|
Did someone already post on this?
We leave for Origins on Tuesday so there may not be enough time to cook it up for a few more days, but we're making a "Pathfinder RPG Enabled" logo and drafting a couple short paragraphs of legal text that you have to include in order to use it. It'll say something about Paizo not being responsible for the content, that the logo is our trademark, etc.
Anyone will be able to use that logo. Of course, anyone can use our rules as they are already open under the OGL.
--Erik Mona
Publisher
Paizo Publishing, LLC
Splutendous!
:: HEAD EXPLODES ::
<Licks up the brains.>
That's really interesting (and I don't mean the brain-eating). Having a Pathfinder RPG Enabled logo would be a really good idea, and something I could imagine quite a few people and smaller publishers would have a look at.
I know it's not particularly necessary, what with Pathfinder being OGL and all, but will hopefully help cement the Pathfinder RPG 'brand', if that doesn't sound too distasteful.
Unlike the brain eating.
Chobbly
One thing I'd like to be clear about is that while the Pathfinder RPG contains OGL content, Pathfinder itself is and will remain a Paizo trademark. (And by the time our compatibility logo will be available, it will almost certainly be a registered trademark. Yay for ®!)
Absolutely. Being able to mark a product as being compatible with the Pathfinder RPG is a really good thing, and may give those people who had an idea for a 4th ed supplement or setting an alternative to the GSL.
Chobbly
Chief Technical Officer
|
One thing I'd like to be clear about is that while the Pathfinder RPG contains OGL content, Pathfinder itself is and will remain a Paizo trademark. (And by the time our compatibility logo will be available, it will almost certainly be a registered trademark. Yay for ®!)Absolutely. Being able to mark a product as being compatible with the Pathfinder RPG is a really good thing, and may give those people who had an idea for a 4th ed supplement or setting an alternative to the GSL.
Chobbly
Actually, as I understand it (and I am not a lawyer), so long as they provide proper notice of ownership on the trademark, and ensure that there's no possibility of brand confusion, trademark law allows folks to make statements like "compatible with the Pathfinder RPG" without our permission... but they couldn't use our logo or anything derived from it.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
Actually, as I understand it (and I am not a lawyer), so long as they provide proper notice of ownership on the trademark, and ensure that there's no possibility of brand confusion, trademark law allows folks to make statements like "compatible with the Pathfinder RPG" without our permission... but they couldn't use our logo or anything derived from it.
D'oh! I forgot something. While trademark law would allow people to make such compatibility statements, the OGL specifically disallows it:
You agree not to indicate compatibility or co-adaptability with any Trademark or Registered Trademark in conjunction with a work containing Open Game Content except as expressly licensed in another, independent Agreement with the owner of such Trademark or Registered Trademark.
So you can't publish an OGL product and advertise it as compatible with the Pathfinder RPG without having an agreement with us. But that's OK—we'll make it easy.
|
So you can't publish an OGL product and advertise it as compatible with the Pathfinder RPG without having an agreement with us. But that's OK—we'll make it easy.
But you could advertise...
"Compatible with PRPG."
"Compatible with 3P."
"Compatible with that game made by that company that used to publish the magazines for the world's most popular fantasy rpg."
Ok.. the last one is a bit of a stretch. :)
Nice... very nice. Now if some other 3PP's (say Necromancer's next ToH) pop that on their product PRPG will be on it's way. I much prefer 3.x to 4E and this will help keep it alive. Thanks :)
Quick question: Will the logo/license be usable with the Beta or next year after the PfPRG's official release?
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
Quick question: Will the logo/license be usable with the Beta or next year after the PfPRG's official release?
Even Paizo isn't making products compatible with the Beta... we're staying straight 3.5 until the finished product is available at Gen Con 2009.
We're still nailing down the details on the license, but the current plan will allow publishers to release products with the compatibility logo starting the same day that Paizo releases the finished RPG. (We'll be giving publishers access to the rules as soon as we finalize them.)
|
|
So you can't publish an OGL product and advertise it as compatible with the Pathfinder RPG without having an agreement with us. But that's OK—we'll make it easy.But you could advertise...
"Compatible with PRPG."
"Compatible with 3P."
"Compatible with that game made by that company that used to publish the magazines for the world's most popular fantasy rpg."Ok.. the last one is a bit of a stretch. :)
"ComPAtable wiTH that game that is made by that awesome game company that used to publish award-winning magazines For the world's most popular RPG, back when It was still in a recogNizable form, anD not a stEaming pile of [censored] like the sub-paR product that now erroneously bears the same name. You know, the real new edition of the world's most popular role playing game, even if it doesn't have the world's most popular name any more.."
Ooh! Ooh!
I want to so use that on the first page of any Netbook I do for PRPG. :D
With a dedication to Gygax and Arneson, of course... I think Paizo should include that, and require it for the logo as well. I would hate to think that others may be trying to claim creating the RPG genre...
|
Director of Brand Strategy
|
"ComPAtable wiTH that game that is made by that awesome game company that used to publish award-winning magazines For the world's most popular RPG, back when It was still in a recogNizable form, anD not a stEaming pile of [censored] like the sub-paR product that now erroneously bears the same name. You know, the real new edition of the world's most popular role playing game, even if it doesn't have the world's most popular name any more.."
