Early in the new year, we expect to announce the details of our free Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License, by which publishers can create OGL products using the Pathfinder RPG rules and promote their compatibility with the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game.
May I officially say that is freaking awesome?!
I've been contemplating compiling a campaign setting and a bunch of adventures for it and putting them in PDF format (I have a bit of pre-press experience and a great artist so I think I can do the whole PDF creation myself) but I was wondering if I'd be able to publish them as Pathfinder RPG compatible. Now I know.
Hmm, I'm running out of excuses not to get this done now.
This is really great news. I've been working on a campaign setting for most of the last year, and the latest playtesting copy I'm running with a playgroup at the moment (Christmas notwithstanding).
I'll be really interested to see how the licence pans out - I was originally thinking about 4th Ed for the setting but the restrictions in the GSL turned my hair white with shock.
|
This is excellent news. It looks like the spirit of the OGL lives on!
IMHO, the entire hobby owes a huge debt of gratitude to people like Ryan Dancey and Peter Adkison who took a huge gamble on the OGL licensing scheme back in the late 1990's.
Despite the glut of bad d20 books towards the end of the 3.0 era, there is an entire ecology of cool RPG material that simply would not exist without their foresight and imagination. Heck, even Paizo would not exist in its current form without the OGL...
It will be interesting to see whether companies like Green Ronin, Necromancer, and Goodman Games announce third-party Pathfinder RPG support shortly after the terms of the compatibility license are announced.
Keep in mind that at least some of these companies will choose to support both 4e and Pathfinder (which is probably the best possible outcome for the hobby as a whole).
The release of the Pathfinder compatibility license will hopefully ensure that those of us who like the underlying 3.5 game system will have new products to look forward to from a number of different publishers for the next few years.
Chief Technical Officer
|
This is excellent news. It looks like the spirit of the OGL lives on!
IMHO, the entire hobby owes a huge debt of gratitude to people like Ryan Dancey and Peter Adkison who took a huge gamble on the OGL licensing scheme back in the late 1990's.
Ryan was one of the first people outside Paizo to have a look at our license in draft form; he made a few excellent suggestions.
IMHO, the entire hobby owes a huge debt of gratitude to people like Ryan Dancey and Peter Adkison who took a huge gamble on the OGL licensing scheme back in the late 1990's.
+1
|
Early in the new year, we expect to announce the details of our free Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License, by which publishers can create OGL products using the Pathfinder RPG rules and promote their compatibility with the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game.
Will this Compatibility License address things like story hours, fanfic or webcomics based on Pathfinder and/or Golarion, or will those kind of things be addressed in a different license or handled on a case by case basis?
Sam
Early in the new year, we expect to announce the details of our free Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License, by which publishers can create OGL products using the Pathfinder RPG rules and promote their compatibility with the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game.Will this Compatibility License address things like story hours, fanfic or webcomics based on Pathfinder and/or Golarion, or will those kind of things be addressed in a different license or handled on a case by case basis?
Sam
From what I understand it will not.
However I believe that they have a set of guidelines coming for that as well, although I'm not sure what they are called right now. Fan creation guidelines? I'm not sure how to describe what it would allow though.
|
Early in the new year, we expect to announce the details of our free Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License, by which publishers can create OGL products using the Pathfinder RPG rules and promote their compatibility with the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game.
I dont know Vic,
Pathfinder as it stands in the BETA is very limited in the rules necessary for campaign world building. Sure Chapter 13: Dungeons, Wilderness, Cities carries a few ideas that apply to Miniatures and what that miniatures terrain should look like if you go to the expense more than anything else but frankly that is it.
If it is a new Golarion version of 3.5 it fails to stand alone.
- The Prestige Classes in the new Pathfinder supplement are How do i say this without hurting the team's feelings: Boring. The metaclass: Executioner(fighter/Thief, alignment any neutral or evil) surpasses the Assassin (alignemnt Evil) making him a mainstream character with limits to his abilities that sepearate him from other classes not an evil paintjob that applies to any class that wants it. The arcane Archer(whether Fighter-Wizard, Thief-Wizard (Guild-Specialist) or Barbarian-Sorcerer) should be distinctive.
