Some very surprising new developments are making me change some of my opinions about the potential of the #ORCLicense
Especially one big revelation...
#onednd #openDnD #dnd5e #OGL2.0 #openrpg
#dnd       #ttrpg   #osr 

With the exeption of Macris I don't trust any of them as far as I can throw them.

Now I'm willing to wait for the text of the license to drop before deciding between CC By SA and ORC.

Good video and follow-up. I am both happy and surprised to hear Macris is in, especially considering all of the mud he has been dragged through for no reason.

I do not believe an OGL is necessary for the hobby. If I want to play a game with Magic Missile, I have OD&D (with supplement), AD&D, 2e, Basic, or any of the old retro clones I can play. I believe the market for "D&D" is saturated.

If I created material, I certainly wouldn't want to have WotC or Paizo's name anywhere in my book.

Good video.

I pretty much called it in the last video thread... Paizo, Green Ronin, etc. would ultimately have to release an actual open license simply because its in their own best financial interests.

I agree if all you're doing is releasing a product for others to buy, you absolutely don't need to use any OGL. However, another reason to use a OGL type license you missed was "because you want other people to be able to make content for your system." That's the particular boat I'm in and I think a lot of the people behind the close kin to D&D systems are kidding themselves about how quickly they'll be able to actually strip the things WotC could claim as legitimately copyrighted elements (i.e. not mechanics, but protectable concepts and ideas)

For examples;
- chromatic/metallic dragons (particularly the big five of white, black, green, blue and red) and Tiamat as a 5-headed dragon goddess and Bahamut as a benevolent platinum dragon.

- reptilian kobolds

- the arcane/divine casting divide

- the specific set of eight schools (abjuration, conjuration, divination, enchantment, evocation, illusion, necromancy, transmutation + universal) particularly in conjunction with a slot-based nine-level casting structure and/or D&DVancian style spell preparation with VSM components, key spells at the same level and under the same schools as they're found in D&D (invisibility as 2nd level illusion, fireball as 3rd level evocation, etc.) ... basically the closer you get to actual structure of casting system the closer you get to where WotC could claim infringement on their unique expression of a magic system.

- the specific descriptions of various PC races. Sure, you can use elves and dwarves... but when they're described exactly like they are in WotC material (almond shaped eyes, 600 year lifespan, etc.) you're stepping into "specific expression" territory.

- all the spell flavor text a lot of them mostly cut and pasted out of the SRD rather than having write hundreds of spells from scratch.

- The same for monster flavor text.

There's a LOT more they're going to need to either change or bank on WotC either not caring enough to go after them or that someone will step up and successfully defend the OGL 1.0a so they don't HAVE to change all that much.

I've spent nearly 2/3 of my development having stripped out all the OGL material so I could be free and clear of it so I'm basically just waiting on artwork to get done... others might have a lot of work they're scrambling to do to actually get a non-OGL version of their system out the door.

This is definitely a shock to the entire OGL-part of the ttrpg ecosystem and I expect a lot of "retcon events" as the main settings get updated.

Quote from: Chris24601 on January 17, 2023, 05:43:20 PM
Good video.

I pretty much called it in the last video thread... Paizo, Green Ronin, etc. would ultimately have to release an actual open license simply because its in their own best financial interests.

I agree if all you're doing is releasing a product for others to buy, you absolutely don't need to use any OGL. However, another reason to use a OGL type license you missed was "because you want other people to be able to make content for your system." That's the particular boat I'm in and I think a lot of the people behind the close kin to D&D systems are kidding themselves about how quickly they'll be able to actually strip the things WotC could claim as legitimately copyrighted elements (i.e. not mechanics, but protectable concepts and ideas)

For examples;
- chromatic/metallic dragons (particularly the big five of white, black, green, blue and red) and Tiamat as a 5-headed dragon goddess and Bahamut as a benevolent platinum dragon.

- reptilian kobolds

- the arcane/divine casting divide

- the specific set of eight schools (abjuration, conjuration, divination, enchantment, evocation, illusion, necromancy, transmutation + universal) particularly in conjunction with a slot-based nine-level casting structure and/or D&DVancian style spell preparation with VSM components, key spells at the same level and under the same schools as they're found in D&D (invisibility as 2nd level illusion, fireball as 3rd level evocation, etc.) ... basically the closer you get to actual structure of casting system the closer you get to where WotC could claim infringement on their unique expression of a magic system.

