fee and then not use their mechanics.
Quote from: sureshot;1125249If they put as much effort as they do in being SJWs as they would learning copyright law they would come across less as complete and utter idiots.
Pretty sure that's why they got their knickers in a twist over Mongoose putting a few of their precious Gloranthan items in their MRQ1 SRD (nothing much - names of runes and monster stats, no descriptions). Ever since, even when they were still Moon Design, they've been trying to claim Open Content becomes invalid once people lose the original licence they had when they made the Open Content. Jeff is supposed to have a legal background, but it's plainly not in copyright law - though he's pretty handy with vaguely legalistic threats made in the knowledge that most people will fall for them and back off.
Quote from: Vile;1125252Pretty sure that's why they got their knickers in a twist over Mongoose putting a few of their precious Gloranthan items in their MRQ1 SRD (nothing much - names of runes and monster stats, no descriptions). Ever since, even when they were still Moon Design, they've been trying to claim Open Content becomes invalid once people lose the original licence they had when they made the Open Content. Jeff is supposed to have a legal background, but it's plainly not in copyright law - though he's pretty handy with vaguely legalistic threats made in the knowledge that most people will fall for them and back off.
I'm not a lawyer by any means yet I'm not also not going online and in person making wrong claims about copyright law. I'm assuming they have access to the Internet just look it up online if they can't or won't afford an acutal copyright legal expert.
As I said it makes them look like complete and utter idiots.
Quote from: trechriron;11251551. It's 23 pages and is very light on useful info. You could go with tons of other Open Content and combine with Legend to get a better game.
2. It's WAY too restrictive. There's nothing left besides the resistance table (which Mythras/Legend does better anyways). EDIT to add: no sanity, no passions, etc. All restricted IP...
Frankly it was a terrible approach and somewhat useless. It's kind of insulting to be honest. I'm trying to figure out what they hope to gain from it? If you are a publisher, you are going to have to fill in a ton of blanks.
Well I had a look, I won't be using it. I'll stick with the Open Gaming License. They act like they invented d100 mechanics. They didn't. I was using percentile dice to adjudicate game issues long before I ever saw Runequest, and even longer before Basic Roleplaying became a thing. This is one of them examples of the slippery slope Chaosium has always traveled. Back at Ghengis Con I in 1979 when Greg Stafford showed up and setup a booth there he had a banner over his booth claiming Redmoon/Glorantha Runequest was the first true RPG. Of course we laughed at them then for making such a ridiculous claim. It might have actually been true, though. The problem was that only Greg, and his immediate gaming group from California knew this. In the meanwhile in midwest Dave Arneson and Gary Gygax had gotten together and published an RPG named Dungeons and Dragons in 1974, but most importantly they got this new D&D game into the hands of gamers. I had been playing D&D for years before seeing Runequest, and I never saw Runequest in gaming stores, only at Ghenghis Con I, and then after that in gaming stores. So they were late to the table, despite any claims on their part to the contrary.
Same deal with all this BS now. OOOoooooo We own the D100 mechanics with our BRP license! Yah! Right! Screw that! Imma make whatever I want using the WOTC Open Gaming LIcense. ...and again, ...they are late to the table with a claim. I might have been more inclined to go with them, if they, ...you know, actually made and released the BRP OGL around 1998 or so, before the release of the Open Game License. But no. Even later than normal, only now, trying to make a claim after twenty years. They would be better off, just keeping their Runequest and Glorantha IP unique and separate from BRP.
For the record, they had issued gaming licenses to other companies for BRP since 1980, but they didn't have an Open Gaming License until about 2012?... or so.
For the record I really like Runequest with it's strike ranks and % based skills. When you think about it though, D&D could easily be a percentile based system, just take the d20 and multiply by 5, and you have a d100 percentile based system. Runequest and BRP is nothing new under the sun, just better organized then D&D using a modified version of the same game mechanics and rules everyone else has used since Dave Arneson invented it.
RuneQuest is great, and Steve Perrin did a really good job in adapting the original D100 D&D thief skills into an entire game system. In the dedication they even thanked Ken St. Andre for opening the way to writing D&D-derivative games to a thousand publishers. ;)
QuoteThis book is dedicated to Dave Arneson and Gary Gygax, who first opened Pandora's box, and to Ken St. Andre, who found it could be opened again.
As MOB states ad infinitum everywhere, this thing isn't designed to let people create retro-clones of RQ7 or COC7. Well, that's not surprising because that would be a first for an OGL. What's not clear is what it is supposed to do, but there are plenty of products out there with no conceivable purpose so this is not the worst offender. What's somewhat puzzling is why there isn't a BRP equivalent of the Jonstown Compendium for RQ7 or the Miskatonic Repository for CoC7 instead. The PR disaster that was Chaosium's failed attempt at scaring Open Cthulhu into shut-down (https://cthulhureborn.wordpress.com/2019/09/28/open-cthulhu-satan-or-savior-part-1/) may have something to do with it, who knows. Really, fan publication of monograph-style stand-alone books with a BRP logo on the front seems to be the only niche for this, which I guess is an improvement of the original monograph disaster under old Chaosium.
I wouldn't be interested in a 'clone' of CoC7 anyway, but if someone were to take GORE and flesh it out into a fuller Lovecraftian game... starting from HPL's stories for names and descriptions... what could nuChaosium rightfully grumble about? They don't own the system in GORE (https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/28521/GORE) or HPL's works... so 'Nuts!' to them.
Quote from: Simlasa;1125326I wouldn't be interested in a 'clone' of CoC7 anyway, but if someone were to take GORE and flesh it out into a fuller Lovecraftian game... starting from HPL's stories for names and descriptions... what could nuChaosium rightfully grumble about? They don't own the system in GORE (https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/28521/GORE) or HPL's works... so 'Nuts!' to them.
That is essentially Open Cthulhu, isn't it?
Quote from: sureshot;1125249If they put as much effort as they do in being SJWs as they would learning copyright law they would come across less as complete and utter idiots.
Okay, I know I have been out of the loop for a while, but what did Chaosium do that made them SJW's? This isn't an attack on your belief or denial of any facts, I am honestly asking. I never thought their company could ever be ALLOWED to be brought into the Liberal fold, as many of their historical settings are played straight. They don't seem too focused on changing history. Now I haven't seen the final print of Cthulhu Dark Ages 3rd Edition, but the 2015 GenCon copy I have makes it clear that having female investigators is no where near the norm (but they did provide examples of a few women that were warriors or had power).
I seemed to have missed something. This may also affect whether I ever use their license (doubtful I will at this point based on the wording), but still good to know.
Quote from: Eldritch_Knight;1125334That is essentially Open Cthulhu, isn't it?
From what I've read, Open Cthulhu uses chunks of the Delta Green OGL (?) as well... which I don't think existed when GORE was written. It also appears to be much more expansive and thorough than GORE. Like, GORE has no creatures statted out. It has suggestions for creature abilities and characteristic scores (and illustrations of various well-known Lovecraft critters)... but no pre-fab bestiary.
Chaosium's OGL seems more than a bit like trying to close the barn door after the cats have already bolted.
This all seems part of an attempt to stave off the retro clones coming in and taking "their" cheese...
Although slower than the OSR/D&D side of the hobby; it is only a matter of time before a proper CoC Clone is done...
CoC is Chaosium's bread and butter. They will be all manner of butthurt, and I expect baseless legal actions to be made...
Chaosium as a company is just converged enough that they are starting to turn off customers with their SJW wankery.
If someone did a straight up "Culthulu Rising" d100 rpg, based on the H.P. Lovecraft works in public domain, with high production values...
Over time Chaosium could easily find themselves in a 4e/PF1 situation...
There aren't enough publishing labels. They have Jonstown Compendium and Miskatonic Repository, but nothing else.
As a Nephilim fan, I find that unfortunate.
It was only a matter of time, but
NuChaosium finally responds (https://basicroleplaying.org/topic/11615-announcing-the-basic-roleplaying-system-reference-document-and-open-game-license/page/8/?tab=comments#comment-177733) to crowd beta testers of the first back-of-bogroll draft of the NOGL:
Quoteif it offends you that this is a different OGL than WotC or is somehow not worth being called an Open License because it is different from how that term is used elsewhere, you can go pound sand. I really don't care.
If you want to sell hamburger, call it hamburger. No-one believes it's steak.
Quote from: NuChaosium...
If somehow it offends you that we aren't letting you make your own retroclone of Call of Cthulhu or RuneQuest, well that was never our intention. And if it offends you that this is a different OGL than WotC or is somehow not worth being called an Open License because it is different from how that term is used elsewhere, you can go pound sand. I really don't care..
I see that they are taking the hearts and minds approach...
They could have went Pinnacle's approach with Savage Worlds but as an OGL.
As in, they could have released a generic core rule-book and then say all supplements have to require the core-rulebook.
That way they avoid retroclones but at the same time don't have vague statements that let them shut down any work they don't like (as in not an OGL at all).
Quote from: Jaeger;1125341it is only a matter of time before a proper CoC Clone is done...
I would nominate Sine Nomine's SILENT LEGIONS
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/145769/Silent-Legions
It's absolutely excellent, and more importantly, it is predominantly a resource book for Lovecraftian occult/horror RPGing regardless of what system you might use.
I always find it amusing that whenever anyone asks who has the rights to what in the Cthulhu Mythos, the answer is always, "Don't ask, it's way too complicated!" Yet, somehow, the implication is that Chaosium knows exactly what is and isn't 'theirs' ...
Quote from: Rhedyn;1125359They could have went Pinnacle's approach with Savage Worlds but as an OGL.
As in, they could have released a generic core rule-book and then say all supplements have to require the core-rulebook.
That way they avoid retroclones but at the same time don't have vague statements that let them shut down any work they don't like (as in not an OGL at all).
There already is a generic BRP rulebook.
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/24384
The only problem is that it hasn't been updated since 2007. Call of Cthulhu 7th edition made a lot of revisions to the rules that aren't presented, such as condensing the skill list and percentile characteristics.
BRP became abandonware when the Moon Design overlords took charge. One of the reasons for this fiasco was probably to have something to toss at the complaining fans and say, "Here, you want BRP stuff, you write it. Losers."
Thanks for the explanation, I got it now.
TweakBox (https://tweakbox.mobi/) word counter (https://wordcounter.onl/) Tutuapp (https://tutuappx.com/)
Quote from: Vile;1125364I always find it amusing that whenever anyone asks who has the rights to what in the Cthulhu Mythos, the answer is always, "Don't ask, it's way too complicated!" Yet, somehow, the implication is that Chaosium knows exactly what is and isn't 'theirs' ...
I find NuChaosium and reaction and response to be completely and utterly predictable. They want their cake and eat it too. No one can tell them otherwise. I'm no copywriter lawyer but if HPL works are public domain. They don't suddenly stop being so because NuChaosium and it's hardcore fanbase say it is so. They need to once and for all clarify their issue. Saying it is too complicated is being evasive in the extreme and imo somewhat shady as a company.
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1125368There already is a generic BRP rulebook.
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/24384
The only problem is that it hasn’t been updated since 2007. Call of Cthulhu 7th edition made a lot of revisions to the rules that aren’t presented, such as condensing the skill list and percentile characteristics.
One would think that Nuchaosium would update the book ASAP given the new edition of CoC and their not very Opengl being worked on.
Is it just me or is it that these older rpg companies really and I mean really do not know how to handle any push back from the fans. If it's not constant praise they get all angry and passive aggressive. Palladium Books, Chasium they have no skills or very little in terms of public relations and only seem to want to deal with sycophants and no one else.
Quote from: sureshot;1125376Is it just me or is it that these older rpg companies really and I mean really do not know how to handle any push back from the fans. If it's not constant praise they get all angry and passive aggressive. Palladium Books, Chasium they have no skills or very little in terms of public relations and only seem to want to deal with sycophants and no one else.
