Not sure how you can say that it wasn't owned.  But sure, I guess it meant nothing.  /s

I can, at this very moment go reprint a nearly word for word copy of the D&D 5e core rule book. I would have to scrape the actual trademarks out, Mordenkeinen, beholder, etc. but the mechanics of the game can remain 100% intact with no alterations to them functionally. Game mechanics don't fall under a trademark or patent, only specific verbiage might fall under a copy right. They would have no actual legal grounds for a case against my newly created Generic Fantasy Game.

Now GFG wouldn't have the same brand recognition as D&D so my sales would suck. If you wanted to write 3rd party material for GFG you don't really have a fan base to rely on. But it could exist and I could sell it. It's basically how all the unauthorized SRD's stay afloat.

d20heroSRD had to change hero points. 13thagesrd had to change the names of the icons. Names can be protected legally but the mechanics can't (so far).

Sure, and you'd get sued for copyright infringement if you copied it nearly word for word.

You would have to do a significant rewrite of the core rulebook, in order to explain the mechanics in your own wording.

Game mechanics can be patented.  I don't assume WotC has patented anything, but they can be patented.  There are patented fairy chess moves, and patented video game mechanics.  It wouldn't be a stretch to patent some of the D&D game mechanics.
This message was last edited by the GM at 17:47, Fri 13 Jan 2023.

I only know of two existing game patents, tapping from magic and a very specific set of poker dice. It is nearly impossible to prove novelty in a game. At this point everything D&D has to offer is already public in terms of patents.

https://www.gamesradar.com/vid...-might-surprise-you/

Falcon chess has a patented move for the Falcon.  I think that patent has expired.

https://www.chessvariants.com/large.dir/falcon.html

Sure, it might be difficult to patent novel game mechanics...

But D&D could probably lay claim to a few, even today.  Would it be worth it?  I don't know.

Circling back to the original purpose of the OGL: You wouldn't have to worry over being sued, and the company granting the license wouldn't have to worry about their stuff being ripped off whole cloth.

It was to the benefit of everyone.

The OGL is dead, all hail the ORC.

I bet you'd be surprised. At one time, perhaps, but my guess is that the equivalent to the statute of limitations would have run out by now.

Please move any further discussion on the ongoing OGL story to this thread: link to a message in this game

I don't mind the initial discussion, but when it begins to dominate a thread it should move to its own thread. Thank you.

I want to personally  thank everyone here. If you have watched the OGL thread you see a lot of discussion, and disagreement, all of which has been strenuous but still respectful. It is heartening to me to see our community able to disagree without it devolving into a shouting or name calling match.

These times have people disagreeing and not being able to communicate without such attitudes, have shown our society is failing to live up to its core values. (The right to free speech and to assemble.) And therefore I thank you all for remaining true to the spirit of the community, which is to promote discourse.

Keep up the good work everyone!

Recruiting

I've done an IC thread for a game I'm going to run and got far more interest than I thought likely. So I'm going to have to cull numbers down after reviewing their RTJs.

My question to other GM's here is, what have you found to be the most relevant things to ask for in an RTJ that speak to a player's likelihood to stay, contribute, write well, be engaged, etc.

For me, the character concept,,,  If a player is invested in the character they create then they will usually stick around...

I've actually had good luck, thus far, with people who tell me up front that they don't ghost games - but if you ask for them to say that, it's meaningless, because what else are they gonna say? "I regularly ghost games"?

I would say the biggest thing for me is if I'm with them in other games or they run a game of their own. Both things tend to reduce the likelihood of ghosting (but not eliminate it entirely). However, in the case of the former, there's a happy medium - one or two games is best, because anything more, and they might conceivably be overwhelmed with the number of games they're in and begin ghosting.

Lissa, it is true that a player who puts a lot of effort into the character concept may stick around - but they may just be really excited about character creation. Same deal with a player who writes a lot.

Ultimately, I feel like it's often a craps shoot. :/

(That said, if you can push the RTJ process long enough, some people will end up showing their true colors during the RTJ process itself - that will help eliminate those most likely to ghost quickly.)

People who have DMed on here probably have more respect for player attrition and not wanting to be one of those ghosters.

I have ghosted, never intentionally, but it's happened.  :|

In reply to V1510n (msg # 236):

I would suggest not worrying so much about the character concept, since either the character would either fit or need to be changed. Many players change characters when they hear what others are playing. I know I don't like being the third mage in a group.

I recommend asking about the person themself. When you get to know a person it helps connect to them. Psychologically  it's harder to abandon someone your friends with. Don't ask for identifying details, but interests and preferred playstyles and such all can help. I don't do anime, so when I end up in a group of heavy anime fans, I sometimes have to bow out shortly into the game, since I don't feel as connected to the group. Similarly if for some reason you find a player who has a great character concept but hates dungeon delving, and your game will involve heavy amounts of dungeon delving, that's not a player you want. they won't be happy, and are more likely to ghost.

