![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif?v=92.2){kind=small}
thoughtful For some time I've had the idea of a massive wiki containing every scrap of open gaming content I can find. If we start with everything I've written, rip out the open content, and categorize it, that'd be a good start.
From there, we'd need either helpful/forward thinking publishers to give us their open content in digital form, or we could scan/rip the text from books. Ideally, if this project was distributed over enough people, it wouldn't be much work. You could build teams for different publishers, with sub-teams to cover different lines or time periods.
The real trick would be paying attention to open content declarations. A lot of publishers are afraid of their fans and the power that this would give gamers. In some cases, a team would have to build text skeletons so that crippleware either has a context or makes sense.
(You could be nice and, if a publisher complains about the project, push it to the back of the queue. Alternatively, you could slip them to the front of the queue just to make a point.)
I think it would make sense to provide the data in two forms: a PDF, and a wiki. If there was some easy way to allow a ready to collect articles, bind them into a single file, and download them, that'd be great. I'm a few years behind on what's out there, so I'm a little foggy on the technical side.
The wiki would be for user-driven development. You could even extend the team function to include a sort of project management group. The manager would cull the best comments, variants, and other changes from the wikis in monthly revisions and updates. The community could even drive towards a set of standards that each manager would apply to the material he cares for (example: a feat is designed as falling with power range Y; a 7th-level spell can have the following set of basic parameters; a spell that turns you to stone has to be at least 6th level; etc). (The really interesting thing would be watching competing ethos spring up - I'm sure the project would fork multiple times before a front runner improves.) (Also, note that the real value of the OGL isn't necessarily in improving a specific RPG rule, but in providing standards for the body of rules as a whole.) (Also, I used too many parens in this paragraph.)
I think this would be a very useful, cool project for the community. As I said at my Iron Heroes seminar, the publishers don't get open source. If the fans want a real open community to grow around the OGL, they need to do it themselves.
Who wants to start it? Would anyone step up and do it? I think it's something that should've happened four years ago.
(The big challenge to this project would be finding a Ron Edwards like figure to lead it. You'd need someone who is above the petty jealousies and fears of the RPG "industry" to get it rolling. The first time this project caves to a company, rather than forcing the company to accept its mission, it will be mortally wounded.)
← Ctrl← Alt
Ctrl →Alt →
August 24 2005, 22:52:46 UTC 6 years ago
August 24 2005, 22:58:23 UTC 6 years ago
August 24 2005, 23:00:30 UTC 6 years ago
August 24 2005, 23:08:21 UTC 6 years ago
Difficult one, of course, as you've anticipated. Most or all of the publishers are going to dislike it. It's a huge amount of work. Divvying up the work adds on a huge amount of work for whoever is managing the site & having to co-ordinate all the volunteers.
I think your Ron Edwards style figure needs to be a fan, rather than an industry professional, so as not to cave to a company. He or she will need a close assistant. One or other of the two needs to be a real stickler for rules accuracy, with a very thorough mind; someone like John Cooper (ENworld reviewer). The other needs to be an intellectual property expert, preferably with a legal background; an IP lawyer with a non-industry day job but a serious enthusiasm for the industry would be perfect, though I can't think of any candidates off-hand.
August 24 2005, 23:09:28 UTC 6 years ago
August 24 2005, 23:11:23 UTC 6 years ago
I'm travelling to Seattle for Dragonflight this weekend. Will you be at the con? We could talk about this.
August 24 2005, 23:17:40 UTC 6 years ago
6 years ago
August 24 2005, 23:40:31 UTC 6 years ago
In my opinion, the greatest difficulty in this kind of project - assuming that it takes off, bearing in mind that giving away free D&D stuff earns a lot of goodwill toward a project - would be maintaining quality. While the success of Wikipedia infers that more people people generally means more quality, one must also contend with the "too many cooks" problem where contributors with big egos will argue over what exactly should be added to the site. Unlike Wikipedia, you don't have as many guiding factors in a project like this - Wikipedia has guidelines like "articles should be encyclopedic", "factual accuracy" and so on to default to in the case of a dispute.
You also have the question of what exactly goes into the project. All OGL content, even if it's poor? That would be of little value to anyone except to show potential writers what mistakes not to make. All OGL content by big name publishers? Again, even among big name publishers there has been some exceedingly poor content. How do you judge what's good content and bad content? Would editing existing content for balance be acceptable, even if it conflicts with the original source, or earlier revisions of the same item in the wiki? These factors and others must be considered.
