Chainmail Retro Clone?

[ishmann]

Is there or has there ever been a Chainmail retro clone? If so where could I get a copy? As far as I know there isn't a way to purchase the original so I was hoping there was another option.

[scottenkainen]

Chainmail is not covered by an Open Game License, so it would be very difficult to make a legal retro-clone of it.

~Scott "-enkainen" Casper

[ishmann]

Oct 12, 2013 17:58:55 GMT -6 scottenkainen said:

Chainmail is not covered by an Open Game License, so it would be very difficult to make a legal retro-clone of it.

~Scott "-enkainen" Casper

Ahhhh.... I hadn't thought of that. That's too bad. A retro clone may of sparked a revival of the game. I'm sure there are people out there like myself who don't have access to the rules and would like to try Chainmail out.

[cooper]

Open Gaming License doesn't mean anything. OSRIC is not published under it's aegis. Game rules are not copyrightable. The only thing you can't do is take Gary Gygax and Perren's text and call it your own, their words are copy written. If someone wants to clone CHAINMAIL they are welcome to do so. For pete's sake the Fantasy Supplement is practically a wargame based on J.R.R. Tolkien's material. I don't know how TSR/WOTC owns any of that.

[Azafuse]

Actually Platemail should be a pretty loose clone of Chainmail.

[Vile Traveller]

Oct 12, 2013 22:45:37 GMT -6 cooper said:

Open Gaming License doesn't mean anything.

That's right, the only time you need the OGL is if you want to use the wording in the various System Reference Documents. Chainmail is so generic in its creatures and magic that you could easily write your own without all the restrictions that the OGL places on you.

But, yeah, I thought this is what Platemail is supposed to do.

[waysoftheearth]

Copyright is one of several legal protections pertaining to Intellectual Property.

Generally, it is "the right to copy", but also gives the copyright holder the right to be credited for the work, to determine who may adapt the work to other forms, who may perform the work, who may financially benefit from it, and other related rights.

Creation of a Derivative Work is a breach of copyright.

A “derivative work” is a work based upon one or more preexisting works, such as a translation, musical arrangement, dramatization, fictionalization, motion picture version, sound recording, art reproduction, abridgment, condensation, or any other form in which a work may be recast, transformed, or adapted. A work consisting of editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications which, as a whole, represent an original work of authorship, is a “derivative work”.

Oct 12, 2013 23:19:16 GMT -6 Vile Traveller said:

Oct 12, 2013 22:45:37 GMT -6 cooper said:

Open Gaming License doesn't mean anything.

That's right, the only time you need the OGL is if you want to use the wording in the various System Reference Documents. Chainmail is so generic in its creatures and magic that you could easily write your own without all the restrictions that the OGL places on you.

The OGL means anyone who abides by the terms of the OGL can legally create a derivative work of the SRD.

[Vile Traveller]

Those statements are correct in their context, but the specific case we are talking about here is that copyright cannot be applied to game rules, only the expression of those game rules (and rulebooks are not automatically copyrighted if they are not considered literary works, but that's another can of worms). You can legally re-create and sell your version of the Chainmail gameplay written in your own words (with all due care, I.A.N.A.L., etc.) without the OGL.

[jcstephens]

A few years back there was a pamphlet called "Using Chainmail to Resolve OD&D Combats", but it no longer seems to be available online. Anyone know what happened?

[Azafuse]

Oct 13, 2013 12:06:02 GMT -6 jcstephens said:

A few years back there was a pamphlet called "Using Chainmail to Resolve OD&D Combats", but it no longer seems to be available online. Anyone know what happened?

Maybe here?

[waysoftheearth]

Oct 13, 2013 9:59:31 GMT -6 Vile Traveller said:

Those statements are correct in their context, but the specific case we are talking about here is that copyright cannot be applied to game rules, only the expression of those game rules (and rulebooks are not automatically copyrighted if they are not considered literary works, but that's another can of worms). You can legally re-create and sell your version of the Chainmail gameplay written in your own words (with all due care, I.A.N.A.L., etc.) without the OGL.

I'm no lawyer, but I can't see how game rules expressed as prose and published as books or booklets could be exempt from regular IP law.  If they were, the market would be awash with legal copies of every game and the OGL would not exist (it would be pointless to specifically grant permission to copy something everyone could copy anyway).