- Where are the uniquely Golarion Artefacts, Magic items, and Spells, Where are the rules covering new spell research and development (how a bout ingredients for new spells?
If Pathfinder is a Campaign Enhancement Guide for use with existing D&D 3.5 it falls short.
- WHere are all the aspects of Campaign enhancement? There should be more than just ideas on adventuring in the wilderness. There should be Templates for Half Troll, or Half elf, or Half Giant, or Half Dwarf, or Half Fiend that can be applied to any PC race so as to generate a broader selection of Golarion "Races". There needs to be more of something that can be applied to Campaign Building if that is the purpose of Pathfinder.
In the end it is going to need to be a stand alone D&D Rules Cyclopedia that covers both concepts.
I dont know Vic,
Pathfinder as it stands in the BETA is very limited in the rules necessary for campaign world building.
Just curious, but what are you expecting? Are you expecting rules on how to describe a setting based on Ancient Mesopotamia? Pathfinder's license is going to be for the system, not the setting. You can come up with your own setting that utilizes Pathfinder's rules.
The Prestige Classes in the new Pathfinder supplement are How do i say this without hurting the team's feelings: Boring.
They're just Pathfinderized stuff from the DMG. Those weren't the most exciting either. They're also not world specific, like the stuff in Pathfinder APs. Doesn't mean that you can't come up with your own PrC and stick a Pathfinder logo on it (as long as you meet all the requirements of the license).
In the end it is going to need to be a stand alone D&D Rules Cyclopedia that covers both concepts.
The Pathfinder RPG core book isn't suppose to be world specific. Its not suppose to have tons of info on the setting.
|
And they have not even begun to put out Pathfinder Monster books - when you talk about templates that is where they are going to come from.
Besides in my opinion - the difference between Paizo's work and WoTC's work is that WoTC creates rule books and does some adventures those rules support and Paizo creates adventures and then is doing a ruleset to so they can continue to create the kind of adventures they want to create.
|
|
I just glanced over the designation of Open Game Content and Product Identity in the Pathfinder beta rulebbook and a couple of other recent Paizo products, and I would like to thank Paizo for being so generous with their intellectual property - it is really wonderful to see a company giving so much back to the gaming community.
I am particularly impressed by the fact that Paizo doesn't cripple the OGC designation on its products in the way that some third-party publishers have, effectively preventing other people from using their 'open' content while complying with the letter of the license. Given that Paizo has a lot financially riding on the Pathfinder RPG, it is extraordinary that they have shown such faith in the concept of the OGL.
It should be noted that Paizo has been more generous with its intellectual property than WoTC was with the 3.5 SRD - the designation of Open Content in the beta rulebook fully opens up the rules for character generation and advancement for the first time.
If Paizo comes out with a separate license that allows third-party publishers to claim compatibility with the Pathfinder RPG (something which is forbidden under the OGL), that will simply be the icing on the cake so far as I am concerned.
|
|
Ryan was one of the first people outside Paizo to have a look at our license in draft form; he made a few excellent suggestions.This is excellent news. It looks like the spirit of the OGL lives on!
IMHO, the entire hobby owes a huge debt of gratitude to people like Ryan Dancey and Peter Adkison who took a huge gamble on the OGL licensing scheme back in the late 1990's.
Wow, it's great to hear that you guys showed it to Ryan -- I hold him in high esteem, and wish him all the best!
Paizo is now carrying the torch for OGL (and quality D&D products, to boot :), and you guys are doing such a great job! I'm proud to be a member on this forum and part of the playtesting process for PF RPG!
I wish you guys a very successful year 2009! :)
|
Ryan was one of the first people outside Paizo to have a look at our license in draft form; he made a few excellent suggestions.This is excellent news. It looks like the spirit of the OGL lives on!
IMHO, the entire hobby owes a huge debt of gratitude to people like Ryan Dancey and Peter Adkison who took a huge gamble on the OGL licensing scheme back in the late 1990's.
PAIZO IS ON THE BALL!!!
First, you received the unofficial "blessing" of Monte Cook, and now I hear that Ryan looked over your license!? YOU ARE ALL AMAZING! And did I mention, ....brilliant! The open game movement is alive and well folks! Three cheers for Vic, and the PAIZO team!!!Hip, hip.... Serenrae!!!
