I had a chat with one of my players today. A bard is the closest thing we have to a wizard or a sorceror. I remarked, "It's a shame, because no one crafts stuff. The writers suggested/encouraged allowing the players to have a week or two off between Chapter 1 and Chapter 2 to facilitate an opportunity to craft."
The response?
They were surprised.
"Most Adventure Paths don't allow, or accomodate crafting, thus nobody wastes a feat on that," I was told. Bear in mind, the use of the term Adventure Path was generic, and not targeted specifically at Paizo per se.
Bear in mind, I take what they say at face value, I myself don't know about other AP's.
I thought I was pass that along, as a way of saying that the notion that crafting was even possible was met with approval by the players. To further that line of thought, when you do extended city guides, having locations where services and/or materials suppliers are available would be a good thing. Not that Sandpoint doesn't do that on a small scale now, with places where alchemical and high quality materials can be purchased. Rather I say, continue keeping those role-playing possibilities open in future publications.
I am going to hope for a wizard or a sorcerer in Crimson Throne...
Chief Technical Officer
|
Bear in mind, the use of the term Adventure Path was generic, and not targeted specifically at Paizo per se.
Bear in mind, I take what they say at face value, I myself don't know about other AP's.
I'm compelled to note that the term Adventure Path is a trademark of Paizo Publishing, and should not be used generically. There have only been three Adventure Paths before the current one: Shackled City, Age of Worms, and Savage Tide, all in Dungeon magazine.
Contributor
|
To further that line of thought, when you do extended city guides, having locations where services and/or materials suppliers are available would be a good thing.
Noted for the future.
To further that line of thought, when you do extended city guides, having locations where services and/or materials suppliers are available would be a good thing.Noted for the future.
Too late, you've been Kleenex'd. People are going to use the term. I'm sure you could sue them if they sold it like that, but you're not going to stop the average table from using it for other APs. Consider it a compliment to Paizo's marketing and success!
Too late, you've been Kleenex'd. People are going to use the term. I'm sure you could sue them if they sold it like that, but you're not going to stop the average table from using it for other APs. Consider it a compliment to Paizo's marketing and success!
I agree, but I have to point out to Vic, that the only other interpretation would be that the player was actually specifically talking about Paizo products. And I'll leave it at that.. it's feedback.
|
Vic,
While I understand Paizo has trademarked the phrase Adventure Path, I should point out it is not a REGISTERED trademark. Small difference, I know, however, as you point out the previous three APs were in Dungeon and all material that appeared in Dungeon was official D&D material, therefore WOTC could lay claim to it as well. Being that there is a clear avenue for disputing that trade mark, I think it is one Paizo will see become generic whether they want it to or not.
Unless there was a clear written agreement between Paizo and WOTC regarding the use of the phrase Adventure Path, I think it is a generic term now. And if there should be such an agreement, it is perceived as generic now by the gamin public for just those reasons and you will need to be very aggressive regarding trade mark protection.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
... I think it is a generic term now. And if there should be such an agreement, it is perceived as generic now by the gamin public for just those reasons and you will need to be very aggressive regarding trade mark protection.
Regardless of what you think, it is *not* a generic term now. It is a trademark of Paizo Publishing, and we're noting as such in our products and in the tiny little text at the bottom of every page on our site. We're doing everything we can do to keep our claim on it (which is why, as I said, I was compelled to post here earlier). To the best of our knowledge, only one publisher has attempted to use the term to market a published product, and when we called their attention to our trademark, they agreed to stop using it.
We do understand the distinction between a registered trademark and a non-registered trademark. But you should understand that non-registered marks are still valid and meaningful. Further, the theoretical potential for a mark to not be viable does not itself invalidate the trademark—that's a matter for an appropriate legal body to determine at the appropriate time. (And right now, that's all I'll say about that.)
(For the record, Kleenex is also not a generic term—it's a registered trademark. While the general public often uses the term incorrectly, you won't find anyone other than Kimberly-Clark marketing their facial tissues with the word Kleenex.)
