# Mongoose 3.0/3.5 Grand Archive - Any Interest?



## MongooseMatt (Jun 18, 2008)

Hi guys,

There is (predictably) a lot of talk at the moment about 4e and the GSL.  At Mongoose, we are currently going through the fineprint to determine whether the products we planned specifically for 4e (no conversions of older books are planned) are still viable.  

However, I wanted to look back for a moment, rather than forward. 

We produced a great deal of OGC under D20.  Most of these books are now out of print, with just PDF copies available - by the end of the year these will disappear too, as it is not realistic for us to remove D20 licensing off every product we produced over the years. Just too many!

However, it seems a shame to have all this material simply disappear, so. . .

If there is any interest, we would be prepared to make the vast majority of our D20-based content available freely.  In the past, there has been talk about an OGC Wiki of sorts, and I think we can kick such a project off in a sizeable way.

If a volunteer (or volunteers - you might have to be some sort of maniac to go through all this material solo!) were to come forward and create a suitable web site, we would happily supply electronic versions of our D20 lines for translation of OGC to such a web site. We would be very free with the material permissable, allowing you to effectively cut and paste large chunks of 'fluff' text alongside the OGC.

This would include all the Quintessentials, Slayer's Guides, Encyclopaedias, Ultimates - potentially, even some Babylon 5 material, if someone is prepared to remove all the licensed text (no Conan though, as that is still current!)

All we ask is that the project is taken seriously and that there is maybe a link or two to us from the site 

If other publishers are interested in such a project, we would gladly welcome work alongside them - this could end up being a seriously large site!

So, any interest?  If someone wanted to build the Mother of All OGC sites, we can give you a serious head start.  Might even be able to provide you with web space and some rather large bandwidth.


----------



## DaveMage (Jun 18, 2008)

That's mighty generous of you!


----------



## lrsach01 (Jun 18, 2008)

I would LOVE to see this sort of thing happen. Makes me sad that I have no skills when comes to programming.


----------



## Lizard (Jun 18, 2008)

I think it would be amazing.


----------



## HyrumOWC (Jun 18, 2008)

This is an awesome idea and one I'd support 100%.

Hyrum.


----------



## Wintergreen (Jun 18, 2008)

That's an amazing suggestion that definitely would have a lot of support.


----------



## Admiral Caine (Jun 18, 2008)

Wintergreen said:
			
		

> That's an amazing suggestion that definitely would have a lot of support.




Matt,

This was cross posted over at Paizo. One of the folks over there has asked what would the storage space requirement be (or even an estimate). They feel they might be able to mirror for this collection indefinitely.


Thanks!


----------



## Darkwolf71 (Jun 18, 2008)

Man, that rocks. I wish my computer skills were up to the task. But I'm a user, not a programer.


----------



## joela (Jun 18, 2008)

*Wow*



			
				MongooseMatt said:
			
		

> So, any interest?  If someone wanted to build the Mother of All OGC sites, we can give you a serious head start.  Might even be able to provide you with web space and some rather large bandwidth.




I'll provide fresh reviews!


----------



## GeorgeFields (Jun 18, 2008)

Great idea!


----------



## MongooseMatt (Jun 18, 2008)

Admiral Caine said:
			
		

> Matt,
> 
> This was cross posted over at Paizo. One of the folks over there has asked what would the storage space requirement be (or even an estimate). They feel they might be able to mirror for this collection indefinitely.
> 
> ...




I can't imagine the storage requirements would be particularly large, if it was all kept text-based (we can talk about art if this gets off the ground ).


----------



## FATDRAGONGAMES (Jun 18, 2008)

That is an extremely generous offer Matt, thank you.


----------



## Pinotage (Jun 18, 2008)

Wow! That's amazing! I genuinely hope this gets off the ground.

Thanks, Mongoose!

Pinotage


----------



## Lord Mhoram (Jun 18, 2008)

Really cool Matt.


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 18, 2008)

MongooseMatt said:
			
		

> So, any interest?  If someone wanted to build the Mother of All OGC sites, we can give you a serious head start.  Might even be able to provide you with web space and some rather large bandwidth.




Mark Gedak (long-time MGP playtester) and editor of the Renegade Wizard's Spellbook, Renegade Cleric's Tome, Epic Monsters - who as a lot of MGP's stuff in PDF from these projects would be very pleased to do this. In fact he has 8 days of school left and then could put serious time to this endeavor.


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 18, 2008)

er, so,... Pick Me! Pick Me!


----------



## Knightfall (Jun 18, 2008)

This is pretty generous of you Matt; however, I hope such a project will include errata and bulletproofing of the OGL content. I suggest asking John Cooper to do that, if possible.


----------



## kensanata (Jun 18, 2008)

I'm a wiki developer and I run several small wikis and one larger wiki – the Emacs Wiki.

I volunteer to set up an appropriate wiki using Oddmuse and starting this project as well as maintaining the wiki itself.

Also check out my Campaign Wiki which I've started using for my campaigns – that would give you an idea of where this would be heading. (And we might get a nicer CSS, hehe.)

I guess something like the Hypertext d20 SRD would be the goal. Using a wiki would allow us to allow anybody interested in collaborating. Having a dedicated software maintainer at the head of the project would make sure that software problems can be dealt with and that eventually many of the cool things seen on d20srd.org will be available on the new OGC Wiki as well.

Contact me via kensanata@gmail.com.


----------



## sgstyrsky (Jun 18, 2008)

Man-thing said:
			
		

> er, so,... Pick Me! Pick Me!



Pick me too! I can help.


----------



## Voadam (Jun 18, 2008)

MongooseMatt said:
			
		

> Most of these books are now out of print, with just PDF copies available - by the end of the year these will disappear too, as it is not realistic for us to remove D20 licensing off every product we produced over the years. Just too many!




Oh crap! I was hoping to keep buying this stuff on pdf for years to come, art and fluff in addition to OGC rules. My monthly gaming budget will not allow me to get all the ones I'm interested in before the end of the year. 

Back when he first anounced that the logo would be retired Scott Rouse mentioned he thought it would be as simple as placing a black square to cover the d20 logo in pdfs for companies to keep the products available.


----------



## 2WS-Steve (Jun 18, 2008)

Voadam said:
			
		

> Back when he first anounced that the logo would be retired Scott Rouse mentioned he thought it would be as simple as placing a black square to cover the d20 logo in pdfs for companies to keep the products available.




There's also license text within the books themselves that you'd need to edit.  

And, I'm not sure about this but it's a concern I have, in a lot of books you might mention the "d20 system" in the text repeatedly.  If you need to change all those references to the OGL system or whatever, then that'd be a lot of worker-hours spent.


----------



## Yair (Jun 18, 2008)

That's very generous! Cool!

I wish I had the time or money to contribute significantly.  As it is, all I can promise is that once a site is agreed on, I'll do my best to aid in distilling OGC.


----------



## Sigurd (Jun 18, 2008)

Matt, that is an amazing plan that really shows your heart is with the players. The sort of thing that restores ones faith in companies.

I hope this gets done. If there's a way I can help with a small part of it pm me. You guys have some great stuff. I like to think the imagination of the writers continues and endures.


Sigurd


----------



## jdrakeh (Jun 18, 2008)

For the purpose of historical documentation, I fully support this endeavor!


----------



## TheLe (Jun 18, 2008)

Voadam said:
			
		

> Back when he first anounced that the logo would be retired Scott Rouse mentioned he thought it would be as simple as placing a black square to cover the d20 logo in pdfs for companies to keep the products available.




It's not that simple at all. Many books say "d20" in their credits. As a matter of fact, there is one "d20" at the end of the OGL itself for using d20.

I am not looking forward to removing all those references from 70+ of my books. Then again, I could always replace them with PATHFINDER...

`Le


----------



## MongooseMatt (Jun 18, 2008)

Okay, then chaps, it looks like we have a direction of sorts 

What I would like to happen is this. . .

Get together and figure out who should be leader/main point of contact for us - we will need to funnel files to just one person, so we can watch what is going on.  That person can change over time, but we need to start somewhere, right?

Such a person will receive files, and send them on to whom ever is mad enough to take them on (!), and then ensure the files find their way into the wiki/database/whatever.  Then they can request more.

The magnitude of this task is not to be underestimated, and it will take some effort from a number of people - for example, it occured to me that we could declare the entirety of the Drow War campaign as Open Content (levels 1-30, three volumes, 760+ pages. . .).  There is more than just a few Slayer's Guides in there


----------



## jdrakeh (Jun 18, 2008)

TheLe said:
			
		

> It's not that simple at all. Many books say "d20" in their credits. As a matter of fact, there is one "d20" at the end of the OGL itself for using d20.