I don't see much difference between them and younger ones, except the older ones have been dealing with it longer. The stress starts to show same time the old-age filter is wearing thin. The signs are there earlier, but then a person hides it better. One difference might be that for the older ones, they are conscious of someone coming along and being the Williams to their Gygax. The whole Wotc/Paizo OGL thing shows that there is more than one way for that to legally occur, too.
I do think there is a certain element with licensing of you are either in or out. If you want to have control and not deal with that stuff mostly, then you don't need to flirt with it at all. That always runs the risk that someone will compete outside the license, but at least they'll have to establish their game first.
Quote from: sureshot;1125376I'm no copywriter lawyer but if HPL works are public domain. They don't suddenly stop being so because NuChaosium and it's hardcore fanbase say it is so. They need to once and for all clarify their issue. Saying it is too complicated is being evasive in the extreme and imo somewhat shady as a company.
If you look at FFG's Arkham games, they are all copyright FFG, there is no mention of HPL or Chaosium and no phrases like "used with permission" or anything. And FFG often uses quotes from HPL novels.
Compare that to FFG's Star Wars game which are straight up copyright of Lucasfilm. Any HLP stuff that shows up in any FFG Arkham product has to be public domain.
Quote from: sureshot;1125376I find NuChaosium and reaction and response to be completely and utterly predictable. They want their cake and eat it too. No one can tell them otherwise. I'm no copywriter lawyer but if HPL works are public domain. They don't suddenly stop being so because NuChaosium and it's hardcore fanbase say it is so. They need to once and for all clarify their issue. Saying it is too complicated is being evasive in the extreme and imo somewhat shady as a company.
Not a lawyer.
There is a mix of information out there about HPL copyrights. For years, Arkham House claimed they had copyright to many of his works. At least some have already gone to public domain simply because of age. Some likely because they didn't ever have their copyright status renewed. I believe much of Chaosium's early claims about copyright were based on their licensing from Arkham House, but there have been some researchers that have stated that Arkham House never had the copyright. It is easiest (and probably best) for Chaosium not to weigh in, because there is much evidence to prove most of HPLs works are now public domain, and that some were public domain even when parties were trying to lay claim to having some rights (or rights by way of sub-licensing). I think in this case, it
is simply too complicated for Chaosium to weigh in.
Quote from: Lynn;1125406Not a lawyer.
There is a mix of information out there about HPL copyrights. For years, Arkham House claimed they had copyright to many of his works. At least some have already gone to public domain simply because of age. Some likely because they didn't ever have their copyright status renewed. I believe much of Chaosium's early claims about copyright were based on their licensing from Arkham House, but there have been some researchers that have stated that Arkham House never had the copyright. It is easiest (and probably best) for Chaosium not to weigh in, because there is much evidence to prove most of HPLs works are now public domain, and that some were public domain even when parties were trying to lay claim to having some rights (or rights by way of sub-licensing). I think in this case, it is simply too complicated for Chaosium to weigh in.
Chaosium can still apply trademark law. They could argue that any other tabletop game with "Cthulhu" in the title endangers their trademark.
Quote from: Lynn;1125406Not a lawyer.
There is a mix of information out there about HPL copyrights. For years, Arkham House claimed they had copyright to many of his works. At least some have already gone to public domain simply because of age. Some likely because they didn't ever have their copyright status renewed. I believe much of Chaosium's early claims about copyright were based on their licensing from Arkham House, but there have been some researchers that have stated that Arkham House never had the copyright. It is easiest (and probably best) for Chaosium not to weigh in, because there is much evidence to prove most of HPLs works are now public domain, and that some were public domain even when parties were trying to lay claim to having some rights (or rights by way of sub-licensing). I think in this case, it is simply too complicated for Chaosium to weigh in.
Only need to look at Conan to see how weird copyright claims can get. If you have a big pot of money to pay lawyers with you can easily abuse copyright law.
If you have a really big pot of money (Disney) you can have copyright law changed to suit you.
Quote from: Toadmaster;1125420If you have a really big pot of money (Disney) you can have copyright law changed to suit you.
Or you can bank on your target not having any money for lawyer fees, and just intimidate them with boilerplate cease & desist letters, like nuChaosium does (https://www.yog-sothoth.com/forums/topic/33031-open-cthulhu-announcing-public-beta-release-of-open-cthulhu-srd/?do=findComment&comment=352574):
QuoteIt is worth repeating again that despite Chaosium repeatedly stating that Open Cthulhu is an "egregious violation" of their Intellectual Property they have still not provided to us (or anyone) examples of passages which they consider to be violations . We have repeatedly asked for any evidence to back up such claims, and none has been forthcoming. We even made a request 14 days prior to the release of the v2 SRD, in order to permit us to fix any points of objections -- all our requests have been met with silence.
We realize that Chaosium is under no legal obligation to substantiate their non-specific claims, especially in relation to a competing product,.But we would also call into question their motivations here -- if the Intellectual Property are as significant as they claim, surely the easiest way for them to permanently end the debate would be to substantiate their claim with some examples?
One good thing (of many) that has come out of the original OGL is that indie publishers are a lot more savvy about IP law, and less likely to be intimidated by old-style Gygaxian empty threats.
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1125407Chaosium can still apply trademark law. They could argue that any other tabletop game with "Cthulhu" in the title endangers their trademark.
They already blew it then.
"CthulhuTech" has been out for years- even had its 15 minutes.
Chaosium is playing the 'it's complicated' card out of sheer self-interest. The more people think that they might get in legal trouble messing with lovecrafts playground, the fewer potential competitors will consider making a clone.
CoC as an RPG is ripe for cloning, and Chaosium knows it.
Muddying the IP waters is their tactic for putting off the inevitable.
What they really need to do is find another property that can perform as well as CoC before someone with more money comes along and out-competes them in that niche. And Cthulhu has become considerably more mainstream since the 80s, so that's not too unlikely. The way their portfolio stands now I'm not sure the company could survive that.
Quote from: Vile;1125364I always find it amusing that whenever anyone asks who has the rights to what in the Cthulhu Mythos, the answer is always, "Don't ask, it's way too complicated!" Yet, somehow, the implication is that Chaosium knows exactly what is and isn't 'theirs' ...
I was part of a HPL copyright research project 20 years ago and the real answer is simple. HPL's own work has been in the public domain for a long time. However, there are stories where HPL was the co-writer and most of those are in the public domain, but one needs to check on the co-author's year of death and do the copyright math.
As for Chaosium, they have full rights to their INTERPRETATION of HPL's work. AKA, the artwork and description of monsters and characters from HPL's stories. Just like you would! So the key to making a game based on HPL's work is to NOT use Chaosium's artwork or embellishments and make sure you do everything from the source material.
Once stuff is in the public domain, anyone can use it BUT you have to use the public domain stuff, not other people's renditions.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1125431I was part of a HPL copyright research project 20 years ago and the real answer is simple. HPL's own work has been in the public domain for a long time. However, there are stories where HPL was the co-writer and most of those are in the public domain, but one needs to check on the co-author's year of death and do the copyright math.
When did the USA do away with a registration requirement for copyright? Around 1952 when the Universal Copyright Convention was created I think? Material in the first half of the 20th century in the USA needed to be registered for copyright, and AFAICT most of the pulp magazine stuff was never in copyright to begin with. Regardless of authorship.
Quote from: Jaeger;1125428They already blew it then.
"CthulhuTech" has been out for years- even had its 15 minutes.
Chaosium is playing the 'it's complicated' card out of sheer self-interest. The more people think that they might get in legal trouble messing with lovecrafts playground, the fewer potential competitors will consider making a clone.
CoC as an RPG is ripe for cloning, and Chaosium knows it.
Muddying the IP waters is their tactic for putting off the inevitable.
Why would anybody want to clone it? The d100 rules are already modular.
I think Chaosium should focus on the Japanese market, since apparently their game is more popular in Japan than D&D is. They could probably make money by licensing their trademark to visual novels, manga, etc.
There's already
Demonbane,
Song of Saya, and
Sharnoth as notable examples of Lovecraft-based visual novels.
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1125453Why would anybody want to clone it? The d100 rules are already modular..
Same question with the D&D OGL, It's not like one still can't get the original books...
I think that it will be cloned for the same reasons we have many OSR games.
People like complete games. One stop shops.
Why do all the work yourself to not send money to nuChaosium, when someone has already done it for you in a well illustrated package?
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1125453I think Chaosium should focus on the Japanese market, since apparently their game is more popular in Japan than D&D is. They could probably make money by licensing their trademark to visual novels, manga, etc..
Absolutely. I would do a Japanese edition with anime style art cover to cover. A total no-brainer! With a 1920's Japanese/Far east setting sourcebook.
But they won't. I doubt they have the savvy to try and capitalize on their current rise in popularity. They are probably just glad to rake in what they can while it lasts.
Quote from: S'mon;1125433When did the USA do away with a registration requirement for copyright? Around 1952 when the Universal Copyright Convention was created I think? Material in the first half of the 20th century in the USA needed to be registered for copyright, and AFAICT most of the pulp magazine stuff was never in copyright to begin with. Regardless of authorship.
Remember Sonny & Cher? After they broke up, Cher continued singing and Sonny Bono became mayor of Palm Springs and then a US Congressmen. Bono was Disney's whore in Washington, DC and made sure Disney got copyright laws rewritten repeatedly to protect the Unholy Mouse.
It would have been far better if our scumbag politicians just gave Disney a permanent copyright over the Mouse and left the Copyright Laws alone. That way so much more would have passed into the public domain decades ago instead of so much potential creativity just stuck in legal limbo.
I'm expecting a new copyright law very soon. The Mouse goes public domain in 2024...and Disney will NEVER let that happen.
Quote from: Jaeger;1125458Absolutely. I would do a Japanese edition with anime style art cover to cover. A total no-brainer! With a 1920's Japanese/Far east setting sourcebook. But they won't. I doubt they have the savvy to try and capitalize on their current rise in popularity. They are probably just glad to rake in what they can while it lasts.
There is at least one iteration of CoC like that. My kid has a book of Japanese anime style occupations for Call of Cthulhu which looked neat. A guy over on Reddit posted this album of images of CoC in Japan (https://imgur.com/a/EmFjq7d).
https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/official-brp-srd-coming-from-chaosium.855842/post-22968142
Any lawyers on here want to take a stab at this? Seems like it's an attempt to rewrite the OGL to fit their needs. Using this logic, can Mongoose not publish anything using the OGL content they already created? That seems wrong.
Quote from: Brad;1125537https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/official-brp-srd-coming-from-chaosium.855842/post-22968142
Any lawyers on here want to take a stab at this? Seems like it's an attempt to rewrite the OGL to fit their needs. Using this logic, can Mongoose not publish anything using the OGL content they already created? That seems wrong.
Did Chaosium release material under the actual, real, OGL? If they did, that material is gone. If not, they still have it.
If Chaosium only licenced material to Mongoose, Mongoose couldn't then release that material under the OGL, since they didn't own it or have the authorisation from Chaosium to do so, presumably. But Mongoose could release their own material under the OGL.
Also since game rules/formulae/mechanics are not copyrightable, anyone could create their own version of the BRP core systems and release the text describing those systems under the OGL if they wanted.
Edit: The kind of thing you could do legally with the OGL would be to take the WoTC SRD and rewrite the rules stuff using BRP style d% formula. You could restat the SRD monsters in BRP terms.
Quote from: Jaeger;1125458Same question with the D&D OGL, It's not like one still can't get the original books...
I think that it will be cloned for the same reasons we have many OSR games.
People like complete games. One stop shops.
Why do all the work yourself to not send money to nuChaosium, when someone has already done it for you in a well illustrated package?
But
Call of Cthulhu isn't like D&D. The rules have remained largely the same for decades, and even the most extreme changes in 7th edition are window dressing. Converting between different editions of d100 games is extremely easy, to the point where several BRP books are slightly revised versions of popular rules from prior editions.
The Cthulhu mythos lack a cohesive setting due to being a literal mythos, so you can't even argue that a retroclone is needed to replicate a bygone setting.
