A 4e product for sale right now. Saying "For Use with Fourth Edition Dungeons and Dragons" right on the cover. And their promo blurb:
Not using the GSL.
From Mark Plemmons:
And from David Kenzer (who according to Mr. Plemmons, is an IP lawyer):
If these guys can do this for 4E... why can't/shouldn't we just do it for our own releases for whichever edition we favor?
(and I meant obsolete in terms of "being a publisher's tool"... obviously as stand-alone game products in stores, there is merit to the idea... but I can't believe "OSRIC" has the name recognition of "AD&D" for selling modules, for example...)
The Kingdoms of Kalamar fantasy campaign setting is now fully compatible with 4E D&D, and a must have for players and Dungeon Masters of any fantasy campaign.
Not only does this 501-page PDF reference 4E D&D classes, races, monsters, and more, but it also includes expanded background details, over 50 new 4E game mechanics, and an incredibly detailed full-color atlas!
Not using the GSL.
From Mark Plemmons:
No, this 501-page setting PDF does not use the GSL. You don't need to use the GSL to create 4E-compatible products, as long as you don't tread on WotC's legal territory (similar to how a computer company makes a game/virus program/etc that runs on a Windows PC without asking Bill Gates permission...). Fortunately, David Kenzer is a lawyer, and knows what to do (or avoid doing).
And from David Kenzer (who according to Mr. Plemmons, is an IP lawyer):
that is not copyright infringement.
copyright infringement is basing your work on someone else's creative expression. Rules are not creative expression. Also, it is not "based" on their rules. It happens to "work with" their rules.
SHould every programmer that writes a program that works with a computer have to pay the owner of the OS it runs on? I think not. I could be wrong, but fortunately, the US and International copyright laws agree with me.
A world where one could not reference others' materials in their product would be a dark and sad place.
If these guys can do this for 4E... why can't/shouldn't we just do it for our own releases for whichever edition we favor?
(and I meant obsolete in terms of "being a publisher's tool"... obviously as stand-alone game products in stores, there is merit to the idea... but I can't believe "OSRIC" has the name recognition of "AD&D" for selling modules, for example...)
This may be true, but it will take an organization with the will and the money to prove it in court. Hopefully this company does, but most bloggers, fansites and niche publisher don't have the resources to fight Hasbro (WotC). So far the companies that do have that ability would rather either just play the way WotC wants them to play or takes their ball and goes somewhere else. Once a court decision is reached or WotC chooses not to enforce its copyright, then the worm may turn, but not before then.
ReplyDeleteFWIW, David Kenzer is a lawyer (and I think he's an IP lawyer) in "real life."
ReplyDeleteehhhh. It's either legal or it's not. If it is, then not one single person should avoid doing what they are legally entitled to do for fear that they are going to get a harassment suit.
ReplyDeleteThe trick is figuring out what exactly is legal to do and what isn't in cases like this.
But there are third-party compatible car parts, vacuum cleaner bags, printer ink, not to mention the given examples of software written without consulting Microsoft for Windows compatibility, unauthorized guidebooks to games and movies and such...
Fuck worrying about "It's not worth doing because I'll be sued into the stone age whether I did everything right or not." Living in fear is a shitty way to live.
The only thing to worry about should be, "How do I do it right?" Obviously Kenzer's got more tools for that than anyone else... but... there are things that the hobbyist publisher can learn from this situation.
Well that certainly explains the mystery of how Kenzer is going to be selling 4E product at Gencon. Kenzer does seem to delight in pissing of WotC; first Hackmaster, and now this.
ReplyDeleteBut the idea of publishing compatible material without a license is nothing new. Mayfair Games did it for years (and in the end got sued by TSR for violating a license agreement it *did* have). Pied Piper did it, although they decided to shift to the OGL for various reasons. It's certainly legal to do so, as long as you don't infringe on the actual copyrighted or trademarked material (no quoting blocks of text). Frankly, I'm amazed more publishers haven't already gone this rout, and I agree that simulacra are unnecessary, from a legal point of view.
Pied Piper did it
ReplyDeleteNot on Cairn of the Skeleton King, they didn't. They avoided saying Dungeons and Dragons anywhere ("for Advanced Fantasy Role-Playing Games"), and they had a "close but not quite" stat block there.
Hell, *I* released something without a license, but I didn't declare direct compatibility anywhere.
And I think that's the big thing that people want to do (and would help the visibility of our stuff outside of our little online "in the know" cliques).
I've always thought all this jumping through hoops people have been doing just so they can put out adventure modules is silly. There is no market for it yet. Not one thats big enough to attract a serious lawsuit. Mostly what people will get is a call from WotC lawyers telling them to cease and desist.
ReplyDeleteNot that it matters to me. I play BFRPG and am happy with it for now. There are hundreds of existing adventure modules created by professionals during the early 80's that are easily convertible to BFRPG. And plenty of modules written by hobbiest freely available as pdfs.
This is a tempest in a teapot.
Yes. I've said it from the start. OSRIC was never necessary.
ReplyDeleteThough that doesn't mean it isn't useful.
And I wouldn't be surprised if Kenzer talked to Wizards about this before it became public.
