Would you fund a kickstarter for an improved RMC rulset?

[Frunobulax]

Just out of curiosity, and completely hypothetically... would you fund a Kickstarter for a new RMC ruleset? I'm not talking about Unity or anything else, JUST the RMC ruleset. One that was updated to CoreRPG and had all the bells and whistles that the D&D rulesets have? I realize that this would only interest fans of Rolemaster, but then again I think the cost would not be that great if everyone who was interested chipped in. I'm thinking a few thousand bucks for a really good job.

Again, I'm NOT talking about the Unity build or anything else, just hiring a skilled Lua programmer to take what is there, the existing ruleset, convert it to CoreRPG, and make any fixes/improvements/additions so that it had all the same features (such as loot packages, Party Screen, additional classes/races, bug fixes, new tables, etc)?

Now, maybe I'm wrong - maybe there just aren't enough Rolemaster fans to make it viable. That's actually what I expect. Clearly most people want to play D&D, and that's fine. But you never know until you ask - I'm just curious. Please vote, and maybe add a comment about how much you might pay to have such a thing and any other details.

Thins is not intended to disparage Dakadin, he has done a super job and I greatly thank him for all his work. But he is busy with Real Life(tm) and it seems he won't have time for these tasks anytime soon. I hope that if such a thing happened he would be willing to help.

[Nickademus]

Out of curiosity, would it be necessary to get legal permission from Smiteworks to make a Kickstarter for a product that bears the Fantasy Grounds name?

[Frunobulax]

Out of curiosity, would it be necessary to get legal permission from Smiteworks to make a Kickstarter for a product that bears the Fantasy Grounds name?

The only honest answer is: I don't know - I'm not a lawyer. Having said that, it's fun to speculate.

It may well be not legal to actually use the names"Fantasy Grounds" or "Smiteworks" in the description of a new ruleset. I don't know, I'm not an IP lawyer. But competing brands of other products can use their competitor's names as long as they include the trademark symbol ("compare to Advil!(tm)"), so who knows? Not me!

First, I see no reason why Smiteworks would care or complain as long as no one is SELLING such a thing. Even if someone were, I don't think there's any law against selling software that works with other software. In any case, Smiteworks doesn't "own" the RMC ruleset as far as I can see - they advertise it as supported, and try to make it LOOK like it's a product of theirs, but it was written by a fan who has never been paid (as far as I know), and they do not officially support it (other than answering forum questions), so I don't think they have any claim to intellectual property other than having a license to sell the branded IP. They have essentially set a precedent for allowing people to make software that works with Fantasy Grounds without charging them with any legal issue.

Iron Crown/Aurigas Aldebaron/Guild Companion Publications (ICE for short), on the other hand, would have more of a legal standing - I'd be much more worried about what ICE thinks than Smiteworks (I think Smiteworks has a license deal with ICE). But that's all really an academic issue! I'm just playing "what if" games because it's fun. If someone were to release (for free) something that made RMC work better with FG, and they were not charging any money for it, I think it would be a win/win/win for everyone - Smiteworks is happy (more sales), ICE is happy (Rolemaster is more popular), and players are happy (better support for the game they love)/ It would be the exact same situation as exists now, just with a better ruleset, so why would anyone care?

In MY imagination, such a kickstarter would not earn any money, it would be just to fund the project. If someone wanted to sell it? I still don't think there would be any problem legally, but again - it's academic. If it were my project then I, personally, would not try to sell it, and it would be dumb for anyone else to try since 1) the people backing it would get copies anyways, and 2) the RMC ruleset is not all that popular and is hardly a big moneymaker. I doubt anyone would sue anyone else over what amounts to beer money.

In the end, all I want is a better RMC ruleset! :-)

[Andraax]

It would probably be easier for the ruleset author to setup a "GoFundMe" or "Patreon" account; unless they have a deal in place with either Smiteworks or ICE, in which case their deal with either of those might disallow it.

