D&D 4th Edition Game System License Announced 131
Wizards of the Coast has announced plans for a brand-new system license for the fourth edition of Dungeons and Dragons . As with the d20 STL for Third Edition, this is a royalty-free license that will allow third parties to publish products using the rules developed by WotC. The new system reference document will be made available early in June (just after the release of the new edition). That license only covers fantasy gaming, but a second license (the d20 GSL) will be released allowing for any type of gaming product to be developed. For analysis and follow-up on the announcement, the ENWorld boards have full details.
Sharing the Wealth (Score:1)
Re:Sharing the Wealth (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Sharing the Wealth (Score:5, Informative)
A project I was working on some months back was game-related, and we figured we'd use the D20 system because if someone is going to know how to make a compelling game engine, it's going to be the makers of Dungeons & Dragons.
So we researched the license for D20, were really excited for a while, but eventually found a sentence or two buried deeply in the license which brought us to a screeching halt.
D20 allows you to use the game rules defined by the D20 engine for pretty much any purpose you want, royalty free; I think with some attribution clauses or the like. You never have to pay WotC a dime.
However that one little clause deep in the license basically grants WotC the right to choose to seize the exclusive rights to anything you produced surrounding the D20 system. It grants them full and unrestricted access to all source materials, and it grants them the right to resell and distribute the goods produced from it. Further, it grants them the right to revoke the license from you, barring you from further use.
Essentially the system is open and free for as long as you don't turn into a juicy target for WotC, who reserves the right to take whatever you produced away from you and sell it themselves, and keep you from selling or even using it any longer.
When you have a litigatious-happy company like WotC offering an olive branch, you must watch out for any poison-tipped thorns contained in it, and at least for D20, there is one, and it is deadly.
Re:Sharing the Wealth (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
It may have something to do with the termination clause coupled with the sharing clause.
Re:Sharing the Wealth (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Sharing the Wealth (Score:4, Informative)
They can't seize it in the sense of use it and deny you from printing your own books - but they and every other publisher has the right under the OGL to use the game mechanics created by any other publisher under the OGL. This has rarely been capitalized on but it has happened - Mongoose publishing put out a series of collection books on spells, feats and the like regardless of who originally published them.
That is true to the give and take nature of the OGL. You get the right to use materials designated as open under the license - such as Wizard's System Reference Document (which is an open clone of the D&D core rulebooks). You give up the right to close off your unique game mechanics from all other parties to the OGL.
This really isn't any different in principle from the Gnu Public License (No accident - the GPL inspired the OGL) - you get the right to use code from any program released under the license, but you give up the right to keep your derived code closed off from everyone else.
Citation Needed (Score:3)
However that one little clause deep in the license basically grants WotC the right to choose to seize the exclusive rights to anything you produced surrounding the D20 system. It grants them full and unrestricted access to all source materials, and it grants them the right to resell and distribute the goods produced from it. Further, it grants them the right to revoke the license from you, barring you from further use.
Can you quote the specific language which you are referring to? I see nothing in either the OGL or the d20 License that grants them the rights you speak of. The closest thing I can find is the clause that terminates your license if and only if you are in breach of the contract.
Re: (Score:1, Insightful)
Apparently this is unacceptable to the parent.
Game Rules (Score:5, Informative)
My understanding is that the WOTC gaming licenses give you some extra rights (for instance, you could use their skill and magic descriptions verbatim), but takes away others (you are given certain restrictions, such as requiring use of the D20 logo). I'm not criticizing WOTC, just saying that using their licenses are not the only way to write compatible rules and expansions.
Re: (Score:2)
One point that is often forgotten when discussing the OGL and D20 license is that game rules cannot be copyrighted
Neither can a story. Or a collection of facts. But if you add enough details to a story, or enough specificity to those facts, you have a fairly solid case that you have something distinct and copyrightable.
The game rules for D&D are "everyone sits around a table, and one person describes the world. The referee asks players what they want to do, has them roll dice to determine specifics, and the game continues as a collaborative drama."
Where exactly the line between the above (which anyone can, and
Re: (Score:1)
A story can be copyrighted. A particular collection of facts can be copyrighted (but not the facts themselves - e.g., someone is free to make a collection independently). Rules can't be copyrighted.
Re: (Score:2)
There were two main licenses, the Open Gaming License was a copyright license which let you use the material covered by their copyright with some restrictions; it is loosely analogous to an open-source software license.