3.5 Never Dies! PRPG Forever.
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
Will this Compatibility License address things like story hours, fanfic or webcomics based on Pathfinder and/or Golarion, or will those kind of things be addressed in a different license or handled on a case by case basis?
Sam
From what I understand it will not.
However I believe that they have a set of guidelines coming for that as well, although I'm not sure what they are called right now. Fan creation guidelines? I'm not sure how to describe what it would allow though.
Blazej is correct: that sort of thing is not part of the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License; pretty much all that license does is let publishers advertise compatibility with the Pathfinder RPG.
Our Community Use License will allow non-professional use of some of our other trademarks and setting material under certain guidelines. That document is also at the lawyer right now (and Ryan has also looked that one over).
Anyone wanting to use any of our trademarks or setting material for *professional* publication (beyond what's allowed in the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License) will need to contact us for a direct license (and we'll be pretty selective about granting those).
|
|
Blazej is correct: that sort of thing is not part of the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License; pretty much all that license does is let publishers advertise compatibility with the Pathfinder RPG.Our Community Use License will allow non-professional use of some of our other trademarks and setting material under certain guidelines. That document is also at the lawyer right now (and Ryan has also looked that one over).
Anyone wanting to use any of our trademarks or setting material for *professional* publication (beyond what's allowed in the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License) will need to contact us for a direct license (and we'll be pretty selective about granting those).
OK... so the licensing options that will be placed on the table are:
- Open Game Content: Anybody can use the Open Game Content contained in the Pathfinder RPG under the terms of the OGL, but cannot claim compatibility with the Pathfinder RPG (as per the restriction contained in Section 7 of the OGL).
- Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License: Anybody who complies with the terms of this license can use the Open Game Content contained in the Pathfinder RPG under the terms of the OGL and can also indicate compatibility with the Pathfinder RPG. However, they cannot use any material from Pathfinder products that has been designated as product identity (eg. Paizo trademarks, elements of the Golarion campaign setting, deity names, etc).
- Community Use License: This license allows limited non-professional usage of Paizo product identity and trademarks under conditions that are yet to be revealed. From the description above, it sounds like this license is designed for folks who want to set up a Golarion-based campaign blog or something similar.
- Direct License from Paizo: Professional publishers who wish to utilize Paizo trademarks or material that has been designated as product identity in Paizo products must enter into a separate commercial license with Paizo. In order to prevent a glut of substandard Pathfinder products, Paizo intends to limit the number of direct licenses granted and presumably retain some kind of approval power over products that fall into this category. This would cover stuff like articles in Kobold Quarterly and established third-party publishers who wish to produce a quasi-official Pathfinder product (such as a Pathfinder version of Green Ronin's Freeport that contains advice on placing the city in Golarion).
It should be noted that every single one of these licensing options is considerably more friendly to the licensee than the 4e GSL...
A couple of general questions:
- How do you ensure that material released under the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License actually uses the Pathfinder RPG ruleset and is not merely 3.5 material that has been re-badged?
- Will the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License or Community Use License contain a 'community standards' clause like the one that was inserted into the revised d20 trademark license?
- Will Paizo provide a standard logo that products released under Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License can use to indicate compatibility? I'm wondering if Paizo is planning something like Green Ronin's M&M Superlink logo...
- Would Paizo consider releasing some trade dress guidelines for products released under the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License to help develop a sense of brand identity. I presume that the license will prohibit licensees from producing material that imitates the look and feel of official Paizo products and was wondering whether Paizo would consider would consider wourking with the community to develop a style guide for third-party Pathfinder RPG products?
- Will the development of third-party character generation software be permitted under the terms of the the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License? This was always a grey area for the d20 trademark license, and it would be nice to have some clarity in this area.
- Will there be a restriction in the Community Use License against using Paizo material with game systems other than the Pathfinder RPG? For example, if a fan wants to write up 4e conversions of NPCs from a Pathfider module, would that be acceptable? What about adaptations of monsters from Pathfider products to OSRIC or other retro-clone systems?
|
|
But then again i'm running my own Sci-fi game and the engine is free (Kriegsspiel is two hundred years old and free to anyone who cares to use it- its why Gygax plundered it as the platform for D&D). In the end there are always going to be alternatives out there.