Questions of copyright and trademark laws aside, I got around the "who would waste a feat on that" roadblock by allowing on non-normal feat levels (2nd, 4th, 5th, 7th, 8th, etc.) my players to choose off of a list of feats that generally don't have any big game impact. It includes a lot of the +2 skill feats, etc., that no one ever "wastes" a feat on. The list includes all of the crafting feats; I'm trying to encourage them to do more crafting. So far no one's taken one yet, but then again they just hit 3rd level at Thistletop.
I would love to see what 4th edition's take on crafting is, seeing as they're trying to incorporate a lot of MMO feel into the game, and crafting is such a big part of a lot of MMO's.
Personally I don't care if characters craft or not. If they find themselves in a situation where there are no shops and they can't craft, it makes for interesting encounters. If they are in a city where they can shop, I roleplay shopping encounters for anything that is not in the PHB. So it may cost them PC's more depending on the area and on my whims. If they do decide to take crafting feats, then I will find times for the party to craft. I like giving breaks and roleplaying side quests, so I would make concessions. What I do think should happen is that characters who craft should have a allocated XP just for crafting. I dont like PC's losing XP. So I think I'll devise a system where a certain percentage of their level in XP will be used for crafting. Once they have used the allotted amount, then they can no craft more items. Now what would be a good percentage? How about 30 percent?
(For the record, Kleenex is also not a generic term—it's a registered trademark. While the general public often uses the term incorrectly, you won't find anyone other than Kimberly-Clark marketing their facial tissues with the word Kleenex.)
From a branding standpoint, it definately is.
Consumers are going to continue using the term Adventure Path or AP to designate any large series of modules, especially ones that claim to be a campaign in a box.
Also, I've seen the term used by the RPGA already to describe their upcoming campaigns.
I see your point, and it makes sense from a business standpoint to corner the market on the term.
That aside, good luck with keeping it out of common speech. It reminds me of Owens Corning trying to get "pink" considered intellectual property. To my knowledge, the ice cream shop where I grew up is still called "The Freezer" despite changing hands and names six times.
The following terminology is released by Mike Beeler under the creative commons Attribution No Derivatives license: "Campaign Arc"
Questions of copyright and trademark laws aside, I got around the "who would waste a feat on that" roadblock by allowing on non-normal feat levels (2nd, 4th, 5th, 7th, 8th, etc.) my players to choose off of a list of feats that generally don't have any big game impact. It includes a lot of the +2 skill feats, etc., that no one ever "wastes" a feat on. The list includes all of the crafting feats; I'm trying to encourage them to do more crafting. So far no one's taken one yet, but then again they just hit 3rd level at Thistletop.
I would love to see what 4th edition's take on crafting is, seeing as they're trying to incorporate a lot of MMO feel into the game, and crafting is such a big part of a lot of MMO's.
I'd not actually recommend giving out crafting feats free of charge. Far from being a useless feat their actually some of the more powerful feats in the game. Essentially speaking for the price of a small amount of 1/10 of the items XP (1/5 of 1/2 price) you can double your wealth by level. Basically speaking your players are going to convert almost all their gold into magic items one way or another anyway - but if they can craft them they get those magic items for 1/2 price.
Now admittedly the mages and clerics are going to balk at spending XP for the other players magic items but chances are they can come to some sort of a deal, my players certainly did, I think they sold the other players their magic items at 75% of book value, thus giving the other players about 1.5 times their wealth by level and giving the mage and cleric about 2.5 times their normal wealth by level. Heavy expenditure on magic items will eventually cost the mage and cleric a level but its probably worth it considering the benefits and furthermore once your behind by a level you earn more XP per encounter.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
Consumers are going to continue using the term Adventure Path or AP to designate any large series of modules, especially ones that claim to be a campaign in a box.