Basically, Chaosium doesn't want anyone to infringe on their revenues and I don't really see any reason to try. The only complaint I've seen so far is that their latest adventure books portray all white people who lived in the 1920s as
literally frothing racists, even though the premise of their game is
still about killing mi-go and deep ones because they're filthy alien scum literally trying to steal our women. Your premise can't get more racist than that.
Quote from: Jaeger;1125458Absolutely. I would do a Japanese edition with anime style art cover to cover. A total no-brainer! With a 1920's Japanese/Far east setting sourcebook.
But they won't. I doubt they have the savvy to try and capitalize on their current rise in popularity. They are probably just glad to rake in what they can while it lasts.
They already do that. I'm talking about licensing deals into multimedia. Give us more waifus like Saya-chan, Nyarko-chan, and Azif-chan (https://www.zerochan.net/1114221).
[/HR]
Here's an online thread (https://forums.sufficientvelocity.com/threads/lets-read-everything-howard-phillips-lovecraft-ever-wrote.19724/) where somebody reads everything Lovecraft and analyzes them, including the racism (no, they don't demonize Lovecraft; they say his irrational racism is WHY his works are so compelling; #2smart4me). It includes a lot of mindblowing stuff. I especially like the takeaway that the mi-go trying to handle Akeley were incompetent morons and the protagonist is equally moronic.
I recommend reading "The Litany of Earth" and "The Black Brat of Dunwich" for alternate takes on Lovecraft where the aliens are actually the victims or even heroes of the story.
#AlienLivesMatter #NotAllAliens #HumansAreTheRealMonsters
Quote from: S'mon;1125539Did Chaosium release material under the actual, real, OGL? If they did, that material is gone. If not, they still have it.
If Chaosium only licenced material to Mongoose, Mongoose couldn't then release that material under the OGL, since they didn't own it or have the authorisation from Chaosium to do so, presumably. But Mongoose could release their own material under the OGL.
Also since game rules/formulae/mechanics are not copyrightable, anyone could create their own version of the BRP core systems and release the text describing those systems under the OGL if they wanted.
Edit: The kind of thing you could do legally with the OGL would be to take the WoTC SRD and rewrite the rules stuff using BRP style d% formula. You could restat the SRD monsters in BRP terms.
Yeah, see, that's what I don't know. Didn't Mongoose release some sort of Runequest OGL game at one point? Again, I am not entirely sure, but that post from Chaosium's presumed lawyer implies none of that stuff is actual OGL, but I was always under the impression everything Mongoose did was because they put OGL all over every book I've ever seen them publish.
Quote from: Brad;1125537https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/official-brp-srd-coming-from-chaosium.855842/post-22968142
Any lawyers on here want to take a stab at this? Seems like it's an attempt to rewrite the OGL to fit their needs. Using this logic, can Mongoose not publish anything using the OGL content they already created? That seems wrong.
The system that Mongoose created was original to them. Since the license termination they re-released it as the Legends RPG.
Stafford didn't have any rights to Runequest the system. He only controlled the trademark and Glorantha. Mongoose was well within their right to make the system they wrote open content. The only issue with the first two SRDs was the use of the Runequest trademark throughout. Which is why have now have Legends.
As for Jeff's reply, it was resolved on the Chaosium forums (https://basicroleplaying.org/topic/9809-just-a-reminder-there-is-no-ogl-for-brp-rq-or-coc/page/2/?tab=comments#comment-145867) after I and other called them out about this issue.
QuoteQ: What about Mongoose's Legend?
A: Legend is its own thing and not under license from Chaosium or Moon Design Publications. Mongoose was perfectly entitled to take their work, remove from it those elements that were derived from RuneQuest or Glorantha and give it its own name, and then do with it as they see fit. Legend is not RuneQuest or BRP or Call of Cthulhu, and nor does it purport to be.
If Mongoose wants to do a OGL of their original work, that is not Chaosium's issue or concern.
Quote from: Brad;1125559Yeah, see, that's what I don't know. Didn't Mongoose release some sort of Runequest OGL game at one point? Again, I am not entirely sure, but that post from Chaosium's presumed lawyer implies none of that stuff is actual OGL, but I was always under the impression everything Mongoose did was because they put OGL all over every book I've ever seen them publish.
Before the Legend SRD there were several MRQ1 SRDs, which did contain some Glorantha terms - basically the names (but not images) of the runes, and a few monster names like Broo, etc. These are the ones Moon Design have frequently claimed to be illegal, without ever offering evidence. It is interesting that the SRDs appeared almost as soon as Mongoose started publishing MRQ1, and only faded from view when they moved to MRQ2 and withdrew the accompanying logo licence from all the 3rd party publishers - same as they did with Traveller, presumably because they thought the OBS community content schemes served them better.
I have never heard Greg publicly say anything about the MRQ1 SRDs being invalid, and I also had a couple of short converstaions with him involving the issue. One was on a Glorantha group where I hyperbolically claimed that Glorantha was now "out there" and Greg corrected me in saying that the OGL is still a licence and users have to abide by the terms of that licence (which I expected everyone to take as a given, but he was right, of course). The other time was when I was writing my RetroQuest II clone and Mongoose gave up their RuneQuest licence, so I told Greg I'd rather have the RuenQuest name on the cover of my clone using the MRQ1 SRDs and asked "how much?". Too rich for me, but he didn't tell me "don't use it, they never had the rights to release that". I also talked to Matt about it, and he said Mongoose were within their rights to release the SRDs. Greg is gone, but Moon Design tells us how he really felt about it privately and without telling Mongoose to stop it. In the absence of a court case or out-of-court settlement, we can only speculate and draw our own conclusions.
Legend is actually based on MRQ2, a substantially different game much closer to Mythras and thus more popular than MRQ1 with 3PPs even without NuChaosium vague booking about the legality of the latter. They only
sort-of-admitted they had nothing on Legend (https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/official-brp-srd-coming-from-chaosium.855842/post-23172124) once they were called on it, immediately before that clarification
Jeff was telling me (https://basicroleplaying.org/topic/11615-announcing-the-basic-roleplaying-system-reference-document-and-open-game-license/?do=findComment&comment=177356):
QuoteIf you think the Legend OGL is "cast-iron", then you are fooling yourself. Heck, on the face of it, the very license used is invalid.
I wandered over to BRP forums and had this reply in a thread about an OpenBRP project (where publishers fix, reorganize the abysmal "OGL" offering Chaosium released.)
QuoteOr... you can look at the Legend material that is open (tons of it) and the open content in the new Delta Green and perhaps filter in a little open content from other open games (D6, d20, Action! System, Entropy System... the list is pretty large) and not reward a company for putting together THE WORSE OGL terms I have ever seen in the many years I've been a publisher groupy.
Don't reward stubborn adherence to "the time before"
Chaosium lives in a world built in 1980 where "IP" was king. Someone must be under the delusion that a company (that has gone bankrupt how many times now?) has something so valuable that they must protect it like gold.
Why would you do all this work for them? They obviously don't give a shit about content creators or they wouldn't have created the most obtuse "open" license model.
"but Trent, I want to support Chaosium!" - awesome. Buy*their stuff!*RQ seems to be doing well as is CoC7. They just picked up 7th sea. Chaosium needs to focus on content and they'll be great. The quality is high. They do know the traditional Freelancer - Editing Staff - Distributor - Retailer model. They are obviously steeped in the Scarcity Model and can navigate the idea that we're going to run out of RPGs on Cthulhu with little impact to their day to day.
However, as a publisher I would never a) use this bogus "OGL"***or b) enter into ANY arrangement with a group of the "old guard" painfully clinging to the old ideas like a misguided knight clings to a cheap brass goblet regarding is "as unto the True Grail."
Just make a complete game with the open content that already exists with the options that work for your setting.
You are dealing with obsessive people here. Look at how touchy they are about all their "restricted content". Does this seem like the behavior of a group of people that know what they are doing? Are confident in their works? Have any clue at all how the open gaming movement works?!?! Clearly not.
It would be in the best interest of everybody to let these people focus on what they are good at. When they get overly-emotional about someone using open content they deem illegal, we can give them hugs and fist-bumps and assure them everything is going to be ok. Kind of like the same thing we do with young children who don't understand and are probably not going to understand.
Support Chaosium by playing RQ and CoC7. Run one of their incredible campaigns. Buy their books. Be a good fan!
But I would highly recommend you stay away from this company as a publisher. You are dealing with some obviously manic people whose "old ways" are going to blow up your shit long before you realize your publishing dreams.
Just my two cents...
**Frankly, the whole idea that this is Open is insulting. I would have had more respect for Chaosium if they had just belligerently cast aspersions from the castle walls Monte Python style. It would have been more consistent.
Quote from: Vile;1125575Legend is actually based on MRQ2, a substantially different game much closer to Mythras and thus more popular than MRQ1 with 3PPs even without NuChaosium vague booking about the legality of the latter. They only sort-of-admitted they had nothing on Legend (https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/official-brp-srd-coming-from-chaosium.855842/post-23172124) once they were called on it, immediately before that clarification Jeff was telling me (https://basicroleplaying.org/topic/11615-announcing-the-basic-roleplaying-system-reference-document-and-open-game-license/?do=findComment&comment=177356):
Jeff: "But if you want to use something close to Prohibited Content, then you should probably ask myself, "would the reasonable person think this is a substantially similar mechanic?"
The legal situation is, AFAICS (all liability disclaimed) :D
1. Nobody owns mechanics per se, unless you manage to Patent them (like WoTC's card-tapping patent).
2. If you sign up to a contract such as a licence, you are bound by the contract terms (with very limited exceptions in common-law systems like England and most of USA). So a contract can prohibit you using game mechanics.
3. However if a standard written terms contract is deliberately vaguely written - "substantially similar mechanic" - the people who wrote the contract can't rely on their own interpretation of what the terms mean, and the court may lean towards
contra proferentem - interpreting the vague terms in the (reasonable) way most favourable to the one who didn't write the terms. This varies a bit by jurisdiction, but it's pretty consistent that the creator of the standard written terms can't say "that means whatever I want it to mean" - at best if the parties are in disagreement then the court will consider what a reasonable neutral third party would think it meant.
Quote from: trechriron;1125600I wandered over to BRP forums and had this reply in a thread about an OpenBRP project (where publishers fix, reorganize the abysmal "OGL" offering Chaosium released.)
Hear hear! :cool:
Quote from: trechriron;1125600I wandered over to BRP forums and had this reply in a thread about an OpenBRP project (where publishers fix, reorganize the abysmal "OGL" offering Chaosium released.)
Yes, that was a bit of a worrying thread in the making. This disaster needs to be aborted, not fixed by a bunch of fans.
I don't hate Chaosium as 7E is my favorite version of CoC. To be hones and imo it was high time for some new rules.
Why the company is getting hate is because they tried to push their version of an OGL which is completely the antithesis of such a license. Then for some odd reason thought no one would notice. Instead of apologizing for doing the complete of what they promised told the fans to go to hell. So yeah some of us are not fans of the company. If someone in a rush to get their work published failed to read through the license they would be screwed and any writer using the BRPNONOGL is. Seeing as how Chaosium has little skill dealing with the public would blame the writer.
I still think they tried to pull a fast one and were caught. OGL means an OGL not something that protects the company interests only while screwing over those who use it. Then thinking no one would notice.
https://www.chaosium.com/brp-system-reference-document/?mc_cid=c4d00225e7&mc_eid=adcea3c29b (https://www.chaosium.com/brp-system-reference-document/?mc_cid=c4d00225e7&mc_eid=adcea3c29b)
From what I am seeing in the SRD the following would be prohibited content
- A magic system where points are spent from a pool based on a characteristic and/or regained over time and/or the chance of casting the spell is based on skill or a characteristic.
- A magic system where points are permanently spent to gain spells based on an available pool of spells from a source.
- A system which measures standing in an organisation/society/culture/country by accruing points based on actions and/or maybe used to gain something
- Systems which measure personality traits which change based on actions and/or are tested to restrict or encourage behaviour.