Honestly, that's still pretty simple. One person could feasibly update multiple PDFs in one 8-hour business day (if that's all they were doing). In order to keep a catalog in print/available for sale, contracting one individual to do this work over a period of a month or two seems like it would be well worth it (for larger publishers, anyhow).


----------



## MRTrice (Jun 18, 2008)

I'm working on my thesis concerning wiki collaboration and bias, and would love to help out as part of the team that gets this going.

I'd also like to document the process (not for the thesis, but for future use). 

contact me at: mt1225 @ txstate.edu

Beyond the thesis, I've worked with mediawiki, tikiwiki, and breifly with wikkawiki.

-Michael Trice


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 18, 2008)

MongooseMattt said:
			
		

> Get together and figure out who should be leader/main point of contact for us - we will need to funnel files to just one person, so we can watch what is going on.  That person can change over time, but we need to start somewhere, right?




Matt, could we set-up a yahoogroup for this discussion, similar to the one that the MongoosePlaytesters are on?

I'm very willing to lead this project: gedakm@gmail.com
Mark Gedak


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 18, 2008)

*Name*

Matt,

Do you have a preference for the wiki's name? Do you want MGP to host the wiki or are you fine with outside hosting.

I'm thinking calling it:

Dr. Blottenberger's Grand Wiki 

would be a very appropriate name.


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 18, 2008)

Like this:

http://grandwiki.wikidot.com/start


----------



## joela (Jun 18, 2008)

*Dw*



			
				MongooseMatt said:
			
		

> wiki/database/whatever.  Then they can request more.
> 
> The magnitude of this task is not to be underestimated, and it will take some effort from a number of people - for example, it occured to me that we could declare the entirety of the Drow War campaign as Open Content (levels 1-30, three volumes, 760+ pages. . .).  There is more than just a few Slayer's Guides in there




I have the deadtree version of those books. That makes Shackled City look anorexic


----------



## GeorgeFields (Jun 18, 2008)

I really wish I had time to help out with this on a big scale. Once things are rolling, I might be able work some time to do 1 or 2.


----------



## Cavalorn (Jun 18, 2008)

MongooseMatt said:
			
		

> The magnitude of this task is not to be underestimated, and it will take some effort from a number of people - for example, it occured to me that we could declare the entirety of the Drow War campaign as Open Content (levels 1-30, three volumes, 760+ pages. . .).  There is more than just a few Slayer's Guides in there




Well, what with Drow being absent from the 4th Edition SRD, I'd be happy to see this happen.

Fly, my gargantuan creation, fly! Be free!


----------



## jdrakeh (Jun 18, 2008)

Man-thing said:
			
		

> Matt, could we set-up a yahoogroup for this discussion, similar to the one that the MongoosePlaytesters are on?
> 
> I'm very willing to lead this project: gedakm@gmail.com
> Mark Gedak




I would like to say that I think Mark would be a great person to head up this project.


----------



## MongooseMatt (Jun 18, 2008)

Man-thing said:
			
		

> Matt,
> 
> Do you have a preference for the wiki's name? Do you want MGP to host the wiki or are you fine with outside hosting.
> 
> ...




Cute 

Not too fussed about the name, not too fussed about hosting, though the offer is there.  The only real stipulation is that (aside from the usual section 15) there are links back to our site.

Also, a big picture of me on the front page would work well on the ego front, but then we can't have everything. . .


----------



## GeorgeFields (Jun 18, 2008)

MongooseMatt said:
			
		

> Also, a big picture of me on the front page would work well on the ego front, but then we can't have everything. . .




Only if you do the "Buddy Jesus" pose from _Dogma_.


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 19, 2008)

MongooseMatt said:
			
		

> Also, a big picture of me on the front page would work well on the ego front, but then we can't have everything. . .




I'll expect a picture sent to my email.

I've put up a copy of the open game license on the site and am currently preparing a template for content.

If people want to be involved in this project please join the Grand Wiki Yahoogroup

Subscribe: 	Grandwiki-subscribe@yahoogroups.com


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 19, 2008)

jdrakeh said:
			
		

> I would like to say that I think Mark would be a great person to head up this project.




Oh, and thanks.


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 19, 2008)

Cavalorn said:
			
		

> Well, what with Drow being absent from the 4th Edition SRD, I'd be happy to see this happen.
> 
> Fly, my gargantuan creation, fly! Be free!




Especially the Slklavadok and Bodiless Ao/The Ivory Child from Drow War III: The Darkest Hour.


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 19, 2008)

GeoFFields said:
			
		

> I really wish I had time to help out with this on a big scale. Once things are rolling, I might be able work some time to do 1 or 2.




I'm sure there will always be room for people to help out.


----------



## GeorgeFields (Jun 19, 2008)

Man-thing said:
			
		

> I'm sure there will always be room for people to help out.




Great!



			
				Man-thing said:
			
		

> If people want to be involved in this project please join the Grand Wiki Yahoogroup
> 
> Subscribe: 	Grandwiki-subscribe@yahoogroups.com




DONE!


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 19, 2008)

GeoFFields said:
			
		

> DONE!




You should already be approved on the yahoogroup.


----------



## GeorgeFields (Jun 19, 2008)

Man-thing said:
			
		

> You should already be approved on the yahoogroup.




Yep - thanks, Mark!


----------



## xmanii (Jun 19, 2008)

Very cool of you to do this.


----------



## Kerrick (Jun 19, 2008)

I think this is a fantastic idea, and I'd be fully willing to contribute content also (we've already got an OGC wiki of our own; see my sig), but I've got one small question: What about the Section 15? Every time a previous discussion came up about an OGC wiki, this killed it. That little clause about "You must provide the entire S15 for every product from which you used content in this book" makes borrowing content from an OGC wiki kind of untenable, even if each item were clearly marked. Now, if WotC were willing to give an exception (say, use the site as the sole source for the S15), that'd be great... but would they?


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 19, 2008)

I understand that.  So I'm planning on breaking the content into manageable chunks and using this:

http://grandwiki.wikidot.com/contenttemplate


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 19, 2008)

Kerrick said:
			
		

> I think this is a fantastic idea, and I'd be fully willing to contribute content also (we've already got an OGC wiki of our own; see my sig)




I saw that earlier today in another thread. We be pleased to have you on board. I have a yahoogroup signup in this thread and on the http://grandwiki.wikidot.com site.


----------



## Yair (Jun 19, 2008)

Man-thing said:
			
		

> I understand that.  So I'm planning on breaking the content into manageable chunks and using this:
> 
> http://grandwiki.wikidot.com/contenttemplate



I think it's best to just enter a seperate OGL for each entry. But there is no need to have this discussion here....

Edit: Oh, and while I don't know him, I would add my vote in support for Man-thing to be the contact man and wiki-manager. He seems to have his act together


----------



## kensanata (Jun 19, 2008)

I have some questions. 

What's the significance of "Dr. Blottenberger"?

Can we add our own markup rules? I liked the dice-rolling links on the d20srd site, for example.

Can we download the database or raw material of our wiki? Basically I don't know enough about Wikidot and I'd be really sorry to see our wiki disappear into oblivion one day just because the company folds or starts asking for a lot of money.


----------



## jdrakeh (Jun 19, 2008)

> MGP 2600 D20: Dr Blottenberger’s Bestiary of Extraordinary Creatures will be releasing in 2006.




I think that he's a fictional narrator of Mongoose design.


----------



## kensanata (Jun 19, 2008)

jdrakeh said:
			
		

> I think that he's a fictional narrator of Mongoose design.




Ah, thanks. Are we doing a Mongoose-only OGC wiki? Better decide such things as early as possible. If we're using Mongoose's fictional narrator, that may discourage other publishers, I'd think. Perhaps we could use him for the page heading the Mongoose section (basically the only section for the moment).


----------



## kensanata (Jun 19, 2008)

Man-thing said:
			
		

> http://grandwiki.wikidot.com/start




Will the wiki remain read-only for casual users? I noticed that I couldn't edit any pages even though I created a wikidot account.


----------



## Yair (Jun 19, 2008)

I don't think the d20-srd site is a good model for this enterprise. That would entail a single interconnected work, and hence a single enormously long Section 15. I suggest instead publishing each distillation as a single stand-alone product. This can be done in a hypertext-document, if desired, but I think the document needs to be seperate under the OGL.