- the specific descriptions of various PC races. Sure, you can use elves and dwarves... but when they're described exactly like they are in WotC material (almond shaped eyes, 600 year lifespan, etc.) you're stepping into "specific expression" territory.

- all the spell flavor text a lot of them mostly cut and pasted out of the SRD rather than having write hundreds of spells from scratch.

- The same for monster flavor text.

There's a LOT more they're going to need to either change or bank on WotC either not caring enough to go after them or that someone will step up and successfully defend the OGL 1.0a so they don't HAVE to change all that much.

I've spent nearly 2/3 of my development having stripped out all the OGL material so I could be free and clear of it so I'm basically just waiting on artwork to get done... others might have a lot of work they're scrambling to do to actually get a non-OGL version of their system out the door.

This is definitely a shock to the entire OGL-part of the ttrpg ecosystem and I expect a lot of "retcon events" as the main settings get updated.

Not to rain on your parade or anything but Basic Fantasy is done with the first review of their book stripping all WotC content from it, the second pass is underway, there'll be a third and fourth passes and then it will be out, probably in 2-3 weeks, that's what? A little over a month since the fiasco started?

Quote from: Chris24601 on January 17, 2023, 05:43:20 PM
Good video.

I pretty much called it in the last video thread... Paizo, Green Ronin, etc. would ultimately have to release an actual open license simply because its in their own best financial interests.

I agree if all you're doing is releasing a product for others to buy, you absolutely don't need to use any OGL. However, another reason to use a OGL type license you missed was "because you want other people to be able to make content for your system." That's the particular boat I'm in and I think a lot of the people behind the close kin to D&D systems are kidding themselves about how quickly they'll be able to actually strip the things WotC could claim as legitimately copyrighted elements (i.e. not mechanics, but protectable concepts and ideas)

For examples;
- chromatic/metallic dragons (particularly the big five of white, black, green, blue and red) and Tiamat as a 5-headed dragon goddess and Bahamut as a benevolent platinum dragon.

- reptilian kobolds

- the arcane/divine casting divide

- the specific set of eight schools (abjuration, conjuration, divination, enchantment, evocation, illusion, necromancy, transmutation + universal) particularly in conjunction with a slot-based nine-level casting structure and/or D&DVancian style spell preparation with VSM components, key spells at the same level and under the same schools as they're found in D&D (invisibility as 2nd level illusion, fireball as 3rd level evocation, etc.) ... basically the closer you get to actual structure of casting system the closer you get to where WotC could claim infringement on their unique expression of a magic system.

- the specific descriptions of various PC races. Sure, you can use elves and dwarves... but when they're described exactly like they are in WotC material (almond shaped eyes, 600 year lifespan, etc.) you're stepping into "specific expression" territory.

- all the spell flavor text a lot of them mostly cut and pasted out of the SRD rather than having write hundreds of spells from scratch.

- The same for monster flavor text.

There's a LOT more they're going to need to either change or bank on WotC either not caring enough to go after them or that someone will step up and successfully defend the OGL 1.0a so they don't HAVE to change all that much.

I've spent nearly 2/3 of my development having stripped out all the OGL material so I could be free and clear of it so I'm basically just waiting on artwork to get done... others might have a lot of work they're scrambling to do to actually get a non-OGL version of their system out the door.

This is definitely a shock to the entire OGL-part of the ttrpg ecosystem and I expect a lot of "retcon events" as the main settings get updated.

Most of that is either rules, has plenty of precedent at this point outside of D&D (Seriously, even Warcraft has the Chromatic Dragons), or so innane nobody cares about - the shape of elven eyes, or how long they live? Even D&D isn't consistent about that from one product line, setting, edition, or even just author to another. It is not the herculean task you make it out to be.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 17, 2023, 05:58:51 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on January 17, 2023, 05:43:20 PM
Good video.

I pretty much called it in the last video thread... Paizo, Green Ronin, etc. would ultimately have to release an actual open license simply because its in their own best financial interests.