The old posts of the "Player Attrition" thread has insight on this.

As was said, if you draw out the RTJ process a little, some applicants might fizzle out before they get in the game (saving a headache).
Can ask for a concept before the full RTJ write up. Can discuss with them a little.
Maybe ask questions just to drag the discussion out a little. Some GM's really like to drag it out.

Try to be clear what the game is and isn't, expectations, etc.
Try to keep momentum going, and address anything that's holding things up. Encourage player communication so people know who's waiting on who.

Telling players in the game information "If you gotta leave, it's fine, just let us know" might help, but maybe not. Similarly "Let us know if you'll be away."

And just try to run the best game you can.
Like others, I think attrition is largely luck.
I've also had long time and active players just disappear too. (Some eventually came back.)

Accepting more players than you want, knowing some will drop, is a common strategy too. (I.e. If you want 8 players, recruit 12+, knowing some will probably drop.)

... On the above strategy, does anyone have a ratio they like to aim for? Like if you want 8, do you accept 12, 16, 20?

Just be aware that this strategy has been known to backfire. I wanted 3-5 characters in one of my games, so I accepted 8 (Window: I dont really have a hard and fast ratio - 3 people seemed like a reasonable number to drop). Unfortunately (?) none of them have ghosted. It's a good problem to have, but definitely resulted in more work on my part.

The ratio completely depends on how many you can handle. I'd suggest something like 50% more than your average ideal number. So in Storyteller's case he wanted 3-5 so we'd call that 4 and accept 6 people. It's obviously not a hard and fast rule, if you feel like 3-5 is your ideal but you could also handle 6 no problem then maybe do 7 or 8 like he did. Obviously that can backfire like in his case but that is very much the exception.

So:

1. setting expectations
   
2. ask for a character concept

Anything else that's good to have in an RTJ? (other than character name).

It depends a lot on the game. I've said a few times that in games where you are doing truly random stats a character concept is actually harmful to the process.

Expected post rate doesn't hurt. At least it tells you who are your weekend warriors and who are the online 24/7ers.

In reply to Sir Swindle (msg # 225):

There are a few things I feel need to be said here. D&D's open license contained no actual requirements that the open source license  couldn't be altered, or removed without notice. Thus, legally speaking, it could be altered, or removed without notice. It was not, and this is important, a contract between the publishing company, and anyone else.  This is something I've mentioned in a few places, and usually gotten flack for, but its true, nobody actually can say that  D&D's open source license can't be altered.    Everyone held to the expectation that it wouldn't, and that is an understandable expectation, but there's nothing currently present to exclude the possibility.

Legally.

We'll avoid poor decision.

Now, by giving it over to a non-profit to maintain,  depending on how it was given, and I've not listened to this part, so this is a bit of a guess,  but if you state in the original license that the holder cannot retract the license, or cannot alter certain elements, then you have *cue the fan fair music* an open contract.   This, if it is indeed the case, something third-party sources can more reliably ride elephants and have them dance on.

Yes, poor humor, but still, tis true.

Posting frequency expectations. How you run the game. Tonal expectations, if you have any pet peeves or focuses for the game: after all, they don't know what you are planning.

You want to weed out disinterested players who aren't going to flake when you find out the style you run doesn't match what they envisioned.

Length and depth you want of the background/concepts. What kind of characters you are looking for and what you want in an RTJ.

I feel there's a number of times I've put way more effort than I should have on RTJ's that just didn't fit the scope of the game: and I wouldn't have suggested that concept if I had some idea what the GM was looking for.
This message was last edited by the player at 23:13, Sat 21 Jan 2023.

That's why I usually put a maximum on RTJ length. Also why I don't apply if there is a huge invasive RTJ requirement.

But then I hate backstory; reading or writing them.

I do this often with non home games. I prefer 5-6 players so I'll recruit 8-10 knowing some will drop. This has, delightfully, bit me in the ass on occasion. I'm currently running 7 players in an online game. They just won't leave! Great problem to have.

Anyone else have to almost constantly resist spite-starting new games. Like "Oh, that's a cool concept but you are doing it just the stupidest. Here, this is how it's done!" but you know that it's a passing fancy and you won't be able to sustain another game/you have been working on getting something to the RTJ phase and it would be a distraction?

Also guilt-starting games "Yay, us six players got through character creation and the GM ghosted after the first IC post. Well I know I have a player base and I did just brush up on the rules, maybe I could run one but without banning the one book I like."

In reply to Sir Swindle (msg # 251):

I think it's only a bad thing if you're a forever-GM and actually just wanna play for once.

But if you don't mind starting and running another game, it is a decent way to start off with players who should stick around.