I've always thought all this jumping through hoops people have been doing just so they can put out adventure modules is silly. There is no market for it yet. Not one thats big enough to attract a serious lawsuit.
ReplyDeleteYou can't build a market without putting the effort into it.
Mostly what people will get is a call from WotC lawyers telling them to cease and desist.
Not that receiving one of those means anything as far as whether you're doing anything wrong.
Not that it matters to me. I play BFRPG and am happy with it for now. There are hundreds of existing adventure modules created by professionals during the early 80's that are easily convertible to BFRPG.
To me, releasing my work for free (or just in pdf form, even for pay) is the same as flushing it down the toilet. And I want it to look good and feel good as well as being good, which means paying for art, and from here on out paying for actual covers (I bet I'm going to spend more on the color for the next cover by itself than I actually make up in sales, let alone the other art, printing, etc). If I can't do this, I won't bother, because it's about my fulfillment in a job well done.
And I have full confidence that Insect Shrine will sit comfortably next to anything that's ever been released for this family of games, in presentation (not that a lot of the 70s stuff set the bar really high here, so don't expect GLITZ AND GLAMOR) and in content. If you won't think paying a few bucks will be worth it... your loss, not mine.
The only thing to worry about should be, "How do I do it right?" Obviously Kenzer's got more tools for that than anyone else... but... there are things that the hobbyist publisher can learn from this situation.
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely, and where my genuine interest in this issue stems from. :)
David Kenzer alluded to the only reason *not* to do this was FUD, a term I hadn't heard of before...
I really don't believe there will be any lawsuits between WotC and Kenzer & Co over this. Besides, it's ultimately good for WotC as it encourages 3rd party support for their products.
Jim, you missed my point entirely. I am not opposed to people writing new adventures nor expecting to be paid for it. My point is that you could probably safely put on your cover "An adventure game for old school Dungeon and Dragons" or something similar without ever hearing from WotC. No need to create LL or to reference LL.
ReplyDeleteConcerning paying for self published work. I have no problem with that. My family owns 2 paperback copies and 1 hardback of BFRPG. I've bought novels published on Lulu, heck I sold my novel on Lulu. I bought these because I KNOW the work is good because I played the free PDF of BFRPG and read a good portion of the novels online first. The truth is that there is a flood of self-published work that is crap either because the author has no talent or spent no time edited his work. Hell, most of the self published work is not worth paying for. But some is. The trick is determining which are and which aren't. Just because someone spends money on a project doesn't mean it will be good. Plenty of self-published novelists spend money to have someone design a cover or to edit their manuscript, but that doesn't mean the story will be good. A metal band might have a cool photo on their home produced CD's but that doesn't mean their music is good.
You're upcoming work, Insect Shrine, may be the exception to the rule, and it probably is since you are a skilled writer, have a passion for the game, have experience running games, and a love of creating worlds. I know this because I read your blog, but if I just saw Insect Shrine on Lulu, on a store shelf or being sold at a con.
Long story short, there is very little difference between self published works whether they are free or not in your chance of getting something worthwhile. The only way to know is if you have a history with that publisher, you can try the work for free or they have positive reviews from trusted reviewers.
BTW, I was very interested in your Insect Shrine project when I thought it was being written for BFRPG. Now that I know different, I may still buy it depending on what you will be charging, but like I said before there are plenty of adventures that are non BFRPG specific that I can convert for my use. My thinking is that if I am going to support the industry I will start with the people supporting my game of choice and move out from their as my finances allow.
Also, independent publishers can't just republish old D&D rules as such. Compatable material, sure, but they can't just reprint Gygax's DMG and sell it.
ReplyDeleteEven if all LL does it get the old B/X D&D rules back on store shelves where with a slick new makeover, that's more than enough.
This is great news! It's about time someone feels like they can step up and exert their legal rights in this mess. Other little companies have thwarted Hasbro before, like RADGames, which puts out addons for Monopoly. Hasbro sued them for that and RADGames (two guys in a basement at the time) defeated them handily. Living in fear about doing this is indeed FUD. Go Kenzer & Co!
ReplyDeleteThe role of simulacrum games may have changed as a result of this ... from the best vehicle for publishing, they may have shifted their importance more toward the "bridge" editions that allow modern players to learn how to play old style games. The older books are, I think, less accessible than the retro-clones.
ReplyDeleteThe above is more applicable to the actual retro-clones than to simulacrum games which are further from the original rules they emulate.
However, it remains to be seen if anyone in the old school community will actually take up the gauntlet in the same way Kenzer has.
Matt
Hey - I happened to find the "101 Days of Advanced Dungeons and Dragons and the thread ends on 10-05-2006. I was wondering if it continued anywhere?
ReplyDeleteThanks!
It didn't... and that campaign lasted another 6 months. It just got too time-consuming to continue the log...
ReplyDeleteBlogger JimLotFP said...
ReplyDeleteIt didn't... and that campaign lasted another 6 months. It just got too time-consuming to continue the log...
July 15, 2008 9:24 AM
That's understandable. Even playtest reports for single adventures tend to take up a lot of time in my experience.
Do you happen to have any of the scans that are broken links in the thread (the doctor's journal, maps) online anywhere else?