How can I express in an OGL release that a deity from another setting is equivalent to a Golarian deity?

[The Masked Ferret]

Let us say that I have a deity, "Punchy Traveller", in a campaign setting I am working on. I want to be able to tell my players that any Pathfinder 1e rules element designed for Irori can instead be used for "Punchy Traveller". How can I express that in my own OGL product without violating Paizo's IP rights to Irori?

Thanks,

Glen

[David knott 242]

By OGL alone, you can't do it as Irori is Product Identity. So if this is a product that you intend to sell, you are almost certainly out of luck.

But if this is a free product, Paizo's Community Use policy should work for you. That is what the publishers of the free Wayfinder magazine use, for example.

[Anguish]

Legendary Games has had expansions (for sale) that simply refer to things by function. So they've got products for a "gothic horror adventure path", and it's up to the consumer to figure out what that means.

As David says, you can't refer to IP by name with for-sale products.

But realistically, if you're expecting someone to pay for your product and they can't reverse-engineer "Punchy Traveler is a good option in place of another popular deity", then they're really not in the market to start with.

[Meraki]

You could use phrasing like "Worshipers of Punchy Traveler can use rules elements designed for worshipers of a god of martial arts and self-perfection," I believe. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but that kind of vague description seems to be how Legendary does a lot of their plug-ins.)

[David knott 242]

Meraki wrote:

You could use phrasing like "Worshipers of Punchy Traveler can use rules elements designed for worshipers of a god of martial arts and self-perfection," I believe. (Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but that kind of vague description seems to be how Legendary does a lot of their plug-ins.)

That should work. d20pfsrd.com (which is not allowed to use the Community Use policy because they have an online store that sells gaming material) often uses phrases like that in reference to game elements for Golarion deities.

At other times, they simply say that the prerequisites are incomplete and that you should refer to the original material if you want to have the full correct prerequisites (commonly done when there is no obvious way to express what the Golarion Product Identity info represents).

[Steve Geddes]

If you’re interested in unsolicited advice (stop reading if you’re not!)...I dont really like it when 3PP strive to exactly mimic some IP via convoluted nudgenudgewinkwink sentence constructions. (Legendary Games specifically building a campaign supplement for some specific AP being the exception, in my case).

I’d much, much prefer they make something self contained - I’m going to spot the suitability of subbing in Irori without you telling me and if I get the impression you’re trying to write for Golarion without actually bringing anything standalone to the table, I’m unlikely to keep reading/buying.

I have way more Paizo stuff for Golarion, I don’t need to go elsewhere. If your non-Golarion stuff inspires me, chances are I’ll incorporate it, but not if it’s just Golarion-with-the-serial-number-filed-off.

[The Masked Ferret]

This would be for a non-Golarion setting, with many other deities. I just want to say something along the lines of "If you worship Punchy Traveler in my setting, then you can use options designed for Irori as if they were intended to be used for Punchy Traveler" or something like that, probably better worded.

I'm not making an Irori clone, I just want existing Pathfinder options to match up with my campaign setting without rewriting everything.

[Gorbacz]

OK, core question nobody asked because they're not lawyers, is this for something that will be published in any way publicly, or just for your personal use (where personal: you and your group)?

[David knott 242]

Good point. If nobody outside your immediate gaming group will ever see what you are producing, you can pretty much get away with anything.

I think the phrasing of the original question led me to believe that he was thinking of going into the 3pp business, but the fact that he is raising the question here rather than with his business colleagues should have suggested otherwise.

[Meraki]

I assumed OP was looking into self-publishing things from his setting. (Upon re-reading the question, that might not be correct.) If you're just doing stuff for your players in a personal game, you can do what you like. Personal games don't have OGL restrictions.

If you're intending to make your work publicly available for free, that falls under the Community Use Policy. Basically, you can reference Paizo IP as long as you aren't charging anyone for it. That's how things like Wayfinder operate.

The OGL is for commercial use, when you're making something to sell to people.

[Nathanael Love]

Yes- I say things like, "you can substitute Ge'Shanai (one of my world's deities) for any neutral aligned god of magic or knowledge" for instance.

So you could say, "you can substitute Punchy Traveler for any world appropriate deity of martial Arts and travel"

Or "Drunk Bro God's followers can take options designed for other good aligned deities of drinking"

[Staffan Johansson]

The question also assumes that your setting's deities will align neatly with Golarion's, which is not a given. To use Eberron as an example: there, Aureon is the god of knowledge, law, and organized magic. These aspects map to both Irori, Abadar, and Nethys on Golarion. As a result, you couldn't just make a thing that's appropriate for a devotee of Aureon and expect it to easily map onto any one of these. If it's a magic feat, say it's appropriate for a god of magic. If it's a law feat, say it's appropriate for a god of law.

You will also have things depending on things that are based on lore rather than portfolios. To use Aureon again, part of his lore is that the other god of magic, The Shadow, was created from Aureon's actual shadow. Some legends say that it was a consequence of Aureon rejecting "forbidden" magic, others that the Shadow gained divinity on its own and made away with the forbidden aspects. A feature based on this rejection of forbidden things wouldn't map neatly to any Golarion god.