Traveller Developer's Pack
- Thread starter MongooseMatt
- Start date
kristof65 said:
Correct.
kristof65 said:
Incorrect - it will be OGC. If it is based on Open, it must be Open.
kristof65 said:
You can publish the differences - or you could declare it a while new career (which, in effect, it is), and print it in its entirety.
Hi guys,
Just to let you know, the Developer's Pack has now been updated with the Mercenary SRD. Let us know if you see any obvious issues with it.
Just to let you know, the Developer's Pack has now been updated with the Mercenary SRD. Let us know if you see any obvious issues with it.
dmccoy1693
Cosmic Mongoose
This is just a quick glimpse but here's what I noticed thus far:
Page 41: term Aslan is used.
Ending: No OGL (if infact you do not want Merc covered under "Traveller System Reference Document Copyright © 2008, Mongoose Publishing" from the original SRD)
Question: Are the mass combat rules included in here?
Page 41: term Aslan is used.
Ending: No OGL (if infact you do not want Merc covered under "Traveller System Reference Document Copyright © 2008, Mongoose Publishing" from the original SRD)
Question: Are the mass combat rules included in here?
msprange said:
Hang on. The Readme in the SRDpack says this:
Doesn't this just mean that only the parts that you use that are taken from the SRD must be declared as open content (which makes sense - a third party author can't close content that is already open)?
e.g if a third party make a career that uses some OGC skills then they cannot say that those skills are closed content, but can they say that the career that they made is closed content?
Or to take it the other way - if you (as a third party) just mention an OGC skill in the book, then suddenly the whole product has to be OGC?
Or if you _base_ material on Open - if you do a new career (say), it may be wholly originial, but it is still based on the system of careers, which is Open.
Hope that is clear!
Hope that is clear!
msprange said:
Yes, but what I'm not clear on is if you have to declare the entire book (i.e. everything else in the book that isn't the careers) to be Open just because of that. I can understand saying that the career itself must be open, but don't see why everything else has to be if that's the case - authors have the capacity to say "the career material on page X is open, but the material on pages Y to Z is closed"
EDG said:
You can say that - so long as Open Content is designated, other material can remain closed.
. Thanks for the clarification.dmccoy1693
Cosmic Mongoose
EDG said:
Use Zephnil (the planet I wrote in Jan '09's Signs and Portents) as an example. I was planning on starting my own RPG company using Zephnil as my first product, but I decided instead to stay a freelancer and sell it to Mongoose (but that's another story).
The only part I was planning on adding to the 'library' of open content was the planet code for the world. Why? Because it was already open content. I arranged the open content from the SRD in a fashion that worked for me, but it was still open content.
The rest of the product that was not directly taken from open content would have been closed content. Example: Government/Ruler: Corporate Owned, Zephnil Corp, Charles Grayson, Corporate Rep. would have been mostly closed content. The planet code corresponded to corporate owned, so the terms "corporate owned" and "government/ruler" would have been open content, but there is not way derive "Zephnil Corp" or "Charles Grayson" from the SRD, therefore it would have been up to me as to whether to release that as open content. (But I decided to sell it instead to Mongoose, so it is their decision, not mine.)
Patrons are trickier. While the format for the patrons was obviously open content the format was in the SRD, the plots described therein and the names used are not based on anything in that same document.
So going back to your original question about a career, if you use the format presented in the SRD, then the format is open content. If you are using the characteristics and skills presented in the SRD, those are open content. Mustering Out Benefits, cash is open content if you're using credits, since the currency is open content. Other benefits, like ship shares would need to be open content. But if you come up with your own type of benefit, you can declare that closed. If you're Mishap/Events table contains plots, you can declare those plots closed content, but not the tables themselves.
Does this help?
Hmm - ok, I did forget the fact that if I use predefined skills, etc in my new career, then it has to be open. For my purposes, that's fine.msprange said:
However, that leads to another question. If all of the skills, mishaps and events are of my own creation, so that the only thing left is the structure - that doesn't have to be open content, does it? It shouldn't have to be based on my understanding of copyright law as applied to game rule systems.