- A system were fails can be re-rolled
- Any augment of abilities based on another ability be they rolled and/or as a fraction of the other ability
- Anything that symbolizes a power or group of powers obtained from a source.
- Anything that represents a person's state of mind such as sanity/despair/guilt which involves making a die roll to avoid the loss of points from a pool and/or an effect occurs if a certain number of points are lost or gained.
It's a garbage license imo and instead of admitting they screwed up in typically Chaosium fashion double down. I honestly think they thought they could make as non-opengl gaming license as possible in their favor and somehow thought the majority of the fans would be fine and more importantly not notice.
The thread from BRP Forums on the topic:
https://basicroleplaying.org/topic/11615-announcing-the-basic-roleplaying-system-reference-document-and-open-game-license/page/11/#comments
My favorite response and another reason for not wanting to touch the license if I was an rpg writer
poster A: I have an honest question, why would the BRP OGL be a better option than the Legend OGL with is far less restrictive?
Poster B: Because you have BRP.
Yes because that is ample enough reason to want to get screwed over by the BRP non-ogl when one can use an existing actually OGL.
Quote from: Eldritch_Knight;1125335Okay, I know I have been out of the loop for a while, but what did Chaosium do that made them SJW's? T
You obviously haven't read any of the Call of Cthulhu products since Chaosium was possessed by NuChaosium.
Quote from: S'mon;1125603Jeff: "But if you want to use something close to Prohibited Content, then you should probably ask myself, "would the reasonable person think this is a substantially similar mechanic?"
The legal situation is, AFAICS (all liability disclaimed) :D
1. Nobody owns mechanics per se, unless you manage to Patent them (like WoTC's card-tapping patent).
2. If you sign up to a contract such as a licence, you are bound by the contract terms (with very limited exceptions in common-law systems like England and most of USA). So a contract can prohibit you using game mechanics.
3. However if a standard written terms contract is deliberately vaguely written - "substantially similar mechanic" - the people who wrote the contract can't rely on their own interpretation of what the terms mean, and the court may lean towards contra proferentem - interpreting the vague terms in the (reasonable) way most favourable to the one who didn't write the terms. This varies a bit by jurisdiction, but it's pretty consistent that the creator of the standard written terms can't say "that means whatever I want it to mean" - at best if the parties are in disagreement then the court will consider what a reasonable neutral third party would think it meant.
This thing is only useful to people who are really keen to get the BRP logo on a product and don't really give shit about producing anything decent or usable . They also get to cut and paste the rules in the SRD rather than rewriting it.
Quote from: Gagarth;1125965You obviously haven't read any of the Call of Cthulhu products since Chaosium was possessed by NuChaosium.
You will have to be more specific on what in their products you are referring to. I backed their Kickstarter (so I have all the products released through that), picked up Pulp Cthulhu, and I also have the GenCon 2015 release of Cthulhu Dark Ages. (I also have a variety of older products) I haven't used the books much since they arrived 4 years ago.
Quote from: Eldritch_Knight;1125989You will have to be more specific on what in their products you are referring to. I backed their Kickstarter (so I have all the products released through that), picked up Pulp Cthulhu, and I also have the GenCon 2015 release of Cthulhu Dark Ages. (I also have a variety of older products) I haven't used the books much since they arrived 4 years ago.
Their reprint of Chris Spivey's shitfest Harlem Unbound is one release worth mentioning. Chris Spivey hates Lovecraft but wants to make money off his name. The man-by-DNA Stephanie McAlea also hates Lovecraft so much he posted a tasteless poem on the author's day of death in the Facebook Call of Cthulhu group. It took quite awhile before Chaosium removed it since they secretely clapped their little manlet hands. Also I have noticed the influx of aussies in all things Call of Cthulhu. Their genes are tainted and nothing good will ever come out of it. They can't even make proper beer.
While I'm ranting, I would like to measure Mike Mason's skull. He has a very odd headshape. So odd I wonder if there's actually the average man's brain mass hidden beneath that dome. There was a villain in Hulk who had a weirdly shaped head and big eyes, Missing Link. Mike Mason reminds me of him, sans the muscles and superpowers.
(http://www.marvunapp.com/Appendix2/missinglinkhulk3.jpg)
(https://www.hplhs.org/images/reviews/mikemasonpaulfricker.jpg)
Quote from: Groom of the Stool;1126171... The man-by-DNA Stephanie McAlea also hates Lovecraft so much he...
Also I have noticed the influx of aussies in all things Call of Cthulhu. Their genes are tainted and nothing good will ever come out of it. They can't even make proper beer. ...
Let me be direct here.
1) Your transphobia is cute, but tired. If you could tone down your self-hatred and secret desire to be woman just a little bit? Maybe to the point you don't have to go out of your way to hate on trans people? That would make you... mature? Believable. Yes!
believable. Also, stop hating yourself girl. HRT treatments are much cheaper now and the surgery techniques are spot-on accurate. I've seen a whole swath of nuVaginas and you CANNOT tell the difference. You just let go of your misassigned gender, stop pretending like your a macho "man" and jump in! Only about half the country will judge you. And because you obviously live in a conservative-far-right echo chamber, you already have all the skills to join a liberal-far-left echo chamber! Seriously honey - you need to let go.
2) Their genes are tainted? It's funny you should mention tainted. I was imagining what you look like while saying these words out loud standing in front of me. You know what I imagined? A taint! You know that part in between the front parts and butthole? I imagined a giant taint just vomiting haterade all over the floor trying to get the words out and seem intelligible. I just wanted to hand that poor frothing taint a towel and give 'em a big hug. I was like bouncing up and down in my office chair screaming "you can do it little taint!"
So. There it is little taint. I'm pulling for you. I know you can do this. Just give up your faux-machismo for a real vagina and dive in like the hot little girl you know you can be. I believe in you!
I made a new post on BRP Central. This one might get me banned but I was more direct and... less offensive? I didn't call anyone names!
QuoteI had this long response to replace my offensive post. Then I thought "why?" Here are a few bullet points.
- I wouldn't touch this license with a bacon-wrapped 10 ft pole. Even if dipped in honey.
- Using the term "open" and making any inference that it is related to the OGL is insulting to the broader Open Content community. It's misleading and demonstrates a much stronger desire to exploit that community as a marketing gimmick vs. contribute to it. Might I suggest "BRP-Derived RPG License"? Clearer, makes more sense... maybe a tad more honest? Doesn't use the word "open"?
- This is NOT an open license. For the fans / publishers in the cheap seats - this. license. is. NOT. OPEN. This is the polar opposite of what OPEN is supposed to mean. I get "open" is right there in the name. But French Toast is not from France and that bouncer is not named "Tiny Tom" because he's actually... tiny.
- Based on the responses by Chaosium staff in this thread I've gleaned a few things; a) they don't trust their fans or the broader publishing community, b) they don't like us - at all, c) they have no concept of the esprit de corps of the Open Content movement, and d) they don't appear very self-aware of how an Open License is supposed to support*the "parent" publisher. I was going to drop some knowledge in the thread and then thought - "who would heed it?"
Of course, it's not too late to undo it. Maybe consult an OGL expert? Rethink the whole idea of how restricted-use licensing doesn't do anything to build your market or increase your bottom line? Nah. Forget I mentioned it.
Have fun storming the castle!
Quote from: trechriron;1126194I made a new post on BRP Central. This one might get me banned but I was more direct and... less offensive? I didn't call anyone names!
Only the mods are allowed to be rude there.
Oh how I miss the early carefree days of the board Trifletraxor set up because he was banned from Mongoose for posting a picture of someone milking a Morocanth herd cow, when Chaosium was a fading light and Moon Design were safely walled off in Glorantha Grognardland where no-one had ever heard of them.
Quote from: trechriron;1126194I made a new post on BRP Central. This one might get me banned but I was more direct and... less offensive? I didn't call anyone names!
This whole not OGL stinks of Rick Meints.
Dammit, Genie, get back in the bottle!
(https://2.bp.blogspot.com/--h_FxWpzTP4/VlA8OGFwt5I/AAAAAAAAVRw/mGIMLOcjhqE/s1600/genie_degeneratelowlife-2.gif)
Even WW did a better job without the OGL. They just said, "you can freely publish work using our copyright for profit, but you have to publish it on this website and pay us a cut of royalties."
I don't understand why Chaosium can't do that. Most people don't write this stuff for profit, and if they do it's not their only source of income.
Quote from: trechriron;1126193Let me be direct here.
1) Let me be direct here, Bearded one. No matter how many pretty vaginas McAlea gets I can still tell he is a man. And a he's a false fuck who doesn't mind earning a few bucks writing material that originated with the dead author he despises. As for the other stuff...if you feel like wearing lipstick, getting a 70's hairy snatch or walk around in high heels all day long is your problem. Just don't try to claw at me with your pink bitch nails. You also misuse the word phobia. I have no fear of trannies. I don't fear mayo either but that doesn't mean I like it.
2) By now this is starting to sound like you want to date-rape me. All this vagina, taint and hot little girl talk is exciting you, I can tell. You definitely need more social distancing in your life.
I'm not a publisher and have no plans to publish anything, but I took a look at this. All I have to say is that I wouldn't even consider using that BRP SRD/license. It doesn't offer anything of value except the ability to use the BRP logo (which is of dubious value) while loading you down with ill-defined restrictions. If I were looking to publish a d100 based product, I'd probably take one of two approaches, depending on what I want to publsh. The first would be publishing without any OGL at all (care needed, here, obviously). The second would be to use the regular OGL along with open content from another source. The open content from Legend is a likely candidate, but there are several possibilities.
Quote from: Vile;1126200Only the mods are allowed to be rude there.
Oh how I miss the early carefree days of the board Trifletraxor set up because he was banned from Mongoose for posting a picture of someone milking a Morocanth herd cow, when Chaosium was a fading light and Moon Design were safely walled off in Glorantha Grognardland where no-one had ever heard of them.
Isn't that Trifletraxor guy running the Chaosium forum now where MOB runs his mouth unhindered thinking he is tough shit when he is in fact genetic trash from Australia. That shitshow of a forum is just an ad for Chaosium products. 90% of all posts are in the vein of "Hey, look here, pay pigs! 197th Edition of Masks of Nyarlathotep. Buy the Caked-In-Shit Premium Edition and get Lynne Hardy's used panties for free."
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1126226Even WW did a better job without the OGL. They just said, "you can freely publish work using our copyright for profit, but you have to publish it on this website and pay us a cut of royalties."
I don't understand why Chaosium can't do that. Most people don't write this stuff for profit, and if they do it's not their only source of income.
I thought they actually did that, with their monograph series.
It's they are very controlling, like August Derleth was. The idea of them doing something like Call of Cthulhu without their permission or blessing just drives them batty.
Hol' up, set aside CoC for a moment...did they really say...
all works related to Le Morte d'Arthur
Did they really just try to copyright a book written in fourteen fucking seventy five??? Bad news chums, I think Sir Thomas Mallory has in fact been dead more than 75 years.
Quote from: thedungeondelver;1126300Hol' up, set aside CoC for a moment...did they really say...
all works related to Le Morte d'Arthur
Did they really just try to copyright a book written in fourteen fucking seventy five??? Bad news chums, I think Sir Thomas Mallory has in fact been dead more than 75 years.
It may seem dumb but there's nothing stopping them from getting you to 'give up' rights you have, even if it is in public domain.
Quote from: Groom of the Stool;11262301) ...By now this is starting to sound like you want to date-rape me. All this vagina, taint and hot little girl talk is exciting you, I can tell. ...
Nope. Trying to publish something under the BRP "open" license is very much like signing-up to be date-raped. And of course you excite me! You have a wonderfully filthy mouth.
Quote from: Lynn;1126307It may seem dumb but there's nothing stopping them from getting you to 'give up' rights you have, even if it is in public domain.
This makes me want to publish a Le Morte d'Arthur RPG in every system that's open just to spit in their eye.