A d20-srd style site would be fun, but I don't think it's a good way to distill the huge collection of sometimes contradictiory material Mongoose is offering here, certainly not in a way that would make it easy for someone else to then use the material in his own work.


----------



## jdrakeh (Jun 19, 2008)

kensanata said:
			
		

> Ah, thanks. Are we doing a Mongoose-only OGC wiki?




They're the only publisher that I have seen voluntarily offer their OGC for such a project. Last time an OGC wiki was proposed, a lot of publishers threatened to _sue_. This being the case, a good rule of thumb for we free indviduals who can't fight a corporation in the courts is, I think, that we don't enter OGC in the wiki until it is specifically volunteered for the project in writing by the publisher who owns it (no, OGC declarations in printed works _dont_ count).


----------



## kensanata (Jun 19, 2008)

Yair said:
			
		

> I suggest instead publishing each distillation as a single stand-alone product. This can be done in a hypertext-document, if desired, but I think the document needs to be seperate under the OGL.




I agree that this will be the easiest way to start and the easiest on other publishers that want to reuse the content. (Although their section 15 isn't too intimidating)

The d20srd.org site is very player & DM friendly. I think getting the OGC Wiki into a very player & DM friendly form will be possible to do, eventually. It's a wiki, and it's OGC. There's nothing stopping us (except lack of time and energy, haha).


----------



## Witchfinder General (Jun 19, 2008)

There are several wikis that host the SRD and fan contributed OGL content, such as http://www.dandwiki.com/ and http://www.d20wiki.com. Active publisher support for a community OGC wiki would be awesome.

A commuity OGC wiki will have thousands of pages. I think it would be a good idea to discuss the technical merits of different wiki engies before deciding on a particular hosting service / wiki syntax / feature set. Features such as templates, categories and automated scripting (bots) are very helpful when writing markup, organizing content and maintaining the wiki.

My personal preference is MediaWiki (as used on Wikipedia and the wikis I mentioned earlier). I have used PhpWiki, but it is no longer maintained,  so I needed to move to a new wiki engine. I found these pages useful:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_wiki_software
http://www.wikimatrix.org/
I've written a perl script which I use for migration from PhpWiki to MediaWiki (change markup and links, preserve page history). It's a lot of work, even with automated conversion. I sincerely hope that others do not have to go through it. I'm not saying that the proposed community wiki should use MediaWiki, just that it worked for me.


----------



## MongooseMatt (Jun 19, 2008)

Kerrick said:
			
		

> I think this is a fantastic idea, and I'd be fully willing to contribute content also (we've already got an OGC wiki of our own; see my sig), but I've got one small question: What about the Section 15? Every time a previous discussion came up about an OGC wiki, this killed it. That little clause about "You must provide the entire S15 for every product from which you used content in this book" makes borrowing content from an OGC wiki kind of untenable, even if each item were clearly marked. Now, if WotC were willing to give an exception (say, use the site as the sole source for the S15), that'd be great... but would they?




You need a section 15 for each entry, for best effect - surely it is easy to have a link on each page that points to an OGL page, with a custom section 15 on each that relates to the entry in question?  No web site wizard, but it seems to me a that a simple database can handle that 

Oh, and Mark, it looks like you have volunteered/been volunteered.  Drop me a line at msprange@mongoosepublishing.com - a couple of bits and pieces we need to cover, and I'll start sending along files.


----------



## Sitara (Jun 19, 2008)

Hey Matt, where is your reaction/review/comment about 4e? I and many others were looking forward to it.

Also, how's the new Lonewolf rpg coming along?


----------



## MongooseMatt (Jun 19, 2008)

Sitara said:
			
		

> Hey Matt, where is your reaction/review/comment about 4e? I and many others were looking forward to it.




Hey there,

Well, in a nutshell, 4e/the GSL is pretty much what we expected - in fact, if we were WotC, we might have gone further   If there could have been an extended grace period for publication for first-adopters (as was originally being discussed), then we might well have been prepared to lay down 'an amount' of money for the privalege ($5-10,000 was being floated around during discussions).

As it is, the only 'surprise' we are. . . not miffed about, but mildly irked, I suppose. . . is that we cannot include 4e-based articles in S&P.  However, we can still link to outside PDFs from the magazine, and we can still preview source material.

As for actual titles, we are preparing some announcement material right now.  Three lines are currently planned (after which, we will assess the 4e market).  The Quints will be making a return, though in a very different format, and they will actually be done by a completely different studio.  There will be just one book that converts older material from one of our previous lines. However, I am most looking forward to something we did not do in the D20 days - a full blown setting.  This one uses pretty much all the rules (races and classes, etc) of 4e 'as is', but in a manner that has not been done before in fantasy - it was also specifically designed to play to 4e's strengths, rather than shoehorn A N Other fantasy setting into the mould.  When you see it, you will know exactly what I mean by that 

Anyway, Chris Quilliams (he of Conan cover and Slayer's Guide anatomy fame) is prepping some concept art and the front cover right now, and we'll be putting together a preview PDF that introduces the concepts of the game/setting, as well as the steps we went through with concept art.



			
				Sitara said:
			
		

> Also, how's the new Lonewolf rpg coming along?




Done!

Well, almost.

The system is finished, and the final manuscript complete, bar an introductory scenario.  We also have outlines for supplemental books.

The main hold up is the status of the softcover Lone Wolf gamebooks, which we are intending to release into the mainstream book trade, both in the UK and US.  The intent of the new Lone Wolf RPG (or Multiplayer Gamebook, as we call it) is to sit alongside the gamebooks, and cunningly draw in new players to RPGs as a whole - it is aimed squarely at Lone Wolf fans who have yet to enter roleplaying proper, and thus, in the grand scheme of things, bring new blood into the hobby.

With suchg a goal, we are not going to rush the book to market, but position it ready to take advantage of gamebook sales.


----------



## BPIJonathan (Jun 19, 2008)

MongooseMatt said:
			
		

> This would include all the Quintessentials, Slayer's Guides, Encyclopaedias, Ultimates - potentially, even some Babylon 5 material, if someone is prepared to remove all the licensed text (no Conan though, as that is still current!)




This is a great idea, one that I will support where I can, but one question -- Does this mean that Babylon 5 is no longer a current product?


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 19, 2008)

MongooseMatt said:
			
		

> Oh, and Mark, it looks like you have volunteered/been volunteered.  Drop me a line at msprange@mongoosepublishing.com - a couple of bits and pieces we need to cover, and I'll start sending along files.




Sent. Please check your email.


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 19, 2008)

jdrakeh said:
			
		

> I think that he's a fictional narrator of Mongoose design.




Dr. Blottenberger is indeed a Mongoose narrator. He's been away from the world at large working on things I expect.


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 19, 2008)

kensanata said:
			
		

> Will the wiki remain read-only for casual users? I noticed that I couldn't edit any pages even though I created a wikidot account.




I think that is probably best to avoid potential vandalism. This is something that we can discuss on the yahoogroup.


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 19, 2008)

kensanata said:
			
		

> Ah, thanks. Are we doing a Mongoose-only OGC wiki?



I believe Matthew suggested that others would be welcome. I will be talking with Matthew soon on this. I have had some interest from at least one other publisher.


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 19, 2008)

BPIJonathan said:
			
		

> Does this mean that Babylon 5 is no longer a current product?




I think some of the earlier B5 products had a d20 logo on them. The 2nd edition stuff did not.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Jun 19, 2008)

Yair said:
			
		

> That would entail a single interconnected work, and hence a single enormously long Section 15.




I'd like to see the individual entries of each Section 15 hyperlinked to the original source, as the original source is added to the wiki. (The last entry of any given work should be its own copyright notice, and so it would "link" to its own page.)

Also, although I'm not willing to join yet another Yahoo group to discuss (nor really particularly interested in influencing the direction), if I have author permissions for the wiki when it goes live, I will add my own OGC.


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 19, 2008)

Wulf Ratbane said:
			
		

> I'd like to see the individual entries of each Section 15 hyperlinked to the original source, as the original source is added to the wiki. (The last entry of any given work should be its own copyright notice, and so it would "link" to its own page.)




Wulf, does the template that I have posted at: http://grandwiki.wikidot.com/contenttemplate

Or what would you suggest as a change. I like having individual entries for each item because then if other people donate material it is easy for a consumer to see who was being generous.