I agree if all you're doing is releasing a product for others to buy, you absolutely don't need to use any OGL. However, another reason to use a OGL type license you missed was "because you want other people to be able to make content for your system." That's the particular boat I'm in and I think a lot of the people behind the close kin to D&D systems are kidding themselves about how quickly they'll be able to actually strip the things WotC could claim as legitimately copyrighted elements (i.e. not mechanics, but protectable concepts and ideas)

For examples;
- chromatic/metallic dragons (particularly the big five of white, black, green, blue and red) and Tiamat as a 5-headed dragon goddess and Bahamut as a benevolent platinum dragon.

- reptilian kobolds

- the arcane/divine casting divide

- the specific set of eight schools (abjuration, conjuration, divination, enchantment, evocation, illusion, necromancy, transmutation + universal) particularly in conjunction with a slot-based nine-level casting structure and/or D&DVancian style spell preparation with VSM components, key spells at the same level and under the same schools as they're found in D&D (invisibility as 2nd level illusion, fireball as 3rd level evocation, etc.) ... basically the closer you get to actual structure of casting system the closer you get to where WotC could claim infringement on their unique expression of a magic system.

- the specific descriptions of various PC races. Sure, you can use elves and dwarves... but when they're described exactly like they are in WotC material (almond shaped eyes, 600 year lifespan, etc.) you're stepping into "specific expression" territory.

- all the spell flavor text a lot of them mostly cut and pasted out of the SRD rather than having write hundreds of spells from scratch.

- The same for monster flavor text.

There's a LOT more they're going to need to either change or bank on WotC either not caring enough to go after them or that someone will step up and successfully defend the OGL 1.0a so they don't HAVE to change all that much.

I've spent nearly 2/3 of my development having stripped out all the OGL material so I could be free and clear of it so I'm basically just waiting on artwork to get done... others might have a lot of work they're scrambling to do to actually get a non-OGL version of their system out the door.

This is definitely a shock to the entire OGL-part of the ttrpg ecosystem and I expect a lot of "retcon events" as the main settings get updated.

Not to rain on your parade or anything but Basic Fantasy is done with the first review of their book stripping all WotC content from it, the second pass is underway, there'll be a third and fourth passes and then it will be out, probably in 2-3 weeks, that's what? A little over a month since the fiasco started?

And Basic Fantasy is the most affordable RPG I can think of.  They have garnered nothing but good will, since its very inception.  A true low cost alternative, to scratch the D&D itch.

Quote from: Jam The MF on January 17, 2023, 06:24:07 PM

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 17, 2023, 05:58:51 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on January 17, 2023, 05:43:20 PM
Good video.

I pretty much called it in the last video thread... Paizo, Green Ronin, etc. would ultimately have to release an actual open license simply because its in their own best financial interests.

I agree if all you're doing is releasing a product for others to buy, you absolutely don't need to use any OGL. However, another reason to use a OGL type license you missed was "because you want other people to be able to make content for your system." That's the particular boat I'm in and I think a lot of the people behind the close kin to D&D systems are kidding themselves about how quickly they'll be able to actually strip the things WotC could claim as legitimately copyrighted elements (i.e. not mechanics, but protectable concepts and ideas)

For examples;
- chromatic/metallic dragons (particularly the big five of white, black, green, blue and red) and Tiamat as a 5-headed dragon goddess and Bahamut as a benevolent platinum dragon.

- reptilian kobolds

- the arcane/divine casting divide

- the specific set of eight schools (abjuration, conjuration, divination, enchantment, evocation, illusion, necromancy, transmutation + universal) particularly in conjunction with a slot-based nine-level casting structure and/or D&DVancian style spell preparation with VSM components, key spells at the same level and under the same schools as they're found in D&D (invisibility as 2nd level illusion, fireball as 3rd level evocation, etc.) ... basically the closer you get to actual structure of casting system the closer you get to where WotC could claim infringement on their unique expression of a magic system.

- the specific descriptions of various PC races. Sure, you can use elves and dwarves... but when they're described exactly like they are in WotC material (almond shaped eyes, 600 year lifespan, etc.) you're stepping into "specific expression" territory.

- all the spell flavor text a lot of them mostly cut and pasted out of the SRD rather than having write hundreds of spells from scratch.

- The same for monster flavor text.

There's a LOT more they're going to need to either change or bank on WotC either not caring enough to go after them or that someone will step up and successfully defend the OGL 1.0a so they don't HAVE to change all that much.

