So I'd like to post some new monsters and some monster tweaks.
However, I'm unclear as to "how" to do that within the confines of the OGL.
I noticed James at Grognardia posted the OGL on his blog and references monsters as open game content under said license with his Grognard's Grimoire monsters.
Rather than fumbling around in the dark, can someone light a torch on this issue for me?
Oglor
ReplyDeleteHD: 4
AC: 3
Dmg: d12
The Oglor resembles an Ogre but is wears fine clothes, wears a steel breastplate, and carries a great sword which it wields in one hand. Craftier than others of it's kind they often serve as Mercenaries for leaders who will tolerate their cruelty and sinister appetites.
Ok, but what if you want to publish that?
ReplyDeleteI understand you're supposed to post the terms of the OGL somewhere, although if you do it online you can probably get away with a link and then specify what's OGL and what isn't.
ReplyDeleteReading the license itself should be helpful- if I recall, it has the terms and limitations and whatnot somewhere in there.
The d20 OGL is the most vague thing ever. From what I can determine from the OGL, only content specified as Open Content by WOTC may be used. So, I hunted for what WoTC considered open content and didn't find anything concrete. I think the 3.5 Player's Handbook may be OGL since it contains the d20 game mechanic. I developed this attitude, I'm Just write up the monster it would be compatible with Labyrinth Lord, or the system of your choice, and consider it done. The L L forums might help you with this question too, I don't read that forum often enough.
ReplyDeleteI'm going to do my best to explain this, and hopefully I understand this correctly.
ReplyDeleteIf you want to throw up some new monsters on your blog and stat them up you can; nothing is stopping you. You can even call them D&D or AD&D compatible; they can't stop you from doing that either.
If you use the OGL your new monsters will be "open source" and _anyone_ will be able to publish them. Just like the SRD. And you'll have signed away your right to indicate compatibility with D&D (but I'm not sure if that just applies to just that one monster or anything you ever make).
Later on, if you want to publish your unique monsters for profit you can slap the OGL on them at that time, if you choose. Choosing not to use the OGL is getting into some gray area and it's not quite as "safe" as using the OGL. This is why Rob Kuntz said the D&D Clones were "unnecessary". Because you can just publish without the OGL.
Monster _tweaks_, those are a different story. If you want to publish for profit somebody else's OGL monster, then you'll have to use the OGL on your tweaked version. They call that "copyleft".
So,
just stating up monsters for blog = don't need it
stating up and publishing monsters = judgment call
Personally, I wouldn't use the OGL unless I needed to because it can be seen as a virus of giving up your right to use the D&D trade mark to indicate compatibility. Unless your intent is to throw your monsters out there for the whole community to use and publish but I might be tempted to just make them public domain instead.
I _hope_ that's all correct; I'm no lawyer.
Honestly,
ReplyDeleteI've asked this question on my blog before as well and I still felt so uncomfortable with the answer that I've just kinda stopped considering whether producing OGL content is worth it since the whole thing is painfully vague.
That said, I've put up stats for things on my blog the way I use them in my home campaigns and I think that for the most part the anonymous poster is correct, nobody is going to come and slap your wrist for blogging some stuff -- it's only once you get into publishing for profit (or publishing large amounts of material) that I'd start to worry.
The post above is 100% wrong.
ReplyDeleteI guess that is the post above the post now.
ReplyDeleteWhat game system are you wanting to publish material for?
ReplyDeleteOk, but what if you want to publish that?
ReplyDeleteI would rather operate under normal copyright and trademark law than enter into a more complicated business contract where I'm giving up some of my rights in exchange for being able to copy-and-paste material that I don't want to copy-and-paste anyway.
The text in a game book is copyrightable like any other book. However the premise and rules for a game cannot be copyrighted.
Labyrinth Lord, eventually.
ReplyDeleteI do appreciate the comments and the efforts to add some clarity to the situation. It certainly does seem like a more painful process that it should be lol
@Chris Creel
ReplyDeleteActually, I find the OGL is pretty crystal clear. NO WotC book except Unearthed Arcana is released as Open Game Content under the terms of the OGL (oh, and 2 monsters in MMII or III, can't remember which one).
For it to be Open Game Content it MUST include a copy of the OGL and MUST indicate what parts are OGC and what parts are not.
So, for WotC stuff, it's the stuff included in the SRD.
- - -
@Kilted
Post it, include a link to a copy of the OGL that you have posted on the blog (probably to a page called OGL), and include a specific Section 15 declaration for the individual post - particularly for posts that rely on material from other sources of Open Game Content (and thus require that you reproduce their Section 15 in your Section 15).