----------



## Lizard (Jun 19, 2008)

I'd thought of something like this a long time ago. My thought was, for the 'S15' problem, you could have a script where you could click on content to 'mark' it. (Giving it -2 to attack anyone else) Then you could click a 'download marked content' button, which would:

a)Compile all your marked content.
b)Produce your S15.

Basically, each book's S15 would be entered into a DB, then each feat, skill, power, PrC, whatever would have a 'Source' tag. The S15 from all sources in the 'shopping cart' would be examined, merged, and a 'new' S15 would be produced.

Ideally, the best thing would be to break each S15 into sources. 

Table a: A source and an identifier. Each entry would be unique.
Table b: A book name and an identifier. Each entry would be unique.
Table c: The joining table, with column 'a' being a Book ID and column 'b' being a Source ID.

"Select a.book_name, b.source_text from Books a, Sources b, S15 c where c.book_id=a.book_id and c.source_id=b.source_id".


----------



## Propagandroid (Jun 19, 2008)

Man-thing said:
			
		

> Like this:
> 
> http://grandwiki.wikidot.com/start




Have you used Wikidot before? I just migrated my wiki away from there because the interface and editing were terrible, in my opinion. 

I moved over to Wetpaint, which is so much easier I can't tell you. There are some annoying things (too many ads, no auto-ToC), but overall the experience has been like night and day.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Jun 19, 2008)

Man-thing said:
			
		

> Wulf, does the template that I have posted at: http://grandwiki.wikidot.com/contenttemplate




It looks all right. I don't know if you're going to be able to find the author information in every case, however. I'd guess you won't be able to find it for a good number of projects, where there is more than one freelancer on the product, and/or where the publisher does not include that information in the S15.

Allowing the publisher to include a discretionary link (back to their own site, or to a PDF reseller) might not be a bad idea.

You're also going to want to make robust use of tags. For example, their are portions of Heroes of High Favor: Dwarves that I might tag with [dwarf], [Craft], [feat], [skill], and [equipment]. Anybody searching for any of those things would be able to find my rules for masterwork dwarven adamantine items.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Jun 19, 2008)

Propagandroid said:
			
		

> Have you used Wikidot before? I just migrated my wiki away from there because the interface and editing were terrible, in my opinion.
> 
> I moved over to Wetpaint, which is so much easier I can't tell you. There are some annoying things (too many ads, no auto-ToC), but overall the experience has been like night and day.




I use WetPaint myself for some things, and it definitely wins "ease of use" in my book, but it does have some serious limitations that I think would disqualify it from a wiki of this size.

(As for the WetPaint ads-- I use Firefox so I never see them.)


----------



## Yair (Jun 19, 2008)

Man-thing said:
			
		

> Wulf, does the template that I have posted at: http://grandwiki.wikidot.com/contenttemplate
> 
> Or what would you suggest as a change. I like having individual entries for each item because then if other people donate material it is easy for a consumer to see who was being generous.



I see several problems with the template. Assuming that the idea is to publish OGC directly to the wiki (which I object to, as mentioned above and in the Yahoo Group - I prefer to attach OGC files, each published under its own OGL), I would suggest the following template instead:

[TEMPLATE]
<Distillation Name>

Product Source: <Product Name>
Publisher: <Publisher Name>, <Publisher's Website>
Author: <Author's Names>
Distiled by <distillers>

The text below, from the "Open Game Content" heading to the "Open Game License" heading, is published under the Open Game License.

Designation of Product Identity: No part of the text below is designated as product identity.

Designation of Open Game Content: All text under the "Open Game Content" heading, excepting the "Open Game License" heading and all text below it, is designated as Open Game Content.

Open Game Content


Open Game License

...

Section 15:

...

<Distillation Name>, copyright Grand Wiki of Dr. Blottenberger, 2008.

[END TEMPLATE]

If the OGL is linked to dynamically, then of course this needs slight altering. But I think the designation of open content is missing in your version.

The major change is in clearly designating where the OGC begins and ends.

Note that both templates assume that we have the agreement to identify the source material and so on. If someone wants to donate their OGC but not allow us to use his PI (like his company's name) to identify it, for some reason, that needs to be changed.


----------



## Maggan (Jun 19, 2008)

Man-thing said:
			
		

> I believe Matthew suggested that others would be welcome. I will be talking with Matthew soon on this. I have had some interest from at least one other publisher.




I think, for completeness, that you should add the SRD itself, and structure the ... structure ... around that.

/M


----------



## BPIJonathan (Jun 19, 2008)

Man-thing said:
			
		

> I think some of the earlier B5 products had a d20 logo on them. The 2nd edition stuff did not.




Ah yes. I see. I run a game that is a mixture of the two editions and never really thought about the logo (or lack there of). 

To get this back on topic, I sent Matt an email saying that we would be interested in some participation with our material. Im not sure yet what we would include, but we have a list.


----------



## Witchfinder General (Jun 19, 2008)

Wulf Ratbane said:
			
		

> I use WetPaint myself for some things, and it definitely wins "ease of use" in my book, but it does have some serious limitations that I think would disqualify it from a wiki of this size.



As I said in my earlier post in this thread, the wiki feature set must be considered before starting the wiki. Hosting and access to the database is very important for a large community project. At the very least, access to a database dump or ability to export all page revisions is a must. This will allow wiki replication and migration, and thus avoid web host lock-in.

Wikia is an option for free (with ads) MediaWiki hosting, and there are plenty of gaming wikias, such as the Forgotten Realms Wiki.

It should be fairly easy to construct a MediaWiki template for Section 15. These have the advantage that layout and boilerplate changes are applied to all pages that use the template. WikiDot templates (widgets?) seemed more limited, but I could be wrong. I can probably create a MediaWiki mock-up on my wiki for a section 15 template if anyone is interested.


----------



## Witchfinder General (Jun 19, 2008)

Maggan said:
			
		

> I think, for completeness, that you should add the SRD itself, and structure the ... structure ... around that.



This. An OGC wiki should be usable on its own.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Jun 19, 2008)

Yair said:
			
		

> <Distillation Name>, copyright Grand Wiki of Dr. Blottenberger, 2008.




I'm going to be annoyed if that copyright notice will be stuck on the end of any OGC I contribute.

Ideally the last line in any of my content is _my_ copyright notice.


----------



## Yair (Jun 19, 2008)

Wulf Ratbane said:
			
		

> I'm going to be annoyed if that copyright notice will be stuck on the end of any OGC I contribute.
> 
> Ideally the last line in any of my content is _my_ copyright notice.



If you enter the entry, of course you can put your copyright notice there. If someone else does, he has to put yours but he also HAS to put his. That's just the way the OGL works. In general, I think a line saying "Grandwiki" is best so as not to meddle with each particular volunteer's name. Of course for anything you enter yourself entering the last copyright as your own is perfectly acceptable.

The volunteer can put the new line one line before the end, though, I believe.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Jun 19, 2008)

Yair said:
			
		

> If you enter the entry, of course you can put your copyright notice there. If someone else does, he has to put yours but he also HAS to put his. That's just the way the OGL works.




So then I can take the entry that includes Copyright Me + Grandwiki, make an edit, and republish it again as Copyright Me + Grandwiki + Copyright Me?

What a can of worms.

EDIT: What portion of the work, exactly, is Copyright Grandwiki? Simply the fact that they copied it down?

(These are honest, not snarky, questions. My brain is not really in OGL mode today.)


----------



## Yair (Jun 19, 2008)

Wulf Ratbane said:
			
		

> So then I can take the entry that includes Copyright Me + Grandwiki, make an edit, and republish it again as Copyright Me + Grandwiki + Copyright Me?
> 
> What a can of worms.



Yes. Isn't the OGL grand? 



> EDIT: What portion of the work, exactly, is Copyright Grandwiki? Simply the fact that they copied it down?



The part designated as Open Game Content in the "work" Grandwiki published, i.e. the webpage (or the pdf document if my recommendation somehow, miracolously, fiies through). Even if they just copied it down. You allowed them to copy (USE) it and thereby claim copyright when you put it as OGC under the OGL. Also any part designated as Product Identity on that page, also any part not designated as either PI or OGC and therefore copyrighted under standard copyright law. Isn't the OGL grand?


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 19, 2008)

Wulf Ratbane said:
			
		

> I'm going to be annoyed if that copyright notice will be stuck on the end of any OGC I contribute.
> 
> Ideally the last line in any of my content is _my_ copyright notice.




Not the intention at all. 