This way, the author gets some money thrown their way to hopefully spur more / faster development, and it continues to be sold via the FG store...

[Frunobulax]

It would probably be easier for the ruleset author to setup a "GoFundMe" or "Patreon" account; unless they have a deal in place with either Smiteworks or ICE, in which case their deal with either of those might disallow it. This way, the author gets some money thrown their way to hopefully spur more / faster development, and it continues to be sold via the FG store...

I agree that would be the best option. But from what I know about the author (Dakadin) and what I have heard, he's a student and made the ruleset on his own free time, without much left over to do major work on it. I'm really psyched he has done so much so far, but I don't think he has time to do this kind of major rewrite even if he were paid. Of course, you'd have to ask him. Certainly I think if anyone were to do any crowdfunding for the ruleset, he should be the first person they contact. I don't know what his life plans or goals are.

[Asterionaisien]

I would like a new RMC ruleset, but I admit I'd prefer way more an extension or modules for Harp.
I'm amazed at the fact isnt more widespread, it's a pity because it is an excellent system and feels like a modern Rolemaster.

[Nickademus]

First, I see no reason why Smiteworks would care or complain as long as no one is SELLING such a thing. Even if someone were, I don't think there's any law against selling software that works with other software.

I think you misunderstand. I wasn't referring to the product or the act of selling it. I was referring to the use of the 'Fantasy Grounds' name, which I assume would have to be present to inform people that it was a ruleset for this software. I remembered reading something about this and did a quick search of the City Hall section. I found the advice I was looking for (and that you might be interested in for this project).

www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?33913-Warning-about-Kickstarters-Claiming-to-support-Fantasy-Grounds-add-ons

[Trenloe]

You'd definitely need to check with Smiteworks on this. SmiteWorks own the Rolemaster code (it's a commercial product owned by them, with a license from the original material owner).


I'd be much more worried about what ICE thinks than Smiteworks...
I think you should be very concerned about doing any crowd funding with the Fantasy Grounds name on it without backup from SmiteWorks. This is not a threat (I don't work from SmiteWorks) - I'm just highlighting that if you don't have Smiteworks on board then there are going to be a lot of issues:

- the new RMC ruleset will have to be developed completely from scratch as you wouldn't have permission to use any of the current RMC code. The ruleset has the following in license.html: "The Rolemaster Classic Ruleset format, programming code, and presentation is copyrighted by SmiteWorks USA, LLC and Aurigas Aldeberon LLC. Redistribution by print or by file is strictly prohibited." Developing a new ruleset would take hundreds of hours of work. You wouldn't be able to do what you mentioned in post #1: "...hiring a skilled Lua programmer to take what is there, the existing ruleset, convert it to CoreRPG, and make any fixes/improvements/additions so that it had all the same features (such as loot packages, Party Screen, additional classes/races, bug fixes, new tables, etc)"
- "...hiring a skilled LUA programmer..." What is the going rate for such a programmer? Developing a ruleset is many hundreds of hours work. Then, is this skilled LUA programmer going to do updates next year? The year after?
- Why could the Rolemaster IP owners allow use of their material if SmiteWorks (who they already have a license agreement with) aren't behind it? Even if they did - how much would they charge?
- The crowd funding would struggle if Smiteworks aren't behind it. Case in point - the failed ruleset/GUI development application - Smiteworks weren't against this, but neither did they actively support it.
- Without Smiteworks behind it, the ruleset probably wouldn't be put on their store or included in the update system.
- lots more issue I'm sure.

So, SmiteWorks would most definitely have to be behind anything like this.

[JohnD]

How about improving the one we already have?

[Nickademus]

How about improving the one we already have?


...to take what is there, the existing ruleset, convert it to CoreRPG, and make any fixes/improvements/additions...

That's the idea.

[Valatar]

I'm not willing to drop cash on Rolemaster specifically, as I don't use it. However I'm not averse to paying for ruleset improvements in general, so long as they're rulesets I'm actually using in games. 4E D&D, for example, would be worth something to add in the extra features that the 5E ruleset boasts, since I'm running a game in it.

