Legality and derivative work

Making
1

Hi!

Like most people, I have a favorite TTRPG. I think the resulting dynamics from the game’s rules are incredible. I think a lot of its ideas are unique in the TTRPG landscape. However, I also think the editing is not great, the game is incredibly bloated, it has a certain complexity but how its presented makes it seem worse. Every day I wished for a light version of this TTRPG. I’ve got a few hacks for its subsystems. I also tend to play in slightly different settings than the game originally suggests.

For a while, I’ve been taking notes, doing some small tests and planning to make a new game. I kinda want to make this derivate game, that is lighter, more tightly edited and offers a much more accessible experience.

I know all creative work is derivative. I also know that game mechanics per say can’t be copyrighted, but their wording, presentation and other elements can be. And even if it was legal, I don’t want to morally feel like I’m stealing someones work.

If I was making another game based off the B/X chassis, I wouldn’t care. Everyone heavily picks from all the other games, it’s a mosaic of games all tightly knit.

The game I want to derive from is a bit unique, I don’t know many hacks of it. There doesn’t seem to be that culture around it. I don’t think it has any license to allow third-parties to create content. It doesn’t feel as welcoming as the OSR and NSR spaces.

Finally, I read hearsay (don’t know if it’s true or not) that the creator might have been a bit abrasive at moments and was protective. I don’t know.

I know yall are not necessarily lawyers. But I thought about asking other designers that they thought.

As I’m progressing in my work, I’m changing some of the absurd terminology that the game has, but there are plenty of other elements where… I don’t think they need changing. They deserve to be taken as they are. I don’t want to just file the numbers off just for the sake of it.

2 Likes
2

so, legally speaking: if you’re not copying chunks of text from one to the other, and the books are visually distinct both inside and out: you’re probably fine

socially, the safest move would be to get approval from the original author

ethically… harder to answer, there’s a lot of ethics-of-art conversations that don’t have clear answers, or have different consensus answers depending on what community you’re working in. and then free work vs paid work goes and complicates things again.

3 Likes
3

[Edit: I had originally quoted this comment in my reply, but Discourse didn’t like that, I guess. :sweat_smile: ]

Hard agree from me on all three of these points, but particularly the “social” pillar. To my mind, the best way to get some clarity in this situation is to contact the original author. Knowing where they stand will inform a hell of a lot about where to go from there. Best case, many of these questions become a lot easier to answer. Worst case, you’re just where you are now, but with new information. Even if it results in a lack of answer, that can say a lot, too.

1 Like
4

Personally, I think it’s nice to give attribution if you’re using ideas from another author. If you put your own spin on it or if you’re just reusing some parts, that should be enough. But it sounds like you want more than that. So, asking the original author for permission might not be a bad idea. However, there’s a good reason why mechanics can’t be copyrighted, and I think everybody should be encouraged to make use of their rights - as long as they give attribution and don’t claim authorship of other people’s ideas.

5

seeking permission is one thing: seeking approval and endorsement might suit you even better.

HOWEVER, if the creator is indeed abrasive and protective, that might fail, AND set you up for the creator bashing your product or threatening/doing legal actions (even if you eventually prevail in a legal action, its likely NOT WORTH IT).

maybe just continue asking around more to see if you can get more info on the creator to take a guess how they would react.

6

Well I don’t know about anyone else but I’m massively curious about which game this is!

Other than that, just want to echo what has been said about contacting the creator—they can only say no (or “you do not have my blessing”) in which case…

…have you considered “releasing” it non-commercially?

Three examples spring to mind:

  • the 7 billion hacks of Arnold Kemp’s GLOG (although hacking has explicitly been part of the GM’s job since its inception)
  • Milton’s (not QB, the other OSR Milton, Last Redoubt) ItO hack of Warhammer (THE LAST REDOUBT: Outlaw Merchant 2nd Edition)
  • My hack of RRD’s Spire using Jason Tocci’s 24XX SRD

Of course there’s loads more, but I doubt the author would (or even could) have any objection to you publishing your own houserules as a series of blogposts or free PDFs, in the grand tradition of TTRPGs.

1 Like
7

I definitely have intentions to make it into something commercial down the road. :joy:

But the word is really just to talk to the author. I’m pretty confident that legally I would be fine, but I think that subconsciously I don’t want to go forward without the authors blessing, and I feel like I might not get it.

8

I can see the hesitation. due to AI discourse, a lot of artists are changing their views of IP.

rewind a decade or so ago, and most artists had a less NATURAL LAW view of copyright, which is the corporate interpretation (literally created by corporate booksellers, art is private property, to be bought and sold POV) and more the POSITIVE LAW viewpoint (the community property artsy fartsy view, lets make temporary money while making art point of view).

now a lot of people (puzzlingly, to me, a lot of leftists) have flipped their views…

9

I’d talk to the original author first. Then, I’d ask myself if my proposal truly offers something new. I think creating a derivative work in a similar setting might not be the best use of time. However, if you’re considering using similar rules in a different setting, that’s interesting. For example, Cloud Empress did something amazing with that approach. Anyway, just my two cents. Best of luck with your venture.

10

The question of it something brings something new is the difficult one to answer.

If you look at the OSR, a huge majority of it is incredibly close to the material it derives from. As time passes we’re obvious moving further away. But there are actual retroclones, then hacks. I’d 100% feel comfortable taking the chassis of an OSR product, fill in new classes, change a system, rework some details and release it as is if that’s what I had in mind. But once you leave that space, it becomes quite different.

I wouldn’t feel as comfortable with other design spaces.

1 Like
11

But… Come on! What game is it that you say? :grin:

12

Cairn right??? WINKY FACE.