> My concern is with games, not utilities. I want to support OGL/D20
> utilities.
>
> But a good utility begins to take on the aspects of a game. For example,
> one thing we're talking about for the Master Tools product is a "monster
> combat assistant" that will suggest courses of action to the DM for the
> monsters involved in combat based on current conditions in th
> game. That's
> clearly a utility, but how do I describe it in a license in such
> a way as to
> allow that functionality, but not allow someone to "play a game" with the
> utility.
Ryan, the OGL now doesn't explicitly exclude computer games, however the d20
SRD isn't finalized. Why wouldnt it be possible to exclude those portions of
the draft d20 so that the final d20 SRD is safe for use in any expression,
including computer games?
I get the impression that you are concerned that developers will create
competitive products to Master Tools or dilute the value of computer game
licenses WotC gets from "Official" computer games. Shouldnt those
expressions which are most valuable be expressed as Product Identity that
remains with WotC (and so excluded from d20 SRD)?
I think everyone is aware of the value of product content licenses into
other media, and revising OGL to make an exception of software makes OGL a
lot less interesting.
Here is my example -- say I create a campaign world with a threaded
storyline ( OGL okay) that I want to tie in to books (OGL okay) and online
"live" content. However in order to make a computer game based on this, we
have to make a new set of core mechanics and exclude the d20 trademark.
--Lynn
