I'm not going to opine on the boundaries of the available space for creating 4e-compatible products without being under GSL, but what some people seem to be forgetting in the analysis here is that there is some limitation to copyright protection for game rules, and you can also stay out of trademark territory if you're smart. People could conceivably create 4e stuff without subscribing to GSL.
You can't reprint stat blocks anyway, right? So use the OGL.
"Devil (Pit Fiend)", "Drow warrior (11th level)", and "Tarrasque" are all perfectly valid 3.5 SRD references under the OGL . . . but not the GSL. They'll go great with your "4 weak kobolds (1 hp/each)" and the "kobold warrior (2nd level)".
And which works better to inform the customer, the D&D compatibility logo on the back cover, or
"Compatible with Fourth Edition Dungeon Fantasy Roleplaying"
on the front and back covers?
|
The thing is that without being a GSL licensee, the publisher has no direct method to indicate compatibility with 4th Ed. When customers can't figure out the system which your product runs on, they'll go "meh" and keep on browsing.
More importantly, if distributors, can't figure out the system whcih your product runs on, they may not order it ... and your game might not make it into the stores.
A GSL licensee is far more liekly to get products on store shelves than somebody who's trying to make an end-around run at the GSL.
The thing is that without being a GSL licensee, the publisher has no direct method to indicate compatibility with 4th Ed. When customers can't figure out the system which your product runs on, they'll go "meh" and keep on browsing.
This isn't true. You can indicate compatibility. I'm pretty sure that's been decided in the courts already. You can identify an item as compatible with 4E without violating WotC trademarks.
There are plenty of examples of how you can use someone's trademark in advertising, etc. without violating that trademark.
... and being careful and smart will still not protect you for being sued.
True. WotC might decide it is worth the money to try to extend copyright coverage for game rules. Would make for an interesting case.
... and being careful and smart will still not protect you for being sued.True. WotC might decide it is worth the money to try to extend copyright coverage for game rules.
That's why I suggest using the OGL. Oh, sure, WotC can still try to sue you, but "I have a perpetual license from the plaintiff to refer to 11th-level drow warriors" looks like a pretty solid defense to a copyright claim.
I have wondered whether someone would disgruntedly use the OGL to produce a 3.5 supplement that basically copies 4th Editon. New classes and feats that just happen to make a characer have the same 'powers' but with different names of course. And then someone else would write material for this new 3.5 supplement. 'Fey Step' would become the 'Elven Teleport' racial ability. At-will powers become feats. Encounter powers are feats that can be used after 3 rounds rest.
I have wondered whether someone would disgruntedly use the OGL to produce a 3.5 supplement that basically copies 4th Editon. New classes and feats that just happen to make a characer have the same 'powers' but with different names of course. And then someone else would write material for this new 3.5 supplement.
I'm sure such is in the works all over the place ;)
I have wondered whether someone would disgruntedly use the OGL to produce a 3.5 supplement that basically copies 4th Editon. New classes and feats that just happen to make a characer have the same 'powers' but with different names of course. And then someone else would write material for this new 3.5 supplement. 'Fey Step' would become the 'Elven Teleport' racial ability. At-will powers become feats. Encounter powers are feats that can be used after 3 rounds rest.
As long as you don't copy text verbatim, I think you'll be fine using names of powers. You can even describe powers from the basic books, as long as you don't copy text verbatim, Remember, this is copyright, not patent law.