However, the answer to that doesn't matter as much as the answer to this:
Say I decide to create setting specific events/mishaps for careers in the core book. If those events refer to things that are setting specific and not OGC, what kind of limbo do I put myself in? Can I make a new event table with wholly new entries and declare it closed content? Or does mentioning closed content in the events table suddenly open my setting specific content to OGC? I'm thinking an entry like this:
Code:
"Your starship was attacked by the B'ril, resulting in many casualties. As one of the relatively healthy survivors, you were pressed into medical service despite your lack of knowledge. As a result, you gain Medical 0."If B'ril is a setting specific, closed content Alien species name, where do I stand?
eh? This is somewhat contradictory. If I can't use any of the careers from the core book, then surely it's wrong to take, say the Navy career, and change about half of it, publish it in it's entirety and call it new, open content?[/code]
Conceptually - yes. It was never unclear to begin with. Legally - no. It's still unclear, because the law (like rules) is often defined by the letter of what is written, not the intent.dmccoy1693 said:
Event/Mishap tables are specifically where I'm unclear. If the tables themselves are OGC, many people will assume that the content within them is also OGC. Is the structure itself the OGC part, or is it the content? Both? Neither?
d20 didn't really face this problem, since random result charts aren't part of it's character creation process. In Traveller, the use of the Event/Mishap charts has the potential to really help a designer/author make unique and setting specific careers. But before we do so, we really need to know if that puts the rest of our work at risk.
I have no problem publishing my careers as OGC content. I _do_ have a problem if when doing so I accidently open up content I never intended to be OGC.
Gruffty the Hiver
Banded Mongoose
Matt: do you need any additional paperwork from 3rd party publishers to enable us to use the Merc SRD? Or will the forms we submitted previously cover us for use of the Merc SRD?msprange said:
...and enquiring Hiver wants to know! :lol:
dmccoy1693
Cosmic Mongoose
kristof65 said:
Easy ways to make sure that is closed content is easily declared closed:
- Clearly define what is open content. Examples: stuff in a certain kind of text box is open content while everything else is closed content, state that the careers are open content while everything else is closed content
- Boiler plate. Read game material from the major publishers that are derived from open content. Mongoose's Conan and Paizo's Pathfinder are two great examples. They tend to say that the mechanics are open content while all plots, places, proper names, etc are closed content.
- Release nothing new open content. Simply state that nothing that is not already open content is released as open content.
I understand all that, I really do. It's the Mishap and Event tables themselves that present my issue. In order to maintain the seperation between my closed content and my open content, I need to know if I can:dmccoy1693 said:
A. Declare an entire Event or mishap table as closed content, other than any already open content it references (like a skill name).
or if I should:
B. Keep my closed content as far as possible away from those tables.
or
C. Some other solution I'm not envisioning.
If I publish anything, I do want to offer as much open rules based content as possible - basically, anything related to rules - whether I base it on OGC or create it wholesale myself - I want to be OGC. A lot of my setting specific information - like my major alien races and their histories, various planetary governments/cultures - most of that I want to retain control of.
kristof65 said:
Mishaps and events are based on an existing rules system, so they really have to be Open, if they contain actual rules - such as the Medical 0 you mention above. However, flavour text (which is a lot of what goes on in these tables) does not have to be Open - you just have to ensure you are clear as to what is Open and not.
In your example above, if you bolded the last sentence and had stated in the Credits page (say) that all text in bold was Open, you would be clear in your designation.
To answer the core of your question, the last sentence should be Open, the rest does not have to be.
Gruffty the Hiver said:
No, existing forms cover all Traveller SRDs (will need to update the Licence in terms of using the logo, but you can take that as read).
EDG said:
Mercenary was easy, High Guard will be somewhat more stressful! I am still hoping to get it done before the end of the month, though Conception may interfere.