The d20 System Trademark License, that both
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Yes, you can try to produce a compatible product with someone else's game or even as you put it 'rip it off' - but can you financially withstand a court battle drug out over the course of years if you do.
The main lesson that should be taken from the whole SEO circus is you don't need any merit or evidence whatsoever to sue someone in court. Large companies can knock small competitors out of business quite easily by bankrupting them with legal fees.
Moving back from the general to the specifics of this ca
Re: (Score:2)
There is actually a lot of uncertainty in what is a "particular expression" of the rules. Verbatim copying is certainly out but what about a "character" called a "cleric" who casts "third-level spells" against a monster with 10 "hit dice?" Those terms are all expressions of the rules...
What you can and can't do i
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Well, he said you can't use "names", and yes, it would be risky to use names like "hit dice", or names of spells.
But then words like "character" and "cleric" are words that already existed to describe the terms they are used
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. My point was to show there's a continuum of game terms from general ("healing spell") to specific ("Cure Light Wounds"), and somewhere along that continuum falls a dividing line between what a court would call copyright infringement and what it wouldn't. If you want a game that looks like D&D and plays like D&D, but doesn't require Wot
Re:Game Rules (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Game Rules (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The 'improvements' of D&D 4 (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:The 'improvements' of D&D 4 (Score:5, Funny)
My DM had even harder challenges in the past... The most complicated one involved a lock controlled by four rotating discs, where I had to mathematically proof to him that there is no solution to his puzzle before he let us pass :)
Re:The 'improvements' of D&D 4 (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:The 'improvements' of D&D 4 (Score:4, Funny)
Her? Now I know you're lying!
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re:The 'improvements' of D&D 4 (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Neither of the parent posts are offtopic.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
It might be nice if there were two categories of skills: One with things like Perform, Di
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Oh, no! No Decipher Script? D&D is ruined! (Score:2)
Your game doesn't really sound all that free-form if the lack of a skill on a formal list will determine whether or not your plots can still be played through.
Re: (Score:1)
Decipher script isnt such a useless school when the DM regularly throws encrypted documents into the game as quest hooks and whatnot.
Yeah, and Use Rope isn't useless if your whole campaign revolves around getting Tenderfoot rank in the local Boy Scouts chapter. Your game doesn't really sound all that free-form if the lack of a skill on a formal list will determine whether or not your plots can still be played through.
I never said that our games would be unplayable under the new ruleset. Only that it would probably end with our DM making custom rules for the deciphering the codes he likes so much. And Use Rope IS a useful skill. If you use it right, that is. It is used for more then tying knots, your know.
Re:Oh, no! No Decipher Script? D&D is ruined! (Score:4, Informative)
Why isn't using a grappling hook under Climb? Why not fold tying someone up under getting out of it (i.e. Escape Artist)? Who finds drama or challenge in trying to splice rope together? (For that matter, Profession (Sailor) doesn't include any of this?)
It's a senselessly fine-grained skill definition that wastes precious resources (i.e. skill points) that could be spent on things like Survival or Move Silently or Climb -- you know, skills people would actually *use* every adventure.
4e's philosophy on skills is that skills will generally be broad and cover common adventuring challenges. Their system is designed so that party members aren't excluded from the fun when a rare type of challenge is needed, like the party that won't use horses because only one player has the Ride skill. Lastly, their system is designed with versatility in mind, encouraging players to find creative uses of their skills to defeat challenges, like using History to escape pursuers by remembering an entrance into the ancient catacombs under the city.
If deciphering documents is essential to your game, then there's no reason you couldn't let someone make an Arcane, History, or Thievery check for it, representing their experience with tomes of cryptic lore, translating dead languages, or espionage, respectively. Having a largely one-trick skill is limiting and either forces the DM to find contrived ways to make it relevant or leaves the player with wasted skill points. 4e gets rid of that.
Re: (Score:1)
Skills like Use Rope and Decipher Script may not be used every game, but when they are used they are incredibly helpful.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Trust me, a good Use Rope scores when attempting to take down and deliver alive a rogue with many ranks in Escape Artist.
Only because 3e has those specific skills. In 4e this would be an opposed Dex-check or Thievery check. No need for narrow skills that provide absurd results.
