OSRIC Megatraveller

[kafka47]

Here is an idea...why does Marc not want to release OSRIC (Old School Reference & Index Compilation) Megatraveller or at least release permission to undertake such a project. This could be done without too much infringement on the copyright of Traveller. Some fluff could be added from public domain sources eg substitute references to Ancients with Old Ones, Coreward becomes Towards the Core, etc.

 

[aramis]

Coreward, Rimward, Spinward: all are in the public domain; they are real astronomic terms, and terms used in a number of science fiction works, as well (Including Lensman). Further, they're self-evident.

Trailing I'm not so certain about....

 

[kafka47]

Coreward, Rimward, Spinward: all are in the public domain; they are real astronomic terms, and terms used in a number of science fiction works, as well (Including Lensman). Further, they're self-evident.

Trailing I'm not so certain about....

Well...there you go...even some of the most sacred can be made less profane...

I know that he nixed CT++ because it would compete with T5 but to create and scaffle on an existing game's architecture (in this case MT) I think would do Traveller some needed renovation.

Also, I think a generic SF Encyclopedia could even be drawn up. As you are the expert in all things Holy and otherwise Aramis - what would be forbidden assuming that all tables & charts belong to the public domain.

 

[aramis]

I'm not an expert. IANAL, either.

However...
Greg Porter made a decent reverse engineer of the formula for penetration. (It's in older printings of 3G3, and More Guns.)
I found the needed conversions... (Don: last week) all we need on that score is to collect the proof that all the stuff has been redone in 3g3.... makes the weapon list both a pain and yet very simple.

GCen can be reverse engineered from the Mongoose SRD.
DTons are in the SRD. As are all the major weapons, and most of the screens.

Ship components in the SRD: Bridge, Computer Model 1-9, Radar, Lidar, Densitometer, Jammers, Neural Activity Sensor, Staterooms, Low Passage Berths, Emergency low berths, Cargo Hold, Fuel Scoops, Fuel Processors, Luxuries, Ship’s Locker, Single Turret, Double Turret, Triple Turret, Pop-Up Turret, Fixed Mounting, Pulse Laser, Beam Laser, Particle Beam, Missile Rack, Sandcaster, Missile Bank, Particle Beam, Fusion Gun, Meson Gun, Nuclear Damper, Meson Screen, fission plant, Antimatter drives

The Crew Salaries also are in the SRD.

once the MGTHG comes out, it's going to be possible to do more.

Anything that's a formula is not protected by copyright, but instead by patent; I don't think MWM got patents for any of it. They will need to be presented in a different format, but anyone with 6th grade math should be able to accomplish that.

We clearly can not use: 3rd Imperium, Vilani, any proper names, the shattered imperium, Solomani, ship class names, world names & specific UWP's, maps, etc.

It's doable, since Marc didn't block the MGT SRD. I doubt he'll cooperate, tho', since it would compete with T5.

 

[kafka47]

Naturally, any proper names would be verboten. But, I could see one talking about Empire, Postal Union, etc. and other Library Data terms in neutral terms. Pity, I don't think Laandstrat - Herbert's Moot would qualify but an Assembly.

As I wrote to DonM, it is not deny Marc his copyright but: "[FONT=arial,helvetica] tables and charts to be corrected in a document that would be akin to MT but not MT. And, if people actually like it then they would buy more of MT for the fluff, adventures and other things that made MT great.

Marc would benefit from people having a renewed interest in a game that has languished due to its errata."

[/FONT]

 

[Rhialto the Marvelous]

May I ask what the point of the exercise would be exactly? I'm not being ironic.

Do you want to use it as a legalistic vehicle to enable people to publish MT adventures without getting shot down by the copyright holder, which is what OSRIC did for 1E? That would be confrontational towards Marc, and clearly it's not what you have in mind.

But, given that, wouldn't it be more convenient for all parties if people just asked Marc for permission to publish official/approved for use with MT material?

 

[kafka47]

Well, my point would be for someone (who does not have two small children to take of) to publish a set of a rules that would be MT compatible that could then allow other individuals (perhaps even me) to approach Marc to produce adventures or other supplements for approved use with Megatraveller.