Sure its the Pathfinder Rules rather than the Golarion setting thats up for broad use but the current Pathfinder (as it stands in the Beta)is limited and insufficient for a stand alone engine - i like the adventuring in wilderness and cities section - its very "build your own miniatures battlefield" and points Pathfinder's spear at GW's Warhammer bread and butter.
OK... so the licensing options that will be placed on the table are:
- Open Game Content: Anybody can use the Open Game Content contained in the Pathfinder RPG under the terms of the OGL, but cannot claim compatibility with the Pathfinder RPG (as per the restriction contained in Section 7 of the OGL).
- Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License: Anybody who complies with the terms of this license can use the Open Game Content contained in the Pathfinder RPG under the terms of the OGL and can also indicate compatibility with the Pathfinder RPG. However, they cannot use any material from Pathfinder products that has been designated as product identity (eg. Paizo trademarks, elements of the Golarion campaign setting, deity names, etc).
- Community Use License: This license allows limited non-professional usage of Paizo product identity and trademarks under conditions that are yet to be revealed. From the description above, it sounds like this license is designed for folks who want to set up a Golarion-based campaign blog or something similar.
- Direct License from Paizo: Professional publishers who wish to utilize Paizo trademarks or material that has been designated as product identity in Paizo products must enter into a separate commercial license with Paizo. In order to prevent a glut of substandard Pathfinder products, Paizo intends to limit the number of direct licenses granted and presumably retain some kind of approval power over products that fall into this category. This would cover stuff like articles in Kobold Quarterly and established third-party publishers who wish to produce a quasi-official Pathfinder product (such as a Pathfinder version of Green Ronin's Freeport that contains advice on placing the city in Golarion).
It should be noted that every single one of these licensing options is considerably more friendly to the licensee than the 4e GSL...
Pretty good summation. I expect the Direct License will require Paizo imprinting their material, but that is just a guess. Also, GR can use the Pathfinder STL (or whatever the compatability license will be called) do a Pathfinder Freeport supplement that just gives info on the stats but does not tell where in Golarion it is. It can give general advise like on an island in a major ocean near a number of tropical ports or whatever.
- Will the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License or Community Use License contain a 'community standards' clause like the one that was inserted into the revised d20 trademark license?
I'd expect there to be one. I believe one of the Paizians once said it'll say something to the effect (in legaleese of course) of don't do anything that Paizo wouldn't do. Precisely what that is I'm not sure considering everything that Logue wrote.
- Will Paizo provide a standard logo that products released under Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License can use to indicate compatibility?
If there wasn't, there wouldn't be much point to the compatability license.
- Would Paizo consider releasing some trade dress guidelines for products released under the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License to help develop a sense of brand identity. I presume that the license will prohibit licensees from producing material that imitates the look and feel of official Paizo products and was wondering whether Paizo would consider would consider wourking with the community to develop a style guide for third-party Pathfinder RPG products?
Second this. Please. *gets girlfriend to bats eyes at the Paizians*
I'm assuming you mean things like a standard character/monster stat block, a standard spell/magic item stat block, etc, yes?
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
OK... so the licensing options that will be placed on the table are...
That's a pretty good summary, yes.
As for your questions, keep in mind that our lawyer may recommend some changes to the current draft, but assuming he doesn't, here are the answers as they stand now.
How do you ensure that material released under the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License actually uses the Pathfinder RPG ruleset and is not merely 3.5 material that has been re-badged?
We're not going to individually check and/or approve every product, but the license explicitly requires that publishers actually use the Pathfinder RPG ruleset; if they fail to do so, their product would be in breach; there's a a whole section about how we deal with products that are in breach. (The bottom line: really—don't be in breach.)
Will the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License or Community Use License contain a 'community standards' clause like the one that was inserted into the revised d20 trademark license?
Yes. You'll need to wait for the finished release before we discuss this further, though, as that's one of the areas that I've specifically asked our lawyer for additional advice on.
Will Paizo provide a standard logo that products released under Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License can use to indicate compatibility?
Yes; there will be a logo that must be used, and requirements on how it can and cannot be used.