What absurd result, you might ask? Look up the Escape Artist checks for getting out of chains and manacles sometime. It's a fixed DC. At high levels, it's better to bind someone with a rope than it is to put them in irons -- because apparently you can get more skilled with ropes but not with chains (which has no skill).
This is the end result of an
Re: (Score:2)
Arcane: Wizards commonly write their spellbooks and scrolls in codes to prevent rivals from stealing them. (Real world alchemists did this a lot.) Therefore, Arcane could help.
History: History
Re: (Score:2)
The main problem with rope is that without some fairly basic yet obscure knowledge, you're more likely to overtie and injure the person or undertie and have them slip free than you are to get it right.
You make an excellent and eloquent argument for manacles (though you assume, perhaps erroneously, that most fantasy characters are going to give a crap about over-tying and injuring their quarry). Now explain why chains can't be used with Use Rope. Why aren't there rules for crafting manacles that fit their specific victim optimally?
The problem with 3e skills is that their narrow focus doesn't leave you with guidelines on how to handle these situations. They resemble 2e NWPs that way. By being overly s
Memories... (Score:5, Funny)
Does a 21 save? (Score:5, Funny)
I put on my robe and wizard hat...
Re:Does a 21 save? (Score:4, Insightful)
For mods that don't get the joke [bash.org]
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Does a 21 save? (Score:5, Funny)
> I put on my robe and wizard hat...
Oh, I like to play dress up.
Re: (Score:2)
Dress up?
This is my every day cloak.
You broke the meme. Epic fail.
bloodninja: Baby, I been havin a tough night so treat me nice aight?
BritneySpears14: Aight.
bloodninja: Slip out of those pants baby, yeah.
BritneySpears14: I slip out of my pants, just for you, bloodninja.
bloodninja: Oh yeah, aight. Aight, I put on my robe and wizard hat.
BritneySpears14: Oh, I like to play dress up.
bloodninja: Me too baby.
BritneySpears14: I kiss you softly on your chest.
bloodninja: I cast Lvl. 3 Eroticism. You turn into a real beautiful woman.
BritneySpears14: H
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
I put on my robe and wizard hat.
I for one do not welcome the new 4th ed overlords (Score:3, Interesting)
Good quality books.
While I was never a fan of Drizzit (sorry emo/angsty/goth kids), Eliminster wasn't a bad series and anything with Raistlin was a lot better. In fact, most of Dragon Lance books were amazing, some greyhawk were decent, a lot of Forgotten Realms books were also quite good. There were some good authors writing these books too!
I think most of these books were done by TSR/random house, I do think it is sad that Wizards of the Coast decided that they can just cash in on the long time fans by spewing out more and new shiny books without remembering ALL the things that made dungeons and dragons great:
The inspiring, awesome, fun stories.
I don't think I am the only person who 1st read the various fantasy books and thought "hey, this is pretty cool, I wish I could play a game based on this, I'd totally be a female dwarf cleric"
While there is plenty of ad&d games to go around, I think the number of new/good ad&d books entering the market is depressingly low - sure, they are there, but it looks like the effort just isn't quite there like there used to be. Sure, someone could argue that you can read the old books and they do translate quite well into 3rd or 4th edition ruleset but
It really seems like in the good old days (doh) the holders of the license were like "hey, you can write and you know our world, why don't you write something cool for us ? no pressure, no big lawyery contracts, you write something good, we help you get it published, we'll split profit 3 ways, no worries, lets make a great world" What this means is that lots of good and/or new books would come out all the time.
I read fantasy very rarely, reading mostly sci-fi these days, but forgotten realms and dragonlance are a special place for me. I wish these two places got as much attention as shiny new rulebooks, plastic-manufactured Ebberon, etc
Re:I for one do not welcome the new 4th ed overlor (Score:5, Interesting)
I also find it amusing that you point out stereotypically whiny kids groups and then spend the next five paragraphs complaining about how everything used to be better "back in the day". Fourth edition D&D is all about stripping out rules that shouldn't matter, because it gets in the way of telling a good story. After playing a few of the public play tests, I have to say that I haven't been this excited about D&D since my uncle described my first dungeon, back in '85. Combat is tactically interesting and flows quickly. In all of the earlier editions of D&D encounters ate up most of the play time, because it took so damn long to get through big fights. In fourth edition, instead of spending 10 minutes on plot and 2 hours on combat, most games will be able to split their time more or less evenly between the two.