Quote from: thedungeondelver;1126300Did they really just try to copyright a book written in fourteen fucking seventy five?
Not exactly. They're not claiming copyright, they just want you to agree not to use anything designated "Prohibited Content." They can put anything they like in that category, whether they own it or not (and the license specifies that the list of Prohibited Content "...may be updated in future versions of the License."). It's up to you whether to agree to the contract/license or not.
The license's current list of "Prohibited Content" casts a very broad net that contains all sorts of stuff, including material that is otherwise public domain. "All works related to the Cthulhu Mythos...all works related to Le Morte d'Arthur...proper names (characters, deities, place names, etc.), plots, story elements, locations, characters, artwork, or trade dress from [big list of product lines and related sublines]...", et cetera.
I consider some of that reasonable: stuff like trademarks, artwork, trade dress, Glorantha material, etc. I consider some of that dubious, broad, and ill-defined (like the "all works" related to the Cthulhu Mythos or Le Morte d'Arthur).
Then there's prohibited content based on game mechanics that are "substantially similar" to systems in Chaosium games: Augments, Glory, Passions, Personality Traits, Pushing, Reputation, Rune Magic, Runes, Sanity, Sorcery, Spirit (or battle) magic. My concern, here, is how "substantially similar" would be evaluated (especially legally), and how much room there is for substantial variation within the framework of d100-based rules when addressing similar topics. The license asks you to agree to restrictions that wouldn't exists under copyright law, and doesn't (IMO) do a good job of defining the scope and bounds of those restrictions. I see it as a bit of a minefield.
Another issue I see is that the open content in the BRP SRD document is lacking, especially compared to alternatives.
I understand Chaosium is trying to protect their IP while offering some open content. I have no problem with that concept. But I don't think they came up with a very good approach with this license and SRD. I think the license offers too much uncertainty and too many restrictions for very little benefit. As I said up-thread, I'd pass and look at some of the other alternatives.
Quote from: trechriron;1126311Nope. Trying to publish something under the BRP "open" license is very much like signing-up to be date-raped. And of course you excite me! You have a wonderfully filthy mouth.
I agree on both things. The license and my filthy little whore mouth.
Quote from: JeremyR;1126298I thought they actually did that, with their monograph series.
It's they are very controlling, like August Derleth was. The idea of them doing something like Call of Cthulhu without their permission or blessing just drives them batty.
Yes, they are extremely controlling. I somehow think that they forget that most of Lovecraft's works are in the public domain, and that they have delusions of having created the mythos themselves. I sometimes notice this trait in Sandy Petersen's videos on Youtube too. Maybe it's old age setting in. And MOB even mentioned Hastur being off limits. But then again, he seems to be an idiot.
And another thing, with their so called "Open" license they violate the spirit of Lovecraft and his circle of Mythos-swapping friends. He wanted other authors to expand upon the mythos. Chaosium is more Smaug-like in their approach. And I remember them totally fucking up the French edition of CoC 7th edition and the released/planned products. What those french bastards did was the most beautiful rendition of CoC ever made. So what if they hadn't paid the license fees in a couple of years? It was pure art. Smaug-that-is-Chaosium should have given them some leeway. My guess is that they felt so jealous of the pure talent of that French company that they pulled the plug and made up excuses about it being about fees. The art direction of modern Chaosium is pure shit.
I love Call of Cthulhu (4th ed by preference but up to 6th they're all good), but if this is how Chaosium is going to behave, man, fuck them.
Didn't they just plain stop paying Michael Moorcock for years on end? You know, an actual dude who was still alive and owed licensing fees? I seem to recall reading a lot by him about how peeved he was about that.
Anyway, time to sort out a la morte d'Arthur RPG in every possible system. Probably start with OSRIC and go from there.
Well this thread has convinced me to avoid buying Chaosium stuff! They seem worse than T$R!
Groom of the Stool, what's your deal with Aussies? There's gotta be a story there. Their need to hurl crustaceans at plastic dolls is a tad strange, but what culture doesn't have it's oddities?
Quote from: thedungeondelver;1126300Hol' up, set aside CoC for a moment...did they really say...
all works related to Le Morte d'Arthur
Did they really just try to copyright a book written in fourteen fucking seventy five??? Bad news chums, I think Sir Thomas Mallory has in fact been dead more than 75 years.
They aren't copyrighting anything they are trying to make one set of idiots believe they are and another set of mostly sycophants believe having the BRP logo on your product is great so that NuChaosium can get some free marketing.
Quote from: thedungeondelver;1126350I love Call of Cthulhu (4th ed by preference but up to 6th they're all good), but if this is how Chaosium is going to behave, man, fuck them.
Didn't they just plain stop paying Michael Moorcock for years on end? You know, an actual dude who was still alive and owed licensing fees? I seem to recall reading a lot by him about how peeved he was about that.
Anyway, time to sort out a la morte d'Arthur RPG in every possible system. Probably start with OSRIC and go from there.
I find it ironic that Chaosium profited from a contract that Michael Moorcock wasn't happy with, yet are unable to see the hypocrisy of their position regarding their contract with Mongoose.
As many others have opined, what is the point of the BRP-OGL? Chaosium could easily have set up a Community Content Program for the BRP 4th Edition book (Big Gold Book) and Magic World. I believe most fans wanted a replacement for the BRP Monographs, and a CCP would have suited them and made money for Chaosium.
Instead, we get the BRP-OGL which is a royalty free license similar to the Savage Worlds license which gives Chaosium approval over manuscripts. However, this is disingenuously described an OGL.
From the responses of Chaosium employees at BRP Central, I find myself thinking that this BRP-OGL is motivated by the the following reasons:
1) That Chaosium thinks that only games produced by the current management are 'legitimate' BRP: RuneQuest, CoC, and Pendragon.
2) A contempt for BRP 4th Edition and Magic World, presumably because they were produced by the previous management.
3) A mistrust of third party publishers, despite the fact that many excellent third party publishers, such as Pagan Publishing and Stygian Fox, have enhanced the reputation of CoC with their products.
4) A contempt for the open gaming movement. Chaosium clearly don't believe in the Skaff Effect, that what is good for the hobby is good for the market leader.
5) An attempt to muddy the waters over the legitimacy of the open gaming movement.
This whole BRP-OGL debacle and Chaosium's refusal to respond to legitimate criticism of the license has really soured me on the company.
Quote from: yojimbouk;1126379I find it ironic that Chaosium profited from a contract that Michael Moorcock wasn't happy with, yet are unable to see the hypocrisy of their position regarding their contract with Mongoose.
Yeah. Ripping off an author on licensed stuff is like hanging out a sign that says COME PIRATE OUR SHIT, WE'RE NOT PAYING HIM ANYWAY LOLOLOLOL.
QuoteFrom the responses of Chaosium employees at BRP Central, I find myself thinking that this BRP-OGL is motivated by the the following reasons:
1) That Chaosium thinks that only games produced by the current management are 'legitimate' BRP: RuneQuest, CoC, and Pendragon.
2) A contempt for BRP 4th Edition and Magic World, presumably because they were produced by the previous management.
Yeah, very much this. Looking over that BRP central site, some of the Chaosium guys come across as real asshats. Seems they know better than everyone in the industry and fuck you if you dare to disagree.
Quote3) A mistrust of third party publishers, despite the fact that many excellent third party publishers, such as Pagan Publishing and Stygian Fox, have enhanced the reputation of CoC with their products.
I think its a mistrust of third party publishers who haven't bent the fucking knee and gotten a license from them. Licensees, Good! Non Licensees, Bad!
Quote4) A contempt for the open gaming movement. Chaosium clearly don't believe in the Skaff Effect, that what is good for the hobby is good for the market leader.
Here's a quote from 'Jeff' from a thread on RQ vs D&D (https://basicroleplaying.org/topic/8109-rq-vs-dd/?tab=comments#comment-114984) from 2018. "For what it is worth, for me the jury is still out on whether D&D5e is a good or even particularly interesting role-playing game. My experiences with it so far have not particularly impressed me. But I also am unimpressed by a lot of so-called "modern ideas/approaches" (mostly because I think the basic parameters of game mechanics have not developed nearly as much since the mid-80s as people think, although what is currently popular changes like a kaleidoscope)." So, yeah. Not just the open gaming movement but anything that ain't one of his company's games. I got no problem with anyone holding an opinion, but isn't this guy like the CEO or something?
QuoteThis whole BRP-OGL debacle and Chaosium's refusal to respond to legitimate criticism of the license has really soured me on the company.
Seems to me they're a bunch of arrogant assholes. Fuck 'em.
Quote from: yojimbouk;1126379I find it ironic that Chaosium profited from a contract that Michael Moorcock wasn't happy with, yet are unable to see the hypocrisy of their position regarding their contract with Mongoose.
Except in this case they did not give any rules or mechanics to Mongoose. Greg Stafford license the Glorantha IP i.e. the "fluff" and the Runequest trademark. He did not license any type of rules nor could he other than Heroquest.
Folks need to keep this in mind in regards to Chaosium's complaints about the deal with Mongoose. In short Mongoose wrote an original RPG that uses the d100 and share several common elements with earlier editions of Runequest that also shared with other unrelated RPGs like the many of the characteristics and the 3d6 scale.
However many element of Mongoose take are not the same as BRP or prior edition of Runequest.
Quote from: thedungeondelver;1126312This makes me want to publish a Le Morte d'Arthur RPG in every system that's open just to spit in their eye.
Build one that is 5e compatible and I think you have the makings of an interesting Kickstarter.
Quote from: S'mon;1126363Well this thread has convinced me to avoid buying Chaosium stuff! They seem worse than T$R!
Exactly. I certainly won't be purchasing anything from a company that believes that they can copyright or trademark something that is in the public domain simply by publishing their own version of it. One Disney is enough...
Quote from: yojimbouk;1126380...
4) A contempt for the open gaming movement. Chaosium clearly don't believe in the Skaff Effect, that what is good for the hobby is good for the market leader...
In this I would say there is some legitimate concern for them.
They are not the market leader. D&D is.
And outside of CoC they are the leaders of nothing.
But what they don't seem to get is that their fears of a d100 OGL don't matter!
The cat is already out of the bag! The fat lady has sung! The Prom Queen is doing the walk of shame!
d100 Legends and OpenQuest are out there.
It's over. This is just an attempt to muddy the waters to scare people off from doing a CoC clone.
I believe they are afraid of getting into a D&D4e vs PF1 scenario, and coming out on the short end.
Quote from: BrokenCounsel;1126395...
Here's a quote from 'Jeff' ... "For what it is worth, for me the jury is still out on whether D&D5e is a good or even particularly interesting role-playing game. My experiences with it so far have not particularly impressed me.....
Why must this idiot agree with me?
I'm currently playing in a 5e game. IMHO It's kind of a sucky system for what it is trying to do.
But guess what? 5e is a HUGE success!
The rest of the hobby doesn't care what I think!
The problem with 'Jeff', is that unlike me he thinks his opinion on D&D is actually relevant.
Quote from: BrokenCounsel;1126395... But I also am unimpressed by a lot of so-called "modern ideas/approaches" (mostly because I think the basic parameters of game mechanics have not developed nearly as much since the mid-80s as people think, although what is currently popular changes like a kaleidoscope)." ....
Now that is very telling, and likely the reason why RQ7 is such a cluster fuck with its rules.
With this kind of attitude they will go the way of SJG and HERO system.
Quote from: Lynn;1126405Build one that is 5e compatible and I think you have the makings of an interesting Kickstarter.
I might, but I'd probably go with OSRIC and S&W first.
Quote from: thedungeondelver;1126436I might, but I'd probably go with OSRIC and S&W first.
I'd back that.
The irony is, until their inclusion of Le Morte d'Arthur in the NOGL, it had never occurred to anyone to clone Pendragon - from what I hear it's near perfect as a Malory RPG adaption. You'd also have to squint really hard to think it's BRP.
