I'm curious about OGL stuff

[Graywinter]

How is OGL stuff going to be handled in your groups? I know in our RP group, the DM has final say on what is, or is not, allowed but that doesn't really work in open miniature wargaming where you make a roster and show up for a game.

What is to stop two people from showing up with two different versions of the same thing? The official stamp makes everything game legal, so what are you planning on doing?

 

[hithero]

This is a big problem I can envisage, you could (and probably will) have half a dozen variants of the same tank and would all be official - so who's do you use? Ideally, we need an official Mongoose formula for working out the stats and points of units to keep some sort of consistancy or there will be chaos.

 

[Foxmeister]

I really don't think this is going to be an issue for the most gamers. If someone at my local club turned up with a broken list from an OGL supplement, I'd probably just decline to play and explain my reasons in good-natured way.

Regards,

Dave

 

[hithero]

I really don't think this is going to be an issue for the most gamers. If someone at my local club turned up with a broken list from an OGL supplement, I'd probably just decline to play and explain my reasons in good-natured way.

Regards,

Dave

They don't have to be broken to be different, just a couple of stats would do and its all open to personal opinion which is 'right'. an official way of working out units would be ideal. It would also be an idea as to what actually governs a stat and its value; for example what criteria goes into giving a tank its Hits value, what about size? Armour save should be easy enough to work out depending on the actual armour of the vehicle, but what about Target and Kill?

 

[Agis]

IMO all OGL material is unofficial as far as "official" Tournaments etc are concerned.

For gaming grous etc it is best to agree before on which material to use.
I can already envision game appointements like this:
Let play 1500 pts next saturday, rules per WaW book, army list from OGL X and Y. In addition we use our Auto and Double suppresion rules.

Easy as far as I am concerned.

 

[Agis]

They don't have to be broken to be different, just a couple of stats would do and its all open to personal opinion which is 'right'. an official way of working out units would be ideal. It would also be an idea as to what actually governs a stat and its value; for example what criteria goes into giving a tank its Hits value, what about size? Armour save should be easy enough to work out depending on the actual armour of the vehicle, but what about Target and Kill?

What you are asking for is basically an official unit design system.
I am pretty sure that Mongoose will not provide one.

That is IMO EXACTLY the job of every OGL writer to be and not the part of Mongoose.
The better he is doing the job the better his books will sell in the long run...

 

[Foxmeister]

They don't have to be broken to be different, just a couple of stats would do and its all open to personal opinion which is 'right'. an official way of working out units would be ideal.

The whole point of the OGL is that you can do it "your" way.

Regards,

Dave

 

[hithero]

They don't have to be broken to be different, just a couple of stats would do and its all open to personal opinion which is 'right'. an official way of working out units would be ideal.

The whole point of the OGL is that you can do it "your" way.

Regards,

Dave

Sure I can see that, but surely a Pz111 M's stat should be the same whoever does it and be consistant within the games design parameters.

 

[Foxmeister]

Sure I can see that, but surely a Pz111 M's stat should be the same whoever does it and be consistant within the games design parameters.

Why? It's not going to be part of the SRD, so there's absolutely no reason for it to be so. Logic of course dictates that if you want to be 100% compatible with WaW, you should use the same stats, but if you disagree vehemently with the stats that Agis gave the PzIII M, you're perfectly at liberty to change it.

If someone writing something for BFE wants to remain 100% compatible with WaW, they'd be wise to use the same basic stats, but there's no requirement and to try and enforce one would be to diminish the value of the OGL nature of the game.

Regards,

Dave

 

[Graywinter]

I think what he's saying is that if I really love Tiger tanks, and wanted to use lots of them, I'd go for an OGL supplement written by another Tiger fan who charges a few less points and maybe has a point higher armor or something.

If you look at D20 RP stuff, you will find a thousand books of Feats, and you'll find a dozen of them with the same feat - or version thereof - and you choose the one that gives you what you want. I'm not sure a wargame is going to benefit by that.

I tend to agree that the players involved should discuss what supplements they use, but what if you dropped $30 on a book, then no one let you use it because they personally did not agree with the content? Would you want to have to run your purchases by your game buddies before you buy it?

I just hope that the OGL material produced is not like the Feats/Prestige classes where that's all you see. I swear, hundreds of new classes and feats are just too many - how many different versions of the same thing are we going to have to endure?

Just look at the discussion on this forum. We'd already have 4 or 5 different rulesets with minor differences if we could each write it our own way. I know the rules arent OGL, I'm just using that as an example of how everyone and their brother thinks their idea is the most fair/accurate/simple/best etc.

This will be interesting to say the least!

 

[Foxmeister]

If you look at D20 RP stuff, you will find a thousand books of Feats, and you'll find a dozen of them with the same feat - or version thereof - and you choose the one that gives you what you want. I'm not sure a wargame is going to benefit by that.

That's the price you pay for OGL, and the whole point of it too - anyone can do anything within the confines of the OGL and SRD.

IMHO, these things will work themselves out - if someone produces a supplement that is "overpowered" by the standards set by other supplements, or contains wildly different unit stats, it's not going to be played in conjunction with the other supplements.

Regards,

Dave

 

[Graywinter]

I agree, but I also think it hurts everyone since consumers will hesitate before buying something their game group may reject. I know (First hand experience with D20 OGL) that the market was glutted with product and it hurt across the board. Gamers were really jaded after a few months of so much junk being produced. That's a lot of cash to waste on books you'll never get to use because they were poorly written, or not playtested.

I mean, anyone can sit down and hammer out some rules and stats and call it a supplement, and someone will end up buying it - and being disappointed. That may be the only thing a fly by night writer or company produces, but the damage has been done.

But yes, it is also a good thing, as you can really see a lot of talent come to the fore, and a couple of really wonderful companies arose from the D20 license that would not have been otherwise.

I'm hoping for the best!

 

[Paladin]

We already do this for SST. I wrote word doc of basic rules/stats for new units from the video game and other sources not in MP's version. Ran it past a couple of the "senior players" for confirmation and we use that as our agreed upon standard. Agreed upon changes after playtesting are made and distributed to all players freely.