In the OGL link I have : 

Section 15:
Open Game License v 1.0, Copyright 2000, Wizards of the Coast, Inc.
System Reference Document Copyright 2000-2003, Wizards of the Coast, Inc.; Authors Jonathan Tweet, Monte Cook, Skip Williams, Rich Baker, Andy Collins, David Noonan, Rich Redman, Bruce R. Cordell, based on original material by E. Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson.
Dr. Blottenberger's Grand Wiki Copyright 2008, Mark Gedak
<your section 15 additions go here> 

We are not claiming copyright on anyone else's material.


----------



## Inferno! (Jun 19, 2008)

lrsach01 said:
			
		

> I would LOVE to see this sort of thing happen. Makes me sad that I have no skills when comes to programming.




Yeah, what he said


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Jun 19, 2008)

Yair said:
			
		

> You allowed them to copy (USE) it and thereby claim copyright when you put it as OGC under the OGL.




I'm not going to dispute you-- as I said, my brain is _really_ not in OGL mode at the moment; I think reading the GSL fried the circuits-- but what "work," what "copy," exactly, do you think Grandwiki has copyrights to?

As far as I can tell the only "copy" being added by Grandwiki is the Grandwiki copyright notice itself, and that's only being added to the work because it has to be. Ugh.

I think since it's well established that you can present the S15 in any order, it would probably be best to list the Grandwiki copyright as the very 1st entry, so that it is obvious and out of the way of the "actual work."

I should probably go back and read the OGL again. That's probably a good Step One, huh?


----------



## dontpunkme (Jun 19, 2008)

If someone does the work (sadly, I am not computer savvy enough to do it myself) I would definitely utilize it.  I already own hard copies of a number of the quintessentials and slayers guides and would love access to the ones I never purchased.


----------



## Yair (Jun 19, 2008)

Man-thing said:
			
		

> We are not claiming copyright on anyone else's material.



I am not sure if that is possible under the OGL. 


			
				OGL said:
			
		

> 6.Notice of License Copyright: You must update the COPYRIGHT NOTICE portion of this License to include the exact text of the COPYRIGHT NOTICE of any Open Game Content You are copying, modifying or distributing, and *You must add the title, the copyright date, and the copyright holder’s name to the COPYRIGHT NOTICE of any original Open Game Content you Distribute.*



On the surface, you may simply claim not to be distributing any _original_ OGC. However, you are NOT simply copying someone's OGC. The work involves editing, abridgment, changing words, and so on. It falls under Derivative Material (1b) of the license, and the work is to some extent new. I therefore think it's prudent to add your name to the copyright list, less you be in violation of the bolded part. Better safe than sorry.

I didn't remember the "original" part when answering, though. That does leave a way out to use the license without updating the list, which I didn't remember existed.



			
				Wulf Ratbane said:
			
		

> I'm not going to dispute you-- as I said, my brain is _really_ not in OGL mode at the moment; I think reading the GSL fried the circuits-- but what "work," what "copy," exactly, do you think Grandwiki has copyrights to?



"work" is referred to in Section 8, which essentially requires all OGC to be part of a well-defined "work" for its proper designation; in this case the "work" is probably the webstite, IMO, but arguably the entry. What Grandwiki has copyrights to is more questionable, but surely any words that are used to replace or abridge original OGC, changes in its structure, and so on. If I change your PI "Emerald Empire Guard" to "Imperial Guard", who does the "Imperial" there belong to? I'm releasing it as OGC, after all. If I change your sentence from "Add this to any character" to "Affiliated Crazons Option: Under this option, you add to any character the ability to..." for editing reasons (perhaps making a single entry instead of one of a series, for better inclusion in a wiki structure) - anyone copying that without license would be violating _someone's_ copyrights, but whose? To be on the safe side, it's just better for everone concerned to add the wiki's/editor's name to the copyrights list. 



> As far as I can tell the only "copy" being added by Grandwiki is the Grandwiki copyright notice itself, and that's only being added to the work because it has to be. Ugh.



You are neglecting the various editing changes involved. Regardless, the addition of the name to the list is IMHO prudent at the least.



> I think since it's well established that you can present the S15 in any order, it would probably be best to list the Grandwiki copyright as the very 1st entry, so that it is obvious and out of the way of the "actual work."



Yeah, that's reasonable.



> I should probably go back and read the OGL again. That's probably a good Step One, huh?



Me too. Forgotten all about the "original" up there.


----------



## Michelle Lyons (Jun 19, 2008)

Wulf Ratbane said:
			
		

> I use WetPaint myself for some things, and it definitely wins "ease of use" in my book, but it does have some serious limitations that I think would disqualify it from a wiki of this size.
> 
> (As for the WetPaint ads-- I use Firefox so I never see them.)




Can you be more specific about the limitations? I'm working for Wetpaint these days, actually, and this is a project we'd be really happy to get behind. We also have some changes that will be going live soon that might address some of your concerns. You can contact me at michelle@wetpaint.com directly and/or we can loop in one of our biz-dev guys, Steven, to help discuss it. There are things that can be done regarding ads, etc., depending on how this shapes up.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Jun 19, 2008)

Michelle Lyons said:
			
		

> Can you be more specific about the limitations? I'm working for Wetpaint these days, actually, and this is a project we'd be really happy to get behind. We also have some changes that will be going live soon that might address some of your concerns. You can contact me at michelle@wetpaint.com directly and/or we can loop in one of our biz-dev guys, Steven, to help discuss it. There are things that can be done regarding ads, etc., depending on how this shapes up.




It's a bit buggy at times (though I won't lay that on your feet, it could be my browser/Java console), it likes to drop spaces from edited text, it loads slowly, the tables and the formatting can be ornery, and (although I understand the rationale why not) I'd like to be able to edit my posts to threads.

If I sat down for 30 minutes to work on my WetPaint pages I am sure other frustrations would return to me.

All of that being said, don't get me wrong-- I really dig my WetPaint wikis.

Cool that you're working for them. Small world!


----------



## TheLe (Jun 19, 2008)

kensanata said:
			
		

> Ah, thanks. Are we doing a Mongoose-only OGC wiki? Better decide such things as early as possible. If we're using Mongoose's fictional narrator, that may discourage other publishers, I'd think. Perhaps we could use him for the page heading the Mongoose section (basically the only section for the moment).




I concur.  If its named after Mongoose's character, then it should be for Mongoose products only.


----------



## Michelle Lyons (Jun 19, 2008)

Wulf Ratbane said:
			
		

> It's a bit buggy at times (though I won't lay that on your feet, it could be my browser/Java console), it likes to drop spaces from edited text, it loads slowly, the tables and the formatting can be ornery, and (although I understand the rationale why not) I'd like to be able to edit my posts to threads.
> 
> If I sat down for 30 minutes to work on my WetPaint pages I am sure other frustrations would return to me.
> 
> ...




Yeah, it really is a small world. 

Well, one of the things that might help is that we could boil down some custom templates for the pages, in additional to some special skins for the site as a whole. 

In particular, I'm in charge of home page and category page content too, and we'd be happy to help with site visibility and traffic. We've got some very expansive wikis on our network that get a lot of traffic, and I'd be happy to give examples for people to go look at. 

Seriously, I talked to my boss and my co-workers, and we're more than willing to do what's we can to make this a great experience. This is a unique project and we want to support it however we can. We're happy to actively engage with this project and make it the best possible, including throwing some resources in to copy and paste material over, build cross-links, and other mundane wiki tasks.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Jun 19, 2008)

Michelle Lyons said:
			
		

> Seriously, I talked to my boss and my co-workers, and we're more than willing to do what's we can to make this a great experience. This is a unique project and we want to support it however we can. We're happy to actively engage with this project and make it the best possible, including throwing some resources in to copy and paste material over, build cross-links, and other mundane wiki tasks.




Given all of that, I would say the bar has been raised to demonstrate a good reason _not_ to use WetPaint.


----------



## MongooseMatt (Jun 19, 2008)

Man-thing said:
			
		

> I think some of the earlier B5 products had a d20 logo on them. The 2nd edition stuff did not.




This is correct.


----------



## MongooseMatt (Jun 19, 2008)

TheLe said:
			
		

> I concur.  If its named after Mongoose's character, then it should be for Mongoose products only.




We have never used this character - we would be happy to donate him too to this project.


----------



## Witchfinder General (Jun 19, 2008)

The Wetpaint sites look great. I'm not so sure about the features, though. Is easyedit (WYSIWYG) the only way to edit pages? I looked for a section on wiki markup on the Wetpaint site, but could not find anything. 

