14 Dec, 2009, KaVir wrote in the 81st comment:
Votes: 0
The OGL allows you to create a game as long as you don't use Product Identity. The OP wishes to use source material and information from the Forgotten Realms setting. I was simply asking whether he'd given up on using Forgotten Realms entirely - as opposed to (for example): (1) misunderstanding the OGL, (2) giving up on WotC material entirely, (3) sifting through his source material for things which aren't Product Identity, etc.
14 Dec, 2009, Skol wrote in the 82nd comment:
Votes: 0
Confuto said:
Fan Site Kit Policy said:
Please note that this Fan Site Policy does not allow you to publish, distribute or sell your own free-to-use games, modules or applications for any of Wizards' brands including, but not limited to, Dungeons & Dragons and Magic: The Gathering. If you want to engage in any of these activities related to Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition, such use is subject to the Game System License http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20....


Wouldn't that make ALL Diku-based MUDs be in violation? Diku is clearly based on 2nd Edition D&D.
On the D20/4th edition 'usage'. My game started in 96, before either of those (or the fan-site for that matter). The material isn't 'from' there, nor from there and used in a game etc.

I guess the question boils down to… what if some joe blow named his WoW character Drizz't, would that then be an infringement? Does the same go for NPCs? Perhaps the reason that MUDs have been largely ignored, is due to the game type itself? And size? It's generally more like playing tabletop with 10 buddies, than a true 'massively' multiplayer. Much like an RP/IRC channel about a genre (although I do agree the game itself provides a medium).
14 Dec, 2009, David Haley wrote in the 83rd comment:
Votes: 0
Skol said:
what if some joe blow named his WoW character Drizz't, would that then be an infringement?

Heh.

Skol said:
Diku is clearly based on 2nd Edition D&D.

The permissions are about much more than merely "basing off" of something – it was pretty specific. Using the general ruleset is ok, as the FAQ says.
15 Dec, 2009, JohnnyStarr wrote in the 84th comment:
Votes: 0
Skol said:
It's generally more like playing tabletop with 10 buddies, than a true 'massively' multiplayer.

What if you based your mud off of a pre-existing table top game like "Firefly the role playing game (D20)"?
Say you adhered to everything in the book, including mobs / objs / combat systems? Wouldn't that be like
inviting 100 people over to play the game? In other words, is there a limit as to how many players can play
without violating the license? If you bought the book, dont you get to play it all you want, even if it is converted to text from a computer?
15 Dec, 2009, David Haley wrote in the 85th comment:
Votes: 0
JohnnyStarr said:
If you bought the book, dont you get to play it all you want, even if it is converted to text from a computer?

cf. the difference between private showings of a DVD and public displays of said DVD. It is quite obvious IMO that putting up a public game is very different in intention from a small, private group of players.
15 Dec, 2009, Tyche wrote in the 86th comment:
Votes: 0
Skol said:
Wouldn't that make ALL Diku-based MUDs be in violation? Diku is clearly based on 2nd Edition D&D.


Yet DikuMud hasn't copied anything. Nothing that I could ever find.
15 Dec, 2009, Greyankh wrote in the 87th comment:
Votes: 0
Sorry for the late response. I have been busy with RL.

So, here is my take, from what is available from WotC license documentation.

I can make a game, but it cannot be interactive (accept human input and resolve combat, experience, etc). It cannot use Product Identity either. My previous quote was to the reason why. WotC has a specific company which holds exclusive rights to make such games.

As for me? I am still going to ask if I can use specific elements, such as the Forgotten Realms pantheon, which is really all I need. I can create everything else. If they say no, then I will make my own, like many others have.

I don't agree with what Wizard's has put in their license. I think that the original design by Gary Gygax was intended for everyone to have a good time and enjoy roleplaying. I don't think he meant for the manner in which this was to happen, become restricted. As it says in his opening remarks in the first edition of the Dungeon Master's Guide, this is a guide. The DM can alter, change, and adapt these rules to his/her specific adventure.

Grey
15 Dec, 2009, bbailey wrote in the 88th comment:
Votes: 0
Greyankh said:
Sorry for the late response. I have been busy with RL.

So, here is my take, from what is available from WotC license documentation.

I can make a game, but it cannot be interactive (accept human input and resolve combat, experience, etc). It cannot use Product Identity either. My previous quote was to the reason why. WotC has a specific company which holds exclusive rights to make such games.


Er, just to add some clarification:

From my understanding of the OGL and d20 System License, you can make an interactive game using Open Game Content licensed under the OGL, under the terms of the OGL. You may not use Product Identity or claim compatibility with D&D and/or the d20 system using only the OGL.

If you also accept the d20 System license, you may claim compatibility and use the d20 logo, but you are then precluded from making interactive software or including/describing the character creation process or the process for awarding experience to characters.

It's important to recognize that there are two separate licenses at work here and that the d20 system license is NOT mandatory to use OGL content.

Edit: The compatibility claim restriction in the OGL is a bit draconian, as it precludes you from even claiming compatibility with third-party (Trademarked) products that use OGL content without an explicit agreement with the owner of that trademark.

P.S. It'd be helpful if you were specific when referencing WotC materials and licenses, as various rulesets and materials are available under separate, distinct licenses (e.g., the Open Gaming Licence and d20 for one edition of materials, and then the Game System License for the latest edition). I mention this because you speak about the GSL at one point, and then point to a FAQ regarding the OGL and d20 licenses shortly thereafter.
15 Dec, 2009, Greyankh wrote in the 89th comment:
Votes: 0
bbailey said:
Greyankh said:
Sorry for the late response. I have been busy with RL.

