Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Burgoyne 01-27-05, 03:37 AM	I admit that I'm interested in this whole Living Greyhawk ordering modules and playing them, but is there a reason it is so hard to get copies of these modules for our own perusal before we decide to pick one? And the pressure to both play and report the game seems rather intense. What happens if the game goes poorly? Can I never order another module again? Also, is there any plan to release past years modules so that the public can benefit from access to... Uh... More modules?
kenobi65 01-27-05, 12:17 PM	I admit that I'm interested in this whole Living Greyhawk ordering modules and playing them, but is there a reason it is so hard to get copies of these modules for our own perusal before we decide to pick one? Well, yes. The big reason is that the RPGA wants to control access to the modules, to forestall opportunities for cheating (i.e., pre-reading modules before playing them). It's not that you and your friends would even consider doing that (I'm sure that you're thinking about this as an analog to looking at adventures at your FLGS), but some folks undoubtedly would, and, unfortunately, a lot of the RPGA's rules are about preventing the lowest-common-denominator behavior. What I might suggest is finding the Yahoo! discussion group for your LG region (NY is in the Keoland region, so you can start by going to the Keoland website at http://keoland.living-greyhawk.com/ ), and asking the members there to recommend a good introductory module for you and your group to try. And the pressure to both play and report the game seems rather intense. What happens if the game goes poorly? Can I never order another module again? I think you're misunderstanding what's involved in "reporting". Reporting largely consists of telling the RPGA: "yes, we played this, on this date, here's who Judged, here's who played." That's it. You don't report any details of what happened. You don't even report any details of the characters that the players played. However, one of the few ways you *can* be prevented from ordering more modules is *not* reporting! (And, if you order a module and end up not playing it, you just report that it didn't go off.) (Note: reporting works differently than this for "D&D Campaigns" like Legacy of the Green Regent and Mark of Heroes.) Also, is there any plan to release past years modules so that the public can benefit from access to... Uh... More modules? Sigh. This question gets asked on a weekly basis. Short answer: not any time soon. Long answer: search the archives here for a more complete explanation (it has to do with contracts and copyrights). Hope this helps. If you're still confused, feel free to drop me an e-mail, and I can try to elaborate further. Mike Mistele
oroborous 01-28-05, 12:49 AM	RPGA sites spoilers as the main reason that mod's aren't released to the general public. Technically, if Player X tells Player Y "Play this module because you get such and such" or "Play this mod down because it can TPK", that is cheating. You're not supposed to have any prior knowledge of the event. Period. As you should know, you can only play an event once with one character, and if you judge a mod before playing it you have "eaten" the mod and can't play it with a PC. The RPGA also frowns on people saving the mods after an event, because it technically is their property on loan to you for the duration of the game only. I know of one player has an instant 3rd level character because a judge friend of his signed off the ARs as if he had played them, but I'm not going to out anyone. I wonder how many other characters have ficticious histories because of that? Copyright issues and intellectual property rights prevent the retired mods from being released, but I am crossing my fingers for the day that a comprehensive release comes out.
Simpi 01-28-05, 01:19 AM	Copyright issues and intellectual property rights prevent the retired mods from being released, but I am crossing my fingers for the day that a comprehensive release comes out. I would be happy to release our retired regional module(s) to general public if author gives his ok. The only problem is of course that all Greyhawk references would have to be removed and that would just add too much to my workload. Example, instead writing Trithereon, there would have to be _________ or "Deity of individuality & retribution" in the module. :( If somebody would volunteer to do it, no problem. S.H, Ahlissa (Naerie) webslave
SteveMND 01-31-05, 02:45 PM	"I would be happy to release our retired regional module(s) to general public if author gives his ok." That's a fine sentiment, except, of course, that you don't have the legal right to do so, nor does the original author. Up until recently, all RPGA mods were written under contract such that they became the property of Wizards/RPGA, and as such they are the only people that could release them in some fashion if they wished -- not the Triads, not the Circle, and not even the original author, as it's not his property anymore. Needless to say, that sucked (although it is a very common practice for freelancers, outside contractors and other 'work-for-hire' types in the business world). However, I understand that the more recent modules in (at least) Living Greyhawk are being done under a new contract with the RPGA, in which the rights of the work revert back to the original author once their run in the RPGA has expired. The author could then, if he wished (and if he removed any IP terms) do with it as he wished. That said, I do not believe that any of the mods that retired as of last year fall under that new contract, although perhaps some of the later mods that will retire next year may be as such.