Since we are talking about wikis, I assume people are somewhat familiar  with wiki markup. Here is a link to a comparison of Wetpaint and Wikia (which uses MediaWiki): 

http://www.wikimatrix.org/compare/Wetpaint+Wikia

Note that ability to export content from Wetpaint appears to be limited.


----------



## thpr (Jun 19, 2008)

Hexdump said:
			
		

> Is easyedit (WYSIWYG) the only way to edit pages?
> 
> Note that ability to export content from Wetpaint appears to be limited.




Both of these are good points.  

The first limits automation (if true).

The second point is a concern.  While I don't want to blow the issue out of proportion, the project should be considering disaster recovery scenarios, and the wikidot export to ZIP file is one method; I don't see the (external) backup method with WetPaint.

TP.
-- 
Tom Parker
PCGen Architecture Lead


----------



## Michelle Lyons (Jun 19, 2008)

Hexdump said:
			
		

> The Wetpaint sites look great. I'm not so sure about the features, though. Is easyedit (WYSIWYG) the only way to edit pages? I looked for a section on wiki markup on the Wetpaint site, but could not find anything.
> 
> Since we are talking about wikis, I assume people are somewhat familiar  with wiki markup. Here is a link to a comparison of Wetpaint and Wikia (which uses MediaWiki):
> 
> ...




EasyEdit is the only way to edit pages. It's a pretty robust WSYIWYG editor and can do a lot, and is friendly to contributors who aren't up to speed on wiki markup. Wetpaint sites export current versions of the pages as HTML to a ZIP file.


----------



## Witchfinder General (Jun 19, 2008)

thpr said:
			
		

> The first limits automation (if true).



I'm not primarily concerned with automation as much as easy of use. In my experience, it's easier to link to a page using markup (e.g. "If you use [[Power Attack]]..") than to use a WYSIWYG editor.

As I understand it, Wetpaint does not allow linking to non-existing pages. On a regular wiki, a list on wanted pages is a great way to see what needs to be done. This means that you need to back to existing pages and add the links manually. This will mean a lot of work if the SRD or other content is to be added to the site. 

IMO Incorporating the SRD is a good idea. This will hopefully result in a wiki version of Hypertext SRD, but with Mongoose and hopefully other OGL content. Note that several wikis with SRD (and some fan OGL content) exist, so SRD wiki markup is already available. 

Of course, having PDF file downloads as well as wiki pages would be nice, but a fully linked gaming wiki is a thing of beauty. Hopefully such a community OGL wiki will include the SRD, published OGL material, and fan contributions. 

I'm not involved with dandwiki.com or  d20wiki.com, but those sites have been very useful. (Yes, I've copied OGL wiki markup to my own wiki ) I'm not saying that this project should join one of the existing wikis, but I'm sure they would approve of Mongoose releasing published material to the community.

One benefit of using MediaWiki markup (regardless of MediaWiki hosting service) is that it will be easy to exchange content with the existing OGL/SRD wikis.


----------



## Wulf Ratbane (Jun 19, 2008)

Michelle Lyons said:
			
		

> EasyEdit is the only way to edit pages. It's a pretty robust WSYIWYG editor and can do a lot, and is friendly to contributors who aren't up to speed on wiki markup. Wetpaint sites export current versions of the pages as HTML to a ZIP file.




I apologize for going off topic but I have a question for Michelle.

Is there a good "visual wiki" such as DMs might use to collaborate on world design?

In other words, I want to be able to lay out a map composed of hexes, then allow DMs to click on a hex, edit its contents (both graphically as well as adding text description), as well as add new hexes around the edges of the map.

I assume as both a roleplayer and a wikimaster you can probably grok what I am looking for without me belaboring the point.

Any help? Maybe email me offline?


----------



## Michelle Lyons (Jun 19, 2008)

Wulf Ratbane said:
			
		

> I apologize for going off topic but I have a question for Michelle.
> 
> Is there a good "visual wiki" such as DMs might use to collaborate on world design?
> 
> ...




Hmm. I must give this thought. I shall indeed contact you.


----------



## thpr (Jun 19, 2008)

Hexdump said:
			
		

> I'm not primarily concerned with automation as much as easy of use.




I would think some development to jump-start the boring parts of extraction would be useful.  I was planning to assist if I could, but it's up to Mark & team if they really desire that help.

TP.
-- 
Tom Parker
PCGen Architecture Lead


----------



## darjr (Jun 20, 2008)

I don't know if it's been stated yet in this thread... I don't think so.

I think it would be a good idea to make the content open in such a way that others could mirror the project or even fork the project.

Not necessarily to fork and change the content of individual items, though that would be cool, but in case there are differing needs and desires for storage and presentation of the material. 

Mirror's are just a good idea anyway.

This would help to more closely follow the open source model.


----------



## Voadam (Jun 20, 2008)

dontpunkme said:
			
		

> If someone does the work (sadly, I am not computer savvy enough to do it myself) I would definitely utilize it.  I already own hard copies of a number of the quintessentials and slayers guides and would love access to the ones I never purchased.




I would definitely utilize it as well. Typing in the exact spell text over from Quintessential Wizard for my personalized spell book and emailing a DM so he could review them for approval in his game and reproducing statblocks for monsters from Slayer's Guide to Demons when I was DMing would have been easier if I could have just copied and pasted information instead of transcribing from my books.


----------



## Feanor Liberius (Jun 20, 2008)

Hi guys,

As you can see from my post total, I'm mostly a lurker (except when I sign up for Chicago Game Days!).

But I'll offer up my site - d20 Haven  - as a host. I have the forums up and running, and started implementing the wiki - mediawiki - before I got swamped with other life priorities.

I see there are some far more experienced wiki-focused folks here, so I'll bow to the greater wisdom. But I thought I'd throw it out there just in case anybody was interested.

Thanks,
Jim

PS - love the idea, no matter who it gets done...


----------



## Nellisir (Jun 20, 2008)

Wulf Ratbane said:
			
		

> I apologize for going off topic but I have a question for Michelle.
> 
> Is there a good "visual wiki" such as DMs might use to collaborate on world design?
> 
> ...



I can't begin to think about how incredible this would be.


----------



## Nellisir (Jun 20, 2008)

Speaking as a future user, I think this is incredible.  Kudos to Mongoose!

Quick thoughts: It needs to be simple and easy for the layman, though.  I go to some wiki sites, and my eyes cross with all the jibber jabber.  I like Lizard's "shopping cart" idea.  Easy exporting is a must; I'm assuming Mongoose is offering this stuff free with the idea that everyone will have equal access to it in the end - I'd hate to have to jump through 20 hoops to use some of it on my own website or game.


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 20, 2008)

It does sound like an excellent idea. 
Its good some programmers have joined the project (because I have no idea how to do that).


----------



## Cat Moon (Jun 20, 2008)

Wow. This is sheer awesomeness. I don't plan on getting rid of my 3rd edition books, so I know I'm definetely going to get out of such an endeavor. Many thanks Mongoose.


----------



## Maggan (Jun 20, 2008)

The project is awesome. The name "Blottenberger" not so.   It sounds more like one of those silly WFRP names (which I love in WFRP) than a name I'd associate with an OGC Grand Wiki.

I suggest a boring and simple name, like OCG Gran Wiki, or The Grand Project, or The OCG Compilation.

I fear adding "Blottenberger" to the name would create a small, but albeit real, hurdle for some publishers to contribute, cause they think either that it sounds silly, or that it is too related to Mongoose.

Cheers!

/M


----------



## Maggan (Jun 20, 2008)

Paizo has this to say about their own content:

http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=4315539&postcount=231

/M


----------



## Witchfinder General (Jun 20, 2008)

Maggan said:
			
		

> The project is awesome. The name "Blottenberger" not so.   It sounds more like one of those silly WFRP names (which I love in WFRP) than a name I'd associate with an OGC Grand Wiki.



I agree. It _is_ a silly name, but the tongue-in-cheek names are great in the Old World.


----------



## Mark (Jun 20, 2008)

Man-thing said:
			
		

> (snip)






I'm in, Mark.  Email(s) on route.


----------



## TheLe (Jun 20, 2008)

MongooseMatt said:
			
		

> We have never used this character - we would be happy to donate him too to this project.




Its still an awfully ambiguous name that adds complexity, for marketing purposes.

What do you prefer to tell people:

"Just to go the 3r OGL Wiki" or "Just go to Dr Blottenberger's wiki".


----------



## xmanii (Jun 20, 2008)

Wulf Ratbane said:
			
		

> I apologize for going off topic but I have a question for Michelle.
> 
> Is there a good "visual wiki" such as DMs might use to collaborate on world design?
> 
> ...