Whether a theoretical Chainmail "clone" would be considered derivative work would ultimately be for the IP lawyers to decide, not us. But what you may be able to print would depend largely on how far the IP holder is willing to go to defend their IP. What is morally or legally "right" is a whole different thing.

An interesting thought experiment would be to imagine applying Vile Traveller's treatment to, say, GameWorkshop's Lord of the Rings Strategy Battle Game or Warhammer Fantasy Battle game or any of their dozens of out of print games, or to Battlefront's Flames of War and imagine how far that would go.  FWIW -- I am confident they would defend their IP vigorously (GamesWorkshop issued a litany of cease and desist orders to fans supporting their out of print games fairly recently).

Of course Chainmail is no longer a going concern in the same manner as some of these games, so the IP holder may not defend their IP with the same energy.  But that is not to say they couldn't.  If it suited them they almost certainly could.  So it all rests upon how much the IP holder really cares about defending their IP.









 

[Ynas Midgard]

Copyright does not protect the idea for a game, its name or title, or the method or methods for playing it. Nor does copyright protect any idea, system, method, device, or trademark material involved in developing, merchandising, or playing a game. Once a game has been made public, nothing in the copyright law prevents others from developing another game based on similar principles. Copyright protects only the particular manner of an author’s expression in literary, artistic, or musical form.

Source: www.copyright.gov/fls/fl108.html

[waysoftheearth]

Oct 12, 2013 22:45:37 GMT -6 cooper said:

Open Gaming License doesn't mean anything. OSRIC is not published under it's aegis. Game rules are not copyrightable. The only thing you can't do is take Gary Gygax and Perren's text and call it your own, their words are copy written. If someone wants to clone CHAINMAIL they are welcome to do so. For pete's sake the Fantasy Supplement is practically a wargame based on J.R.R. Tolkien's material. I don't know how TSR/WOTC owns any of that.

I must respectfully disagree with some of this cooper.

The OGL has, IMHO, very significant meaning to OSR publishers. It is the legal foundation for the so called "clones". If you meant to imply that "Open Gaming License doesn't mean anything to Chainmail" then I agree with you; the OGL does not cover Chainmail.

OSRIC is published under its own "OSRIC Open License" which is states you must:

Comply with the terms of the Wizards of the Coast (WOTC) Open Game License with respect to any use of Open Game Content

.
and:

Not violate or infringe upon any trademark of WOTC (moreover, note that the OGL currently prohibits any indication of compatibility with a trademark without written permission).

Copyright protection extends beyond mere plagiarism. While it is true that someone could clone Chainmail, the real question is whether or not they could do so legally. That would be a matter for copyright lawyers to argue, but without the aegis of the OGL I personally suspect that it would not be easy. (How vigorously the IP owners would actually defend their IP is a separate question).

I don't believe that TSR ever had the legal right to use Tolkien's IP in Chainmail (or OD&D for that matter), which is why they subsequently received a legal directive from the Tolkien estate to cease and desist, which resulted in Tolkien references being deleted (though incompletely!) from OD&D.

It's interesting that nothing was done about Chainmail, but perhaps it was just too obscure to be noticed? Or perhaps it was already out of print? or perhaps they ceased printing it because of the legal order to cease and desist?

Maybe someone here knows the story of Chainmail's sunset?

[krusader74]

Regarding copyrights, it's an important consideration that this is a worldwide forum and that copyright laws vary around the world.

As Ynas Midgard noted, according to the US Copyright Office:

Copyright does not protect the idea for a game, its name or title, or the method or methods for playing it. Nor does copyright protect any idea, system, method, device, or trademark material involved in developing, merchandising, or playing a game. Once a game has been made public, nothing in the copyright law prevents others from developing another game based on similar principles. Copyright protects only the particular manner of an author’s expression in literary, artistic, or musical form.

This article goes on to say that elements like literary expression and art are copyrightable. Digging further, it seems that the typefaces used in a game aren't copyrightable, unless they constitute art. Game mechanics are patentable. Elements like names, brands and logos are subject to trademark.

This post mentions that "Wizards was sued by Palladium simply for publishing a 'multi-system' book that presented a conversion to Palladium." The parties eventually settled. The suit nearly bankrupted Wizards. All that, even though "the idea for a game, its name" etc. theoretically aren't protected. Read more here.

It's noteworthy that the tiny island of Antigua has become a copyright haven. Quoting this article, entitled "Where U.S. Copyrights Go To Die" dated 31 Jan 2013:

In a Monday decision by the World Trade Organization, Antigua & Barbuda can now legally offer downloads of copyrighted U.S. works, and there’s not a d**n thing the U.S. can do about it.

