RE: [dq-rules] More about the New Project

["Stephen Johnson" <HeadsUpNow@worldnet.att.net>]

rthorm wrote...

> Stephen suggested:
>   "FoEx in magic don't write the specific spells, create the
>   mechanics for creating new ones and how they're used/resolved.
>   THEN, using those rules, "duplicate" the Colleges in the Book.
>   Thus providing both the appropriate colleges and an example of
>   how build new ones if someone wants to."
>
> This already exists in Arcane Wisdom.  See 92. MAGICAL RESEARCH AND
> SPELL CONSTRUCTION.  Personally, I don't care for it.  And though I
> haven't gone through and checked, I believe that many spells in the
> existing colleges don't work out when you run their numbers through
> this system.
	My understanding is that Arcane Wisdom was reverse engineered from what they
stuck into 1st Ed.  That was my point though, build the system for creating
spells and the like and THEN build the spells and such so that they match the
mechanics.

> Another point to consider is that other players may want to swap in
> entire new magic systems.  A few months ago there was some discussion
> of a campaign of orcs, based on someone's novels, which had a
> different magic system.  I think that one of DQ's attractions is its
> modularity, and I want to make this version even more so; so that if a
> GM wants to run a campaign with different magic, they can write that
> system up and go.
	I can certainly agree with this!  In fact it fits with what little fiddling I
did with DQ.



Then Esko Halttunen wrote...

> > I am not a copyright lawyer.  But I think all of us have become
> > at least somewhat acquainted with contemporary intellectual
> > property law as we have struggled to understand the ownership
> > and rights issues concerning DragonQuest. It is my understanding
> > that game rules cannot be copyrighted, only the expression of
> > those rules can be copyrighted.
> Afaik, this is true. If it were not, it would be impossible for
> there to be al these game companies other than TSR making all those
> myriad supplements to the D20 system.
	The D20 thing is very specifically crafted by the WotC legal team to do some
very specific things.  See after WotC took over TSR the accounting and finance
types went through everything and determined that pretty much everything TSR
has put out, pretty much since it's founding, and especially since the first
ever Players Handbook (PHB from now on) was a sales driver to the one thing the
company made serious, for TSR, money from - selling the PHB!  All the boxed
sets, the Monster Manual, DMs Guide, all the magazines, supplements and so on,
all of it didn't really make TSR any money.  Selling the PHB was, and in their
current business model is, what makes TSR money, everything else just drove
demand for the PHB.
	Thus the D20 concept, and then that nasty D20 License, to off load all the
stuff that doesn't make TSR money.  The supplements, campaigns and other stuff,
onto the fanbase and let them kill themselves pumping it out into the market to
drive demand for the PHB.  Which is what makes TSR money, it's really a
brilliant bit of commercial thinking in a way.  Get your customers to go crazy
promoting your product for you.
	But that D20 License is not open source, and it's restrictive in other ways as
well.  I have a friend who's putting out some D20 books and some of the stuff I
hear about what it does and does not allow... ::Shudder::  Remember, it was
crafted by corporate lawyers to protect the corporate profit center and thus
it's a legal bear trap.  In fact it's so bad from what I've heard that many of
the publishers that put out D20 stuff are now looking to create a separate logo
and organization to move their customer base away from the PHB and WotC.
	So keep in mind that D20 is NOT Open Source, something even WotC has backed
off of saying BTW.



Then J. K. Hoffman wrote...

> While that all looks good in theory, I'm fairly certain that
> the first time you try to actually sell or market an RPG by
> the name of "DragonQuest", Hasbro lawyers will eat you alive.
> Not that I've had any personal experience in that regard, but
> I've known several corporate lawyers over the years and, well,
> that's what they *do*.  I mean, it's their bread and butter.
	Agreed, completely.  Right now nothing is being done with DragonQuest that
either makes money or threatens Hasbro/WotC/TSR IP, Trademarks or revenue.  As
such we're not worth the time of bothering with, we're flying under their radar
STS.  The moment you put a DragonQuest titled product on the market you appear
on their radar, and IME the first thing any big company does when a new product
appears in their marketspace is research it.  And trust me, when one of their
lawyers discovers that they own IP and Trademarks to a prior game titled
DragonQuest...  ::shrug::  This is what these lawyers are being paid a salary
to do, to sue the crap out of the competition to remove them from the
marketspace if they can.
	Even if the Trademarks can be legitimately disputed, which I suspect it might
well be.  The problem isn't the law it's how deep are your pockets in
comparison to Hasbro/WotC/TSR?  These folks can and will drag out a case for
years in order to financially break whomever is bringing this to market.  It's
a nasty fact of business that many small companies with great ideas and better
products than the established brands get broken in the courts by the legal fees
of defending themselves from frivolous lawsuits brought by big companies.  So
what they get slapped with fees, fines and the like, it's just the cost of
doing business and protecting their turf.
	Sorry, the name is going to have to change.



Stephen