I've spent nearly 2/3 of my development having stripped out all the OGL material so I could be free and clear of it so I'm basically just waiting on artwork to get done... others might have a lot of work they're scrambling to do to actually get a non-OGL version of their system out the door.

This is definitely a shock to the entire OGL-part of the ttrpg ecosystem and I expect a lot of "retcon events" as the main settings get updated.

Not to rain on your parade or anything but Basic Fantasy is done with the first review of their book stripping all WotC content from it, the second pass is underway, there'll be a third and fourth passes and then it will be out, probably in 2-3 weeks, that's what? A little over a month since the fiasco started?

And Basic Fantasy is the most affordable RPG I can think of.  They have garnered nothing but good will, since its very inception.  A true low cost alternative, to scratch the D&D itch.

Plus it will be released under the CC By SA, so, as long as you're willing to adhere to the license you can take anything from their game.

Quote from: Chris24601 on January 17, 2023, 05:43:20 PM
- the arcane/divine casting divide

This is not a divide restricted to D&D, and never was. In fact, it began in the real world: witchcraft, sorceries, and divinations have been forbidden to worshippers of Christianity since the beginning.

More, it's appeared in other games going back to 1991 at least, such as TORG: not only are Miracles and Magic two different rules subsystems, they're governed by two different axioms!

Use this with impunity.

Quote from: Daddy Warpig on January 17, 2023, 08:38:43 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on January 17, 2023, 05:43:20 PM
- the arcane/divine casting divide

This is not a divide restricted to D&D, and never has been. In fact, it began in the real world: witchcraft, sorceries, and divinations have been forbidden to worshippers of Christianity since the beginning.

More, it's appeared in other games going back to 1991 at least, such as TORG: not only are Miracles and Magic two different rules subsystems, they're governed by two different axioms!

Use this with impunity.

It goes way back than Christianity, Jews had the same restrictions, after all the Old Testament is nothing but a part of their holy book. So it's at least 2023+ years old.

Even the Maya who allegedly did not make the distinction had the priests who "performed miracles", the white witches and the black witches (who often could be the same person depending on how they were using their "powers".

You find the same division almost in every culture you find going back to the Summerians. gods on one side, demons on the other with sometimes a grey area where witchcraft wasn't forbidden as long as it wasn't black witchcraft.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 17, 2023, 05:58:51 PM
Not to rain on your parade or anything but Basic Fantasy is done with the first review of their book stripping all WotC content from it, the second pass is underway, there'll be a third and fourth passes and then it will be out, probably in 2-3 weeks, that's what? A little over a month since the fiasco started?

Why would that rain on my parade? I'm just bringing up logistics and potential places where the SRD (and in Basic Fantasy's case the old B/X material which is also copyright WotC) has likely been taken for granted and should be looked at... because I'm sure WotC won't be vindictive towards the third parties who wouldn't step into their trap at all. <sarcasm>

Basic Fantasy's method of crowdsourcing a dozen plus volunteers to go over a 170 page book is honestly a good strategy. I'm glad they'll have something out sooner rather than later. The fact they've also always released as free content also helps insulate them from potential problems with a vindictive WotC (no money to be had) so it's a good move for them.

* * * *

As to my point about the arcane/divine magic divide... angels and demons are of a kind in most religions and the distinction is whether you are relying upon good or evil powers of basically the same type (God could drop a pillar of fire and the Devil could cure your illness... neither happened often, but that was due to a difference in the grantor's intent not "this magic is fundamentally different and can't do that").

WotC's arcane/divine divide makes no such moral judgments and the good/evil divide is entirely on the divine side with its pantheon of good and evil gods while arcane is more akin to a poorly understood science that has almost no moral component to it at all.

I brought it up because that is a specific expression of a magic system that could be a problem depending again on how ugly WotC wants to be because those third parties they wanted to rope in for content for their walled garden exploitationfest escaped their clutches.

Particularly when that divide is included alongside Vancian slot-based spell prep, eight schools of magic and nine levels of spells and a selection of spells at each level that matches very closely the standard setup of D&D.

I think a lot of people are really glossing over matters that fall under the category of protected expression and how it could bite various parties if they don't account for it. One aspect of that expression is a particular collection of elements into a larger whole.