(Similar articles about this here on Phys.org and here on Yahoo!)

In short, to make a legal retro clone, you'd need to consult with a legal expert in your jurisdiction.

Regarding Chainmail, I'd like to see Wizards sell legal PDF copies of Chainmail on DnDclassics.com and also include a print copy of Chainmail in their upcoming (est. 17 Dec 2013) reprint, the Premium Original Dungeons & Dragons Fantasy Roleplaying Game.

I'd also like to see a Chainmail retro clone. I thought about doing one. But, as shown above, the laws are murky, and even if you're legally in-the-right, the Palladium case proves you still might get the s**t sued out of you.

[waysoftheearth]

Oct 13, 2013 17:43:51 GMT -6 Ynas Midgard said:

Copyright does not protect the idea for a game, its name or title, or the method or methods for playing it. Nor does copyright protect any idea, system, method, device, or trademark material involved in developing, merchandising, or playing a game. Once a game has been made public, nothing in the copyright law prevents others from developing another game based on similar principles. Copyright protects only the particular manner of an author’s expression in literary, artistic, or musical form.

Source: www.copyright.gov/fls/fl108.html

And from the following paragraph:

If your game includes any written element, such as instructions or directions, the Copyright Office recommends that you apply to register it as a literary work. Doing so will allow you to register all copyrightable parts of the game, including any pictorial elements. When the copyrightable elements of the game consist predominantly of pictorial matter, you should apply to register it as a work of the visual arts.

It's worth noting too that copyright law differs country to country. So if you live outside the US the above may not be exactly applicable to you, although most western countries probably have similar laws.

It's also worth reiterating that copyright is only one of several protections around IP.

Titles and names are not subject to copyright law but they are subject to trademark law, which is why WotC have a list of trademarked names and terms around D&D (but perhaps they have less protection around Chainmail terms specifically? It might be worth finding out?).

(Less relevant here but ideas -- or their manifestation as inventions -- are, I believe, subject patent law).

[derv]

It seems WotC still has a vested interest in Chainmail. It wasn't that long ago that they produced this set of miniature rules www.wizards.com/dnd/article.asp?x=minis/ch20011129b

There continues to be support for another 4e line that was built off the original concept.

www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/mi/20080117a
and
www.wizards.com/DnD/Product.aspx?x=dnd/products/dndmin/0786960426

Here is an endorsed fan based site
ddmguild.com/rules-and-cards


I have no experience with any of these rule sets, but I also have no doubt that D&DNext will recieve the same treatment as previously done.


edit- just to respond to the OP, you can still find copies of the original Chainmail rules for sale on Amazon or Ebay. They are generally not cheap, but sometimes you can get lucky. Here's a new listing starting at $9.95 on Ebay. I've bought from this guy before in the past and recieved good service. Not an endorsement, just my experience.
www.ebay.com/itm/CHAINMAIL-RULES-FOR-MEDIEVAL-MINIATURES-TSR-6002-D-D-Gygax-Dungeons-Dragons-AD-D-/200974476124?pt=Games_US&hash=item2ecb03235c#viTabs_0

[kesher]

Also, it seems very likely that the PDF will be offered again in the near future through RPG NOW, as they re-release all of the back catalog.

[ishmann]

Derv, thank you for the EBay link. I will definitely be bidding on it. If my memory is correct, Chainmail was once available on Drive-thru.com. Hopefully it will be again.

Question: If a retro clone of Chainmail were created and then given away would that violate any copyright laws? There are quite a few retro clones of the older versions of D&D out there that are free. Don't know if intending to make a profit factors into it or not.

[waysoftheearth]

Oct 13, 2013 22:40:11 GMT -6 ishmann said:

Question: If a retro clone of Chainmail were created and then given away would that violate any copyright laws? There are quite a few retro clones of the older versions of D&D out there that are free. Don't know if intending to make a profit factors into it or not.

ishmann, you should really seek advise from a proper IP lawyer type person, but my guess is that whether you sell a "derivative work" or give it away probably doesn't have any bearing on its legal status.

FWIW -- I suspect you may find that those free "retro clones" of old versions of D&D are all based on the SRD and distributed along with the OGL.

