|
|
Post by Mordorandor on Feb 3, 2023 17:40:29 GMT -6
In so far as OD&D is concerned, one can do that now. “Hobbit” is in the public domain, and no flavor text exists in the 3LBBs to run afoul of the Tolkien conception/version. I'm afraid the word "hobbit" is trademarked so can't be used without permission. That's way The Rings of Power series doesn't call the Harfoots "hobbits". Of course you're right, Tolkien didn't invent the word. In addition to The Denham Tracts, according to English Dialect Dictionary: "sb. Wal. Also written hobit. A measure of corn, beans", attested in 1850. Yes, Tolkien owns a trademark on it. Which means you can't use it (express it) in the same way. But I can use the word Hobbit and put whatever game rules I want on it. They don't own that. In OD&D, there is nothing in the book that describes a Hobbit. One reads Hobbit and thinks, Tolkien! But that is not how trademark and copyright work. If I don't describe what a Hobbit is, I can use it. Edit: I can also talk about a Hobbit that's a fairy or some such. Tolkien doesn't own that. It's in the public domain. |
|
|
|
Post by geoffrey on Feb 3, 2023 17:41:55 GMT -6
Work with Troll Lord Games to re-brand Castles & Crusades to Dungeons & Dragons. That part is easy. No other changes needed. TLG deserves to be the stewards of the line; Gary himself essentially chose them. Good point! Castles & Crusades is the latest of the Gygaxian versions of A/D&D. If fate had been kinder, and Gary had finished his Castle Zagyg for Castles & Crusades, I think that the 21st-century history of old-school gaming would be quite different. A great, GREAT many people now playing one of Gary's earlier versions of A/D&D (and/or a clone thereof) would instead be playing Castles & Crusades. |
|
|
|
Post by DungeonDevil on Feb 3, 2023 23:01:26 GMT -6
And yet Flying Buffalo was able to get away with HOBB as a race -- even into the most-recent Deluxe Edition of Tunnels & Trolls! IMO, that's a little too close for comfort! In Meadows & Megaliths, I decided to go with Beorgseta, Old English for "hill-dweller". Given the (lamentable) prevalence of "reality TV" over the past 2 decades, a new owner may consider a D&D-themed reality show to elevate the profile of the property. "Hobgoblin Bachelor" anyone? How's about "The Only Way is Greyhawk", "Keeping up with the Mordenkainens", "Survivor of the Isle of Dread", "The Real Housewives of the Duchy of Geoff"?  |
|
|
|
Post by machfront on Feb 5, 2023 16:32:42 GMT -6
And yet Flying Buffalo was able to get away with HOBB as a race -- even into the most-recent Deluxe Edition of Tunnels & Trolls! IMO, that's a little too close for comfort! In Meadows & Megaliths, I decided to go with Beorgseta, Old English for "hill-dweller". Given the (lamentable) prevalence of "reality TV" over the past 2 decades, a new owner may consider a D&D-themed reality show to elevate the profile of the property. "Hobgoblin Bachelor" anyone? How's about "The Only Way is Greyhawk", "Keeping up with the Mordenkainens", "Survivor of the Isle of Dread", "The Real Housewives of the Duchy of Geoff"? Actually they used hobbit from the first edition of T&T in 1975 up to 5.5 in 2005. |
|
|
|
Post by jeffb on Feb 5, 2023 18:30:20 GMT -6
Flip it and invest in something that is far less volatile, or at least has better ROI. D&D has way too much baggage and the fanbase is worse than Marvel, Star Trek, or Star Wars. Next option- open it up all completely as tombowings stated. |
|
Parzival
Level 6 Magician
Is a little Stir Crazy this year...
Posts: 401
|
Post by Parzival on Feb 5, 2023 19:06:00 GMT -6
Flip it and invest in something that is far less volatile, or at least has better ROI. D&D has way too much baggage and the fanbase is worse than Marvel, Star Trek, or Star Wars. At least we’re not furries! (We’re not, right? Why are you holding that giant cat’s head?) |
|
|
|
Post by Punkrabbitt on Feb 5, 2023 20:03:01 GMT -6
I for one support our new furrie overlords.
|
|
|
|
Post by tdenmark on Feb 6, 2023 0:22:04 GMT -6
Flip it and invest in something that is far less volatile, or at least has better ROI. D&D has way too much baggage and the fanbase is worse than Marvel, Star Trek, or Star Wars. Next option- open it up all completely as tombowings stated. I've worked on official Star Wars products. D&D fans are mild compared to those religious zealots. |
|
|
|
Post by DungeonDevil on Feb 7, 2023 13:23:09 GMT -6
That's probably why Lucas washed his hands of it all. I think a D&D amusement park would be neat -- something that imitates the look of the park from the cartoon. Then, when entering the ride, you are actually kidnapped, forced to wear hokey faux-Mediaeval garb, and commanded to listen to the inane riddlings of a yoda wannabe, while random monsters try to kill you in earnest. Fun, fun, FUN! |
|
|
|
Post by DungeonDevil on Feb 7, 2023 13:30:33 GMT -6
And yet Flying Buffalo was able to get away with HOBB as a race -- even into the most-recent Deluxe Edition of Tunnels & Trolls! IMO, that's a little too close for comfort! In Meadows & Megaliths, I decided to go with Beorgseta, Old English for "hill-dweller". Given the (lamentable) prevalence of "reality TV" over the past 2 decades, a new owner may consider a D&D-themed reality show to elevate the profile of the property. "Hobgoblin Bachelor" anyone? How's about "The Only Way is Greyhawk", "Keeping up with the Mordenkainens", "Survivor of the Isle of Dread", "The Real Housewives of the Duchy of Geoff"? Actually they used hobbit from the first edition of T&T in 1975 up to 5.5 in 2005. Thanks for the correction. I guess T&T flew under the radar just low enough that the Tolkien Estate didn't discern its existence. |
|
Parzival
Level 6 Magician
Is a little Stir Crazy this year...