Now that would rock!


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 20, 2008)

The Le said:
			
		

> What do you prefer to tell people:
> 
> "Just to go the 3r OGL Wiki" or "Just go to Dr Blottenberger's wiki".




I would prefer go to http://grandwiki.wikidot.com


----------



## Alzrius (Jun 20, 2008)

Man-thing said:
			
		

> I would prefer go to http://grandwiki.wikidot.com




The website seems to be coming along nicely!

I wanted to mention, however, that wikis made over on Wikia (www.wikia.com) seem to get more attention these days. Is it worth considering having them host the OGC Wiki?


----------



## Michelle Lyons (Jun 20, 2008)

Alzrius said:
			
		

> The website seems to be coming along nicely!
> 
> I wanted to mention, however, that wikis made over on Wikia (www.wikia.com) seem to get more attention these days. Is it worth considering having them host the OGC Wiki?




What gets attention (and thus traffic) is SEO, organization, and activity. It's true that some wiki hosts get more than others due to the type of content they feature. It's also true that part of my job at Wetpaint is to handle which sites we feature and promote, adding to SEO. If you guys choose to use Wetpaint, I will help with that. Again, we'll also devote resources to copy/paste efforts from the files and cross-link building. We might even be able to help out with a custom URL. 

But yeah. Neither the current name nor the URL the Wikidot site has are going to get you any traffic.  Which is not to say that can't be fixed, but they're not really searchable terms.


----------



## Feanor Liberius (Jun 20, 2008)

Michelle Lyons said:
			
		

> Neither the current name nor the URL the Wikidot site has are going to get you any traffic.



It's almost as if you need a haven for this material. Like a haven for d20 stuff. Almost like a d20 Haven.  

Sorry, couldn't resist.


----------



## UniversalMonster (Jun 20, 2008)

James J. Skach said:
			
		

> It's almost as if you need a haven for this material. Like a haven for d20 stuff. Almost like a d20 Haven.
> 
> Sorry, couldn't resist.




It would be great if you set up a wiki at D20Haven.com. Even if this other wiki ends up being posted..it's still all D20 Open Gaming Content, so there's no reason it couldn't exist in more than archive.


----------



## Nellisir (Jun 20, 2008)

TheLe said:
			
		

> Its still an awfully ambiguous name that adds complexity, for marketing purposes.
> 
> What do you prefer to tell people:
> 
> "Just to go the 3r OGL Wiki" or "Just go to Dr Blottenberger's wiki".



I wouldn't have clicked on this thread if it had been titled "Mongoose's Dr Blottenberger's Wiki".  "Grand Wiki" is good and generic.  "Dr Blottenberger's" is not.


----------



## Michelle Lyons (Jun 20, 2008)

Just for reference, I thought I'd post to a couple of our larger wikis so you can see what can be done.

http://www.kerrydalestreet.com/
This is a site for the Celtic FC, devoted to lovingly documenting the entire history of the Celtic FC and everything tied to it. It is a large, extensive site.

http://www.mythicalcreaturesguide.com/
Not the largest wiki out there, but a good general reference and just a fun site overall. 

http://supernaturalfanwiki.wetpaint.com/
This is a fan site for the show applied to a wiki basis. It is also massive and has a large community as well.

If you are used to wiki markup and really want that, then Wetpaint isn't the best platform. It is absolutely the best for maintaining the site and engaging the community long-term, however, especially if you will not necessarily continue to have a wiki-markup knowledgable team to maintain the site once the data migration is done. It can make the wiki more than just a static text resource, easily accessible to the community as a whole. 

Aaaand now I've done a sufficient level of pitching, I think. Just had to chime in one more time, and now I think I'll be done.


----------



## keterys (Jun 21, 2008)

Bravo! Absolute stir fried awesome.


----------



## Erik Mona (Jun 21, 2008)

All Paizo rules material is produced under the OGL, and is thus fair game for this project. I strongly encourage folks to mine our rules material for this project, and feel it is in the spirit of the Open Gaming Movement to support something like this.

Full credit to Matt and Mongoose for lighting the torch, but my preference would be that the name for the Wiki be general ("OGLBank" or some such) and not tied to any one company. All publishers who take advantage of the OGL should be amenable to the inclusion of their open content to a project like this, so a general name is in the spirit of the OGL community. 

I would encourage including the acronym "OGL" in the final title, as that is after all the point.

--Erik Mona
Publisher
Paizo Publishing


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 21, 2008)

*Update*

For the time being I have removed "Dr. Blottenberger" from the site page. The members of the yahoogroup can work to decide a final name. Currently the project is based at:

http://grandwiki.wikidot.com

The current title being used is "The Grand OGL Wiki"

So far Mongoose Publishing and Creative Mountain Games have sent me material for the group to use.


----------



## Alzrius (Jun 21, 2008)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> All Paizo rules material is produced under the OGL, and is thus fair game for this project. I strongly encourage folks to mine our rules material for this project, and feel it is in the spirit of the Open Gaming Movement to support something like this.




Wow, that's mighty big of you Erik! I might do that if I can find the time. I've long been enamored of the monsters you guys have been producing regularly in _Pathfinder_.


----------



## Mark (Jun 21, 2008)

I have to concur that a generic name would avoid any perceived publisher bias.  Something like OGL-OGCWIKI or some variation might be good.

Thanks, Mark (Man-Thing), for all of your efforts thus far and in the future!


----------



## GreyWizard77 (Jun 22, 2008)

This project sounds like a GREAT idea. I wish I had skills that I could contribute to it.

Any chance we can sticky this thread and possible move to the news section? I don't want this thread to get buried when it finally DOES become usable.

Great start so far, gang!


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 22, 2008)

Any sort of recognition here, sticky/news item is up to EnWorld. We have a stickied item on the Mongoose General Forums and I'm updating my blog to reflect current news because Croathian asked me to keep people informed that way.

- Mark


----------



## Achan hiArusa (Jun 22, 2008)

Wow!  You guys may end up doing what the OGL was intended to do, allow people to play the game they want to play and make d20 the best system in the world.

Cheers!


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 22, 2008)

*Forums*

Now with forums: http://grandwiki.wikidot.com/forum/start


----------



## joela (Jun 22, 2008)

*Paizo OGL stuff*



			
				Alzrius said:
			
		

> Wow, that's mighty big of you Erik! I might do that if I can find the time. I've long been enamored of the monsters you guys have been producing regularly in _Pathfinder_.




So we could go into a Paizo mod like Crown of the Kobold King, remove non-OGC material like character name, rename it something generic, then put the creature on-line?


----------



## Nellisir (Jun 22, 2008)

joela said:
			
		

> So we could go into a Paizo mod like Crown of the Kobold King, remove non-OGC material like character name, rename it something generic, then put the creature on-line?




I think a moratorium of at least 12 months post-release on products that the publisher is not converting to GSL and has not given explicit permission for that product is a good idea.


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 22, 2008)

joela said:
			
		

> So we could go into a Paizo mod like Crown of the Kobold King, remove non-OGC material like character name, rename it something generic, then put the creature on-line?




Well, it would depend on the OGC declaration. Now the particular product you have identified has no OGC declaraction. Or if it does I have no idea where it is in the module. 

That said, I was not the intention of the Grand Wiki to be a mining project. It is a site for the storage of donated OGC, so anything that we may want to put up from Paizo (because Erik has offered) we will be explicitly checking with them first.

- Mark


----------



## Yair (Jun 22, 2008)

Man-thing said:
			
		

> That said, I was not the intention of the Grand Wiki to be a mining project. It is a site for the storage of donated OGC, so anything that we may want to put up from Paizo (because Erik has offered) we will be explicitly checking with them first.



Right.


----------



## Alzrius (Jun 22, 2008)

Man-thing said:
			
		

> That said, I was not the intention of the Grand Wiki to be a mining project. It is a site for the storage of donated OGC, so anything that we may want to put up from Paizo (because Erik has offered) we will be explicitly checking with them first.




I thought Erik's post above was a statement of blanket permission for Paizo's products; hence, we wouldn't have to bother him about every individual product that someone wants to add.

That said, what about people/companies that can't be contacted regarding this? There are some older books whose OGC I'd like to add, with the companies no longer existing, or simply being completely unresponsive.


----------



## Nellisir (Jun 22, 2008)

Alzrius said:
			
		

> I thought Erik's post above was a statement of blanket permission for Paizo's products; hence, we wouldn't have to bother him about every individual product that someone wants to add.
> 
> That said, what about people/companies that can't be contacted regarding this? There are some older books whose OGC I'd like to add, with the companies no longer existing, or simply being completely unresponsive.




