Using the OGL for Game Development

[ProphetSword]

Creating a game using the OGL seems to be far more complicated than it should be. I'm no expert in understanding the legal complexities of the license, and I have a ton of questions. I figure that since others have either developed games using the OGL or have attempted to do so, maybe this would be a good place to ask questions and get some answers, not only for me but for others who might also be curious.

As for myself, I am terribly confused by things in the FAQ that Wizards of the Coast provided (located here: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/oglfaq/20040123f). In particular, this section, regarding software:

Q: I want to distribute computer software using the OGL. Is that possible?

A: Yes, it's certainly possible. The most significant thing that will impact your effort is that you have to give all the recipients the right to extract and use any Open Game Content you've included in your application, and you have to clearly identify what part of the software is Open Game Content.

One way is to design your application so that all the Open Game Content resides in files that are human-readable (that is, in a format that can be opened and understood by a reasonable person). Another is to have all the data used by the program viewable somehow while the program runs.

Distributing the source code not an acceptable method of compliance. First off, most programming languages are not easy to understand if the user hasnÍt studied the language. Second, the source code is a separate entity from the executable file. The user must have access to the actual Open Content used.

My questions are this:

When they say you have to "give all recipients the right to extract and use any Open Game Content you've included in your application," how does someone handle that in a game?

How would a potential game author "clearly identify what part of the software is Open Game Content?"

I know the second paragraph addresses these questions, but I don't feel they answer them clearly, so I'm curious what others have done or how they would address these conditions.

Anyway, any discussion of this is welcome. Someone out there probably understands this.

 

[Bester]

This. Also, while there is an OGL pdf with all mechanics and shit that you can use for the latest edition, there is no such thing for 3.5. And as such, it becomes very quickly confusing what you can and cannot use. Like is "Tasha's Hideous Laughter" a part of Product Identity or not? Because names are. But spells aren't. So you have to remove Tasha from there or what?
What races are part of PI? You'd think that anything they created would be part of PI, like obviously drow, illithid, etc. But Aasimar somehow isn't, because it's used by Pathfinder. How come?

 

[ProphetSword]

This. Also, while there is an OGL pdf with all mechanics and shit that you can use for the latest edition, there is no such thing for 3.5. And as such, it becomes very quickly confusing what you can and cannot use. Like is "Tasha's Hideous Laughter" a part of Product Identity or not? Because names are. But spells aren't. So you have to remove Tasha from there or what?
What races are part of PI? You'd think that anything they created would be part of PI, like obviously drow, illithid, etc. But Aasimar somehow isn't, because it's used by Pathfinder. How come?

Interestingly, Drow are also used by Pathfinder.

I thought that you were allowed to use the information in the d20 SRD (System Reference Document) in OGL products. I could be wrong, but I thought whatever appeared in the SRD was fair game.

According to the SRD it says:

The System Reference Document is a comprehensive toolbox consisting of rules, races, classes, feats, skills, various systems, spells, magic items, and monsters compatible with the d20 System version of Dungeons & Dragons and various other roleplaying games from Wizards of the Coast. You may consider this material Open Game Content under the Open Game License, and may use modify, and distribute it.

You can find it here: http://dndsrd.net/

 

[J_C]

I was looking into OGL myself recently, and it is indeed confusing.
How can you program a game with restrictions like this at all?
"design your application so that all the Open Game Content resides in files that are human-readable" and "Another is to have all the data used by the program viewable somehow while the program runs."

So if I use the spell names, attributes, stats etc in the game, anyone should be able to open up the files and read them? How is that possible? Game engines compile the data and you can't really go around opening everything and expecting to have readable data. Or am I missing something here?

Did Knights of the Chelice do this? If someone has that game, maybe he could check it out if the game files are readable.

 

[JarlFrank]

I was looking into OGL myself recently, and it is indeed confusing.
How can you program a game with restrictions like this at all?
"design your application so that all the Open Game Content resides in files that are human-readable" and "Another is to have all the data used by the program viewable somehow while the program runs."

