All help would be appreciated.
Ironfang
But anyway, I'm not going to publish, it is all going to be available for free on the site ^_^
I still run a few 2E games. I've always likes 2E better much more color , story lines are better. And most of the "Realms" Ed Greenwood gave us so much to choose from.
And I have a complete 2E forgotten realms libary to work with.
And I'm afraid they won't be re-issueing 2E anytime soon.
Copyright is copyright.
Untill sweet water & light laughter
That said, I would love to help. As a matter of fact, I am working right now on a HUGE personal project for 2ed. HOWEVER, like the other guys wisely pointed out, WotC owns the rights to AD&D and all of it's related material.
If you really want to take on this project, you should ask them first for persmission to create derivative work based on the 2ed material... unless you want them to sue your balls off.
We may not agree with what WotC has done with the D&D license, but we gotta respect them as the copyright holders of the material.
Ironfang
Hiryu, what 2E project are you working on?
So far I am only at chapter 3 (races). Since I am only doing it on my spare time and started only a few months ago, the work is going kind of slow. I am only at around page 50 so far.
Also, it's in spanish... hehe :D
Originally posted by ironfang
I still run 2e (have too many books to upgrade). So if your looking for campaign ideas or other insight, give me a holler. I am not sure if its at all legal to publish 2e stuff since WotC still owns the rights to it.
Ironfang
Actually Kenzer & Co
http://www.kenzerco.com
owns the rights to 1e and 2e
On that note, I am going to try and add some insights into copyright. I am no expert and I may be in over my head, here... but I'll give it a shot.
As I understand the american copyright laws and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, neither WotC or Kenzer own the rights to the game system. What they do own, are only the rights to their trademarks and the printed material, not to the rules or the ideas behind him. In other words, you cannot copyright an idea, such as a game rule, what you CAN copyright are brand names (such as Dungeons & Dragons, d20, Hackmaster, Pepsi, etc, etc and so forth) and the textual printed words used to described the rules.
It's pretty complex stuff, but as far as I can understand it, I think this basically means you can make a game that has a striking resemblance to AD&D as long as the system is not exactly the same and it is worded differently, but in reality is much more complicated than that. I am no copyright lawyer, but for a short time I was an editor for a small independent magazine and we had to deal with copyright issues, so we made sure we never pushed the very sketchy lines to what you can or cannot print. (and yes, for copyright purpouses the internet and other electronic media are considered a print medium)
What I learned from that, is that the copyright laws have certain loopholes intentionally left to protect ideas and freedom of expression. In a nutshell, that means there are certain situations where you can ignore someone's copyright:
1- When making a parody, satire or other derivative materials mocking the copyrighted work.
2- When printing the material information purpouses, such as a review, a preview or an article talking about said work.
3- When you want to be able to present an idea or a work that is very similar, however, not exactly the same.
I think Hackmaster started as situation #1, as any old Dungeon reader may recall, but as time progressed and it went slightly beyond the parody side of it, it moved to situation #3. The problem is that they do need the written permission from WotC. Altho HM's system is not exactly the same as AD&D's, it is obviously based on it, and it is similar enough that it could be argued in a court of law that it is a copyright infringement. Again, and like I said before, because the copyright laws are very sketchy, and the boundaries of copyright infringement vs. freedom of expression are not clearly defined.
Now, one may argue that this new site making brand new material for 2ed falls into situation #2, but it actually doesn't. Since one would be using the same AD&D 2ed game system and books to create such material, this things we may create online become derivative material, not reviews or articles. Only the copyright holder may create or give permision to create this derivative material.
Since the line between fair use and copyright infringement is so damn thin and hard to define, more often than not this kinds of situations will have to be solved in court. Since the copyright law is confusing and not so well defined in this respects, the judge's perception will be all that stands between you making your material public or paying a hefty sum of money for fines and damages to the original copyright holder. More often than not, a judge will rule in favor of the first copyright (or so I hear).