Clearly we can't stop consumers from doing that, but we can chime in to remind them (and, more importantly, to remind any publishers who might happen to be reading) that it's technically incorrect. :-)
Also, I've seen the term used by the RPGA already to describe their upcoming campaigns.
Would you have a link to anything like that? The only thing I've seen from Wizards recently that's even close was a reference along the lines of "We're planning something in the vein of an Adventure Path, but a little bit different," which is fine.
It reminds me of Owens Corning trying to get "pink" considered intellectual property.
They didn't just try—they succeeded. The color pink has been a registered trademark of Owens Corning for 20 years, so no other manufacturer in their market segment can use it for their insulation materials.
|
Consumers are going to continue using the term Adventure Path or AP to designate any large series of modules, especially ones that claim to be a campaign in a box.
Campaign in a Box is a series of articles written by Chad Underkoffler in SJGames' Pyramid magazine. I'm not sure if Chad or Steve trademarked the name, but folks should probably tread lightly before calling their product "Campaign in a Box"
What I do think should happen is that characters who craft should have a allocated XP just for crafting. I dont like PC's losing XP. So I think I'll devise a system where a certain percentage of their level in XP will be used for crafting. Once they have used the allotted amount, then they can no craft more items. Now what would be a good percentage? How about 30 percent?
See Unearted Arcana - Crafting Points (its in the SRD), as well as Eberron's (ick) Artificer class' Craft points.
Questions of copyright and trademark laws aside, I got around the "who would waste a feat on that" roadblock by allowing on non-normal feat levels (2nd, 4th, 5th, 7th, 8th, etc.) my players to choose off of a list of feats that generally don't have any big game impact. It includes a lot of the +2 skill feats, etc., that no one ever "wastes" a feat on. The list includes all of the crafting feats; I'm trying to encourage them to do more crafting. So far no one's taken one yet, but then again they just hit 3rd level at Thistletop.
I would love to see what 4th edition's take on crafting is, seeing as they're trying to incorporate a lot of MMO feel into the game, and crafting is such a big part of a lot of MMO's.
Hey! That's a really great idea with the skill/crafting feats! I think I will just 'liberate' that one. Thanks for that :3
Bear in mind, the use of the term Adventure Path was generic, and not targeted specifically at Paizo per se.
Bear in mind, I take what they say at face value, I myself don't know about other AP's.
I'm compelled to note that the term Adventure Path is a trademark of Paizo Publishing, and should not be used generically. There have only been three Adventure Paths before the current one: Shackled City, Age of Worms, and Savage Tide, all in Dungeon magazine.
Compel:
1: to drive or urge forcefully or irresistibly2: to cause to do or occur by overwhelming pressure
So who or what made you do it? The guy said it was generic, and you still beat the horse.
It honestly doesn't matter if you are "technically" and maybe legally right, you really come across harsh in this response.(and asinine as well).
As proven already people are going to use the term "Adventure Path", whether you like it or not, generically. As one person pointed out people used iconic terms to identify something. (Coke, Kleenex, NyQuil) They do so in writing, in things like blogs and emails.Are you really going to have people run around the net and be "compelled" to chime in that they are technically incorrect in their usage and that it is a trademark of your company?
Just my two cents, your probably going to be compelled to not like it
I'm definitely gonna have to push the crafting on my group.
I hate it when people call Mixed Martial Arts, "Ultimate Fighting."
Compel:
1: to drive or urge forcefully or irresistibly
2: to cause to do or occur by overwhelming pressureSo who or what made you do it? The guy said it was generic, and you still beat the horse.
It honestly doesn't matter if you are "technically" and maybe legally right, you really come across harsh in this response.(and asinine as well).
As proven already people are going to use the term "Adventure Path", whether you like it or not, generically. As one person pointed out people used iconic terms to identify something. (Coke, Kleenex, NyQuil) They do so in writing, in things like blogs and emails.Are you really going to have people run around the net and be "compelled" to chime in that they are technically incorrect in their usage and that it is a trademark of your company?