So if I use the spell names, attributes, stats etc in the game, anyone should be able to open up the files and read them? How is that possible? Game engines compile the data and you can't really go around opening everything and expecting to have readable data. Or am I missing something here?

Did Knights of the Chelice do this? If someone has that game, maybe he could check it out if the game files are readable.

You need to have an in-game manual or wiki that lets you check all the OGL rules.
You also have to have humanly readable files somewhere in the game folder that contain all the OGL rules (PDF or DOC manual for example).

 

[ProphetSword]

You need to have an in-game manual or wiki that lets you check all the OGL rules.

Can this be accomplished by just including information about the pieces of the system that you're using? For example, if a player has a Fireball spell, if the text about the Fireball spell is available whenever they look at it, would that suffice, or does the info need to be collected together?

You also have to have humanly readable files somewhere in the game folder that contain all the OGL rules (PDF or DOC manual for example).

Can one simply drop the SRD (which can be distributed) into the game files?

 

[J_C]

I was looking into OGL myself recently, and it is indeed confusing.
How can you program a game with restrictions like this at all?
"design your application so that all the Open Game Content resides in files that are human-readable" and "Another is to have all the data used by the program viewable somehow while the program runs."

So if I use the spell names, attributes, stats etc in the game, anyone should be able to open up the files and read them? How is that possible? Game engines compile the data and you can't really go around opening everything and expecting to have readable data. Or am I missing something here?

Did Knights of the Chelice do this? If someone has that game, maybe he could check it out if the game files are readable.

You need to have an in-game manual or wiki that lets you check all the OGL rules.
You also have to have humanly readable files somewhere in the game folder that contain all the OGL rules (PDF or DOC manual for example).

Oh, that's it? I thought this is something more technical. :D Alright, this is something I could accomplish.

 

[JarlFrank]

You need to have an in-game manual or wiki that lets you check all the OGL rules.

Can this be accomplished by just including information about the pieces of the system that you're using? For example, if a player has a Fireball spell, if the text about the Fireball spell is available whenever they look at it, would that suffice, or does the info need to be collected together?

As far as I know, you should have an SRD in the game that is accessible at all times and is a full wiki of the rules, not just tooltips over the relevant spells and items. Knights of the Chalice had an in-game system reference document, Realms Beyond will also have an in-game system reference document. The thing with tooltips is, a player would only be able to see the description of fireball when he has a wizard in the party who is capable of the fireball spell. But the player must be able to access that information at all times. So a menu option that sends you to a description of the ruleset, always accessible from within the game menu at all times, is the easiest way to make sure you comply with the terms of use.

You also have to have humanly readable files somewhere in the game folder that contain all the OGL rules (PDF or DOC manual for example).

Can one simply drop the SRD (which can be distributed) into the game files?

Yes, but the best way to make sure you're complying with their terms of use is to compile all the OGL rules into one PDF and put it in the game's installation folder. You could just copypaste the SRD into that PDF and that would be fine.

 

[Mustawd]

KOTC has a good example in terms of in-game wiki.

 

[pm_675]

Kingmaker puts a pdf with the OGL and SRD in the installation directory. In-game acces is well... uh, technically there I think?

 

[ProphetSword]

My next question is this: Do I have to include everything or can I just include the portions of the SRD that I use. For example, if I create a game that doesn't allow for a certain player race or only has a few classes (like KotC) or doesn't use feats or whatever...do I still need to have those available as part of the OGL or can I just include whatever I use?

Another question: Is it acceptable to include a PDF and then access that PDF from within the game. What I mean is can I have the game open up the PDF from within the game and display the PDF or does the in-game information need to be presented within the game itself?

EDIT:
Also, thanks to those who are taking the time out to answer these questions, especially JarlFrank, as this thread might clear up a lot of confusion for a lot of potential developers.

