Plagiarism. Good plagiarism.

[ejh]

I remember reading in a Different Worlds article the phrase "the first rule of game design is plagiarism."  That article went on to talk about ripping off the Resistance Table from Runequest and using it as the central system of a roleplaying game.  (Big prizes to anyone who can actually point me to that DW ish! :)

I also remember vaguely hearing that game rules are not copyrightable, though there has been some muddying of that water in the past by TSR, in response to which WOTC lawyers had to go to crazy lengths to put together Open Game Content Licenses and so on.

Some of the games we see bandied about on the Forge have some really innovative mechanics.  Often they lift innovative mechanics from each other, in a complex chain of mutual influence.

I guess I'm wondering, how far would that have to go before you felt you were cheating, or worried that someone was going to accuse you of theft?  Where do you draw the line?  Is there a good source somewhere that discusses these issues?

I'm working on a little something of my own and I feel like utterly ripping of Wushu's action system, but I don't want to get to the point where I could never publish it for fear of accusations of theft.

[AnyaTheBlue]

I also remember vaguely hearing that game rules are not copyrightable, though there has been some muddying of that water in the past by TSR, in response to which WOTC lawyers had to go to crazy lengths to put together Open Game Content Licenses and so on.

Actually, I think you have it backwards.

My understanding is that you can copyright the specific text of a game and trademark the name and logo of a game, but you can't actually patent them, nor can you restrict the actual content of the rules.  So, for example, you can't keep anybody in the world from publishing rules to poker, as long as they write out the text describing them on their own.

Now, to my knowledge, nobody has made use of this to completely clone another game by filing off the serial numbers, name, and any identifying indicia ("no, no, it's not a Dungeon Master, it's a Dragon Monitor.  Yeah.  Resistance Table?  No, it's the Defiance Chart!"), but I believe it would be doable.

Of course, you'd still probably be sued to within an inch of your bank account's life, even if it was technically legal...

[ejh]

Well, what I said may have been backwards, but that was what I meant. :)  By "you can't copyright game rules" I meant "you can't copyright the *procedures for play* which the text of the game rules describes."   But what I said was ambiguous.

So I could write up a game called "Wizards" from "Arcanist Press" about summoning "Devils," which used D10 rolls and all that, to create my low-rent ripoff of Sorcerer, if I were so inclined.

I wonder at what point you *would* have to change things?  Specific terms for in-game concepts, like Armor Class and so on?  But a lot of games do in fact borrow these terms from each other, so that can't be it...

Just one of those ambiguous conundra.

[Ron Edwards]

Hi Ed,

See the Internet piracy of documents thread for some links I posted which are relevant to your question.

Here's my take on your point - it's not a matter of ambiguous conundra at all. The rock-bottom reality is that no one can enforce a standard across hundreds or thousands of independently-moving instances. There is no authoritative body, no constitution, no licensing, nothing.

The immediate parallel I can think of is the rank of "black belt" or its equivalent in modern martial arts. A black belt is only as good as the school it comes from, and the fighter is only as good as he or she is, regardless of the belt they're wearing. There is no Black Belt Board which reviews various schools' standards and practices.

So the same concept applies to "originality" of game mechanics. The fact is that no one's watching.

My take on the practical approach is well-documented - I think that not only should an author acknowledge his or her sources of inspiration, but also be well-educated enough in the hobby's history to know about and acknowledge games that didn't inspire the current game, but nonetheless did one or another of its mechanics/features first.

Best,
Ron

[Mike Holmes]

In this insular little hobby, how far do you think a real rip-off would get? How long until somebody on RPG.net tore into it with zeal pointing out the lack of originality? Think about that on your next design. If you think people will respect the design then it's original enough. I think you'd feel it if that weren't the case.

Mike

[Ron Edwards]

H'm, given Mike's point, I should emend my point to specify:

"no official and empowered persons are watching"

Best,
Ron

[DevP]

How long until somebody on RPG.net tore into it with zeal pointing out the lack of originality?

my hat for stelerz know no limit

[Mike Holmes]

Right. Basically nobody has ever dared to tread that water that I'm aware of. At the point that the public can tell, and make the decision to refrain from buying, that's a definite cue that you've failed to meet your originality requirement.

From an ethical POV? Well, that's going to be rather personal. I think that the potential for reaction renders an ethical standard moot. If you do something unethical the game won't sell. Unless you're Bill Gates.

Mike

[AnyaTheBlue]

Basically nobody has ever dared to tread that water that I'm aware of

I agree with everybody so far.

I think the case could be made that the water has had toes stuck into it on occasion, however.

I'm specifically thinking of situations like Super Squadron vs. Villains and Vigilantes, DnD vs. Palladium, and even slightly greater stretches, like the Champions/Hero, GURPS, BESM/SAS/Tri-Stat trifecta.

I'm definitely not saying that there was wilful plagarism here, or even that there was unattributed inspiration, but there is a definite strong overlap in the mechanics of certain games, and sometimes the inspiration isn't credited in the game texts as clearly as it might be, if it's credited there at all.

(On a vaguely related note, I remember reading a critique of Aberrant somewhere that noted what appeared to be a 'cut and paste' error.  The text referred to a power that did not exist in Aberrant, but did exist in Champions -- similar kind of thing)

[Ben Lehman]

Right. Basically nobody has ever dared to tread that water that I'm aware of.

BL>  Everquest the RPG.  Is essentially an alternate 3.0 PHB -- with different spells and some better rules.  Is in blatant violation of the OGL, but that doesn't matter, because of the afformentioned reasons.

Further, Monte Cook's (independent!) Arcana Unearthed is, essentially, an entire player's handbook, including ability charts and its own experience table (the two things which are verbotten under the OGL.)  And a damn fine game, at that.  Mad phat color for the gamists, y0.

edit:  Forgot one.  The old RoleAids books were exactly AD&D 1e supplements with changed stat names.  They were great books, too.  I still prize my copy of Lizard Men, which gave me inspirations which haunt me still.  (How cool are hairy artic sentient lizards who roam eternally in search of heart?  How cool!?)

yrs--
--Ben

[Lxndr]

Slight "pendantic" correction:

The things you describe as verboten are under the d20 STL, not the OGL.  The OGL is a free-for-all orgy, the d20 STL is a bunch of simple restraints for those people who like that sort of thing.

[Mike Holmes]

LX, the one requirement of the OGL is that the original game be credited. It's exactly that they don't do this, despite the similarities that would be allowed under OGL that constitutes what they'd like to term a "violation". It's exactly the intent of the OGL to prevent such similar games without the "profit" of at least some credit.

Ben, Anya, note how D&D still outsells those imitators? They are, often, improvements over D&D. It's their imitation itself that relegated them forever to "also ran" status. Again, imitate at your own risk.

Mike