Legal Status of other supplements
- Thread starter Leitz
- Start date
No recent change "allowed" it. It's more like "Necessitated it."
CE could have been done the week MGT 1E was released...
What happened, tho, is that the Traveller Logo License was ended. So, all those old sups can be rereleased just by pulling the logo off.
That said, the new JTAS license is particularly onerous, so CE was, per Jason's stated goals, a way to justify a logo license which meant "Traveller Compatible" without actually saying that.
What supplements do you mean? Which core game?
It should be pretty evident he's talking about the TLL and the cause of the rise of CE, John...
So, yours, Omer's, etc.
Sorry, it really wasn't obvious to me at all.
I will say that if you are correct about his meaning, I completely concur with your response.
Sorry if I added to the confusion. I'm looking to write up some game structures for our sandbox that are similar to Supplement 12, Dynasty. If someone really wanted a fully Dynasty type game I'd point them there. For my effort I just want something simple that will likely be made freely available. Wasn't sure how "different" it had to be to be legal. I'm happy to avoid any hint of questionable legality.
Make more sense?
Make more sense?
OK. This is sort of what I thought you might have been asking.
Only the supplements that were placed in the OGL are open for use and even then there are portions that did not get placed in the OGL. Anything else, such as Dynasty, is off limits for commercial use.
The only supplements in the OGL are portions of the Mongoose 1e rulebook, High Guard, Mercenary, and the second attempt of the 1e vehicle book.
Yeah, that's really the best thing to do.
Sad, really. Before the Great Unpleasantness, I had been given permission to add some of the other supplements to the OGL. Dale McCoy had already added the vehicle book to the OGL and I had intended to add some of the other supplements after I finished with the GKG book I was writing at the time. My intention was to do Dynasty as one of those I added to the OGL.
I never got to it. By the time I was free to attempt it, things were already underway for playtesting and so forth of MgT2 (and the associated troubles we had later) and I went all in on converting the GKG library to MgT2 for what I thought would be an MgT2 version of Clement Sector (and that was not to be either thanks to TAS).
This interests me as well, as I'm considering publishing a supplement for expanded universe and world creation. But despite reading and re-reading threads such as this one, as well as the OGL, I still find it confusing as to how far I can go, or can't. For instance, extended UWP ratings, the expanded UWP string, alternate government types, etc.
I'll continue my work and my research but it's so very disappointing that this situation has become so confusing and seemingly polarized.
I'll continue my work and my research but it's so very disappointing that this situation has become so confusing and seemingly polarized.
It has been a bit confusing in the past but, with the advent of Cepheus Engine, it's really quite clear as Jason Kemp has already done most of the heavy lifting for you.
Pick up a copy of Cepheus Engine. If it is in Cepheus Engine, then it is OGL and available for your use. If it isn't, it's not. Pretty simple.
The classic UWP and UCP values are open; the design tables that underlay them are not. (T20)
Ships and Vehicles written with T20 are open; the design sequences themselves are not.
T20 Classes are open, as are racial stat mods and special abilities; the fluff-text is not.
T20 Char Gen is open, but the specific services are not.
Mongoose only released SRDs (that I've seen) for MGT1E Core, HG, and Mercenary, and there are some interesting omissions therein. Nothing else is open but what is in the SRDs.
Note that CE could technically be unlawful in some jurisdictions; German and French creator rights are far more expansive than US rights. As in, mechanics are covered, unlike the US (where it's blackletter that processes are not, nor are game rules, but the exact wording, where not essential to the game rules, is) or the UK.
Marc or his licensees could, in theory, block publication to France and Germany under the Creator's Rights laws there. Recent (last 5 years) case law includes a case which involved a german company cloning a french company's boxed card game, with new art, reworded rules, and a slight theme change; they got hit by a french court for full stoppage of sales, and damages, and germany accepted the french decision and applied it there...
They also released an SRD for the second of the MgT 1e vehicle design books.
http://forum.mongoosepublishing.com/viewtopic.php?t=72061
http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/pdf/travdevpack.zip
Mongoose had stated that they were going to do an SRD for all of the Book:X supplements at one point or another but later stated that they were too busy to do so. Dale McCoy of Jon Brazer Enterprises worked with Mongoose to create the vehicle SRD.
As I was saying before, I really wanted SRDs for some of the other books (Dynasty in particular) so I asked and received permission to do just that. I put it on the back burner as I working on a GKG release and then the word came to me that MgT2e was coming. I dropped the plan to work on the Dynasty SRD and began working on a Clement Sector version for 2e. Had I known then what I know now, I'd have worked on the Dynasty SRD.
I see some things were not ported over, here and there, from the Traveller SRD.
Were these not ported over for OGL/license issues?
One was capital ship and other options from the High-Guard portion of the Traveller SRD.
Another is the Mercernary and group combat.
Any rumor of these coming forth as additons or are these a no go.
Other seem to be editorial decisions to make Cepheus more like CT. Like the format of character generation. There are no event tables and skill packages, even though they were in the SRD.
Yet event tables are in the new Diverse Roles supplement or at least the sample has them.
Were these not ported over for OGL/license issues?
One was capital ship and other options from the High-Guard portion of the Traveller SRD.
Another is the Mercernary and group combat.
Any rumor of these coming forth as additons or are these a no go.
Other seem to be editorial decisions to make Cepheus more like CT. Like the format of character generation. There are no event tables and skill packages, even though they were in the SRD.
Yet event tables are in the new Diverse Roles supplement or at least the sample has them.
Just purusing DriveThruRPG I have issues with Cepheus. It just feels like a Traveller knockoff, and in that regard a lawsuit waiting to happen. Right down to the generic black covers.
Whatever.
Hey sour-patch. Why the gloom?
I think the IP holder, Mr. Miller, is aware of Cepheus. My understanding from what I have seen on posts he is at the least kept abreast of things by his closer associates. If Marc is vigorous with his IP as John Watts has been with his content and avoiding joining TAS.
It just feels wrong to me. I mean why not just create a different 2d6 game altogether, and not borrow or otherwise mirror someone else's creation? That's what I don't get.
Why not just create something that uses a different 2d6 game mechanic and call it ... I don't know ... "Space Opera Game" or something, and have your own original artwork on the cover?
Like I say. Whatever.
But what thought did you want to compelte with your "If Marc Miller ..." phrase? You said "If", but there was no "then...".
Why not just create something that uses a different 2d6 game mechanic and call it ... I don't know ... "Space Opera Game" or something, and have your own original artwork on the cover?
Like I say. Whatever.
But what thought did you want to compelte with your "If Marc Miller ..." phrase? You said "If", but there was no "then...".
creativehum
SOC-14 1K
I think the logic is...
- The game materials are compatible with Traveller materials, and thus useful to an already established consumer base.
- Since CE is built from materials with licenses that allow the game to be built there is not problem.
I can't speak to the cover design issue, but as far as mechanics, it seems a no brainer to me.
I don't know. It just seems fishy to me. GL to whoever delves into it.