I hope this helps understand a lil bit more what is or could be going on with this proyect. Mind you, I LOVE the idea. If the 2ed AD&D system went true open source I would be beyond happy, but I don't think WotC and Kenzer would be, which could end up in a huge trial for all the people involved.
Originally posted by Plunderer_of_the_planes
Wich I may add is a slap in the facre to most D&D fans since K&co put out that trash called hackmaster from it.
K&C has a license (not ownership).
I am sorry you consider HackMaster "trash", since it is essentially AD&D with "crunchy bits" or "house rules" added.
On the topic of D&D, TSR supported both AD&D and D&D well into the 90's. Many people consider HackMaster to be much more similar to AD&D than 3e is (3e is another game entirely ... HackMaster is closer to both 1e & 2e than 3e is).
To me, HM is a bastardized, geekified, dorkified and lobotomized version of AD&D. I dunno, the flavor of the system and the myrad 'house rules' make it seem like a game for the stereotypical RP nerd in you.
As a matter of fact, I think 'Advanced Dungeons & Toons' would have been a more appropiate name than Hackmaster.
Don't get me wrong, it has some good ideas, like the HP kicker, but in the end, the books just scream GEEK in every page.
I'm sorry, but when a game system has full and detailed 'Getting Drunk' rules, you know it's something out of the Dead Alewives Watchtower.
Originally posted by Hiryu
Actually, Dwarf, although I agree that Hackmaster is a lot closer to AD&D or even D&D as a whole than 3E, a lot of us don't like it because of the 'crunchy bits'... and mind you, Hackmaster is crunchiness from begining to end.
To me, HM is a bastardized, geekified, dorkified and lobotomized version of AD&D. I dunno, the flavor of the system and the myrad 'house rules' make it seem like a game for the stereotypical RP nerd in you.
As a matter of fact, I think 'Advanced Dungeons & Toons' would have been a more appropiate name than Hackmaster.
Don't get me wrong, it has some good ideas, like the HP kicker, but in the end, the books just scream GEEK in every page.
I'm sorry, but when a game system has full and detailed 'Getting Drunk' rules, you know it's something out of the Dead Alewives Watchtower.
Couldn't have said it better myself. Another thing I may add is the fact of the unecessarily volumed monster manuel for HM and the fact they have to Parody Everything. Or did you skip such nonsense as the "lewd beholder" or "Robinloft"?
I was interested in it before I found it was a "parody" that seemes more and more like and insult to 1e and 2e players. Now I wouldn't use it if it was given to me.
So that little game can "rawk" elsewhere....like a landfill wich is where it belongs......
Originally posted by Hiryu
Hey, Plunderer! We forgot the 'Pizza Topings' table on the Hackmaster's GM screen. :D
Oh yeah a useful tool there.....
Originally posted by Hiryu
I'm sorry, but when a game system has full and detailed 'Getting Drunk' rules, you know it's something out of the Dead Alewives Watchtower.
Call me crazy, but I like it.
I grew up on the old 1e stuff - I started playing in 1979. To me, Hackmaster is a good blend of homage and parody.
If you like it, I say go for it. The thing is that, to many of us, there is way too much parody in it to actually enjoy the system. I mean, if they want to parody AD&D that's fine, but making a mockery of every single litle thing is way too much. (like making fun of the art, the ammount of rules, the Monstrous Compeniums, etc.)
You can only parody something until you reach a certain point where it stops being funny. Hackmaster crossed that line, IMHO.
Originally posted by Hiryu
Okay, then you're crazy. ;)
If you like it, I say go for it. The thing is that, to many of us, there is way too much parody in it to actually enjoy the system. I mean, if they want to parody AD&D that's fine, but making a mockery of every single litle thing is way too much. (like making fun of the art, the ammount of rules, the Monstrous Compeniums, etc.)
You can only parody something until you reach a certain point where it stops being funny. Hackmaster crossed that line, IMHO.
Fair enough! I'm the first to admit it's not to everyone's taste. I'm an old school role-player and have been a fan of KODT for a while, so you can imagine that it's my kind of game.