For the greatest obstacle in MT is the errata and it is hard to just make do with the rules as they are now. Furthermore, if Roger would want to publish his DGP files, again, errata stands in his way.

Sure most would not care and adapt to their favorite game ruleset but there would be a significant minority who might be interested in what this MegaTraveller was all about. Should they buy the CD ROM, they will still be getting an errata document. This document could be a bridging and revival document.

 

[aramis]

May I ask what the point of the exercise would be exactly? I'm not being ironic.

Do you want to use it as a legalistic vehicle to enable people to publish MT adventures without getting shot down by the copyright holder, which is what OSRIC did for 1E? That would be confrontational towards Marc, and clearly it's not what you have in mind.

But, given that, wouldn't it be more convenient for all parties if people just asked Marc for permission to publish official/approved for use with MT material?

That's actually not possible given Mongoose's License as promulgated; a work-alike could, but it would need to go clear around the copyright and trademark areas.

The SRD is fair game. Cat's out of the bag there.

However, as Don pointed out recently, it's probably not something we should do here.

Just because it's legal doesn't mean it's ethical.

With OSRIC, the system was out of print, and not available electronically.
MT is available electronically.
Anything even close may devalue that property.

 

[Rhialto the Marvelous]

OK, well, that does indeed make sense... I had totally forgotten about MGT's exclusivity, and a cleaned-up MT would be very nice to have.

It's tough, though... on one hand one wants Marc's blessing, on the other he can hardly give it, precisely because of MGT.

A while back I came across another OSRIC example: a document that I guess is a kind of SRD for SPI's (and then T$R's) DragonQuest. Probably even written with WOTC's permission. I read somewhere they didn't renew the trademark (thus allowing the Japanese computer game of the same name to be released under that title in the US), so they essentially abandoned it.

Of course that means DQ too is not currently available in any medium.

 

[jrmapes]

Just because it's legal doesn't mean it's ethical.

With OSRIC, the system was out of print, and not available electronically.
MT is available electronically.
Anything even close may devalue that property.

Being part of the OSRIC Team, even though I wasn't much more than a cheerleader and pack mule, I believe there is a distinct difference in the the ideas as presented. Mind you I think it is a cool idea and I am all for taking advantage of those pesky SRDs and OGLs that game companies love to toss about only to open the door to hamstringing themselves. Although they are getting better about claiming more things as IP and restricting what is free game in the SRDs and OGLs, thanks to OSRIC. Still I have to agree with Aramis. The difference here isn't legality. What is proposed is legal - hands down. But the question is if it is really ethical.

In this case I would have to say no it really wouldn't be since MT is still very available in "print". And yes, that could very well devalue the property more than it helps value the property by bringing in new players. To increase value the document would have to break away from just the internet and hit the store shelves where it would attract more people- and if that happens then it will likely devalue which we are trying to revive that much more.

Back not long after the release of OSRIC someone decided to do the same thing with a game in print, the game in print, Call of Cthulhu. There are still a large number of folks the refuse to support this author in his other endeavors since CoC is very much in print, it was looked at as being highly unethical - although legal.

Now his CoC revision does have a few followers but since it carried that unethical stigma it really hasn't done much. Too bad too. It was a great piece of writing. Now the real question is did it get anymore people to play CoC, hard to say but it is unlikely since the revision has really only been marketed to people that likely played CoC already. I'm not sure if any adventures have been published let alone sold. Again I would guess it would be little more than a handfull if so.

It is one thing reviving a dead (as in OOP) game it's another thing altogether trying to revive a game that is still in print. I don't see where there is much of a point in it.

Just the way I see it.

Jerry

 

[aramis]

The only way it wouldn't be legal would be if Marc hasn't given permission for the SRD.

Since all we really know of Mongoose's on license is what they and the other affected licensees have had to say about it, we don't know for certain if Marc did approve of releasing so much to the core SRD. (and more goes in every quarter, as the additional rulebooks get filled with more.)

And one further caveat... I've not heard a whit about litigation yet; the courts could very easily declare the OGL invalid, and destroy the current gaming industry in a mire of product recalls.