King Kashue 01-31-05, 04:15 PM	"I would be happy to release our retired regional module(s) to general public if author gives his ok." That's a fine sentiment, except, of course, that you don't have the legal right to do so, nor does the original author. Up until recently, all RPGA mods were written under contract such that they became the property of Wizards/RPGA, and as such they are the only people that could release them in some fashion if they wished -- not the Triads, not the Circle, and not even the original author, as it's not his property anymore. Needless to say, that sucked (although it is a very common practice for freelancers, outside contractors and other 'work-for-hire' types in the business world). However, I understand that the more recent modules in (at least) Living Greyhawk are being done under a new contract with the RPGA, in which the rights of the work revert back to the original author once their run in the RPGA has expired. The author could then, if he wished (and if he removed any IP terms) do with it as he wished. That said, I do not believe that any of the mods that retired as of last year fall under that new contract, although perhaps some of the later mods that will retire next year may be as such. Sort of, the content is the RPGAs to use under very specific circumstances...It's not their property...Using an author's stuff in another module without his permission is not something they are allowed to do...
Simpi 01-31-05, 04:34 PM	That's a fine sentiment, except, of course, that you don't have the legal right to do so, nor does the original author. Up until recently, all RPGA mods were written under contract such that they became the property of Wizards/RPGA, and as such they are the only people that could release them in some fashion if they wished -- not the Triads, not the Circle, and not even the original author, as it's not his property anymore. Why you bother quoting only the first line, when I very clearly say in next line that greyhawk references would have to removed? As far as I know, RPGA owns the permanent rights only to Y1 & Y2 Core modules and Adaptable modules (not 100% sure about adaptables). Therefore once Y3 or later module retires, rights revert back to original author and he could offer it out. S.H, Ahlissa (Naerie) webslave
solbergb 02-02-05, 02:03 PM	Just as a comment. While spoilers are cheating, it IS acceptable to say "You would probably enjoy playing mod XYZ with your diplomatic sorceress" or "Your inflexible Pholtan Priest might be unhappy in mod ABC". The blurbs often help, but not always. As long as you don't say WHY you have this opinion, it's pretty accepted. And of course your opinion could be wrong, so the player is free to make up his own mind.
Majoru Oakheart 02-04-05, 04:49 PM	Well, strictly speaking talking about a mod is against the rules. This includes recommending mods based on anything at all. Just saying "You probably want to play this mod with your diplomatic guy" means that the person now knows that diplomacy will be useful in the adventure. Now, maybe you didn't realize it because your DM said "ok, the guy walks up to you and says hi, everyone make me a diplomacy check." but when thier DM runs it, he says "a man walks up to you and says hi, what do you do?" and your friend, remembering that this adventure is good for diplomatic types says "I approach him and greet him warmly, can I make a diplomacy check?" Now, it's kinda subtle. But you've basically just made their table easier by giving him information about the mod. Don't get me wrong, nearly everyone breaks this rule, but it is against the rules. I think "it was good" or "it was bad" is about the only thing I'd let someone say about a mod. Chris Wachal
King Kashue 02-04-05, 05:47 PM	Well, strictly speaking talking about a mod is against the rules. This includes recommending mods based on anything at all. Just saying "You probably want to play this mod with your diplomatic guy" means that the person now knows that diplomacy will be useful in the adventure. Now, maybe you didn't realize it because your DM said "ok, the guy walks up to you and says hi, everyone make me a diplomacy check." but when thier DM runs it, he says "a man walks up to you and says hi, what do you do?" and your friend, remembering that this adventure is good for diplomatic types says "I approach him and greet him warmly, can I make a diplomacy check?" Now, it's kinda subtle. But you've basically just made their table easier by giving him information about the mod. Don't get me wrong, nearly everyone breaks this rule, but it is against the rules. I think "it was good" or "it was bad" is about the only thing I'd let someone say about a mod. Chris Wachal You've chosen a very specific example to refute a general proposition...not the best of logic... In my (and others I've talked to about this issue) experience, folks recommend more on the ARs or on certain elements that might affect the players enjoyment...Knowing that the AR had mithril armor and telling your friend 'you might want to play your barbarian', because he's been looking for mithril for 6 months now, that doesn't say anything about the module... Or someone telling me 'Don't play that particular module with the character that kills all Scarlet Brotherhood on sight' because I wouldn't be able to complete the module...That's not about gaining advantage, but preventing me from getting screwed by the module... It's akin to the recommendation that went out with Folly last year to "play this module with folks you've gamed with before", because the writers knew it would be best that way...