Just my two cents, your probably going to be compelled to not like it
It's cool dude. I understand where Vic is coming from. I admit, I was a bit put off at first, but he's trying to protect his company. Without the 4th Edition OGL, these are tense times.
I don't mean to come across as a fanboi, but Paizo staffers put up with a lot of my needy questions. I'm like the last guy in America that upgraded to 3.5 (beginning of this September).
We're all going to get through this life easier if we remember to try to be tolerant to each other, and assume some goodwill on the part of others.
And the more respect a man is paid, the more respectable he gets every day.
No hard feelings from me Vic!
No, I feel compelled to tell you I'm the last guy to start 3.5 (after over 25 yrs of D+D off and on)Oct 7th!! And it is good, RotR!!
I'd not actually recommend giving out crafting feats free of charge.
Its an experiment - so far in the 7 years of 3.0/3.5 D&D that our group has played played, exactly zero characters have ever "wasted" a feat on crafting. So far in the new ROTRL campaign (we just finished Burnt Offerings last night and most leveled to 4th), no one yet has taken a crafting feat. So personally for the players I have, I'm not that worried that they'll be swimming in uber-powered magic items soon, its just not their style. That might change, we'll see. You do have valid points though, and if my group make up was different, I would think twice.
|
|
It reminds me of Owens Corning trying to get "pink" considered intellectual property.They didn't just try—they succeeded. The color pink has been a registered trademark of Owens Corning for 20 years, so no other manufacturer in their market segment can use it for their insulation materials.
Or perhaps, more closer to home, TSR's trademark of "Nazi" ???
:) The more things change, the more they stay the same :)
For those of you who don't know what I'm talking about....
I recall this from my youth, but such surplus knowledge is best addressed by wikipedia.
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TSR,_Inc. -->
The company was the subject of an urban myth stating that it tried to trademark the term "Nazi". This was based on a supplement for the Indiana Jones RPG in which some figures were marked with "NAZI(tm)". This notation was in compliance with the list of trademarked character names supplied by Lucasfilm's legal department, specifically referring to a particular illustration of a Nazi on a cardboard game piece, which is legally trademarkable. (Marvel Comics also supplied a list of trademarked Marvel characters which included the term "NAZI(tm)".) Later references to the error would forget its origin and slowly morph into stories of TSR's trying to register such a trademark, possibly aided by TSR's own reputation late in its existence as a "trademark Nazi" company.
As a lawyer, I understand Paizo's unenviable position with such legal tedium and watchdogging. Such is our lot in life.
{So who or what made you do it? The guy said it was generic, and you still beat the horse.}
It's NOT generic.
Xerox isn't a generic name for a photocopy.
Coke isn't a generic name for a cola.
Kleenex isn't a generic name for a tissue.
Band-Aid is not a generic term for a self-adhesive small bandage.
Many people use them AS IF they were generic, but legally they are owned terms and the owning company HAS TO police use of them else they WILL become generic, and then ANYONE can use that name on a product. PepsiCo could sell their own style of coke. HP could sell its own xerox copiers. Johnson & Johnson could sell its own klenex facial tissues. 3M could sell its own band-aid bandages.
Ever hear a modern commercial about Band-Aid bandages? They used to say "I am stuck on Band-Aid, cuz Band-Aid's stuck on me!" They now say "I am stuck on Band-Aid BRAND cuz Band-Aid's stuck on me!" Trademarks are a slippery slope ... unlike copyright ownership or physical property ownership, you can lose ownership of a trademark if you let other people use it. It's like letting your neighbor borrow your lawnmover, and after 4 weeks of doing this he starts keeping it in HIS garage, and legally there's nothing you could do about it because you didn't stop him from borrowing what was your lawnmower.
Examples of things that were once trademarks but are now generic:
aspirin
dry ice
escalator
touch-tone (phone)
thermos
All names that used to make the creator/trademarker money, now available for use by anyone.