 

[tbeard1999]

And one further caveat... I've not heard a whit about litigation yet; the courts could very easily declare the OGL invalid, and destroy the current gaming industry in a mire of product recalls.

Given that the OGL is a "safe harbor" that provides *certainty*, I doubt that it will be declared invalid. All of the requirements of a license (really just normal contractual elements -- offer, acceptance and consideration) are met and I can't really imagine any policy reason to suddenly declare a license invalid. There's also no plausible reason that someone with standing would expend the funds necessary to try to convince a court to invalidate the numerous OGLs.

However, you guys might want to consider asking Marc if he would sanction a cleaned-up version of MegaTraveller. *No* additional rules, no changes, etc. This would not be the time to make your mark on MT by introducing house rules. Just re-typeset the existing rules and insert the reams of official errata. Then give it to him to exclusively distribute on the MT CD-ROM (or the FFE website).

If it were me, I'd go ahead and do it, then present it to him as a fait accompli. At the very least, I'd then have a clean set of rules for personal use. (In cases where the eratta is unclear or contradictory, footnote it and describe the contradiction/ambiguity and move on).

Heck, you might even be able to spawn a cottage industry of MegaTraveller products. MegaTraveller is, after all, a separate trademark from Traveller. It might not have been part of the MGT license (particularly since MegaTraveller's products did not use the same product names as CT products).

Just a thought. And if y'all decide to do it, I'd be happy to draft a proposed licensing agreement for you to present to MM, if that would help. I'd even be willing to draft an OGL to handle MT which would be *far* clearer and better drafted than the WOTC OGL used by most companies (he modestly said).

I don't play MT, but would want a copy of whatever you came up with.

 

[kafka47]

REMEMBER NO-ONE has done any work on this at this stage. It is very much using this board as a sounding off forum to brainstorm and kick around ideas. I had come across the OSRIC site whilst surfing and thought...what a brilliant idea...why doesn't Marc sanction a corrective copy of MT this way. Maybe to someone, they would think that I should draw a fence around that idea and declare it mine alone or I could share the opinion with others.

Presumably, Marc would be in favor of revising MT, as he does have have other parts of the property that could be re-released. There is all of Seeker, DGP awaiting the light of day along with Challenge and maybe drafts & proposals for products from GDW's archive....not to mention the small presses who could again see the light of day.

Therefore, we are not even at the stage of making a proposal statement (unless Aramis has jumped the gun and created the whole dang thing in less than 24hrs ~ just kidding mate, I know that you would go through proper channels). Having a document that would be errata free and largely setting free just a tool akin to a hammer or screwdriver to allow one to play the game is all that I am after. Heck, if Marc likes it, he could even release other products with it as I think was done with OSRIC via Goodman Games and a few others.

Hunter has already called me naive for viewing Intellectual Property akin to agricultural property. So maybe I am. But, I can only see that Traveller has long languished in a fallow state that the wilderness has taken over large parts of it.

 

[DonM]

However, you guys might want to consider asking Marc if he would sanction a cleaned-up version of MegaTraveller. *No* additional rules, no changes, etc. This would not be the time to make your mark on MT by introducing house rules. Just re-typeset the existing rules and insert the reams of official errata. Then give it to him to exclusively distribute on the MT CD-ROM (or the FFE website).

Already done, but it's behind fixing the CT CD-ROM on the FFE list of things to do.

Geeze -- I'm the MT errata guy; you don't think I want MT to stay in the shape it's in now, do you?

 

[DonM]

But, I can only see that Traveller has long languished in a fallow state that the wilderness has taken over large parts of it.

You are aware of a little thing called Mongoose Traveller?

And don't forget T5?

I think your arguments defending your unethical proposal are facetious.

 

[tbeard1999]

You are aware of a little thing called Mongoose Traveller?

And don't forget T5?

I think your arguments defending your unethical proposal are facetious.

<scratches head>

I don't really see anything "unethical" about his proposal. He asked "why does Marc not want to release OSRIC (Old School Reference & Index Compilation) Megatraveller or at least release permission to undertake such a project".

In essence, he's asking why Marc wouldn't sanction a MegaTraveller SRD. Since he's already allowed Mongoose to do so, it isn't obviously an offensive question.