Mechanics are protected, but mechanics presented in the exact same way are not. The example from a while back about the western and samurai themed card games with identical mechanics is apt. The notes in that case indicated that the entire decision was founded on the difference in presentation of western vs. samurai... but that if it had been another western-themes card game with the same mechanics, even with minor name changes (ex. calling the deputies, the posse), it would have been infringement.

Basic Fantasy's swap from chromatic to environmental dragons is an example of such a necessary swap; even when the body text of the new material does indicate colors very much like the classic D&D depictions it isn't making it nearly so prominent and is expressed in their own words not copied and pasted from the SRD and non-profit protects them more than it would Paizo, but the fact it's still a very D&D like setting with the dragons filling the same niches and just reading their descriptions indicating which color they're actually supposed to be could still be a weak point that an unreasonable litigant could go after.

Life is risk so I'm not saying don't go there. I'm just saying to be aware of what wildlife and potential pitfalls are in the forest as you go traveling through it and the more you relied on the SRD directly the more you've got your work cut out for you.

Quote from: GeekyBugle on January 17, 2023, 08:48:33 PM

Quote from: Daddy Warpig on January 17, 2023, 08:38:43 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on January 17, 2023, 05:43:20 PM
- the arcane/divine casting divide

This is not a divide restricted to D&D, and never has been. In fact, it began in the real world: witchcraft, sorceries, and divinations have been forbidden to worshippers of Christianity since the beginning.

More, it's appeared in other games going back to 1991 at least, such as TORG: not only are Miracles and Magic two different rules subsystems, they're governed by two different axioms!

Use this with impunity.

It goes way back than Christianity, Jews had the same restrictions, after all the Old Testament is nothing but a part of their holy book. So it's at least 2023+ years old.

Even the Maya who allegedly did not make the distinction had the priests who "performed miracles", the white witches and the black witches (who often could be the same person depending on how they were using their "powers".

You find the same division almost in every culture you find going back to the Summerians. gods on one side, demons on the other with sometimes a grey area where witchcraft wasn't forbidden as long as it wasn't black witchcraft.

Social/Religious prohibitions are not the same as fundamentally different systems of magic. Black vs White magic is more akin to "Magic Schools" than completely different ways of using magic. Within real life mystical traditions anyone could use either type, it's just that "Black Magic" is frowned upon and has negative spiritual consequences. But you could still try it if you dare, and most of what we take for "wizard" magic today originates from Hermetic traditions that call upon angelic beings and were mixed up with Abrahamic religions, even if the mainstream forms of those religions are against magic or consider it heretical.

Quote from: VisionStorm on January 18, 2023, 09:32:16 AM
Social/Religious prohibitions are not the same as fundamentally different systems of magic. Black vs White magic is more akin to "Magic Schools" than completely different ways of using magic. Within real life mystical traditions anyone could use either type, it's just that "Black Magic" is frowned upon and has negative spiritual consequences. But you could still try it if you dare, and most of what we take for "wizard" magic today originates from Hermetic traditions that call upon angelic beings and were mixed up with Abrahamic religions, even if the mainstream forms of those religions are against magic or consider it heretical.

D&D magic and D&D psionics are fundamentally different systems. Arcane and Divine magic are not "fundamentally different systems of magic". They're the exact same system of magic. The spells function the same way, casting functions the same way, you roll the same things, etc. Just different spell lists. They're no more fundamentally different than Evocation and Necromancy.

Quote from: RPGPundit on January 17, 2023, 04:52:42 PM
Some very surprising new developments are making me change some of my opinions about the potential of the #ORCLicense
Especially one big revelation...
#onednd #openDnD #dn

Once burnt twice shy. I made a mistake in using the OGL when I really didn't need to. Caused myself a lot of unnecessary agita. I don't see myself using this thing even if the current people in charge walk on water.

Quote from: Chris24601 on January 18, 2023, 08:15:14 AM
As to my point about the arcane/divine magic divide...

If you have priests using miracles and wizards casting spells, that is a divide recognized for millennia.

It in no way infringes on WOTC's intellectual property.

Like using leprechauns, will-o-the-wisps, bears, toads, and frogs: these are all common things and the Coast brigade has no rights over them.