SteveMND 02-06-05, 02:47 PM	"Why you bother quoting only the first line, when I very clearly say in next line that greyhawk references would have to removed?" Um, because the next line is irrelevant to the discussion...? Assuming the modules written are the early ones, whether they have Greyhawk references removed or not is irrelevant, because the original contracts with the RPGA (and for years and years prior) was that any modules written would become the property of the RPGA, period. The author effectively signs over his rights to his own work. As also mentioned, this is relatively common in the business world when you are contracted to create something for a parent company -- which is exactly what the RPGA does with authors. "As far as I know, RPGA owns the permanent rights only to Y1 & Y2 Core modules and Adaptable modules (not 100% sure about adaptables). Therefore once Y3 or later module retires, rights revert back to original author and he could offer it out." My understanding is that ALL modules that had to go through the RPGA for final approval -- i.e., all modules until recently -- were done under those original contracts. For a brief time, the RPGA was considering eliminating all regional mods, simply because the workload on them (i.e., SRM, essentially, since he was one of only two -- if not THE only -- paid RPGA employees) to give final edits was too much. However, it was apparently decided instead to revamp the contract that things were written under, allowing the Triads and the regional metacoordinators the right to edit them (instead of it all having to filter through one guy at the top), and at that time, the contracts were re-written so that the rights reverted back to the author (minus any specific GH references) upon it's retirement from the RPGA system. This was a new development (and a welcome one, IMHO). I'm not positive of the exact time period these started going into effect, but I beleive the new contracts were started sometime late Y3, so some mods may have been just recently released back to the authors. Regardless, you, me, Triads, metaregional guys, etc. wouldn't have any say in whether they could release the mods themselves after they retire -- either they were written under the old contracts, in which the RPGA/Wizards is the owner and the only ones who can decide what to do with them once they retire, or they were written under the new contracts, in which case the authors are still the owner, and are the ones that can decide what to do with them once they retire from the RPGA database. Either way, nobody else besides those two entities enter into the equation as far as who can release the mod in non-RPGA channels. Rereading your post, maybe you actually meant "I'd be happy to host their mods if the authors wanted," but that's not what you said. If so, my apologies for misunderstanding what you meant by 'releasing their mods.'
BillKronick 02-06-05, 04:29 PM	RPGA sites spoilers as the main reason that mod's aren't released to the general public. Technically, if Player X tells Player Y "Play this module because you get such and such" or "Play this mod down because it can TPK", that is cheating. You're not supposed to have any prior knowledge of the event. Period. As you should know, you can only play an event once with one character, and if you judge a mod before playing it you have "eaten" the mod and can't play it with a PC. I don't disagree with your statements, but it's awfully difficult *NOT* to pick up spoilers when you judge, as you are supposed to review AR's for accuracy when judging. As a judge, if a player shows me an AR proving he has/had access to spiffy item X, and I haven't played that mod, am I now ineligible to play because I have fore-knowledge? It seems to me that there needs to be a balance between the rules, and practicality. But, I won't be holding my breath until it happens. May your dice skew probability charts, Bill
WotC_Tulach 02-08-05, 10:54 AM	This is not correct. All Living Greyhawk regional and metaregional adventures from Year 3 forward are the property of the author. By writing them for the Living Greyhawk campaign, the campaign and RPGA retain the right to use certain elements of their adventure for purposes of that campaign only (for example, re-using an important NPC or locale). However, the author can certainly strip out all non-OGL references and reuse or resell their adventure. All adventures written for the Living Greyhawk campaign do go through an editing process - for regionals and metaregionals, this involves the triads/authors/circle; for cores, this involves the authors/circle/HQ. However, HQ does not review regionals or metaregionals at all, and they haven't done so since the end of Year 2. My understanding is that ALL modules that had to go through the RPGA for final approval -- i.e., all modules until recently -- were done under those original contracts. For a brief time, the RPGA was considering eliminating all regional mods, simply because the workload on them (i.e., SRM, essentially, since he was one of only two -- if not THE only -- paid RPGA employees) to give final edits was too much. However, it was apparently decided instead to revamp the contract that things were written under, allowing the Triads and the regional metacoordinators the right to edit them (instead of it all having to filter through one guy at the top), and at that time, the contracts were re-written so that the rights reverted back to the author (minus any specific GH references) upon it's retirement from the RPGA system. This was a new development (and a welcome one, IMHO). Chris Tulach