 

[JarlFrank]

My next question is this: Do I have to include everything or can I just include the portions of the SRD that I use. For example, if I create a game that doesn't allow for a certain player race or only has a few classes (like KotC) or doesn't use feats or whatever...do I still need to have those available as part of the OGL or can I just include whatever I use?

You only have to include the parts you actually use. If you don't have gnomes and halflings in your game, you can leave out the gnomes and halflings from your in-game SRD and the PDF.

Another question: Is it acceptable to include a PDF and then access that PDF from within the game. What I mean is can I have the game open up the PDF from within the game and display the PDF or does the in-game information need to be presented within the game itself?

It should be acceptable, I guess, although I'm not 100% sure about it. Realms Beyond is going to have both a PDF and an in-game reference document, KotC also had an in-game reference document. If I remember correctly - and I might be wrong about this - the NWN games and ToEE also had in-game reference documents because WotC insisted on it, and if they insist on it with officially licensed D&D games, they might also want to have it in games using the OGL. Personally, I would include an in-game reference document just to be sure.

 

[ProphetSword]

Thanks, man. Your help has been invaluable.

 

[J1M]

You don't need to have an in-game codex. It is just a recommended way of doing things.

The other requirement can be met by tagging things you've added as open game content in your pdf file.

It's important that you understand what open game content means. There are things you will want to put your game that aren't OGC. For example, you may add a superlich class which is OGC, but the main villain who happens to be that class would not be because you don't want other people to be able to use your characters (so you would label it as Product Identity content if it appears in the SRD).

 

[The Avatar]

One thing to keep in mind is that the 3.5 SRD does not contain rules for character creation(such as point buy). Pathfinder got around this by making their own rules and putting them in their own PF SRD(so they are free to use). Since Realms Beyond is based on 3.5, I'm not sure what they are doing for that.

That being said, game mechanics supposedly cannot be copyrighted, so you should be good as long you don't use IP or infringe on the expression of rules not covered by OGL.

 

[ProphetSword]

Got an updated question. The OGL covers the SRD for the base 5th Edition rules (SRD 5.1). Does anyone know if we are prevented from using these in video game development or are they able to be used the same as the 3.5 SRD?

 

[Alchemist]

Got an updated question. The OGL covers the SRD for the base 5th Edition rules (SRD 5.1). Does anyone know if we are prevented from using these in video game development or are they able to be used the same as the 3.5 SRD?

I realize you are already moving away from the idea of going OGL, based on the other thread - but just to put the information out there: Both the 3.5 SRD and the 5E SRD use the same OGL License 1.0a which WotC wrote up in 2000. So all the same rules apply, and software / games based on the 5E SRD should be doable.

WotC's Software FAQ has some good info on this (just ignore the bits about "d20 System License" as they don't apply for the OGL): http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/oglfaq/20040123i

 

[ProphetSword]

Thanks for the info. I’m surprised we aren’t seeing more 5e type games being developed (they all seem to follow the 3.5 SRD).

 

[JarlFrank]

This. Also, while there is an OGL pdf with all mechanics and shit that you can use for the latest edition, there is no such thing for 3.5. And as such, it becomes very quickly confusing what you can and cannot use. Like is "Tasha's Hideous Laughter" a part of Product Identity or not? Because names are. But spells aren't. So you have to remove Tasha from there or what?
What races are part of PI? You'd think that anything they created would be part of PI, like obviously drow, illithid, etc. But Aasimar somehow isn't, because it's used by Pathfinder. How come?

Drow aren't copyrighted, but Illithid and Beholders are.

Yeah it's weird.

 

[Alchemist]

Thanks for the info. I’m surprised we aren’t seeing more 5e type games being developed (they all seem to follow the 3.5 SRD).

I think in some ways 3.5 is better suited to computer games than 5E, due to a higher degree of "codification" already built into the rules. 5E is a bit more designed to allow for DM adjudication "on the fly", which makes the translation to a computer game a bit less clear cut. Not to say it couldn't be done, but this might be why devs lean toward 3.5. Also 3.5 has an established track record of working in computer games.