[Deleted]

Oct 13, 2013 20:42:17 GMT -6 kesher said:

Also, it seems very likely that the PDF will be offered again in the near future through RPG NOW, as they re-release all of the back catalog.

Cool.

Also, are the combat tables copyrightable? Like "Light Foot vs Light Foot, 1 die per man, 6 kills"?

What about "Class 1 Infantry vs Class 1 Infantry, 1d6 per figure, 6=remove enemy figure"?

[Ynas Midgard]

Oct 14, 2013 16:13:19 GMT -6 @gronanofsimmerya said:

Oct 13, 2013 20:42:17 GMT -6 kesher said:

Also, it seems very likely that the PDF will be offered again in the near future through RPG NOW, as they re-release all of the back catalog.

Cool.

Also, are the combat tables copyrightable? Like "Light Foot vs Light Foot, 1 die per man, 6 kills"?

What about "Class 1 Infantry vs Class 1 Infantry, 1d6 per figure, 6=remove enemy figure"?

The order in which things are presented and the actual text can be copyrighted; however, a table in which data is expressed in a different manner is not a breach against copyright, even if the content practically is the same.

[waysoftheearth]

Oct 14, 2013 17:00:27 GMT -6 Ynas Midgard said:

a table in which data is expressed in a different manner is not a breach against copyright, even if the content practically is the same.

My understanding of this is that tables of facts are not copyrightable and can be freely reproduced. Facts are not "created" or "owned" by anyone, they simply exist in the public domain. However, tables of purely invented stuff are works of authorship, exactly as is prose, and these are the IP of their authors.

As with all of this stuff, YMMV.

[Vile Traveller]

I don't imagine the idea of a 6 on 1d6 = kill was in any way original when Chainmail came out

As waysoftheearth says, if you want to be certain you need a lawyer. But you can get a pretty good idea of how few items of real IP are present in wargames (or RPGs for that matter) by perusing a selection of such products and noting how much they have in common. d6-based wargames, in particular, tend not to be mechanically unique in any particular way. Even RPG parlance such as "1d6" is commonly used by almost every game out there.

However, I think the Platemail reference above was passed over rather quickly. Does anyone know whether that qualifies as a Chainmail clone or is it too much of an RPG?

[ishmann]

I downloaded Platemail a few years ago. Here is the thread where the author discusses his game:

forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?562317-necro-27th-Edition-Platemail

As far as I can tell it is more of an RPG. I haven't read it in a few years though so I'm not 100% sure.

[jacar]

This one I did. I have been slowly working on it as time and mood permits.

odd74.proboards.com/thread/6617/first-draft-chainmail

nobody screamed so I suspect it is sufficiently different as to not infringe on copyright.

[kesher]

Oct 15, 2013 10:12:35 GMT -6 ishmann said:

I downloaded Platemail a few years ago. Here is the thread where the author discusses his game:

forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?562317-necro-27th-Edition-Platemail

As far as I can tell it is more of an RPG. I haven't read it in a few years though so I'm not 100% sure.

Huh. I think I glanced at these rules awhile ago, but now may need to give them a proper read-through...

[Falconer]

Oct 13, 2013 17:50:17 GMT -6 waysoftheearth said:

I don't believe that TSR ever had the legal right to use Tolkien's IP in Chainmail (or OD&D for that matter), which is why they subsequently received a legal directive from the Tolkien estate to cease and desist, which resulted in Tolkien references being deleted (though incompletely!) from OD&D.

It's interesting that nothing was done about Chainmail, but perhaps it was just too obscure to be noticed? Or perhaps it was already out of print? or perhaps they ceased printing it because of the legal order to cease and desist?

FYI, it wasn’t the J.R.R. Tolkien Estate, it was The Saul Zaentz Company d/b/a Tolkien Enterprises.

In Chainmail from the Fifth Printing on they DID change to Halflings and Treants.

[waysoftheearth]

Oct 19, 2013 21:11:11 GMT -6 Falconer said:

FYI, it wasn’t the J.R.R. Tolkien Estate, it was The Saul Zaentz Company d/b/a Tolkien Enterprises.

In Chainmail from the Fifth Printing on they DID change to Halflings and Treants.

Good to know, thanks Falconer. What about Balrogs?

[Falconer]

Excised completely, IIRC. I’d have to check.

[jacar]

Balrog was completely removed at the 5th printing. AFAIK, that is probably the only item completely removed. Everything else was either changed (Hobbit -> Halfling) or kept as is because it appeared in common myths and folklore.