Also, the reason why Eberron got so much more love than Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance in the past few years is because Eberron's new. There's an entire universe of things that people don't know about it. On the other hand, between the 100+ novels and sourcebooks, Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance are pretty well defined. It's really hard to fill a sourcebook with new information. They could retread the old material, but that's boring for everyone except new players and people that are really rabid about their campaign setting.
Re: (Score:2)
Its been my experience that combat is the most memorable part of the game. People I know recall fun and funny moments of DND combat from nearly 20 years ago, not plot points.
Re:I for one do not welcome the new 4th ed overlor (Score:5, Funny)
As someone who used to play a bard that ended up being the smart ass of the group, I can safely say that more people fell out of their chairs during combat than most other times while we gamed.
For example...
Standing watch by myself late at night.
DM: A lone goblin approaches.
Me: I reach into my pocket, pull out a marshmallow, and toss it to the goblin.
*everyone looks at me*
DM: The goblin pokes it with his spear then picks it up and eats it
Me: I cast Enlarge on the marshmallow.
*several players choke on their drinks*
Then there was the rather large group of monsters coming at us down the stairs while we were still on the floor below.
Me: I cast cantrip to create a banana peel in the middle of the monsters.
*saving throws. A monster fails*
DM: The monster slips, taking half of his comrades with him
Me: Okay, guys. I've done my share. The rest are yours... *grin*
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I was a DM as well, but in one campaign (AD&D 2nd Ed) back in the 80's I was playing a halfling psionicist. My poor DM never saw this one comming...
DM: The ogre approaches.
ME: I place a psionic portal on the ground directly below his feet.
DM: Where is the other end?
ME: About four feet above it.
DM: And why are you doing this?
ME: Do the math. (that was a "catch phrase" we had back then.) He will continue to accelerate due to gravity. Give him a minute or so of freefall and then
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't mind having a combat-heavy game. Those can be a hell of a lot of fun. What I was trying to get at was that previously, you basically had no choice; you had to spend more time in combat than you did role-playing. With 4th edition, you can make your own choice; you can knock out a big fight in a half hour or less and have time for
Re: (Score:2)
Wow. My experience over the last 20 years has been the exact opposite. Totally.
Oh, we recall some memorable times when a completely crazy move or lucky roll made the difference, sure. But we usually remember more how we got into that fight in the first place ("He's doing what? He's just supposed to tail the evil wizard/rogue/possible demon, not start a fight with him! Oh shit, let me double-check that lis
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
... Considering that about half of them have made the NYT bestseller list, R.A. Salvatore's fan base is likely considerably larger than you think it is. ...
Indeed. Login to WoW and check out how many night elf hunters there are with some form of Drizzt as their name. ...then there are the Legolas clones.
The propensity to name ones character after a favorite fantasy character is amazing. Recently, WoW added a black panther figurine trinket. You can bet every Dizzolas and Legolizzt out there is drooling to get it. Sheep.
-fragbait
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I for one do not welcome the new 4th ed overlor (Score:5, Funny)
my time (I was, for a while, the copy-editor on the "New Adventures of
Doctor Who" novels), but I can say without a single unmitigated shadow
of a doubt that I have never, ever, ever, ever, ever read a pile of shit
so huge, so mouldering and steaming, so slime-encrusted and maggot-
ridden, so bereft of ideas, characterisation, characters, plot,
background, setting, tone, atmosphere, themes, motifs, sense or words
strung together in an even vaguely readable order as the first
Dragonlance book. It is awful. No, it is beyond awful. It is an affront
to literacy, history and humanity. If Gutenberg had been shown a copy of
this book, he would have placed his head in his printing press and
instructed his apprentices to squash it until the brains were running
out of his ears and they heard his skull crack. It should be taken out
and burnt. Everyone associated with its production should be fucked and
burnt. The Nazi pogroms and book-burnings should be reinstated, together
with the Spanish inquisition, purely to erase all traces and records of
this book from our planet's history.
I was once stuck on a train for six hours with nothing to read except a
copy of this book. After sixty pages I decided that spending the
remaining five and a half hours sitting very still and meditating on the
five screaming children in the seat opposite and their appallingly
stupid parents was preferable to having to read one more word of the
drivel before me.
It even has fucking SONGS in it.