Of course, there are any number of valid reasons an author might have to reject such an idea. But the notion itself is not offensive and is pretty much mainstream in the post d20 universe.

And at the end of the day, rules are not protected by copyright; only their expression is.* Someone could legally re-write MegaTraveller as long as they avoided valid trademarks like "MegaTraveller", "Traveller", etc., and truly re-wrote the rules.

Of course, there's very little reason to do so, if MegaTraveller is cheap and available and actually reasonably playable. But since the consensus is that the reams of errata render it largely unplayable, there appears to be an incentive.

FWIW, I'd simply nominate a small group of volunteers to re-typeset the rules, integrate all errata, and (most importantly) proofread the game. A faster approach might be to produce replacement pages (but if MT has errors on most pages, this isn't a better idea). The result would be assigned to Marc to distribute as he sees fit.

Marc would have little to lose in such a venture. My guess is that dedicated MT players have already done most of the work privately. I would, if I played MT. Ironically, Marc made this a much easier task by providing PDFs of the rules.

*I'm a lawyer, but not your lawyer. Do not rely on this as legal advice; heck I could be channeling this from Thoth the Atlantean.

 

[tbeard1999]

That's actually not possible given Mongoose's License as promulgated; a work-alike could, but it would need to go clear around the copyright and trademark areas.

Actually, it would be conceptually simple. Avoid using *all* trademarks. Since the law requires them to be designated as such, it's a pretty straightforward task. Rewrite every sentence in the rules.

What you wind up with is a generic rules set that would be interoperable with MT.

The problem is that this would be a pretty serious undertaking and consume a lot of man hours. If an arrangement could be made with Marc, you guys would save a TON of work and he would more completely control his intellectual property. A win-win.

However, most folks engage in business deals because the alternatives are less attractive. It's clear to me what the players get out of an arrangement -- a game that is more satisfactory and a *much* more manageable task -- adding errata rather than rewriting an entire game system from scratch. My question is what Marc would get from it?

Off the top of my head...

1. Assuming that you guys actually intended to go through with a generic re-write of MT in the absence of an arrangement, having an arrangement would make the rewrite unnecesasary. It would give Marc more control of his game system (and his IP, which could be unintentionally infringed).

2. Marc would realize an increase in value, since he could include the revised rules on his CD (and/or provide them easily to existing purchasers).

3. If he has a strong emotional attachment to MT, he would get some satisfaction in seeing it cleaned up and turned into a strong product.

Looking at this situation, it seems clear to me that you guys have little leverage here. If #2 and #3 were attractive, I think he'd already have done them.

So what can you offer him to make him willing to do a deal?

 

[tbeard1999]

Already done, but it's behind fixing the CT CD-ROM on the FFE list of things to do.

Help me understand -- are you saying that MT has already been fixed? If so, what possible reason does Marc have for not making it available to MT fans? Heck, sell it for a few dollars as a download. That would take 5 minutes to setup (and would put an end to any talk of a generic version of MT).

Since it's such an easy step, I must have misunderstood you.

Geeze -- I'm the MT errata guy; you don't think I want MT to stay in the shape it's in now, do you?

That's not really the issue for MT players, I suspect. For them, the question is "how long will it be". Given the state of T5, I think they could be forgiven for assuming that the answer is "a long time from now". And some of them apparently aren't willing to wait.

 

[DonM]

No, I'm not saying MT has been fixed. I'm saying Marc's aware that it needs to be fixed, and it's on the "long list of things to do".

And also understand, any such work takes away from T5. And before you say "volunteers can do it", that work would have to be reviewed, etc, and so it still takes away from T5.

And let's face it, as far as fixing CDs goes, there's much more business sense for fixing the CT CD-ROM first.

 

[Rhialto the Marvelous]

On the "in print" issue: Yes, MT is available. But, really, just how MT CDs per month is Marc selling at this point? I doubt it's flying off the shelves, exactly. The grognards have their copy, few others care.

A corrected MT might rekindle the interest--and perhaps even lead some people to check out the CD for the supplements. In other words, Marc may well be amenable to that project.