@ Dyson
ReplyDeleteThanks for that info, looks like I need to get a copy of the 3.5 Unearthed Arcana now and that should be pretty easy to find on the entree-net or at a used book store. The OGL is pretty clear in stating that the artist, in this case Kiltedyaksman, would have little to no ownership of his own creation once published with the OGL.
As I mentioned, the OGL says no material may be used unless it is designated OGL, in the WoTC publications. So, I looked for OGL designations in my 3.5 books and found none. We don't write material for 3.5 or d20 games anyway and there's Pathfinder now too if we wanted to go that route.
I almost wrote a blog post about this about a month ago.
@Chris Creel
ReplyDeleteFirst, most everything being said above is wrong.
Second, this FAQ will answer most of your questions including your legal liability if you ignore it.
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/oglfaq/20040123f
Third, this site shows what is available under the SRD for use in OGL licensed material (including the material that is open from Unearthed Arcana).
http://www.d20srd.org/
Fourth, and most important you keep control of all your own original work by placing it under Product Identity in the OGL. Wizards does not own your work.
'Game Rules' are the mechanics of a game only. They do not include any 'artistic content' which means if you want to create a game where you roll 3d6 to create a character no one can stop you. But if you want to use creatures, weapons, spells, etc they are protected by copyright and may not be used except for those listed in the SRD and third party publications as Open Game Content and only used if the OGL is implemented.
Trust me, it's a lot easier to figure out a one page license than how you are going to pay off a lawyer, court fees and penalties for copy right infringement. Anyone who says otherwise is lying.
'Game Rules' are the mechanics of a game only. They do not include any 'artistic content' which means if you want to create a game where you roll 3d6 to create a character no one can stop you. But if you want to use creatures, weapons, spells, etc they are protected by copyright and may not be used except for those listed in the SRD and third party publications as Open Game Content and only used if the OGL is implemented.
ReplyDeleteYou may wish to go into this point in a bit more detail. If by "use" you mean copy and paste the entry from one book to another, this is correct.
Writing something like this in a publication:
There are 7 Goblins (hp 6,5,5,4,3,2,2) accompanying the Oglor. The 6hp Goblin has a +1 short sword and a scroll with Sleep which it knows how to use.
Is something you can do without signing any special business contracts.
My advice would be to not use the OGL - especially if you're not familiar with it.
ReplyDeleteIf the monster description relies on something owned by Wizards of the Coast, I'd describe it in a different way that doesn't use Wizards' terms. For example if "it's a Barghest but good", say "it's a hybrid of goblin and wolf, but good".
Most of D&D's 'original' monsters have little original about them beyond the name, so you can usually rephrase it.
I'll leave it at this:
ReplyDeleteWould every single major producer of OSR games use the license if it wasn't a good idea?
Would every major writer online, blogger or otherwise, use the license if it was a bad idea?
So the producers of LL, S&W, OSRIC, BFRPG, Mutants and Masterminds even Paizo, the producer of the top selling RPG currently on the market, are just a bunch of tools?
'nuff said.
Most of D&D's 'original' monsters have little original about them beyond the name, so you can usually rephrase it.
ReplyDeleteEven Barghest is a monster from folklore. I think this is why everything is a Goblin Blackblood Runecaster now, instead of just a Goblin. You can't copyright Goblin. :)
Would every single major producer of OSR games use the license if it wasn't a good idea?
Yes.
Would every major writer online, blogger or otherwise, use the license if it was a bad idea?
They don't.
Although some bloggers sure like to spread the FUD around and try to browbeat others into signing onto use the OGL, even when it may not be in their best interests to do so...
There are 3 relevant areas of law: US Copyright Law, US Patent Law, and International Contract Law. The first 2 are non-optional for most people in the world (Berne, WIPO) but the 3rd has to be entered into voluntarily. You can't be tricked into entering into a contract (eg. you read the book now you're bound to this contract) and there are ways to terminate a contract that one or both parties no longer wish to participate in. In a contract both parties agree to doing something in exchange for the action of the other party in the contract. You agree not to say "Compatible with Dungeons & Dragons" and WotC agrees to let you to republish some of their copyrighted material. The links above give more details as to how that particular business contract is structured. However it is not a Law the way Copyright and Trademark Laws are - it's a contract. You can choose to agree to that contract or not.
ReplyDeleteFor more info on Copyright Law: http://www.copyright.gov/ (and specifically: http://www.copyright.gov/title17/)
For more info on Trademark Law: http://www.uspto.gov/
You will also find some useful information posted on the websites of several Universities with Law Schools (eg http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/)
If I were republishing material from WotC's d20 game or Paizo's Pathfinder game I would be inclined to use the OGL. When creating new material or supplements for other games (including TSR's various games) I would be more inclined to use Creative Commons licenses or stick with regular copyright.