Quote from: S'mon;1126363Well this thread has convinced me to avoid buying Chaosium stuff
While I wouldn't use the license/SRD they've offered I'm not angered by it, either. I'll still buy from Chaosium if they offer me something I like. That said, the stuff I like tends to be their older material rather than their new editions/releases. I like Runequest 2. I like the BRP Gold Book. I like Call of Cthulhu (up through 5th edition or so -- can't say I'm interested in new CoC rules). I like Stormbringer (I have the 1e rules/supplements). You can still get some of that stuff. I think they're still selling the BRP gold book. And there are "classic Runequest" PDFs available.
I think a lot of high-quality d100 games and supplements have come from non-Chaosium sources, lately. Delta Green is awesome. There are some really cool settings and sourcebooks for BRP/RQ6/Mythras, too, like the BRP Rome book, or the RQ6 Monster Island, or the Mythras "Mythic Earth" books (Mythic Britain, Mythic Rome, Mythic Constantinople, et cetera).
TL;DR: If Chaosium puts out some cool products that appeal to me, I'll buy from them. Right now they're not offering me much that I want, outside of older material (most of which I already own).
QuoteThe problem with 'Jeff', is that unlike me he thinks his opinion on D&D is actually relevant.
Plus he's a high up in Chaosium, and it's just damned unprofessional to go ragging on other company's games in a public forum - and especially the market leader. That shows contempt for the industry they're a part of. Yet they brag about all their fucking Ennies and Indiana Jones awards, yadda yadda yadda - so clearly they adore the industry when it suits them. It wouldn't be so bad if he gave examples of why he's 'unimpressed' in a constructive way; but he's too fucking cool for that. 'Cept it's just a dick move from an arrogant prick.
Quote... But I also am unimpressed by a lot of so-called "modern ideas/approaches" (mostly because I think the basic parameters of game mechanics have not developed nearly as much since the mid-80s as people think, although what is currently popular changes like a kaleidoscope)." ....
Now that is very telling, and likely the reason why RQ7 is such a cluster fuck with its rules.
I didn't get the new RQ rules because Glorantha just ain't my bag, but looking at the posts about rules issues on that BRP site, I get the impression that Jeff's also the lead designer, but doesn't have a fucking clue about how to design a game. He took an old game, the RQ classic, threw in a bunch of rules from another couple of versions he happened to like, slapped a shit load of pretty art on it, and decided it was done. Yet he's got the balls to rag on 5e and criticize 'modern ideas/approaches'? Fuck. Even Felix.J's got a better sense of how to design a roleplaying game. So if this Jeff's also the genius behind their OGL and SRD, yeah, it's gonna suck.
Contempt for the industry seeps out of them. For one of the big old companies, that's just bad.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1126373Groom of the Stool, what's your deal with Aussies? There's gotta be a story there. Their need to hurl crustaceans at plastic dolls is a tad strange, but what culture doesn't have it's oddities?
Nah, there really isn't a story. I really mean the aussie Chaosium entourage. The thing is that I thought Chaosium was an American company, but all I see on their Youtube channel and Twitter account are rainbow people from the UK and Australia. But if I must confess I hate Lynne Hardy the most. Check out the playtest of Dead of Winter on Youtube. All she does is laugh, laugh and laugh her way through the adventure. And her laugh always sound the same, the same cadence all the time. Well, she has laugh number two as well - when she makes the same laughing face but omitt no sound at all. She might be remotely controlled by aliens.
Quote from: BrokenCounsel;1126484Plus he's a high up in Chaosium, and it's just damned unprofessional to go ragging on other company's games in a public forum - and especially the market leader. That shows contempt for the industry they're a part of. Yet they brag about all their fucking Ennies and Indiana Jones awards, yadda yadda yadda - so clearly they adore the industry when it suits them. It wouldn't be so bad if he gave examples of why he's 'unimpressed' in a constructive way; but he's too fucking cool for that. 'Cept it's just a dick move from an arrogant prick.
I didn't get the new RQ rules because Glorantha just ain't my bag, but looking at the posts about rules issues on that BRP site, I get the impression that Jeff's also the lead designer, but doesn't have a fucking clue about how to design a game. He took an old game, the RQ classic, threw in a bunch of rules from another couple of versions he happened to like, slapped a shit load of pretty art on it, and decided it was done. Yet he's got the balls to rag on 5e and criticize 'modern ideas/approaches'? Fuck. Even Felix.J's got a better sense of how to design a roleplaying game. So if this Jeff's also the genius behind their OGL and SRD, yeah, it's gonna suck.
Contempt for the industry seeps out of them. For one of the big old companies, that's just bad.
Rick Meints is an RQ grognard who made his name in the 90s publishing remastered reprints of old RQ2 classics, such as Pavis and Big Rubble, and lists of RQ/Gloranthan publications. I'm sure Rick Meints pressed for compatibility with RQ2 for the new rule set.
I believe Jeff Richard came out of the Seattle Farmer's Collective group. This group experimented with new rule sets, such as Pendragon Pass, and made the focus of their campaign a village community rather than a band of adventurers. Their campaign was heavily informed by King of Sartar.
It's not hard to see how RQG ended up as it was then. Rick Meints wanted a system that was nostalgic. Jeff Richard wanted a system that was modern and reflected what he viewed as important about Glorantha. I'm not sure these two viewpoints could be satisfactorily reconciled.
Quote from: yojimbouk;1126601Rick Meints is an RQ grognard who made his name in the 90s publishing remastered reprints of old RQ2 classics, such as Pavis and Big Rubble, and lists of RQ/Gloranthan publications. I'm sure Rick Meints pressed for compatibility with RQ2 for the new rule set.
I believe Jeff Richard came out of the Seattle Farmer's Collective group. This group experimented with new rule sets, such as Pendragon Pass, and made the focus of their campaign a village community rather than a band of adventurers. Their campaign was heavily informed by King of Sartar.
It's not hard to see how RQG ended up as it was then. Rick Meints wanted a system that was nostalgic. Jeff Richard wanted a system that was modern and reflected what he viewed as important about Glorantha. I'm not sure these two viewpoints could be satisfactorily reconciled.
Jeff Richard hated RQ 3 he is responsible for RuneQuest Glorantha actually being RuneQuest 2.5. Meints couldn't give two fucks about the game system he only sees $$$$$$$$$.
Quote from: Philotomy Jurament;1126461TL;DR: If Chaosium puts out some cool products that appeal to me, I'll buy from them. Right now they're not offering me much that I want, outside of older material (most of which I already own).
I'd really like if they could release a 2nd edition of
Nephilim. I liked it a whole lot better than
World of Darkness, that's for sure.
Well, conversation has pretty much died down everywhere except for a few posters on BRP Central talking about using the NOGL to re-invent wheels already built into games under other companies' later versions of the rules. Time will tell whether anyone actually produces any meaningful content as a result of this debacle, or whether it satisfies nuChaosium's actual intent of offending 3rd party publishers enough to put forever them off the idea of writing their own D100 games.
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1126613I'd really like if they could release a 2nd edition of Nephilim. I liked it a whole lot better than World of Darkness, that's for sure.
I think my temptation there would be to do something Nephilim-ish with After The Vampire Wars... since I'm more inetrested in ATVW more as a framework for modern weird adventures than its own setting as-written (too True Bllod for my taste, ATM).
Waitaminnit ... did MOB jump the gun and post the BRP NOGL a few days early? Is this whole thing just an elaborate April Fool's joke? :eek:
There is a Polish top-down post-apocalypse horror video game called Darkwood. It's awesome. I think it deserves a tabletop game adaptation. D100 seems serviceable enough.
BRP is my favorite system (specifically Mythras and Call of Cthulu), that being said Chaosium seems to be being run by paranoid cretins. As others have already pointed out, really good OGLs already exist for the system - Legend, GORE, OpenQuest.
It seems like they're worried about being Pathfndered. A knockoff Call of Cthulhu is never going to dethrone the real thing as long as CoC is still available in a recognizable form. That's why Zweihander died the day WFRP 4 was announced, and Fox has been lashing out in desperation ever since. Keep making Call of Cthulhu (no one can take Glorantha from you) and you'll be fine.
Quote from: Mjollnir;1126864Keep making Call of Cthulhu (no one can take Glorantha from you) and you'll be fine.
This is the key underlying assumption when you release a real OGL - that you are confident a 3rd party isn't going to steal your thunder. CoC has such a vast volume of material that they could keep going forever just by updating and re-issuing old books. Glorantha is their thing, especially now that Greg is gone and Jeff can go crazy with the pseudo-anthropolgy stuff, but honestly it's never going to be attractive enough for anyone to even attempt to clone - it's just become way to impenetrable for much of the market. Pendragon seems to be the go-to game for Arthurian fantasy, which is much better protection than disallowing anything even vaguely related under their NOGL.
That said, there are contenders - Delta Green is a very good take on the Mythos, and
Osprey is about to release their own Bronze Age game powered by OpenQuest (https://basicroleplaying.org/topic/11427-jackals-bronze-age-fantasy-roleplaying-powered-by-openquest/) (which I'm sure will be much more accessible than Glorantha). So nuChaosium have some cause not to get complacent, as their main cash-cow lines are mostly public domain, while Glorantha is at its core a historical bronze age setting that could easily be re-skinned with little effort.
In the meantime, Jeff gets it. Not:
QuoteAnd this really displays why I am tempted to give up answering questions on this forum. Do you really plan to publish something using BRP based on Dunsany's "Idle Days on the Yann"? Really? Or is this just an exercise trying to dance around boundaries you don't really have any interest in actually doing anything with at all?
How hard is it for him to grok that an OGL is supposed to be clear on general cases so potential publishers don't have to ask about every little specific detail?
Call of Cthulhu's name recognition and inertia enough to keep Chaosium near the top of the RPG mountain indefinitely as long as they don't make a blunder on the scale of D&D 4e. And Delta Green didn't need Chaosium's useless OGL.
Glorantha is so specific and niche that anyone who want it will buy the real thing, it's not just a generic bronze age setting.
Are they afraid someone is going to remake Pendragon and complete head-to-head with one of the most highly regarded RPGs ever? That seems like an endeavor doomed to irrelevance and obscurity to me, but if I were going to try it I'd just use a different, better OGL.
Quote from: Vile;1126873This is the key underlying assumption when you release a real OGL - that you are confident a 3rd party isn't going to steal your thunder. CoC has such a vast volume of material that they could keep going forever just by updating and re-issuing old books. Glorantha is their thing, especially now that Greg is gone and Jeff can go crazy with the pseudo-anthropolgy stuff, but honestly it's never going to be attractive enough for anyone to even attempt to clone - it's just become way to impenetrable for much of the market. Pendragon seems to be the go-to game for Arthurian fantasy, which is much better protection than disallowing anything even vaguely related under their NOGL.
That said, there are contenders - Delta Green is a very good take on the Mythos, and Osprey is about to release their own Bronze Age game powered by OpenQuest (https://basicroleplaying.org/topic/11427-jackals-bronze-age-fantasy-roleplaying-powered-by-openquest/) (which I'm sure will be much more accessible than Glorantha). So nuChaosium have some cause not to get complacent, as their main cash-cow lines are mostly public domain, while Glorantha is at its core a historical bronze age setting that could easily be re-skinned with little effort.
In the meantime, Jeff gets it. Not:
How hard is it for him to grok that an OGL is supposed to be clear on general cases so potential publishers don't have to ask about every little specific detail?
Seems every time Jeff opens his smart-ass mouth, a little more contempt dribbles out.
Quote from: Vile;1126873That said, there are contenders Osprey is about to release their own Bronze Age game powered by OpenQuest (https://basicroleplaying.org/topic/11427-jackals-bronze-age-fantasy-roleplaying-powered-by-openquest/) (which I'm sure will be much more accessible than Glorantha).
Thanks for the tip! I was not aware of this game in the works. Due right around my B-day too- Time to put it on "Dad's B-day wish list" :)
Quote from: BrokenCounsel;1126909Seems every time Jeff opens his smart-ass mouth, a little more contempt dribbles out.