As it is, I try to use the good stuff - the rules revisions that make sense, some of the "house rules" - and I leave the humor "in the book." I don't try to burden my players with it...
Grrr... need 2e version of NWN... Baldurs Gate III (in 2e).... angry... dont make me angry.... Pools of Radiance (3e blah... disgrace the gold box... grrrr....)....
Ironfang
Originally posted by Hiryu
Okay, then you're crazy. ;)
If you like it, I say go for it. The thing is that, to many of us, there is way too much parody in it to actually enjoy the system. I mean, if they want to parody AD&D that's fine, but making a mockery of every single litle thing is way too much. (like making fun of the art, the ammount of rules, the Monstrous Compeniums, etc.)
You can only parody something until you reach a certain point where it stops being funny. Hackmaster crossed that line, IMHO.
I believe that was part of the licensing agreemant (the parody ... at least to some degree). Also, IIRC, HackMaster goes through an approval process at WotC.
When they came out with 2nd ed, I jumped on the bandwagon withg enthusiasum. Even though I kept my rather extensive library of 1st ed books. I now have one (army) footlocker for my collection of each edition (as well as dundeon modules). And this doesn't count my growing collection of Basis D&D.
Since I work for a local auctioneer, I come across stuff fairly often.
i havent played adnd for the last year because i have been studying but i have been working on a campaign.
ill try to help if i can.
Now, if I could only find some normal players where I live, my life would be complete.
And I agree players in my area are scarce as well....
In actuality, 3E character creation resembles Warhammer more than any other version of D&D. 3E just spread the creation material across a dozen books, rather than sticking to ONE all-purpose character creation and skills book.
HackMaster isn't so bad, but it's hardly worth gleaning much from it so I'm not gonna buy any more of it.
Although I agree that 3E is much different from the previous versions, I think that 2E was much, much worse for the "Having to search out a dozen different books" syndrome. (Have we forgotten Arms and Equipment, Complete class books, complete race books, skills and powers, that magic book that I cna't remember, various campaign setting books with different kits and such, etc.) If anything, 2E is just as bad for having to search multiple books than 3.0 is, at least in 3.0, you can just use the player's handbook and make something decent if you wish.
However, if anyone brings back D&D, I would be very happy, none of this advanced crap, ESPECIALLY advanced 2E.
And don't try to tell me I don't know what I'm talking about, I played the original version of D&D for four years, played 2E for five, and 3E for 4. I know those systems. (Don't know 1E, except for the fact that I have a lot of the old 1E AD&D modules and stuff I managed to get a hold of at some point.)
And anyone compares the dumbed down simplified 3E creation rules to warhammer, has obviously never played warhammer, or has played warhammer and hasn't played 3E. Warhammer is hundreds of times more complicated than 3E is, and better for combat simulation by a long shot. (BTW: Warhammer is cool. I am not very good at it yet, I'm still learning, but so far, it seems like fun.)
;)note: this is typical Count Auroch vs. Plunderer banter It is usually in fun No flame or evil intent is there. It is all in fun. You may now return to Wotc's flamewar...err...boards
Correct me if I'm wrong, but all the race/class/etc books aren't necessary to play the game. I believe this is why they were labeled accessories, not core rules. It makes things more interesting, but they are not required. I played 1e for almost 10 years, and 2e for almost 15 now. I've yet to encounter any of the problems you have. Find a kit you like? Just bring that book. As for rules, remember who is the final arbiter of them: the DM. All your silly books won't help you then.
Originally posted by Wyrmbane
Correct me if I'm wrong, but all the race/class/etc books aren't necessary to play the game. I believe this is why they were labeled accessories, not core rules. It makes things more interesting, but they are not required. I played 1e for almost 10 years, and 2e for almost 15 now. I've yet to encounter any of the problems you have. Find a kit you like? Just bring that book. As for rules, remember who is the final arbiter of them: the DM. All your silly books won't help you then.
