>Now on the other hand, the post which I am quoting from uses the term 
>"crippled OGC" in many, many places. But (unless you I missed it in another 
>post), you never explain exactly what you mean by crippled. You also use 
>the term for a number of different product. Now, no two products are the 
>same, so crippled can be different or even to different degrees in each 
>case, if they are crippled, which I am as of yet declined to even stipulate 
>that they might be.

--and--

>[list of SSS products snipped.  argued that 9 of 10 are OGC "crippled"]
>
>Please explain in *very* specific terms what you mean by being OGC
>"crippled".

I thought I had already been clear on this point - "crippled" simply means 
that the Name of a Creature / Monster / Character / Item / Spell / Whatever 
is PI'd and therefore not OGC.  This in turn means that if I wish to use the 
Creature in another publication, it is useless "as written."  I gave a 
specific example - if I wish to use a FLESHCRAWLER (CCI) in my adventure, I 
have to call it something else - "UNDEAD TETHER-FLINGER," perhaps.

Think of it this way - if I point out an OGC entry in my book and tell you 
that I took it from Book X, would you be able pick up a copy of Book X, leaf 
quickly through it, and easily locate it (leave aside the question of poor 
layout making it difficult to locate)?  If the answer is "no," the OGC is 
"crippled." (At least by my definition.)

In other words, I cannot "transfer" a FLESHCRAWLER without it being 
difficult to locate the original.  Can you tell me what the following two 
creatures are?  The first one may be easy (because of its special ability), 
the second a little harder.  Now answer me this - if you didn't already know 
what they were (I assume you have read MM enough to be familiar with many of 
the creatures therein), would you be able to easily find them in the MM?  
Maybe you could, but I'm leaning towards "no" for the average person.

COPIED THING

Medium-Size Magical Beast
Hit Dice: 2d10 (11 hp)
Initiative: +2 (Dex)
Speed: 40 ft.
AC: 15 (+2 Dex, +3 natural)
Attacks: Bite +2 melee, 2 claws +0 melee
Damage: Bite 1d6, claw 1d4
Face/Reach: 5 ft. by 5 ft./5 ft.
Special Attacks: Scare
Special Qualities: Scent
Saves: Fort +3, Ref +5, Will +1
Abilities: Str 11, Dex 14, Con 11, Int_6, Wis 12, Cha 13
Skills: Hide +4, Jump +4, Listen +4, Move Silently +6
Feats: Multiattack

Climate/Terrain: Temperate and warm forest and plains
Organization: Solitary, pair, or pride (6-10)
Challenge Rating: 1
Treasure: None
Alignment: Always neutral
Advancement: 3-4 HD (Medium-size); 5-8 HD (Large)

Scare (Ex or Su): As a standard action, a COPIED THING can pull the skin 
back from its head, revealing the musculature and bony structures of its 
skull. This alone is usually sufficient to scare away foes (treat as a Bluff 
check with a +3 bonus). Combining this scare ability with a loud screech 
produces an unsettling effect that works like scare cast by a 3rd-level 
sorcerer (save DC 12). If the save is successful, that opponent cannot be 
affected again by that COPIED THING�S scare ability for one day. The shriek 
does not affect other COPIED THING.

======

OTHER COPIED THING

Large Beast
Hit Dice: 5d10+20 (47 hp)
Initiative: +1 (Dex)
Speed: 30 ft.
AC: 15 (-1 size, +1 Dex, +5 natural)
Attacks: 2 claws +7 melee, bite +2 melee
Damage: Claw 1d6+5, bite 1d8+2
Face/Reach: 5 ft. by 10 ft./5 ft.
Special Attacks: Improved grab
Special Qualities: Scent
Saves: Fort +8, Ref +5, Will +2
Abilities: Str 21, Dex 12, Con 19, Int 5, Wis 12, Cha 10
Skills: Listen +8, Spot +7

Climate/Terrain: Temperate forest
Organization: Solitary, pair, or pack (5-8)
Challenge Rating: 4
Treasure: None
Alignment: Usually chaotic evil
Advancement: 6-8 HD (Large); 9-15 HD (Huge)

Combat

Improved Grab (Ex): To use this ability, the OTHER COPIED THING must hit 
with a claw attack.