Pretty much and making other question his lawyer credentials.
What did he and by extension Chaosium expect an improperly worded, unclear non-opengl style listen and no one would ask them questions. What is it with old rpg companies not being able to handle any pushback. New rpg companies are not good at it either yet the older ones have been around longer and should know better.
Quote from: sureshot;1126923Pretty much and making other question his lawyer credentials.
What did he and by extension Chaosium expect an improperly worded, unclear non-opengl style listen and no one would ask them questions. What is it with old rpg companies not being able to handle any pushback. New rpg companies are not good at it either yet the older ones have been around longer and should know better.
Old company, yes, but New management. I'm guessing that being the "saviors" of Chaosium went to their heads, and now that the initial dust has settled where they fixed some old chaosium issues, they are moving forward with their core business plans and probably are a little taken aback by the criticisms.
Quote from: JeffB;1126924Old company, yes, but New management. I'm guessing that being the "saviors" of Chaosium went to their heads, and now that the initial dust has settled where they fixed some old chaosium issues, they are moving forward with their core business plans and probably are a little taken aback by the criticisms.
I can understand being taken aback if they were being asked questions that could easily be answered by a properly written and worded OGL. Instead it's the opposite and acting surprised is more of an excuse and trying to evade responsibility imo. It's like giving someone 50% of the instruction to setup a piece of furniture than getting annoyed they keep asking for the other 50%.
Quote from: sureshot;1126923Pretty much and making other question his lawyer credentials.
My experience is that the law is a tool to express one's intent. If not express clearly yes it can be just a person writing unclearly even when they know how to put thing in the correct legal form. This become clear when you talk to them and they go "Oh yeah this is what I was thinking" And you go "Oh OK I understand now."
However if the plain explanation also remain unclear then that paints a different picture.
When it came to the Judges Guild license a decade ago, I consulted with a lawyer. My approach was to go down the list of what I and Bob Bledsaw II wanted out of the deal and ask several questions. Is the agreement in the correct legal form that expressed those intent. Along with are they any implication to the terms Bob II chose to use when writing it up. Happily after going through it the lawyer said yes it did.
However I did have to explain why I wanted the things I did and why I was willing to agree to certain condition. Part of that was explaining the Open Game License and why I was using it. The lawyer's natural instinct was for me to retain as many rights as possible. However I explain how my marketed work which is just as much about the reputation of the author as it is about the quality of the material. How it is a benefit in terms of people getting to use my material to target a widely used system. That irregardless of one's opinion on how culture is to be shared, from a business standpoint that open content is a form of advertising.
I think the lawyer learned as much from me as I did from him. However the meeting was very much about me making sure that the agreement express what I wanted out of it given my negotiations with Bob Bledsaw II. Not about what I could get if I ask for more.
Similarly with Chaosium, it obvious that they don't want anybody copying their IP heavy RPGs like Pendragon, Call of the Cthulu etc. However there is more going on thus why they can't seemly answer simple questions or implement clearer language for their license. My personal guess is that they rather not share anything at all except under very controlled conditions like the OBS Community Content programs. However the reality of the open content of the Legend RPG coupled with King Arthur being public domain and an increasing amount of Lovecraft works means things are going to happen.
My recommendation is for them to get over their paranoia and just make an SRD out of the BRP mechanics. Most hobbyists are going to look to the IP Holder first than a third party. You have to be exceptional like the crew behind Design Mechanism to even to make a dent. Most prospective authors including myself are not as good as them and a handful of others.
Even if one does crop up like Design Mechanism they rarely supplant the original IP holder unless the original IP holder does something totally boneheaded like jettison all compatibility with previous works and mock fans for liking the older editions.
I'd argue "D100 Bronze Age Fantasy" sold RuneQuest a lot more than "Glorantha as the setting."
Can CoC be dethroned? I'd bet on something akin to CHILL with a polished system or SILENT LEGIONS (https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/145769/Silent-Legions) with a better cover, but CoC (like D&D) has tremendous brand loyalty. Anyone entering that niche would need marketing dollars.
NuChaosium killed my desire to run their games ever again. I can do CoC with Silent Legions easily, and use anything I liked from Old Chaosium.
BTW, Goblinoid Games did a retroclone of CHILL called CRYPTWORLD (https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/118860/Cryptworld).
Quote from: Spinachcat;1127103I'd argue "D100 Bronze Age Fantasy" sold RuneQuest a lot more than "Glorantha as the setting."
Can CoC be dethroned? I'd bet on something akin to CHILL with a polished system or SILENT LEGIONS (https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/145769/Silent-Legions) with a better cover, but CoC (like D&D) has tremendous brand loyalty. Anyone entering that niche would need marketing dollars.
NuChaosium killed my desire to run their games ever again. I can do CoC with Silent Legions easily, and use anything I liked from Old Chaosium.
BTW, Goblinoid Games did a retroclone of CHILL called CRYPTWORLD (https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/118860/Cryptworld).
I think that a horror rpg aimed at a more mature audience (but without the demon dicks of Kult Divinity Lost) with a retro feel to it akin to 70's and 80's horror movies plus a focus on slick layout and art could be a serious threat to CoC these days. CoC gets pulpier and more Scooby-Doo by each product. I like many CoC products but most of them are not Nu-Chaosium ones. Most of them were penned by Keith Herber. And they have no sense of art direction. It's always about slapping on some silly tentacles and Ghostbusters colour schemes. Sure, stealing that French artist will improve the art, but his talents will be wasted since the intent, the drive and the creative vision behind their new products is so PG-13 it makes me sick. I wager that many of them aren't that much into hardcore horror anyway. They are like the producers/directors who go for the safe PG-13 edits of a horror movie thinking of the box office numbers, instead of saying "fuck it" to soulless, watered down compromise and go all out. For the sake of staying true to the genre. Horror fans do care about respecting the genre. A game that caters to this audience could actually become successful. Kids will find a way to play it anyway and that's just fine.
Quote from: Groom of the Stool;1127112I think that a horror rpg aimed at a more mature audience (but without the demon dicks of Kult Divinity Lost) with a retro feel to it akin to 70's and 80's horror movies plus a focus on slick layout and art could be a serious threat to CoC these days.
What do you consider elements of 70s/80s horror movies that would make a good RPG?
Feel free to start another thread if you'd like.
I don't really get this. I mean, there's BRP variations that are open source, aren't there? There's tons of games done with brp-based systems that were not licensed by Chaosium...
Quote from: RPGPundit;1127338I don't really get this. I mean, there's BRP variations that are open source, aren't there? There's tons of games done with brp-based systems that were not licensed by Chaosium...
You are correct. This is a huge gaslighting campaign by the new folks at Chaosium trying to confuse those not in the know. It's a dick move and I hope the blowback teaches them a tough lesson.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1127338I don't really get this. I mean, there's BRP variations that are open source, aren't there? There's tons of games done with brp-based systems that were not licensed by Chaosium...
Very much like Castles & Crusades had no need of the OGL or SRD to make a D&D clone.
Quote from: DocJones;1127363Very much like Castles & Crusades had no need of the OGL or SRD to make a D&D clone.
I feel like I'm missing something, but I'm not sure what you're getting at. Just like the "open source" d100 system variants that RPGPundit mentions, C&C made use of the OGL and open content from the SRD. (Or are you saying yeah C&C did that, but it didn't need to? If so, I'd say that's debatable, as it might be possible to "clone" the game mechanics, but without the OGL you'd need to be very cautious about terminology and such in order to avoid potential copyright issues. Using the OGL and open content terminology makes many of those issues moot.)
It's always fascinating that Sine Nomine doesn't use the OGL.
Philotomy Jurament is correct the OGL offers certain legal protection, but the existence of Palladium Books for 40 years also makes an interesting counterargument, along with many, many other RPGs which "modified" AD&D into their own product long before the OGL.
But if the OGL offers what you want and you're okay with the relatively minimal strictures, its a fine license.
OGL lets you use the D&D IP - game mechanics/formulae aren't protectable, but there is a ton of copyright protected content in the 3e & 5e SRDs. You can use that content with completely different game mechanics if you like, eg you could use a d100 BRP type system with the monsters, spells, magic items et al from the 3e or 5e D&D SRD.
Quote from: S'mon;1127398OGL lets you use the D&D IP - game mechanics/formulae aren't protectable, but there is a ton of copyright protected content in the 3e & 5e SRDs.
That's the single biggest draw of the WotC SRDs - you could probably write your own close-enough D&D clone but it would be a craptonne of work, not to mention the risk of a C&D from WotC that you couldn't afford to fight.
The Mongoose RQ and Traveller SDRs were less valuable in that they had very little IP in them - almost none in the case of Traveller - but they were still useful because they had a lot of mechanical text which meant 3PPs wouldn't have to reinvent the wheel.
An SRD with no IP and almost no rules text makes no sense at all, because you're doing all the work of writing and creating original background in exchange for a whole raft of prohibitions and controls. Giving you access to a trademark might be worth all that - if it was a valuable trademark rather than one that the parent company had already abandoned years ago and just now made up a logo for.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1127338I don't really get this. I mean, there's BRP variations that are open source, aren't there? There's tons of games done with brp-based systems that were not licensed by Chaosium...
It is about teasing people with being able to put the BRP logo on the product and maybe getting your product in the Choasium section of Drivethru. Games like Openquest and Raiders of R'lyeh are under the Mongoose OGL/SRD and Chaosium has an issue with it's legitimacy . If you are suggesting just use the Mongoose SRD rules a lot of people don't like the changes the Mongoose did. Like the Elfquest skills bonuses and the D&D style resistances instead of attribute rolls.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1127394It's always fascinating that Sine Nomine doesn't use the OGL.
Kevin Crawford doesn't make clones. Instead he makes RPGs with mechanics related to classic D&D. And these RPGs tend to be more focused on a situation/genre/setting then a clone is. But even then there always something different woven in.
Quote from: Gagarth;1127409If you are suggesting just use the Mongoose SRD rules a lot of people don't like the changes the Mongoose did. Like the Elfquest skills bonuses and the D&D style resistances instead of attribute rolls.
I don't see that as a problem. The entire text of Mongoose's
Legend RPG is designated as Open Content under the WotC OGL 1.0a. So if you don't like the
Legend skill bonuses, or whatever, you can "Use" them under the terms of the license, which means you can "...Distribute, copy, edit, format, modify, translate and otherwise create Derivative Material of Open Game Content." That means you don't have to use "skill bonuses" (or whatever) as written in
Legend, you can change them. And if your change happens to be the same (mechanically) as some other game's approach...well, that's not a problem as long as you provide the game system rule in an original presentation.
This is what allows clone games to use the (3e) D&D SRD and its open content to clone the rules of earlier editions of D&D. The same approach can be used with the open content from
Legend.
Quote from: Philotomy Jurament;1127389I feel like I'm missing something, but I'm not sure what you're getting at. Just like the "open source" d100 system variants that RPGPundit mentions, C&C made use of the OGL and open content from the SRD. (Or are you saying yeah C&C did that, but it didn't need to? If so, I'd say that's debatable, as it might be possible to "clone" the game mechanics, but without the OGL you'd need to be very cautious about terminology and such in order to avoid potential copyright issues. Using the OGL and open content terminology makes many of those issues moot.)
Castles & Crusades did NOT use D&D's OGL or SRD. You might be confused because Troll Lord games does use the OGL developed by WoTC (but it refers to their books, not D&D) in order to allow people to use C&C content.
Quote from: DocJones;1127470Castles & Crusades did NOT use D&D's OGL or SRD. You might be confused because Troll Lord games does use the OGL developed by WoTC (but it refers to their books, not D&D) in order to allow people to use C&C content.
C&C uses the OGL in order to let them use 3e D&D material converted over to a more 1e-ish game. It certainly does use content from the 3e SRD.
Quote from: S'mon;1127472C&C uses the OGL in order to let them use 3e D&D material converted over to a more 1e-ish game. It certainly does use content from the 3e SRD.