Perfect.
|
|
This is truly awesome news!
Personally, I would like to see those companies who intend to move towards Pathfinder compatibility work closely together to strengthen the Pathfinder brand as a whole.
I think that there are potential benefits in a coordinated effort to build up the Pathfinder-compatible brand as a strong alternative to 4e D&D. This would require a level of cooperation between companies that never really happened with the d20 license.
IMHO, the big challenge will be to ensure that the market for 3.5-compatible material remains viable until the final version of the Pathfinder rules is available. I suspect that the 3.5 market is still viable for small to medium scale publishers at the moment, but it is uncertain how long this will remain true. The risk is that disaffected players will decide to leave the hobby entirely or focus their interest on a non-d20 RPG.
Obviously, the 3.5 rulebooks are now falling out of print. In addition, I suspect that many publishers will choose to retire 3.5 product lines in December with the end of the d20 trademark license. This may hurt the long-term viability of the market for Pathfinder-compatible material unless decisive action is taken by publishers.
The final version of the Pathfinder RPG won't be out until GenCon in 2009 - which means that there will be an eight month gap during which there will be few 3.5-compatible products being produced. Publishers must actively fight the perception that 3.5 is dead during this period or there is a risk that the OGL market could gradually dry up. The open playtest of the Pathfinder rules is a step in the right direction, but it may not be enough on its own.
It would be great if Paizo could convince a couple of the second-tier publishers (Green Ronin, Malhavoc, Necromancer Games, Mongoose, Goodman Games) to throw some weight behind the Pathfinder-compatible brand, but it is not clear whether this will happen. I suspect that many of these publishers are adopting a wait-and-see approach at this point in order to gauge which way the wind is blowing with regard to 4e and the GSL.
Perhaps it would be good if those publishers interested in producing Pathfinder-compatible material to form a publisher's cooperative in order to coordinate their efforts. At the bare minimum, it would be great to see a shared marketing strategy that builds recognition for the brand as an realistic alternative to D&D 4e. The 'open' nature of the brand could be used as a selling point, as could the notion that Pathfinder is attempting to preserve the traditional 'feel' of D&D.
Some shared advertising would be a smart move, as would some form of shared trade dress for Pathfinder-compatible publications. It would also be great if third-party publishers identify some opportunities for shared ventures using Pathfinder-compatible material.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
It would be great if Paizo could convince a couple of the second-tier publishers (Green Ronin, Malhavoc, Necromancer Games, Mongoose, Goodman Games) to throw some weight behind the Pathfinder-compatible brand, but it is not clear whether this will happen. I suspect that many of these publishers are adopting a wait-and-see approach...
I don't expect Green Ronin or Mongoose to be heading our way, since they already have their own OGL-derived lines. Malhavoc has been pretty quiet, but we have a good relationship with Monte, so you never know... Necromancer has informally announced support for the GSL and for the Pathfinder RPG (in separate product lines). Goodman is definitely doing 4E stuff; whether he adds any 3.5-based products to his plans remains to be seen.
(We'll be giving publishers access to the rules as soon as we finalize them.)
Hi, my name is Kae'Yoss, and I'm a publisher. Honest. Could this (<--) face lie?
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
(We'll be giving publishers access to the rules as soon as we finalize them.)
Hi, my name is Kae'Yoss, and I'm a publisher. Honest. Could this (<--) face lie?
Yes, well, I didn't mention that the term "publisher" will have a strict definition, at least as far as early access goes.
I've actually been looking at gearing up to do some PDF stuff again and using a "No Longer Compatible With the World's Most Popular Fantasy Game!" logo as a joke.
Seriously though, a pathfinder compatible logo would be very cool.
Yes, well, I didn't mention that the term "publisher" will have a strict definition, at least as far as early access goes.
Is "I really really want to" a criterion? (insert puppy eyes)
Netbook?
Tentative... VERY tentative.
I have compiled stuff for three different FR Netbook projects, all of which I have cancelled when I saw the atrocity that FR became in 4e. It would be a shame to waste all of my research, so I may yet apply a good deal of it to another world (just changing the history around to fit the new setting).
I also contribute to the CandleKeep Compendium, and the Elves of Faerûn projects, so I'm not exactly unfamiliar with fan-based sources. ;)
I would love to eventually detail-out some little corner of Golarion, but being as that I am still fairly unfamiliar with the world and have no idea what Paizo intends for all of it, something fan-based would have to wait until after the Golarion Setting book comes out... WELL after...
And would also have to depend on Paizo's stance on such projects - WotC pretty much left them alone, and I would find it hard to believe that Paizo would be harsher then the 'ebil empire', but that remains to be seen. A lot of lessons about maintianing one's IP were learned in 3e.
Hi this is Louis Porter Jr. of LPJ Design and Devil's Workshop. I am planning to support Paizo with a few cross over products with Pathfinder and our main d20/OGL fantasy setting, NeoExodus: A House Divided (If you want to check out the setting for free, get your copy of NeoExodus: The World of Exodus here!). I can't wait to what Paizo does with this license and how I can support it.