Vic is doing his part in protecting the company's trademark. He's not being the thought police, and you can call anything whatever you want in your own home or own game, but it's a trademark in the publishing world and there are rights (and obligations) that come from that. So please lay off and don't be a jerk to him.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
Are you really going to have people run around the net and be "compelled" to chime in that they are technically incorrect in their usage and that it is a trademark of your company?
One way that trademarks can fall into the public domain is if the owner chooses not to protect them. Clearly we can't be expected to patrol the internet, but if we see problems on on own boards and fail to correct them, that could potentially put the status of our trademark in jeopardy.
To be clear, I'm not expecting to change anyone's behavior here, but I am compelled to chime in with the correct information in case some other publisher comes to our site and leaves with the mistaken impression that Adventure Path is a generic term that they can use to market their products. It's not.
Please let this be the last post on the topic.
Anyway... now one of players is at least considering crafting scrolls and potions.
Keep up the good work Paizo!
Did you call him a sucker? ;D
Or are you actually NICE to your players? ;)
Lolol! I have no idea! That's beauty of learning 3.5 less than a year before it's outdated, I have no idea if I'm screwin' somebody or not! Just like a being a virgin except you have a better idea of where to put it!
(and as I'm laughing, I'm also thinking.. Am I screwing him over?)
I'm just amazed that a seemingly developed crafting system exists.
|
|
In a recent campaign our cleric became a prolific crafter. The DM was stingy with magic items but generous enough with gold. But we still could not buy items. Rare, he said. Magic items just are not sold.
So he crafted much of what we did have. I was a fighter and relied heavily on my items and his boosts. In all honesty without his items we were not much to look at. An 18th level fighter straight off the pages is ok, but not going to defeat much without the equipment to back him up.
Since then we always have at least 2 crafters in our group. So now the GM just doesn't give us any down time to make anything!
|
|
I'm compelled to note that the term Adventure Path is a trademark of Paizo Publishing, and should not be used generically. There have only been three Adventure Paths before the current one: Shackled City, Age of Worms, and Savage Tide, all in Dungeon magazine.
Vic, Sean, Erik, et al.
It came to my attention today that D&Dinsider.com is using the term "Adventure Path" on their main page describing their "new Adventure Path: Scales of War".
This thread came to mind. I would expect some vigorous assertion of your non-generic trademark, as this is pretty clearly infringing meaningfully upon it.
Let me know if you need representation :)
|
Creative Director
|
I'm compelled to note that the term Adventure Path is a trademark of Paizo Publishing, and should not be used generically. There have only been three Adventure Paths before the current one: Shackled City, Age of Worms, and Savage Tide, all in Dungeon magazine.
Vic, Sean, Erik, et al.
It came to my attention today that D&Dinsider.com is using the term "Adventure Path" on their main page describing their "new Adventure Path: Scales of War".
This thread came to mind. I would expect some vigorous assertion of your non-generic trademark, as this is pretty clearly infringing meaningfully upon it.
Let me know if you need representation :)
No worries. We've decided not to pursue Adventure Path as a trademark, since we feel that it's more useful as a generic term usable by multiple companies, Paizo or WotC or whoever. It's all good! Thanks for the heads up though! :-)
This is what is found at http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/duad/20080711 (bold emphasis mine)
"The Scales of War Adventure Path kicks off in dramatic fashion in issue #156 with "Rescue at Rivenroar," by industry veteran David Noonan."
It gets even worse when you open up the linked PDF:
Some quotes:
"What's an Adventure Path?
Scales of War is the fourth Adventure Path to appear in the pages of Dungeon Magazine. But what, you ask, is an Adventure Path? Quite simply, it is a series of related adventures intended to form a complete D&D campaign that takes your players from 1st level all the way to, in the case of Scales of War, 30th level."
"Previous Adventure Paths, presented with the 3rd Edition D&D rules, took characters from 1st to 20th level."