August 25 2005, 01:17:22 UTC 6 years ago
This is where the radical decentralization of the wiki format becomes your friend. Set up a polling function to allow user comments on the usability of any given crunchy bit. Users could vote for options like:
[ ] I use this successfully in my game.
[ ] I haven't used this in my game, but it looks OK to me.
[ ] I haven't used this and would not allow it in my game.
[ ] I have used this and now disallow it.
A comments section could allow for more detailed actual play results -- even propose fixes to make broken bits workable.
6 years ago
August 24 2005, 23:53:36 UTC 6 years ago
August 25 2005, 00:19:30 UTC 6 years ago
6 years ago
August 25 2005, 00:20:55 UTC 6 years ago
August 25 2005, 00:25:39 UTC 6 years ago
But you don't have to organize the entry of the info. People will do it on their own, I think. It sure worked with the Exalted wiki, and that wasn't even OGL.
August 25 2005, 00:53:20 UTC 6 years ago
MEG stuff
I would be glad to give my OGC stuff to a project like this...August 25 2005, 01:11:23 UTC 6 years ago
August 25 2005, 03:09:05 UTC 6 years ago
August 25 2005, 03:58:52 UTC 6 years ago
August 25 2005, 08:53:36 UTC 6 years ago
August 25 2005, 14:53:23 UTC 6 years ago
As far as companies or authors being willing to contribute their work to the wiki, I thought that once they license it under the OGC license they don't have a choice. OGC content can be repeated anywhere, as long as certain requirements are met.
August 25 2005, 14:57:32 UTC 6 years ago
I would certainly try and help. I would also do some recruitment/marketing so others are aware of such an undertaking.
August 25 2005, 15:38:45 UTC 6 years ago
How do people deal with similar subject matters? For instance, there could be 5 or 6 feats that do pretty much the same thing, or 5 or 6 classes that do pretty much the same thing. How does this get moderated?
I personally love the idea.
August 25 2005, 15:52:49 UTC 6 years ago
This idea -- aggregating OGC on the web -- has been kicking around for awhile (although I've not heard the wiki proposal -- that sounds perfect!), and it's a cool idea. But what's changed in the industry to improve the climate for a project like this one? I know legally it can be done, I'm just curious whether the mood about whether or not it should be done has changed. :)
6 years ago
Anonymous
6 years ago
6 years ago
Anonymous
August 25 2005, 19:07:19 UTC 6 years ago
Question
MV--I suggested a very similar idea to a game designer recently. He was cold to the idea. Wanted to stick to PDF. A person who housed such a project could always publish material from it, couldn't he?
Stupid question but still...
How does one know exactly is OGC in a non-Wizards D20 product? What in Arcana Unleased and Iron Heroes is OGC and what is not?
A project like this may be easier if it started out seperating OGC of different companies. Building seperate wikis first, then merging them.
It's too bad so many designers (but not all) don't see a value in this idea IMO. Time could be saved swiping an idea from elsewhere. You only have to give a little credit to someone else, that's all! Sometimes I wonder if this industry has too many self-conscious types which lead to big egos, when the last thing this industry can use is egos IMHO.
August 25 2005, 19:43:19 UTC 6 years ago
Re: Question
"How does one know exactly is OGC in a non-Wizards D20 product? What in Arcana Unleased and Iron Heroes is OGC and what is not?"I know that the Midnight campaign setting by FFG states in certain areas that "blah" is not OGL. I think there is also a general disclaimer that states that OGL is used but other terms and such are properties of FFG.
The more generic the more likely it is to be open. Hence, if you have a race called Warforeged, I would think that this is not gonna fly per WotC. But a race named Elf is acceptable because it's not specific. Make sense?
Dont aske me how this is determined or outlined in all publications. I could see this getting tricky.
6 years ago
August 26 2005, 03:05:40 UTC 6 years ago
August 26 2005, 12:37:55 UTC 6 years ago
Wiki + PDF = Possible
In theory (and, as it's not something I've had to implement... yet), it should be very doable to have a process that generates .pdf files from the same content that populates the pages within the wiki.(Though, I don't think it's something you'd want to do on-demand; I expect it's somewhat processor intensive. Maybe a nightly/weekly "build" of the wiki's content.")