Maybe, privately, we can start a "wishlist" of companies that'd we'd like to get permission from.  I think that can wait another day or two, though - at least until we get the whole wiki straightened out and everything else solved.

Besides, it's not like Mongoose has a really tiny library of OGC.

But out of curiosity, what companies?  I'll bet someone knows someone who can reach them.


----------



## Alzrius (Jun 22, 2008)

Nellisir said:
			
		

> Maybe, privately, we can start a "wishlist" of companies that'd we'd like to get permission from.  I think that can wait another day or two, though - at least until we get the whole wiki straightened out and everything else solved.
> 
> Besides, it's not like Mongoose has a really tiny library of OGC.
> 
> But out of curiosity, what companies?  I'll bet someone knows someone who can reach them.




There are a few that don't seem to really be around anymore.

Stanton Industries wrote a few books back in 2001, one of which was _The Void_ which was pretty good.

Valar Project Inc. seems to have vanished (yes, I think the BoEF rules are good, and should be put on the wiki).

That's all I can think of off the top of my head, but I know there are others.


----------



## Pinotage (Jun 22, 2008)

Alzrius said:
			
		

> Stanton Industries wrote a few books back in 2001, one of which was _The Void_ which was pretty good.
> 
> Valar Project Inc. seems to have vanished (yes, I think the BoEF rules are good, and should be put on the wiki).
> 
> That's all I can think of off the top of my head, but I know there are others.




I think there are quite a few that aren't around any more. Fast Forward Entertainment certainly isn't, and a few have changed names through the years. Others have just gone really quiet, like Amalara (weren't they sold to somebody else?) and Clockwork Golem Workshop. I don't think Citizen Games is around anymore, Dunham Studios, Gallantry Productions (did some really nice Pick 'n Mix products), and Guardians of Order (which was a great pity). There are loads of others that aren't around anymore.

Pinotage


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 22, 2008)

Pinotage said:
			
		

> Amalara (weren't they sold to somebody else?) and Clockwork Golem Workshop. I don't think Citizen Games is around anymore, Dunham Studios, Gallantry Productions (did some really nice Pick 'n Mix products), and Guardians of Order (which was a great pity).




Amalara's products went to Dark Quest Games I believe. They were supposed to continue development but I've not seen a new Dungeon Dive in a long tim. Clockwork Golem joined with Ronin Arts then left Ronin Arts then vanished.

- Mark


----------



## Mark (Jun 22, 2008)

Nellisir said:
			
		

> Maybe, privately, we can start a "wishlist" of companies that'd we'd like to get permission from.  I think that can wait another day or two, though - at least until we get the whole wiki straightened out and everything else solved.
> 
> Besides, it's not like Mongoose has a really tiny library of OGC.





Projects like this can collapse under their own weight.  I would suggest that everyone involved work on the Mongoose, Paizo and CMG materials already offered (have there been others?) before attempting to expand.  Your best calling card to other companies is showing how well you have done with those already involved.


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 22, 2008)

Yep. And right now there are a lot of suggesters and lurkers and few workers. 

I'm hoping early this week we will have: Feats, PRCs, Career Paths, Totem Spirits and Alternate Rages up on the live site for public consumption.

*Content Pullers:* I have two people on Quint Aristocrat, two people on Quint Barbarian, myself on Quint Barbarian II and one person on The Whispering Woodwind. 

I need a couple dedicated people to go over the content pulled  on the development server and check it against the OGC declarations. And make lists of corrections/suggestions at the bottom of each page in review.

There are 20 people on the yahoogroup currently.


----------



## Ghostwind (Jun 23, 2008)

Man-thing said:
			
		

> Yep. And right now there are a lot of suggesters and lurkers and few workers.
> 
> I'm hoping early this week we will have: Feats, PRCs, Career Paths, Totem Spirits and Alternate Rages up on the live site for public consumption.
> 
> ...




Mark-

Once you get things going more smoothly and are getting caught up, drop me a line and I'll supply you with DragonWing Games/Bastion Press products to include in the project.


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 23, 2008)

Sure thing, Ghostwind.


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 23, 2008)

*Update!*

All the OGC (except variant multiclasses) from "The Quintessential Barbarian II" has been pulled and put up on the development server for review.

I expect this content will be available on the live site in a couple days.


----------



## The Sigil (Jun 23, 2008)

If anybody cares, I hereby explicitly and expressly give permission for OGC from all products published by S.T. Cooley Publishing to be added to this project.  Contact me if you need more information.


----------



## Alzrius (Jun 23, 2008)

The Sigil said:
			
		

> If anybody cares, I hereby explicitly and expressly give permission for OGC from all products published by S.T. Cooley Publishing to be added to this project.  Contact me if you need more information.




Woot! You the man The Sigil!


----------



## The Sigil (Jun 23, 2008)

Thanks, Alzrius.  If I had any wiki-fu whatever, I'd offer to do it myself... but I suck at wiki'ing so I'll let more competent folks do that.


----------



## der_kluge (Jun 23, 2008)

I can't speak for Thunderhead Games or Mystic Eye Games, but both companies are defunct, and I can't imagine that they continue to really profit off their existing libraries. I'll email Hal to see what he thinks about the idea.

If so, I could contribute all the Bluffside stuff, and the Artificer's Handbook is 100% OGC (I declared it so in the errata), so it could be republished verbatim.


----------



## dead_radish (Jun 23, 2008)

I would be interested in this as well, at least on a casual basis.  I certainly can't commit a lot of time to it, but I'm definitely in the "make suggestions and do small edits" category.

I applied to the yahoogroup already.


----------



## Pinotage (Jun 23, 2008)

der_kluge said:
			
		

> I can't speak for Thunderhead Games or Mystic Eye Games, but both companies are defunct, and I can't imagine that they continue to really profit off their existing libraries. I'll email Hal to see what he thinks about the idea.




Didn't Ronin Arts take over MEG's stuff? It's certainly listed amongst their catalog material.

Pinotage


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 23, 2008)

I believe that is correct.


----------



## Mark (Jun 24, 2008)

Might be worthwhile starting up a mirror threads with a summary of what has happened thus far and all of the links to the new wiki over in the OGF forum -


http://www.enworld.org/forumdisplay.php?f=322


It's a bit of extra work but until everyone gets used to what is going on, reminders in all quarters can be the best solution to the widespread nature of the community.


----------



## Man-thing (Jun 24, 2008)

I'm a little terrified of starting another thread. Someone joined the yahoogroup the other day and said they saw the link on Paizo's website and I thought, crap, there's another thread I need to find.

But seriously, it makes sense to do as you suggest and I will start one there for "Live" announcements once I get final internal approval on:

Open Game Content

    * Alternate Rages
    * Career Paths
    * Equipment
    * Feats
    * Magic Items
    * Multiclass Progressions
    * Prestige Classes
    * Skills
    * Spirit Quests
    * Totem Spirits
    * Contests 
    * Wilderness Survival

(Because that's what is sitting waiting for a once over)


----------



## Alzrius (Jun 27, 2008)

Craig Cochran of Eternity Publishing has given permission for his Open Game Content to be posted in the wiki. He's the author of the _Immortal's Handbook_ series of d20 supplements.


----------



## WAR CHILD (Jun 28, 2008)

*Wood Eye? Hare Lip! Hare Lip!*

That would be awesome.


----------



## der_kluge (Jun 29, 2008)

I spoke to Hal with MEG, and he said that was OK with us putting all the OGC from all the MEG products up as well.


----------



## Mark (Jun 30, 2008)

Give Hal my best and tell him to put some pants on!


----------



## joela (Jul 2, 2008)

*pants*



Mark said:


> ...tell him to put some pants on!




Well THAT brought up images on game designers I didn't need to think about!  



der_kluge said:


> i spoke to hal with meg, and he said that was ok with us putting all the ogc from all the meg products up as well.




"meg"?


----------



## Alzrius (Jul 2, 2008)

joela said:


> "meg"?




I believe he means Mystic Eye Games.


----------



## joela (Jul 2, 2008)

*meg*



Alzrius said:


> I believe he means Mystic Eye Games.




Oooh! If they do, I'll personally request to process their stuff. (I'm a volunteer.)


----------



## Mark (Jul 11, 2008)

joela said:


> Well THAT brought up images on game designers I didn't need to think about!






It is indeed frightening.


----------