"Each tier takes roughly six adventures to traverse, which means we'll finish off this Adventure Path in about eighteen issues."
"Finally, this Adventure Path is intended to function as a complete D&D campaign."
""Rescue at Rivenroar"; also marks the first step in a great journey;the Scales of War Adventure Path, which spans 30 levels and put the PCs at the crux of events that shapes the world for centuries to come."
""Rescue at Rivenroar"; introduces the characters to one another and kicks off the new Scales of War Adventure Path. This Adventure Path takes the characters across the countryside of the Elsir Vale and into a deadly dungeon, where they face Sinruth's Hand, a force of goblins, hobgoblins, and other monsters bent on the conquest of the Vale and its environs."
I'm pretty sure that the above quotes fall under Fair Use. ;)
-Steve
No worries. We've decided not to pursue Adventure Path as a trademark, since we feel that it's more useful as a generic term usable by multiple companies, Paizo or WotC or whoever. It's all good! Thanks for the heads up though! :-)
Jeesus, I wish you'd posted this before I started scanning their latest effort for every instance of the two words in combination... :p
-Steve
Hm. A couple of minutes searching gives me usage by zoos (I thought I remembered that from many years ago), amusement parks and attractions, old semi-RPG video games, adventures ("The Sunless Citadel") going back to 2000, and a wikipedia entry (dubious of course) stating that trademark was denied due to being too generic.
|
|
Hm. A couple of minutes searching gives me usage by zoos (I thought I remembered that from many years ago), amusement parks and attractions, old semi-RPG video games, adventures ("The Sunless Citadel") going back to 2000, and a wikipedia entry (dubious of course) stating that trademark was denied due to being too generic.
You can actually check trademark status online using the government's TESS system:
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=tess&state=kml48s.1.1
It's quite interesting, and can occassionally give you a heads up as to what various "Evil Empires" are planning next. (I'm waiting for "power cards" or some such to be released for 4E incorporating a tradeable card element... shudder. Taking a gander at the Adventure Path entry, you can see that the trademark was Abandoned, rather than denied.
So there's one more bit of misinformation you can put in the mental shredder.
|
|
Let me know if you need representation :)You know what would be cool though ... if 7th son really looked like a kobold and carried the sword to court ... just a little tiny kobold lawyer dude setting traps for witnesses in cross-examination.
I actually have a kobold paralegal who usually arrives early and sets those traps for me.
I found him on craigslist.
|
Creative Director
|
No worries. We've decided not to pursue Adventure Path as a trademark, since we feel that it's more useful as a generic term usable by multiple companies, Paizo or WotC or whoever. It's all good! Thanks for the heads up though! :-)AKA your lawyer pointed out to you that as the term originated during your enslavement to Wizards that Wizards could proceed to try to trademark it and have the Hasbro lawyers anally rape your company in the process. You put your "community" spin on it to save face and try to dilute your cold business decision. At least WotC has the decently to not hide it's cold business side and to isolate the developers and designers from it. you guys, its soooo transparent.
If I were interested in hiding our cold business side, I'd just suppress or delete this post, wouldn't I?
It is irritating that a thread I started over a year ago has been resurrected to facilitate some horrible and pointless post.
::shakes head::
Earlier I scolded some 4E bashing on this board, and a few hours ater the other side is at it. I'll be glad for the day when this Edition childishness is at an end.
|
In a recent campaign our cleric became a prolific crafter. The DM was stingy with magic items but generous enough with gold. But we still could not buy items. Rare, he said. Magic items just are not sold.
So he crafted much of what we did have. I was a fighter and relied heavily on my items and his boosts. In all honesty without his items we were not much to look at. An 18th level fighter straight off the pages is ok, but not going to defeat much without the equipment to back him up.
Since then we always have at least 2 crafters in our group. So now the GM just doesn't give us any down time to make anything!
that is something that actually angers me
the system FORCES the characters and players to expect, create or buy magical iems to be able to do anything at all...