Posts: 401
|
Post by Parzival on Feb 9, 2023 9:38:17 GMT -6
In so far as OD&D is concerned, one can do that now. “Hobbit” is in the public domain, and no flavor text exists in the 3LBBs to run afoul of the Tolkien conception/version. I'm afraid the word "hobbit" is trademarked so can't be used without permission. That's way The Rings of Power series doesn't call the Harfoots "hobbits". Of course you're right, Tolkien didn't invent the word. In addition to The Denham Tracts, according to English Dialect Dictionary: "sb. Wal. Also written hobit. A measure of corn, beans", attested in 1850. It’s possible Tolkien was aware of the definition, producing the joke in The Fellowship of the Ring about the number of party guests being “one gross”— which is, of course, a measurement. Maybe a little clever word-play by the linguist for those who can get the added joke on “hobbit.” |
|
|
|
Post by Mordorandor on Feb 9, 2023 10:55:12 GMT -6
I'm afraid the word "hobbit" is trademarked so can't be used without permission. That's way The Rings of Power series doesn't call the Harfoots "hobbits". Of course you're right, Tolkien didn't invent the word. In addition to The Denham Tracts, according to English Dialect Dictionary: "sb. Wal. Also written hobit. A measure of corn, beans", attested in 1850. It’s possible Tolkien was aware of the definition, producing the joke in The Fellowship of the Ring about the number of party guests being “one gross”— which is, of course, a measurement. Maybe a little clever word-play by the linguist for those who can get the added joke on “hobbit.” I wonder here if Lucas was similarly inspired when he came up with the derogatory term "peck" for Hobbit ("Nelwyn") in Willow. |
|
Parzival
Level 6 Magician
Is a little Stir Crazy this year...
Posts: 401
|
Post by Parzival on Feb 9, 2023 15:42:34 GMT -6
It’s possible Tolkien was aware of the definition, producing the joke in The Fellowship of the Ring about the number of party guests being “one gross”— which is, of course, a measurement. Maybe a little clever word-play by the linguist for those who can get the added joke on “hobbit.” I wonder here if Lucas was similarly inspired when he came up with the derogatory term "peck" for Hobbit ("Nelwyn") in Willow. Good catch— yes, it wouldn’t surprise me. Could just be coincidence, but geeky writer types love their linguistic in-jokes that nobody else gets. |
|
|
|
Post by dwayanu on Feb 18, 2023 13:16:25 GMT -6
I would briefly summarize my business model as “covering the spread.” To elaborate at some length …
Notwithstanding the OSR does significantly represent a ‘school’, I think the most important thing it demonstrates is the value of the D&D idiom as a lingua Franca for the hobby, facilitating exchange of ideas even among people with remarkably different campaigns.
Elements of the ‘school’ represent a minority preference, the trends it opposes having demonstrated more popularity. However, the original Arneson-Gygax concept of a framework malleable enough for different groups to make their own game of it can simultaneously maximize the market and profit from sales of supplements (in principle an endless pipeline, versus the finite one of “core books”).
Making the old catalog available POD is a low-overhead profit vector, which WotC seems eventually to have realized at least in part. There may be some things to which the firm does not actually own all the copyright (as is certainly the case for Games Workshop with old issues of White Dwarf magazine).
There’s also the easy money of licensing, which Hasbro has taken with Advanced Squad Leader and more recently WotC has with Original Adventures Reincarnated.
D&D 5E has been remarkably successful at bringing together people whose favorite edition is something else — but falls shorter than needful in scratching those favorite itches.
To some extent there are parallel branches, but broadly the prior history of D&D is a line of progressively more complex developments. One could take advantage of this with an introductory set more like the earlier game, and expansions that bring in elaborations.
For that matter, I think the combat game in 4E might best be implemented as a product that can stand on its own as well as be integrated with the RPG line.
Strict as viable retro-clones of OD&D through 3E are already at large, but works less concerned with being museum pieces could have lucrative cross-generation appeal. Compared with 20 years ago, WotC is no longer so far ahead in lavish production but can still leverage its distribution network, economies of scale, and advertising.
I think Ryan Dancey was on the right track with the OGL — but arguably counterproductively preoccupied with claiming more entitlement than the law provides. I think the synergy of network externalities would actually be greater if people didn’t need for instance to be coy about indicating compatibility.
Take with D&D the approach that Electronic Arts takes to video games: let startups take the risk of pioneering, then buy your pick of the actually successful products. What’s a lot of money to most entrepreneurs is relatively petty cash to Hasbro, and on top of that fortune the latter can offer greater fame. The firm can bring a work to an appreciative audience that otherwise might not even hear of it.
|
|