I have the original core books sitting in front of me... well 2nd edition. There is no OGL or SRD. Maybe much kater editions.
The main point being they didn't need OGL or SRD to clone D&D.
Quote from: DocJones;1127470Castles & Crusades did NOT use D&D's OGL or SRD.
You are mistaken.
QuoteYou might be confused because Troll Lord games does use the OGL developed by WoTC (but it refers to their books, not D&D) in order to allow people to use C&C content.
No, I'm not confused.
Take a look at this errata document for C&C: http://www.trolllord.com/downloads/pdfs/errata.pdf
The last page of the errata is the OGL statement. (TLG has never been very great at editing their releases.)
Note "This book is published under the Open Game License (OGL) version 1.0a...The Open Game Content appearing in this book is derived from the 3.0 System Reference Document, copyright 2000 Wizards of the Coast..."
If you have any doubt about what "book" this is supposed to apply to, see the copyright notice in the OGL statement: "Castles & Crusades: Players Handbook, Copyright 2004...Castles & Crusades Errata Product Support, Copyright 2005, Troll Lord Games."
Quote from: DocJones;1127477I have the original core books sitting in front of me... well 2nd edition.
Here's the 2nd edition errata document: https://www.dropbox.com/s/8dwe5cvvwb4lw3f/PHB80102Errata.pdf?dl=1
OGL on the last page, including the
Players Handbook (Copyright 2004),
Monsters & Treasures (Copyright 2005), and Players Handbook Errata Product Support (Copyright 2007).
EDIT: And one more addition...
Here's a link to Troll Lord's site archived on the Internet Wayback Machine. This is from June of 2004.
https://web.archive.org/web/20040603220535/http://trolllord.com/candc.htm
In the "On the Anvil" section for upcoming products, TLG lists the C&C Players Handbook. Here's what they say about it (emphasis added)
QuoteCastles & Crusades™ Players Handbook
Castles & Crusades™ – the fast, fun, rules lite Fantasy Role Playing Game! This book, some paper, pencil, and a few dice is all you're going to need to unleash the power of your imagination to create tales of high adventure for your friends and compatriots. The Castles & Crusades Players Handbook contains everything you need to know and all the rules necessary to launch your own campaign of high adventure. If your imagination knows no bounds, then these rules are for you.
The Castles & Crusades Players Handbook is a complete manual for Fantasy Role Playing. By utilizing the Open Game License from Wizards of the Coast, Castles & Crusades™ builds upon past and present incarnations of the world's most popular fantasy role playing game and resurrect fantasy roleplay. Castles & Crusades™ Players Handbook includes rules for character generation, character advancement, a fast paced combat and rules system, spells, and instruction for the Castle Keeper™ on how to run a successful game of high fantasy adventure.
Castles & Crusades harkens back to a time when role playing was not constrained by rules but rather, when the rules unleashed the power of the imagination. and tell a tale of wondrous, high adventure, where the fantastic never becomes mundane.
Stop crunching numbers and Game!
TLG 8010, Hardcover;
$19.99, 128 pages, illustrated Hardback,
ISBN-1-931275-60-2
Product and Support Products:
Castles & Crusades™ Players Handbook......On the Anvil
Castles and Crusades™ Monsters and Treasure......On the Anvil
Googling Castles & Crusades for a pirate copy (I gave away my print C&Cs a while ago) I can see the OGL on page 128 of Monsters & Treasure (1st edition, (c) 2005). Unsurprising since the monsters & magic items are mostly taken from the 3e D&D SRD. The preliminary starts with:
Castles & Crusades
128
Monsters & Treasure
129
This book is published under the Open Game License (OGL) version
1.0a by permission of Wizards of the Coast, Inc. The Open Game
Content appearing in this book is derived from the 3.0 System Reference
Document, copyright 2000 Wizards of the Coast, Inc. All contents,
excluding the OGL, is property of and copyright 2004 Troll Lord Games.
All Rights Reserved.
Designation of Open Game Content: The following is designated
Open Game Content pursuant to the OGL v1.0a: all text appearing in the
following sections and subsections, listed by page number and heading
or sub-heading: pages 4-85, "Monsters"; pages 86-127, "Treasure".
Also, the following open game content related words, phrases, and
abbreviations wherever they appear: Strength (Str), Dexterity (Dex),
Constitution (Con), Intelligence (Int), Wisdom (Wis), Charisma (Cha),
Class, Fighter, Ranger, Rogue, Assassin, Barbarian, Monk, Wizard,
Illusionist, Cleric, Druid, Knight, Bard, Paladin, Race, Demi-human,
Dwarf, Elf, Gnome, Half-Elf, Halfling, Half-Orc, Hit Dice (HD), Hit
Points (HP), Alignment, Lawful Good (LG), Lawful Neutral (LN),
Lawful Evil (LE), Neutral (N), Neutral Good (NG), Neutral Evil (NE),
Chaotic Good (CG), Chaotic Neutral (CN), Chaotic Evil (CE), Level,
"to hit", Damage, Experience Point, Saving Throw, Player Character
(PC), Non-player Character (NPC), Turn Undead, Spell, Arcane, Divine,
Magic, Spell Resistance, Item, Equipment, Armor, Weapon, Potion, Rod,
Staff, Wand, Scroll, Ring, Wondrous Item, Artifact, Cursed, Bonus, d4,
d6, d8, d10, d12, d20, d%, round, and turn.
Designation of Product Identity: Product identity is not Open Game
Content. The following is designated as product identity pursuant to
OGL v1.0a(1)(e) and (7): (A) product and product line names, including
Castles & Crusades, Castles & Crusades: Player's Handbook, Castles
& Crusades: Monsters and Treasures, Castles & Crusades: Castle
Keeper's Guide; (B) logos, identifying marks, and trade dress; (C)
all artwork, logos, symbols, graphic designs, depictions, likenesses,
formats, poses, concepts, themes and graphic, photographic and other
visual representations; (D) logos and trademarks, including Castles &
Crusades, Castle Keeper, SIEGE engine, and Troll Lord Games, or any
other trademark or registered trademark clearly identified as product
identity by the owner of the product identity, and which specifically
excludes the open game content.
The C&C PHB (latest printing) has been available for free for the past few weeks. So anyone can go take a look themselves and score a copy.
But yeah, they use WOTC SRD (3.0). Always have
Get your free copy here at the TLG site (https://www.trolllord.com/tlgstore/)
Quote from: S'mon;1127503Googling Castles & Crusades for a pirate copy (I gave away my print C&Cs a while ago) I can see the OGL on page 128 of Monsters & Treasure (1st edition, (c) 2005). Unsurprising since the monsters & magic items are mostly taken from the 3e D&D SRD. The preliminary starts with:
Troll Lords opted for a minimal declaration of open content. The material of that books as well as the player handbook are useless for anybody to build on as far as publishing goes.
I think WoTC doesn't have any interest in going after tiny (from their point of view) game designers, at the cost of getting the kind of reputation that TSR once had. It's just not worth it, unless some OSR game rose to gigantic Pathfinder-esque proportions, and even then they know that trying to claim rights to game mechanics is a legally dubious endeavor. They're just better off ignoring it, especially considering how incredibly well D&D is doing.
Cloning is the most sincere form of flattery - if a clone starts outselling the original, it still shows there must be something good about the original. The best way for publishers to "fight back" is to make sure their product stays ahead of the clones. If they can't do that, their business model is flawed.
Quote from: Vile;1127698Cloning is the most sincere form of flattery - if a clone starts outselling the original, it still shows there must be something good about the original. The best way for publishers to "fight back" is to make sure their product stays ahead of the clones. If they can't do that, their business model is flawed.
The smart move would be to create a larger D&D community and embrace all the clones. Talk up different mechanics, new ideas and champion the do-it-yourself movement. Create a regular monthly digital magazine with all kinds of D&D hijinks, modules and hacks. Have guest spots where OSR designers show how to take a hot item and put in D&D 5e or vice versa. Make encounters with 8 different variant clone stats. Just embrace the whole damn thing as one happy family of house-rules, custom content and variant builds. Like build the brand vs. the ruleset. Then sell the shit out of the brand. Fucking Jack Cheese on a Slinky it's Hasbro. When you are that big you should be playing in the big leagues for the big money. Fucking clowns.
Quote from: trechriron;1127719The smart move would be to create a larger D&D community and embrace all the clones. Talk up different mechanics, new ideas and champion the do-it-yourself movement. Create a regular monthly digital magazine with all kinds of D&D hijinks, modules and hacks. Have guest spots where OSR designers show how to take a hot item and put in D&D 5e or vice versa. Make encounters with 8 different variant clone stats. Just embrace the whole damn thing as one happy family of house-rules, custom content and variant builds. Like build the brand vs. the ruleset.
I agree with you- 100%
Unfortunately this doesn't fit in with WOTC's "Shared Experience" modus operandi for the D&D brand- which is the D&D Brand Team providing the experience they want you to have and you sharing that experience with the community they want /have built around 5E.
I believe WOTC also feels most D&D fans cannot handle that. TMI/Product confuses consumers, and makes purchases more difficult or keeps consumers from making purchases. (Like the 4E PHB1/2/3 scheme). Instead they make the DM's guild and want the community to funnel alt material through that. or D&D Beyond or any other number of business partners they work with.
I don't believe D&D will ever get back to the hobbyist community of times past- that is precisely why we have the OSR. I didn't really care for the guy, but Thank God for Ryan Dancey- he saw the writing on the wall and gave the hobby community a really big gift in the OGL/SRD. It backfired on WOTC, but was a blessing for us.
edit- Forgot to add- Chaosium however, could definitely benefit from a more charitable OGL for their products.
Not sure if anyone noticed/knows- but looks like they opened up the HEROQUEST system as well
QUESTWORLDS (https://www.chaosium.com/questworlds-system-reference-document/?mc_cid=e214eac8f0&mc_eid=81a8e7496d)
Quote from: JeffB;1127752I agree with you- 100%
Unfortunately this doesn't fit in with WOTC's "Shared Experience" modus operandi for the D&D brand- which is the D&D Brand Team providing the experience they want you to have and you sharing that experience with the community they want /have built around 5E.
Finally, someone else gets it. :) I'm sure there are a lot of people who get it; I just haven't seen that many, that's all.
Quote from: estar;1127522Troll Lords opted for a minimal declaration of open content. The material of that books as well as the player handbook are useless for anybody to build on as far as publishing goes.
If they declare the product as open, and do not designate any product identity, the whole thing is open. So, you could just take the rules and build whatever OGL game you wanted.
However, C&C is a very playable game. It's got tons of details. So, probably not the best business plan. :-)
Editing has never been a TLG strong suit, and they've been somewhat inconsistent with their OGL statements. Like not including it in early printings, for one (other than putting it in errata, which makes for potential confusion and questions). And in their open content declarations. For example, at least one of the OGL statements they released said (blue emphasis added):
QuoteThis book is published under the Open Game License (OGL) version 1.0a by permission of Wizards of the Coast, Inc. The Open Game Content
appearing in this book is derived from the 3.0 System Reference Document, copyright 2000 Wizards of the Coast, Inc. All contents, excluding
the OGL, is property of and copyright 2004 Troll Lord Games. All Rights Reserved.
Designation of Open Game Content: The following is designated Open Game Content pursuant to the OGL v1.0a: all text.
...
15 COPYRIGHT NOTICEOpen Game License v 1.0 Copyright 2000, Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
System Reference Document Copyright 2000, Wizards of the Coast, Inc; Authors Jonathan Tweet, Monte Cook, Skip Williams, based on
original material by E. Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson.
Castles & Crusades: Players Handbook, Copyright 2004, Troll Lord Games; Authors Davis Chenault and Mac Golden.
Castles & Crusades: Errata Product Support, Copyright 2005, Troll Lord Games.
But if I were making a game using the OGL I wouldn't use C&C as a source of open content. I think there are better options without editing/error/omission introduced uncertainties.