Would Paizo consider releasing some trade dress guidelines for products released under the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License to help develop a sense of brand identity. I presume that the license will prohibit licensees from producing material that imitates the look and feel of official Paizo products and was wondering whether Paizo would consider would consider wourking with the community to develop a style guide for third-party Pathfinder RPG products?
You're correct that the Compatibility license does not allow publishers to use our trade dress; we have no interest in designing a new trade dress for them to use. Their Pathfinder RPG-compatible products should have *their* look and feel. That said, the guidelines for placing the compatibility logo should ensure that players won't have a hard time identifying compatible products.
Will the development of third-party character generation software be permitted under the terms of the the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License? This was always a grey area for the d20 trademark license, and it would be nice to have some clarity in this area.
The Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License only applies to printed books, electronic books, and websites that are freely available to the general public. Anyone seeking to professionally publish electronic tools will need a specific license from us. (Non-professional, non-commercial electronic tools are a different story—the Community Use License covers that.)
Will there be a restriction in the Community Use License against using Paizo material with game systems other than the Pathfinder RPG? For example, if a fan wants to write up 4e conversions of NPCs from a Pathfider module, would that be acceptable? What about adaptations of monsters from Pathfider products to OSRIC or other retro-clone systems?
There are no system restrictions in the Community Use License. For that matter, there are no system restrictions in the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License (aside from requiring compatibility with the Pathfinder RPG), so if people want to use it to publish books that are compatible with other systems in addition to the Pathfinder RPG, they may.
|
|
Thanks for the clarifications, Vic.
At this point, the licensing arrangements are sounding very reasonable (barring last-minute changes at the request of the lawyers).
I did think of a couple more quick questions though...
Will the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License only permit the licensee to indicate compatibility with the material from the Pathfinder RPG core rulebook, or can the licensee also use it to indicate compatibility with OGC from future Pathfinder RPG material from Paizo?
For example, let's say that Paizo releases an updated set of psionics rules and declares some of the content to be OGC. For the sake of this argument, assume that the new psionics book makes that minimal references to the Pathfinder RPG core rulebook. Could a third-party publisher use this OGC under the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License to publish a book of psionic monsters without directly referencing the core rulebook anywhere in the work? Or would that be a breach of the license?
The reason that I ask this question is that the legal status of books that used the d20 logo and OGC from Unearthed Arcana was always very unclear - was this OGC covered under the d20 trademark license or not? WoTC never clarified the situation either way - my gut feeling is that they basically lost interest in the d20 license at some point around 2005.
It would be nice if the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License covers claims of compatibility with OGC from the entire Pathfinder RPG product line, but from a legal perspective I can understand the desire of Paizo to establish clear boundaries around the license.
On a different subject, how will the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License handle works that do not fall into the medieval fantasy genre? For example, let's say that I want to publish an updated version of material from the d20 modern system that has been reworked to incorporate the new mechanics from the Pathfinder RPG (such as CMB and the revised skill list). Could I publish this under the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License or would I be in breach of the license? How would the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License handle something like a Pathfinder version of Mutants & Masterminds - a product that applies the Pathfinder rules to a different genre?
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
I expect the Direct License will require Paizo imprinting their material, but that is just a guess.
I assuming you mean "publishing" when you say "imprinting"... that's not the case, though. We already have a few such licenses, including Crocodile miniatures and Q-Workshop dice (with more to come) in which we're not the publisher.
I assuming you mean "publishing" when you say "imprinting"... that's not the case, though. We already have a few such licenses, including Crocodile miniatures and Q-Workshop dice (with more to come) in which we're not the publisher.
Umm, yes, that's what I meant. And nifty. :D
|
Chief Technical Officer
|
Will the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License only permit the licensee to indicate compatibility with the material from the Pathfinder RPG core rulebook, or can the licensee also use it to indicate compatibility with OGC from future Pathfinder RPG material from Paizo?
The license carries an appendix of products that may be referenced; we can update that appendix as often as we need to. Upon initial release, the appendix will include the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game and the Pathfinder Bestiary.
On a different subject, how will the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License handle works that do not fall into the medieval fantasy genre? For example, let's say that I want to publish an updated version of material from the d20 modern system that has been reworked to incorporate the new mechanics from the Pathfinder RPG (such as CMB and the revised skill list). Could I publish this under the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License or would I be in breach of the license? How would the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License handle something like a Pathfinder version of Mutants & Masterminds - a product that applies the Pathfinder rules to a different genre?