 

[The Avatar]

There are only a handful of OGL games out there that are not an officially licensed product. And that's in the almost 20 years of the OGL's existence. So, it wouldn't be that unusual that there aren't many(any?) 5th edition games yet. As for officially licensed products, I donno- maybe Baldurs Gate 3 will be 5th edition.

 

[Syl]

Q: I want to distribute computer software using the OGL. Is that possible?

A: Yes, it's certainly possible. The most significant thing that will impact your effort is that you have to give all the recipients the right to extract and use any Open Game Content you've included in your application, and you have to clearly identify what part of the software is Open Game Content.

One way is to design your application so that all the Open Game Content resides in files that are human-readable (that is, in a format that can be opened and understood by a reasonable person). Another is to have all the data used by the program viewable somehow while the program runs.

Distributing the source code not an acceptable method of compliance. First off, most programming languages are not easy to understand if the user hasnÍt studied the language. Second, the source code is a separate entity from the executable file. The user must have access to the actual Open Content used.

It's important that you understand what open game content means. There are things you will want to put your game that aren't OGC. For example, you may add a superlich class which is OGC, but the main villain who happens to be that class would not be because you don't want other people to be able to use your characters (so you would label it as Product Identity content if it appears in the SRD).

This. That's what the first quote is about.

By default, you can use the SRD or any other third party Open Game Content. You just have to give credits to each one. Easy solution is to provide the original documents.

But the quote is about YOUR content. What you modified, what you have added that didn't exist. You must also give access to that in a readable text file (for others to use).

Product Identity is a way to protect your content, but it should only be used for copyrighted material.

 

[deuxhero]

One thing to keep in mind is that the 3.5 SRD does not contain rules for character creation(such as point buy). Pathfinder got around this by making their own rules and putting them in their own PF SRD(so they are free to use). Since Realms Beyond is based on 3.5, I'm not sure what they are doing for that.

That being said, game mechanics supposedly cannot be copyrighted, so you should be good as long you don't use IP or infringe on the expression of rules not covered by OGL.

For what it's worth, the attribute increases and feat rate are both easily reverse engineered from advanced monsters that are OGL, so it's technically OGL Wizards just owns the copyright on the text used to describe it. That's how stuff like Spycraft/Fantasy Craft has the same rate and why PF has the same attribute increase rate. Base attribute generation is the only thing that has to be designed from the ground up.

Thanks for the info. I’m surprised we aren’t seeing more 5e type games being developed (they all seem to follow the 3.5 SRD).

Because 5E is a barebones system designed for women and non-whites who are too stupid to understand complex mechanics. Unlike 3.5 there's no interesting character builds to be made. Also character progression is essentially auto-pilot, especially when most of the options aren't OGL, so there's no interesting mechanics to use.

 

[JonDM]

Hello!
Sorry for necro...
I've looking for the details of creating a software game that uses the OGL, either with SRD3.5 or 5.1.

Once you get your head around it a bit, it is mostly understundable what you have to do for each portion of the content and what you can use etc.

I'm still stuck in the "Character Generaction" portion and would be glad to get some oppinions there from people who have solved the equation.

My understanding so far is: Because the Character creation process is missing from the SRDs you can't reproduce it in the software.
(btw I have a strong question mark over my head, because I have found a LOT of web sites and applications that describe and use the official Dnd character creation process straight from the PhB.... Most of them have no evidence of using a direct agreement with WotC about it.)

So to get around that you could either:
1. Skip the character creation process altogether and offer some pre-made level 1 characters for the player to choose and start playing (without mentioning how they were created), or
2. Invent a char. creation process that is quite different from the official dnd in the PhB, much like PF2 is using.

Anyone that has searched this and found some sound information please help me out, I've been looking into this for quite some time now...
Thanks in advance!

 

[The Avatar]

I would make your own character creation process or just use Pathfinder 1. Their point-buy system is slightly different from 3.5. Most of the character creation process as described in the PHB is fluff text- it really just amounts to "pick your race/class/feats".