Just to add one thing. The accessories are nice to have for any ed but, remember what you are getting into. Making a pc that uses Feats , skills or spells, from separate books take much longer to make and be a pain if you have adm that insists that every book you sourced from is brought.
They do create more detailed pc's and give good fluff as well, but they are a double edged sword.
Originally posted by Plunderer_of_the_planes
Or perhaps I understood it
note: this is typical Count Auroch vs. Plunderer banter It is usually in fun No flame or evil intent is there. It is all in fun. You may now return to Wotc's flamewar...err...boards
Damn that dashing villain, Count Auroch, and his thread disrupting banter. ;)
Originally posted by Count Arioch the 28th
Damn that dashing villain, Count Auroch, and his thread disrupting banter. ;)
An Algoholic curse upon ye booth.
The thing about 2E, see, is that everything 2E was optional, see.
The thing about 3E, see, is that everything is intertwined to greater depth, see, making "optional" stuff harder to wrangle, see.
Ah, screw it: AD&D R00LZ!!1!1! :D
Originally posted by Count Arioch the 28th
Damn that dashing villain, Count Auroch, and his thread disrupting banter. ;)
Damn Plunderer and his ability to be distracted by.....hey look a monkey
Originally posted by Count Arioch the 28th
I think I'll pass.
Although I agree that 3E is much different from the previous versions, I think that 2E was much, much worse for the "Having to search out a dozen different books" syndrome.
A dozen? I think your mistaken here... that would have been 1e. For Second Edition you'd have to search dozen(s) of books. (Plural) 2e had an insane number of add products for it. By all rights we should be on 5th edition by now not 3.5
Note: not to be mistaken for an endorsement of 3e or 3.5e I agree with rolling back to D&D where you could role/roll up a character in 5 minutes and get playing with the DM just making it up as he went.
In my 2e heyday we had very few books. Thanks to being in Highschool, limited incomes, and the nearest store that handled gaming supplies being 60+ miles away.
We were lucky to have the 'core' books. We did make alot of it up as we went along. I have come to the opinion that as as gamers we create these traps by a better availability of books.
In particular I find myself using more and more of the 3e material to generate pc's and npc's than I used to. So in the end character creation does become a longer process than it used to be.
Not that I am complaining. I rather like the fleshing out aspect that happens when I am using certain books ( like races of Faerun etc).
In the end The more material you get the more it adds to generation time. And also remember they wouldn't print it unless we bought it. So truly where does the fault lie?
Originally posted by Wyrmbane
Methinks you've confused your versions of Warhammer, Count. Warhammer is darn close to 3e. Warhammer 40K is the miniature combat simulation you're referring to. I dug out both of them just to be sure.
Not trying to be a jerk here, but I think you're mistaken.
Warhammer and warhammer 40K are both miniature combat games.
You must have a warhammer 40K and a warhammer D20 book, and it would make sense that Warhammer d20 is very similiar to Dungeons and Dragons D20 are similiar, since they're the same basic game. ;)
But Warhammer doesn't have default character generation anyway. (I'm thinking that there's a variant for that, there's a lot of optional stuff in that game, I'm still learning most of it.)
But Warhammer D20 is not meant as a replacement for Warhammer 3rd edition. (I'm pretty sure that's the most recent edition, like I said, I'm new.)
Originally posted by Cessna182
Call me crazy, but I like it.
I grew up on the old 1e stuff - I started playing in 1979. To me, Hackmaster is a good blend of homage and parody.
To me, Hackmaster is what 3.0 should have been. It took the best of AD&D and added a few new features. Before you get into a huff, I like 3.0 and play it once per month. However, Hackmaster is my current game of choice.
I know that a lot of people look at hackmaster as a joke game on the level of Paranoia because it is a parody of AD&D and comes from the Knights of the Dinner Table comic book. However, it is not a joke. It is based on a solid rules system and only has as much humor as your players and GMs add to it.
If your local gameshop or convention is holding a demo, I highly recommend you try it once. If you are an "old school" gamer, you might be pleasantly surprised.