[JohnD]

I'm going to go off on a tangent for a bit here. Sorry about that but it's all part and parcel of my opinion which forms my answer to the question posed.

I would use the heck out of an expanded and improved RMC. It won't happen because the current owner of Rolemaster is moving towards the next version, which will ultimately be 95% the same as the old version, just like all the other "new versions" before it (RM2, RMSS, FRFRP...). Which will arrive first between this new iteration and the next ice age is a coin flip right now.

RMU might get a new ruleset for it, who knows, if it ever gets released. 2020 perhaps?

I've looked back through my purchase history and see that I've spent almost $1000 USD via Fantasy Grounds since I joined. A lot of that gets opened once, I realize it isn't what I consider a finished/useable product and it just sits there. If I buy something and then still have to spend time on basic prep work as if I were making it myself from scratch... well, poor value for the $ spent. IMO anyways, which as a paying customer I have a right to make that value judgement for myself.

You hear a lot about how these products were made a few years ago which I suppose absolves the consumer of expecting a functional product in 2017. Nobody to go back and maintain the catalog. These older products should have a note in the store that they don’t make use of some/any/all of the newer features a 2017 FG user might expect, probably with a price reduction to acknowledge the buyer still will have some hours of work in front of them before they have an adventure they can just sit down and use on game night.

Even current 3-rd party 5e stuff is released with easy to insert effects for NPC abilities not auto populating in the CT. So there again there's work I have to do on a 2017 product, not a 2013 product, to make it meet expectations as fully useable and for it to take advantage of the bells/whistles of the ruleset it was written for.

So, I suppose I support the idea of targeted funding to improve rulesets in principle. In practice, I believe I've been doing my part to accomplish that all along, possibly not getting value for some of what I've spent. So even with no realistic expectation of it happening, I'd like some of these other things looked at first.

I guess you could put me down as an "if depends" response. Frankly I don't think these kind of questions are entirely helpful, JMO and all that.

[vodokar]

First, I see no reason why Smiteworks would care or complain as long as no one is SELLING such a thing. Even if someone were, I don't think there's any law against selling software that works with other software.

Speaking hypothetically about a community ruleset, which traditionally are not sold via any means and are donated to the community, and not an official ruleset like RMC, which is being sold in the FG store, such a kickstarter or patreon would not constitute "selling" of the ruleset product generated, but selling of the ruleset developer's time to devote to making said product.

What's the difference? A lot.

If 20 people donate to the kickstarter, they get the ruleset developed. If a year later, 20 more people download it that didn't donate to the kickstarter, they still get the product at no cost. The 20 people that did donate didn't pay for a product, they payed for the ruleset developers time, likely just pennies on the dollar of what it actually cost in man hours for the developer to work on it.

Why would someone donate when they know they can just wait and get it for free? Well, they can, but, they have the knowledge of knowing that if they do donate, they helped the community developer, likely someone they know quite well on these forums, to buy some beer or new tennis shoes for their son etc. It's an opportunity to say thank you to the developer for the time spent providing them something they wanted.

With regards to which format works best? I've never tried kickstarter to support a community ruleset development. I have tried Patreon, Paypal and Drivethru RPG donations. No one seems to like Patreon as a support mechanism, likely because it is a monthly thing, rather than a one-time cost, even though they could simply subscribe for a short time and then unsubscribe. I have had some one-time donations via Paypal and some people buy and send me stuff from Drive Thru. Thanks so much to those people.

A Kickstarter campaign would basically be the same sort of thing. The developer could set a goal, maybe $100 or $500. If he attains that goal, he then sets aside the time to develop the ruleset. If he doesn't attain the goal, then maybe he doesn't. In order to avoid any Imperial Entanglements, it should be spelled out very clearly in the kickstarter that what is being payed for is not a product, but a person's time and talent and that the product itself will be given away freely to anyone who wants it, regardless of whether they donated or not.

