Re: (TFT) Open Source TFT

[Mark Tapley <mtapley@swri.edu>]

Ty wrote:

> But *if* a group of folks were willing to undertake this, I would be willing
> to be the "front guy" on the project.

I'm in.

> Alternatively, we could call it something different -- say, "TFT 2" or
> somesuch.

"The Labyrinth Rules!" ;-) get it?

> - - Someone (the "Outliner") needs to produce an outline of all the 
> current TFT
> rules, organized into logical sections.

This will help a lot with the copyright problem. Reorganizing will 
force rephrasing in many cases, and make it easy in other cases.

However, it would be very nice to somehow keep the "programmed 
introduction" whereby Melee alone makes a good game, can be extended 
with Wizard, extended more with ITL, extended more with "Mounted 
Combat" and "Critical Hit" rules, etc.

I wonder if there is some electronic publishing format that will 
address both issues above? Something like Word (spit) markup format, 
such that one can "turn on" additional rules, which then fill in 
between the very simple basic rules. One might even have multiple 
layers of complexity, which can be turned on in various combinations. 
Begin with just Melee rules, "turn on" spells but not magic items, 
then "turn on" magic items at a later date, etc. Each time something 
is turned on, the rule book expands. The table of actions has new 
options ("cast spell") appear in the middle, highlighted by being a 
different color. List of options to turn on, and dependencies, (e.g. 
need to have Wizard magic before magic items) appears in a table of 
contents type page at the beginning. Same system could handle the 
various extensions captured in this mailing list as well, including 
20-sided dice, David's new 3D Melee rules, etc. Some layers might 
have to "turn off" simpler predecessors, as in replacing DX with 
"Speed" and "Accuracy" attributes.

Sorry, I digress. That would be murder to proofread and playtest, too. Hmm.

> Well, you can rest assured that I will not suggest anything that I think
> might consitute copyright infringement.

A second legal opinion might be a *great* idea. I'd be willing to 
chip in for part of that, depending on its cost. And no offense 
intended, Ty.

Rick wrote:
>   I would rather we get the rights to the real TFT

Big 10-4 on that. Part of our business plan should be an ongoing 
search to try to do that. But if what we do is a serious extension of 
TFT's utility, by cleaning up, rearranging, modularizing, and 
extending, it may not be incompatible to do both simultaneously.

Ty wrote:
> Referencing Cidri and prootwaddles *would* almost certain
> violate the copyright.

Hm. Small loss, imho.

Rick wrote:
>  Well we like the Image spell, the 4 hex
> Dragon spells, etc.  If we have to reword
> everything the names of the spells all
> change.

Ouch! That'll pain me, but I'll get over it. A good reason to get the 
real rights, though.

>  Now who would object to us making a
> derivative copy?  Steve Jackson maybe if
> TFT starts cutting into GURPS money.

I suspect it would be a good idea to inform SJ of our plans before we 
proceed very far. It would certainly be a courtesy, and getting him 
on our good side would be tremendously better than opposing him and 
HT at the same time.

David wrote:
> First of all Ty, thanks for bringing this up.

<clink> I'll drink to that!

> I really thought that would generate more discussion than it
> did. Oh well, 3 months of work down the tubes.

I felt really guilty about that. But it ain't down the tubes - it's 
in the archive. I *am* going to dig it out and use it when I get some 
minutes free to play. Thanks for your work! But I just haven't the 
time right now. I have two things of my own that I'm letting languish.

Next year, some time.... (sigh).

--
					- Mark
			210-522-6025, temporary cell 240-375-2995
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"