The only good thing associated with Dragonlance is Margaret Weis's
daughter, who is a fox.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
God. Jesus. No. For fuck's sake, no, no, no. I've read a lot of shit in
my time (I was, for a while, the copy-editor on the "New Adventures of
Doctor Who" novels), but I can say without a single unmitigated shadow
of a doubt that I have never, ever, ever, ever, ever read a pile of shit
so huge, so mouldering and steaming, so slime-encrusted and maggot-
ridden, so bereft of ideas, characterisation, characters, plot,
background, setting, tone, atmosphere, themes, motifs, sense or words
strung together in an even vaguely readable order as the first
Dragonlance book.
Wow, I don't know whether to give this guy Left Behind or Battlefield Earth. I bet I'll be able to hear the crinkling of his soul withering.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
When I was a teenager, I read the vast majority of the Dragonlance Books and loved them. I also re-read the Forgotten Realms books, and decided they were really bad.
In college, I re-read many of the Dragonlance books. I realized they're really bad too, and their main virtue over Forgotten Realms was a different setting.
Good fiction in an RPG universe is very rare. I
Open source the Magic CCG system? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Open source the Magic CCG system? (Score:5, Insightful)
In RPGs, by contrast, core books outsell supplements, even from the first party publisher, by an order of magnitude, yet the amount of work to produce a book is roughly the same for both. Supplements make the core books more attractive to potential players, yet are much less profitable to produce. So, in a stroke of generosity, WotC enables other companies to tie into their product, thereby increasing the salability and appeal of the D&D brand without having to invest in supplements no one will buy.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Open source the Magic CCG system? (Score:5, Insightful)
2: Because Ryan Dancy convinced them that it's save tabletop gaming as a whole, and D&D's bottom line in particular, to let smaller companies support D&D.
one question (Score:5, Insightful)
Does this free license apply only to pen-and-paper games or could you build a [non-commercial] computer RPG based on the WoTC rules?
Re: (Score:2)
def skillCheck("skill", target):
foo = rollD20()
if foo >= target:
return true
else return false
you'd be okay.
(Sorry if my Python isin't 100% correct tonight)
Re: (Score:2)
I think what I had in mind was not the mechanics of the die roll - but of striking the right balance between the different elements of a game.
Re: (Score:2)
return rollD20() >= target
roll = rollD20();
return (((roll==20) || (roll+modifier) >= target) && (roll != 1))
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
This can be achieved somewhat easily if the game is an engine that interprets a text/xml document that defines the rules of the game.
However, you would not be able to include the d20 logo or reference compatibility with the D&D brand.
Re: (Score:2)
2: You'll have better luck trying a COMMERCIAL game than vice versa.
Re: (Score:2)
- The OGL would let you do it but didn't cover things like character generation and a couple of other key parts.
- The D20 license let you use the extra parts, but you couldn't 'create an interactive game.' The translation provided by WOTC was that you could build software but couldn't roll an
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
d20srd.org (Score:2, Insightful)
Does this license... (Score:5, Funny)
I love me some D&D and I can't imagine much better than girls playing.
Perhaps my wish should be filed along with "Year of Linux on the desktop" and Duke Nukem Forever...
Re: (Score:2)
Hell, I've even played D&D with women on the internet, of all things ^^
Re: (Score:2)
Also, anyone who plays pen+paper games through IRC or skype can tell you that theres actually a good ratio of women playing games in that medium. Mostly housewives, oddly enough.
Re: (Score:2)
1-900-Nerd-Girl (Score:2)
It will answer all your questions about D&D and girls!
Re: (Score:2)
Here's the most important question I have... (Score:2)
How nice of them... (Score:3, Insightful)
Under what made up law did they think they could stop people from creating 100% original content that works within their game rules?
Re: (Score:1)
Can this be the last version, please? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Keeping the core books.
Ditch the rest of your rule books.
Make up the extra rules (like prestige classes, spells, feats, and so forth) as you need them, or download the thousands of free fan-created ones online.
Use a library card to get new setting content. It's cheaper.
I admit, I may pick up the 4th edition books out of curiosity. But for actual playing, I prefer Spirit of the Century, True20, and The Dying Earth RPG.
Nice try (Score:2)
Third parties are already allowed, by law, to publish products using the rules developed by WotC
From the US Copyright Law Factsheet on Games: [copyright.gov]