August 29 2005, 19:38:20 UTC 6 years ago
One problem with this is that the site will constantly be in violation. OGC is terribly misunderstood by most people, and they're always going to post something that isn't actually OGC. The first time something from a book goes up, unless the editor is a professional, there will be PI included and that will tick off the publisher even worse than just posting OGC stuff.
So, I guess what I'm saying is that there needs to be a non-public area where preliminary versions of OGC can be posted, looked over and corrected, and then released to a public area once they are ready.
Anonymous
August 30 2005, 01:07:46 UTC 6 years ago
I already have such a wiki
Currently it's only open to people who have accounts, because it's my home campaign and it hasn't been completely scrubbed of closed content.I could easily clone it to create an open wiki. I'm using the same software that runs Wikipedia, so there should be ample room for precedent when we need to sort out community processes.
Basically, we can designate a set of editors who can lock pages that have been scrubbed for legality.
Each contribution can have a link to its section 15 (something I already do). Variants can be distinguished by category. Watch pages can be set up for contentious issues.
So, here's what I'll do, and what I'll need. I need to obtain some hosting; if one of the big players (EnWorld or others) wants to volunteer, I'll take it, otherwise I'll stick it up on my current host in a new domain name.
I'll clone my existing wiki and make a quick pass through to remove any non-open content; probably deleting pages instead of correcting them.
I'll open it up to three volunteers to do initial organization and write some guidelines for publishers and contributors.
I'll then open it up to the public, and start adding my own contributions. Sound good? give me feedback at jbowtie@gmail.com and I'll start the ball rolling in two weeks.
My existing wiki is at http://nzlinux.org.nz/aestia/index.php?t
John C Barstow
August 31 2005, 21:54:13 UTC 6 years ago
Re: I already have such a wiki
I was going to have a wiki for my homebrew campaign setting too, but decided that there wasn't enough interest.I've set up a wiki much like that before. I forget how it's done, but you can do a thing with mod_rewrite to take out the unsightly "index.php?title=" part of every page.
August 30 2005, 01:12:01 UTC 6 years ago
Study those who went before and failed...
Mike, this would be, at least, the fourth attempt at a "free OGC collective" that I've seen. In the past they've all failed for an amazingly simple reason:There is no reward in it.
I've been part of efforts to do it volunteer-style--and everyone wound up dropping out to puruse gigs that would actually pay them something, rather than spending their time to do something that the rest of the folk really didn't want them to do. No one ever caved to pressure from a publisher of any size--we just ran out of gumption and never got our shipment of warm fuzzy.
Now, it's entirely possible that it's simply a matter of a lack of critical mass. If you poney up the domain and the host, I'll grab what I can and add it in. (And if no one else steps up and sets it up for you, I just muddled a DocuWiki install for my home campaign and can easily repeat the effort.)
August 31 2005, 21:56:52 UTC 6 years ago
Re: Study those who went before and failed...
Indeed, the lack of reward has killed two projects I've been on in the past. It's hard to keep a project going when the contributors run out of motivation.Anonymous
August 30 2005, 18:31:29 UTC 6 years ago
Who starts?
Mearls said....>Who wants to start it? Would anyone step up and do it?
Since this is your suggestion, then I would think that you should be the one to start it by including all OGL content you have written, including Iron Heroes.
In other words, "put your money where your mouth is".
September 1 2005, 02:32:56 UTC 6 years ago
Re: Who starts?
I dunno, I don't think putting Iron Heroes in is all that big of a deal. If/when this thing gets off the ground, I'll copy the OGC part of Iron Heroes out of the drivethroughrpg pdf I have and paste it into the wiki. I doubt Mike has the rights to Iron Heroes, so it would really be Malhavoc Press / Monte Cook who might get pissed about giving away the OGC in Iron Heroes. Given that the front of Iron Heroes spells out pretty clearly what of the book is and what isn't OGC, I suspect Malhavoc / Monte don't have a problem with it getting into a/the wiki.Anonymous
6 years ago
Anonymous
6 years ago
6 years ago
August 31 2005, 09:21:34 UTC 6 years ago
...
I've been advocating something like this for a while.
In silence, apparently. ;)
I think I may just have to start typing in stuff from the (relatively few, I realize) OGL books I have at home, just to get the ball rolling.
← Ctrl← Alt
Ctrl →Alt →