======

For those who haven't figured it out, COPIED THING is a krenshar and OTHER 
COPIED THING is an owlbear - but do you see how uselss the OTHER COPIED 
THING makes it if you are trying to find "owlbear" in the original without 
already knowing what an owlbear is?  "Crippling" OGC by stripping the Name 
of the Thing from the OGC designation makes the OGC all but impossible to 
cross-reference (meaning I can't easily credit you so others can find your 
creation).

>I think after the thread of a couple weeks ago it should be clear that I'm
>all in favor of improving the clarity of OGC/PI designations in products;
>but I really don't understand your claim that the OGC in the SSS products
>you listed (and no, I don't own all of the items listed - I only have CC1,
>RR, W1, R1) don't contain useable OGC.

Please see my example above.  For the record, SSS actually does a pretty 
good job of being clear on what IS OGC and what is PI.

>It would appear that you think that a publisher has to make it so a
>product can be photocopied or cut&pasted for there to be useable OGC in
>the product.  Don't think you're going to get very far with that argument,
>but you're free to hold it if you like.

I don't need the entire product to be OGC and therefore "cut&pasteable."  I 
will give another example - Monte Cook's Book of Eldritch Might.  Although a 
lot of people have jumped on it because it contains a VERY small portion of 
OGC (that's another issue entirely), the OGC that it DOES have is quite 
usable.  If I drop "magical construct" into another book and tell you it's 
from the Book of Eldritch Might, you will have no trouble locating it.  If I 
tell you "UNDEAD TETHER-FLINGER" is from the CCI, you will have some trouble 
locating it.

>While I think Necromancer modules W1 & R1 could be improved in terms of
>complete clarity, there is certainly plenty of useable OGC in each - but
>it's probably got to be retyped by the secondary user rather than just
>photocopied.  I'm not certain how much new OGC is presented in any case.
>(I really don't expect modules to be great sources of a lot of new OGC in
>the first place - mostly they take OGC and put it together in an
>interesting way for a gaming session.)

True that modules aren't going to be "gold mines" of OGC - but any new 
monsters, items, NPCs, and whatnot probably ought to be OGC - and by 
stripping the name, you "cripple" it (granted, if there's only one new 
monster in the module and I say I got OTHER OTHER MONSTER from it, it 
doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out which monster it is).

>CC1 is extremely clear in
>designation of OGC - the main complaint seems to be that the names of
>creatures are OGC.  But I just don't get the argument that the name is
>that important for using a creature.

See my example above for why.  If you still can't see it, I can't help you - 
I have put in as clear terms as I can.

>(And actually with CC1 the names
>aren't PI either so they can pretty much be used anyway unless they're
>specific to the Scarred Lands and could therefore be claimed as
>unregistered trademarks.  And anyway, Clark has said to just ask if you
>want to use the names.)

I am not going to quibble that Clark is pretty generous in allowing other 
people to use the names.  I like Clark.  I just happen to think that the way 
the OGC is designated makes it difficult for people to use his stuff 
effectively without coming to him first - and I would prefer to see it more 
easily accessible.  If he wants to keep the "flavor description" of the 
monster, I am all for that - that's not "modular" - but removing the name of 
the creature from the portion of OGC means I can't make it easily clear 
where I got the creature without going to him first.  Granted, I'd probably 
go to him anyway as a matter of politeness, but the fact remains that it is 
currently compulsory and not voluntary.

>So I guess I really don't understand your claim that these products are
>"crippled" in terms of their OGC.  The OGC is there and it can be used.
>There's nothing in the license (either spirit or letter) that requires
>that secondary users can't be required to do some work to use the OGC.

I have tried to explain pretty thoroughly what I mean by "crippled" and 
provided examples.  If I am a writer, I *WANT* to give the original 
publisher credit for his work - and if you don't let me use the name of the 
beastie/spell/whatever, I can't easily do that in a form that everyone can 
recognize.

--The Sigil

P.S. - Please read through all 6 of my posts before replying.  Thanks.

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp

_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l

Reply via email to