We don't specifically address genre, but we do require that the products using the license be fully compatible with the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game as published in August, 2009.
If you want to do something that's NOT fully compatible, then you shouldn't be indicating compatibility, or using the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License—you should just use the portions you want as already available under the OGL.
|
All I can say is that I really want to see a Pathfinder Modern system. More so, I would really like to see it fully compatible with Pathfinder.Agreed. It would be wonderful if somebody like RPGObjects did a Pathfinder-based version of d20 Modern or d20 Future.
Actually I would like to see a Modern and Future versions that do not screw around with rules and concepts as much as d20 Modern and Future did.
In essence I want one core set of rules (Pathfinder) and supplements that expand and take it to Modern and Future, not replace it. Sort of like GURPS. The core is the same no matter the genre.
BTW the suff in Unearthed Arcana stated that it was an addition to the OGC and can be found on d20srd.org as alternate rules. Other stuff under the d20 and even OGL licenses were closed content except for the material clearly listed as OGC.
For example Monte Cook's Iron Heroes has whole chapters that are Open Game Content, and can be used by anyone. Other parts had to be used exactly as written, and some parts were not open at all. It was listed at the front of the book. That material became OGC but not SRD (SRD essentially being Core material).
|
|
For example Monte Cook's Iron Heroes has whole chapters that are Open Game Content, and can be used by anyone. Other parts had to be used exactly as written, and some parts were not open at all. It was listed at the front of the book. That material became OGC but not SRD (SRD essentially being Core material).
I am very happy that Paizo's approach to open game content is completely different to Malhavoc's.
|
RPG Superstar 2013
|
In the end it is going to need to be a stand alone D&D Rules Cyclopedia that covers both concepts.
My apologies if this ground has already been covered, I'm bad about not reading whole threads..but then who has time?
Except for Rone.
The purpose of the OGL is to allow other writers to use the base Pathfinder system for their world-building or for other projects. And widespread use of that system should lead to increased popularity for the system.
New prestige classes, new adventures, new campaign settings and other new sets of rules come from the authors that generate them. As example, I mgiht want to create a book engineered specifically for evil characters and villains. I'd take options from the Pathfinder basic classes, alternatives from the Pathfinder Campaign Setting, and mix in my own rules to develop villains or evil campaigns for other DMs. Paizo doesn't have to tell me how to do all that. They just have to give me a system to use.
A few friends and I have debated the idea of a small effort to compete for gaming dollars, and this is the best news for that concern we have had yet. A lot more decisions have to be made, but how many sets of rules Paizo has to release to make it possible is not one of them. If I wanted to go forward, and felt good about my understanding of their OGL, Paizo has already given me everything I need.
EDIT - and any clamor for a PAthfinder Modern just makes it harder not to dive in.
|
|
A lot more decisions have to be made, but how many sets of rules Paizo has to release to make it possible is not one of them. If I wanted to go forward, and felt good about my understanding of their OGL, Paizo has already given me everything I need.
Keep in mind that the OGL on it's own does not permit you to indicate compatibility with the Pathfinder ruleset - you need the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License for that.
You could publish material using the OGC in the Pathfinder Beta without any claims of compatibility, but gamers would need to work out which rule systems it can be used with on their own.
It will be interesting to see just how closely you need to follow the Paizo RAW in order to utilize the Pathfinder RPG Compatibility License - for example, if you develop a variant combat system or significantly modify one of the core classes for your own campaign can you still publish it the compatibility license? Or does any significant change to the official Paizo rules make the work infringeing?
Another thought...it will be interesting to see how the Community Use license handles things like non-commercial software such as fan-made Neverwinter Nights modules set in Golarion or homebrew tools for online play using Fantasy Grounds or OpenRPG...
|
|
all of that will be exciting to see. Hopefully there'll be a growing market for the game and eveything associated with it.
I think that if Paizo successfully delivers on the promise of the Pathfinder RPG and brings in some third-party support from established names, the future for may be bright - once a few of the well-known publishers release some Pathfinder material, other companies will feel more confident about taking the plunge.