Question about game licensing

I've primarily been a contributor to other people's projects up to this point and I haven't reallye paid much attention to the minutae of product licensing. Whatever I have offered up to this point has been under the Open Game License and that has tended to suit my needs. However, I have a few ideas for game supplements that while I don't want to make the whole work open, I do want to make it availiable for derivative works. I'm aware of the Creative Commons Share and Share Alike and that really seems like it would suit my needs. However, what I have in mind is essentially a derivative of the Labyrinth Lord Rule Set which is itself under the Open Game License. So, for instance, if I wanted to come up with a fantastic location and release it as a common idea for people to create derivative works from but not directly take my work whole cloth and use it for their own commercial projects, what is the best way to proceed? I like how the Cthulhu mythos authors had common touch stones such as the Necronomicon or Carcosa that they could all use in their work. Ideas?

Comments

  1. TreyFebruary 24, 2011 at 10:12 AM

    If your willing to allow derived works, what particularly are you looking to retain? If its just you always want to be given credit for the original ideas.

    So more a game product you would designate the OG content, then maybe designate product identity, but note that that is covered under whatever version of the creative common license you want to use? I'm just guessing here, but that's what I'd think.

    ReplyDelete
  2. TimeshadowsFebruary 24, 2011 at 4:00 PM

    I recommend looking at:

    * FUDGE: http://www.fudgerpg.com/fudge-publishing/15-fudge-system-logo.html?catid=21%3Alicenses

    * Creative Commons: http://creativecommons.org/choose/

    ReplyDelete
  3. XyanthonFebruary 24, 2011 at 10:14 PM

    Thanks Trey and Timeshadows. I'll probably go OGL but I wanted to see if there are more flexible options. I'm still mulling it over though.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Dyson LogosFebruary 25, 2011 at 6:33 AM

    Since you plan on using the LL ruleset which in turn is OGL, you have no choice but to remain with the OGL.

    At the same time, you can protect your PI, AND make it available for others to use. This was done in a lot of the original Sword & Sorcery Studios products where they identified the monster names and proper names in their spells as Product Identity, and then provided a separate license to use them in your own products, as long as you note that said items are the copyright of (company X) and are used under license.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Neurodiversity and Dragons - the adventure begins!

Image
  Tl;dr: Kia ora all! I don’t often post much about my personal life, but as a parent of two neurodiverse teens, I reckoned that I’d post some of my experience in gaming here on our journey. My daughter was diagnosed with autism almost a year ago and my son is dyslexic/dysgraphia with ADHD like presentation. Both are incredibly bright and very different from each other (my son has lots of friends and is very bright and gregarious if also very lazy while my daughter is very retreating and shy but incredibly driven and motivated). They both love fantasy and fantasy literature, movies and gaming has been a way for us all to connect. Though often what works for one, doesn’t necessarily work for the other. This brings me to my point, I am working on trying to best accommodate the needs of my neurodiverse daughter and include her in an experience that she very much wants to participate in, but often feels frustrated and overwhelmed by. This is an introduction to our journey so far.   For s
Read more

More Thoughts on my Campaign System

So, I’ve been thinking of my campaign world again and my magic system a lot lately. I’ve been reading a lot of Michael Moorcock’s Elric Saga and the Hobbit (what a strange dichotomy!) and they have both influencing my thoughts on magic systems. I’m becoming more and more intrigued of having only a single “class” and everything else being a trapping of that. For my campaign world, I’m steering towards an everyman approach were you purchase “disciplines” as you advance to create different character types. I’m not really interested in creating a whole new retro-clone system per se, but building on top of either the Labyrinth Lord or Swords and Wizardry White box. For what I have in mind, the S&W Whitebox might make even more sense. So I’m thinking that the normal adventuring type guy would have a base d6 hit die. You’d have some starting amount of experience to spend on disciplines to start down the road of customizing your character. So for instance, if you wanted brawny fig
Read more

I like pie!

Cyclopeatron made an interesting blog post which I tend to agree with. Most conent posts don't get responses but opinion posts do. I've noticed the trend in my own blogging as well. There is some incredibly interesting content being generated out there in OSR blog land. I think folks tend to react more to opinion pieces because no one really wants to 1) either say your stuff sucks on a blog post or 2) only say "that's cool man". I tell you what, I cherish the "that's cool man posts", it at tleast let's me know folks are paying attention. As to the your stuff sucks, well those are OK too as long as they tell me why they think my stuff sucks so I know how to try and improve it. At any rate, I like pie. It even tastes better when I had to kill an orc to get it ;).
Read more