[Frunobulax]

Just want to say a couple things before I reply to Vodokar.

First, I really wish I had titled the poll "If you use the RMC Ruleset, would you contribute to a kickstarter?" Obviously people who do not use it wouldn't be interested. I wonder if anyone voted "no" because they don't care about Rolemaster - I hope not.

Second, I want to make absolutely clear that by discussing copyright and IP issues, in absolutely no way am I encouraging or suggesting that people should try to rip off any company or person. I'm a huge fan of both Smiteworks and Iron Crown, and in all cases I want all copyrights honored and for corporations and content creators to be paid fairly for their stuff. So I'm not trying to "wiggle" out of anything or circumvent any laws. I just find IP law fascinating and enjoy discussing it. So this is all hypothetical/theoretical.


Speaking hypothetically about a community ruleset, which traditionally are not sold via any means and are donated to the community, and not an official ruleset like RMC, which is being sold in the FG store, such a kickstarter or patreon would not constitute "selling" of the ruleset product generated, but selling of the ruleset developer's time to devote to making said product.

Yes - this. I'm not suggesting a kickstarter to create a ruleset that would then be owned or sold, simply to pay programmers for their time to revise and expand the existing RMC ruleset. It would be impossible to sell anyways as it would be chock-full of copyrighted IP by its very nature. It would be a lot of work, though, so I'm thinking it would have to be a couple thousand $ at least. I don't know if that much could be raised. Good programmers aren't cheap, and most people who know Lua are probably getting paid to do it for other commercial games.

Now, the question of whether someone could create and sell an adventure module that works with the RMC ruleset is a little more open. I strongly doubt you would have to get Smitework's permisson unless you wanted to sell it in their store. There are a million examples of people making and selling additions to existing software. Certainly you could advertise it with "Works with Fantasy Grounds(tm)!" in just the same way as generic drugs can say "Compare to Brand Name(tm)". As long as you use the trademark symbol you would be fine.

Naturally, if you wanted to use any copyrighted Iron Crown material you would need their permission. On the one hand, you wouldn't be able to use any copyrighted original stuff like spell list names, Shadow World places, or anything that ICE wrote. On the other hand, there is lots of stuff they don't have copyrighted because they are generic terms - "elf", "dragon", whatever. Certainly if you wanted to use any copyrighted terms like that you would need their permission. Then again, all that stuff is contained in the already-licensed modules Character Law, Spell Law, etc. so if you owned those you could probably refer to them. I think it might be possible to make an adventure module for the RMC ruleset without the permission of either company as long as you were careful not to use any original/copyrighted material. But that's all theoretical - why would anyone NOT work with Iron Crown? I'm sure they'd be happy for more new modules to exist. Yeah, you would save yourself the cost of their royalties, but the module would be dull and generic and hardly sell at all, I imagine.

I myself am thinking of creating a new adventure module for the RMC ruleset, but if I did so I would certainly work with Smiteworks and Iron Crown and pay their royalties. The only thing I don't like about the Smiteworks system is that you only get paid for the first year the material is out. That seems a little unfair. But it's a relatively small point, and they seem to be a bit flexible on it.

[Trenloe]

The only thing I don't like about the Smiteworks system is that you only get paid for the first year the material is out. That seems a little unfair. But it's a relatively small point, and they seem to be a bit flexible on it.
Huh? Are you sure about this? I have never heard of this from anyone and know developers who are getting payment for products developed a few years ago.

I assume you're getting this misconception from a SmiteWorks "Work for Hire Contract"? Point 3 in my contract with SmiteWorks states that the contract terminates one year after the product is no longer for sale - not one year after it is put on sale.

[Frunobulax]

Huh? Are you sure about this? I have never heard of this from anyone and know developers who are getting payment for products developed a few years ago.

I don't want to discuss my, your, or Smiteworks personal business stuff in public so I will reply privately.