So, here is my take, from what is available from WotC license documentation.

I can make a game, but it cannot be interactive (accept human input and resolve combat, experience, etc). It cannot use Product Identity either. My previous quote was to the reason why. WotC has a specific company which holds exclusive rights to make such games.


Er, just to add some clarification:

From my understanding of the OGL and d20 System License, you can make an interactive game using Open Game Content licensed under the OGL, under the terms of the OGL. You may not use Product Identity or claim compatibility with D&D and/or the d20 system using only the OGL.

If you also accept the d20 System license, you may claim compatibility and use the d20 logo, but you are then precluded from making interactive software or including/describing the character creation process or the process for awarding experience to characters.

It's important to recognize that there are two separate licences at work here and that the d20 system license is NOT mandatory to use OGL content.

Edit: The compatibility claim restriction in the OGL is a bit draconian, as it precludes you from even claiming compatibility with third-party (Trademarked) products that use OGL content without an explicit agreement with the owner of that trademark.


Here is what it says on the Software FAQ
Please pay attention to the section of the license that
    prohibits a Covered Product from being an interactive game
. It is not enough to say your product isn't a game; the license gives a definition for what is considered to constitute an interactive game.

"Interactive Game": means a piece of software that is designed to accept inputs from human players or their agents, and use rules to resolve the success or failure of those inputs, and return some indication of the results of those inputs to the users.

This includes the obvious examples of attacking in combat, saving throws, and skill checks, but also includes dice rolling for character ability scores and hit points and rolling for damage. Why? Because in the d20 System a higher number is almost always better. Rolling an 18 for strength is obviously a preferable outcome to rolling a 3. In any circumstance where one outcome is quantifiably better than another is considered by Wizards to be an indication of success or failure; the software cannot perform these kinds of operations without breaching the license.

My understanding is, you can't use their products to make a Mud.
Grey
15 Dec, 2009, bbailey wrote in the 90th comment:
Votes: 0
Greyankh said:
bbailey said:
It's important to recognize that there are two separate licences at work here and that the d20 system license is NOT mandatory to use OGL content.
.


Here is what it says on the Software FAQ
Please pay attention to the section of the license that
    prohibits a Covered Product from being an interactive game
. It is not enough to say your product isn't a game; the license gives a definition for what is considered to constitute an interactive game.

"Interactive Game": means a piece of software that is designed to accept inputs from human players or their agents, and use rules to resolve the success or failure of those inputs, and return some indication of the results of those inputs to the users.

This includes the obvious examples of attacking in combat, saving throws, and skill checks, but also includes dice rolling for character ability scores and hit points and rolling for damage. Why? Because in the d20 System a higher number is almost always better. Rolling an 18 for strength is obviously a preferable outcome to rolling a 3. In any circumstance where one outcome is quantifiably better than another is considered by Wizards to be an indication of success or failure; the software cannot perform these kinds of operations without breaching the license.

My understanding is, you can't use their products to make a Mud.
Grey


The portion of the faq you are quoting pertains to the terms of the d20 system licence, which is NOT mandatory. You may use Open Game Content under the terms of the OGL without having to accept and apply the terms of the d20 system license. If you'll read the Open Gaming License here, you'll see that the term "interactive" does not even appear in the license.

The question in the FAQ is even titled "Q: What is different if I use the d20 System License?" (emphasis mine)
15 Dec, 2009, Greyankh wrote in the 91st comment:
Votes: 0
Quote
The portion of the faq you are quoting pertains to the terms of the d20 system licence, which is NOT mandatory. You may use Open Game Content under the terms of the OGL without having to accept and apply the terms of the d20 system license. If you'll read the Open Gaming License here, you'll see that the term "interactive" does not even appear in the license.

The question in the FAQ is even titled "Q: What is different if I use the d20 System License?" (emphasis mine)


This is what answers my question. I really don't care about the OGL, since it doesn't cover the material I wanted. I wanted the material covered under the d20 System License, to which I must comply with the above software restriction, unless I can get specific permission.

Character creation, combat resolution, experience awarding, and campaign setting (Forgotten Realms) and other important information are not in the SRD of the OGL. So, in the original intent of this thread, I cannot make a Mud using WotC material, without expressed permission by them.

So, where does that leave me now. I will still be contacting them, because I can't lose what I don't have, so it doesn't hurt to try. Secondly, once I get this coding ironed out, I'll be soliciting for builders and storywriters to help shape a vision. I was hoping to most of the work myself and have my staff deal with RP and general game running.

No worries though. Luckily, I am not under any time constraints.
Grey
15 Dec, 2009, Tonitrus wrote in the 92nd comment:
Votes: 0
Even if they give you permission, they could later revoke it.

You might be able to make an argument for using some of that under Fair Use. I have pretty liberal views on what Fair Use means, though.

Ultimately, I think you're better off designing your own world, possibly using Forgotten Realms as an inspiration. It would most likely be easier and less frustrating than having to deal with humorless legal entities.
15 Dec, 2009, David Haley wrote in the 93rd comment:
Votes: 0
Tonitrus said:
You might be able to make an argument for using some of that under Fair Use.

You might be able to make such an argument, but it would be a very, very tenuous one in this instance.
80.0/93