Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 inkpenavenger Dec 03, 2009 21:50:24	So here's the problem with building an original campaign setting as I see it: I cannot use the cosmology described in the DMG, nor can I so much as use the words "Astral Sea" "Feywild" "Shadowfell" "Elemental Chaos" or "the Abyss" O.K. fine. I don't have a big problem with the fact that I'd have to develop my own cosmology from scratch. Here's the problem though: Since I cant redefine any 4E references, I cannot tell readers that creatures with the "shadow" orginin are native to "Plane X" in my setting because the reference of "shadow [origin]" in the MM states that such creatures are native to the Shadowfell. Please tell me I'm wrong about something here! See, I've found an example of a well respected publisher doing something very similar to just this: On page 13 of Mongoose Publishing's Quintessential Wizard the text mentions in passing the Wizard of the Spiral Tower paragon path. Specifially it says... "Due to their traditions and their innate talents, eladrin are skilled wielders of long swords; indeed, wizards of the Spiral Tower are renowned for their ability to channel magic through their swords." Neither the Wizard of the Spiral Tower paragon path nor the Spiral Tower itself are in the SRD so, theoretically, this passage is a blatant violation of the GSL. OR IS IT? Could I publish the following: "Demon Lord A rules over a extremely hypothetical layer of the Abyss known as Layer B" or "The theoretical city of Town N holds a famously ornate portal to the Feywild" Someone please throw me a bone here! P.S. Yes, I know that no one here is an IP lawyer and that for legitimate advice I should consult one. I'm just looking for personal opinions. Please, please, please no "consult a lawyer" replies. Thank You.
#2 RogerC Dec 04, 2009 22:51:08	I cannot tell readers that creatures with the "shadow" orginin are native to "Plane X" in my setting because the reference of "shadow [origin]" in the MM states that such creatures are native to the Shadowfell. My understanding is that you can add to the terms, but not redefine them.  So something like "Plane X is inhabited primarily by shadow creatures, many of whom live their entire lives there"  is fine. Mongoose Publishing's Quintessential Wizard I don't have that book, but double-check that it was actually released under the GSL. I'm just looking for personal opinions. In my opinion, WotC probably has bigger fish to fry, but I think it's feasible to steer clear of any violations. Cheers, Roger
#3 inkpenavenger Dec 05, 2009 4:42:28	Quintessential Wizard is under the GSL. It has the D&D compatability logo on it. I agree that WotC likely won't waste time an resources going after my one-man operation for such a small infraction. Honestly, my plan now is to just not do anything I don't see other 3PPs do, but keep an eye on them. If I hear that Mongoose or Goodman Games or someone get in trouble for such violations, I'll just pull/ammend my products before they find me (I'm using a print-on-demand service so that'll be easy).