Nerun Posted April 17, 2022 Share Posted April 17, 2022 (edited) Hail rune brothers! This topic is related to this very old one: D100-system charter (2008). Would be better you read that first (just 2 pages). Here a charter to use Open D100 System compatibility logo, with minimum game mechanics to be considered compatible in one-page PDF. It's just a draft. Sorry for my bad english, i am not a native english speaker. Feel free to correct my spelling in the attached document. I accept suggestions, including those that say: "abandon this idea". Charter requisites derives from the 2008 discussions and seems to me to be quite solid. There is some d20 System inspiration in this logo, of course. Please note that "D100" is not capable to be registered as a trademark in many countries. And I'm not interested in registering either. But Open D100 System may well be registered. Anyway, I think I have certain copyright on that expression and the logo at least. Nevertheless this is a work in progress. Open d100 System Charter.pdf Member @peterb also created a logo, never used i think. Attached bellow mine. Peterb said in 2008 it is in Public Domain. Edited April 18, 2022 by Nerun 4th draft, 2nd logo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
g33k Posted April 17, 2022 Share Posted April 17, 2022 That "d100 Basic System" logo is just really uncomfortably-close to Chaosium's BRP SRD logo (see here: https://brp.chaosium.com/ ) ... stylized d10 in the background "Basic" and "System" in the text... red elements in the logo Add to that, that both logos are for RPG's and highly-similar ones at that... Is there some reason you don't want to use Chaosium's own BRP SRD, or RD100's SRD, or ... ? 1 Quote C'es ne pas un .sig Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nerun Posted April 17, 2022 Author Share Posted April 17, 2022 52 minutes ago, g33k said: That "d100 Basic System" logo is just really uncomfortably-close to Chaosium's BRP SRD logo (see here: https://brp.chaosium.com/ ) ... stylized d10 in the background "Basic" and "System" in the text... red elements in the logo Add to that, that both logos are for RPG's and highly-similar ones at that... Is there some reason you don't want to use Chaosium's own BRP SRD, or RD100's SRD, or ... ? Thx! I agreed, BRP SRD logo is by far much better. The problem with BRP Open Game License is that it is not really free, no open at all. For example: prohibited content. If i create a Cthulhu game, i can't use BRP logo, nor even the BRP Open Game Content! And 2nd, if you use any portion of BRP SRD, you MUST use BRP logo, it's not optional. As a Linux user, I do like freedom. But no, i have no issues in use any other SRD (Revolution, Renaissance, Legend, OpenQuest, GORE, RetroQuest etc), i love all them! My point is to create a common logo to all these systems that can't use BRP logo. But anyway, doesn't means that people wants one. Maybe OQ prefere to use their own logo! Maybe i am wrong and Chaosium made BRP logo free to use in any system independent of which SRD are you using. But i think not. As i know, BRP logo is exclusive to games developed from BRP SRD and BRP (not so much) Open Game License. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nerun Posted April 17, 2022 Author Share Posted April 17, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, g33k said: That "d100 Basic System" logo is just really uncomfortably-close to Chaosium's BRP SRD logo (see here: https://brp.chaosium.com/ ) ... stylized d10 in the background "Basic" and "System" in the text... red elements in the logo Add to that, that both logos are for RPG's and highly-similar ones at that... Is there some reason you don't want to use Chaosium's own BRP SRD, or RD100's SRD, or ... ? Uh, the similarity issues... That's a good point too. I will try new logos, maybe closer to peterb logo, and d20 System logo itself. And name... Change to Open D100 System sounds good! Translates the essence. Edited April 17, 2022 by Nerun Working in new logo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nerun Posted April 18, 2022 Author Share Posted April 18, 2022 (edited) Just trying new concepts: ugly, but creative. Inspired by Open Source Initiative logo. Copyleft symbol (C inverted) disposed like "%", reference to d100. And the green remember "traffic green light". Edited April 18, 2022 by Nerun Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
soltakss Posted April 18, 2022 Share Posted April 18, 2022 Interesting, the Charter excludes Revolution D100 because Revolution does not use the SIZ Characteristic. 1 Quote Simon Phipp - Caldmore Chameleon - Wallowing in my elitism since 1982. Many Systems, One Family. Just a fanboy. www.soltakss.com/index.html Jonstown Compendium author. Find my contributions here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nerun Posted April 18, 2022 Author Share Posted April 18, 2022 (edited) 2 hours ago, soltakss said: Interesting, the Charter excludes Revolution D100 because Revolution does not use the SIZ Characteristic. Hmm... Maybe Characteristics list should be removed? Other alternative that comes in mind is to consider POW and SIZ as optional. Because i think that some Characteristics should be present. SIZ ok, not fundamental, and POW is essentially a stat for magic (or Will) and not all settings use both. But STR, DEX, INT, CHA and CON are a minimum. Edited April 18, 2022 by Nerun Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nerun Posted April 18, 2022 Author Share Posted April 18, 2022 Thinking here, maybe a "by-law" would be better than a "charter". A document written by many hands, with which the majority can agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDLeary Posted April 18, 2022 Share Posted April 18, 2022 (edited) 4 hours ago, soltakss said: Interesting, the Charter excludes Revolution D100 because Revolution does not use the SIZ Characteristic. Also excludes Delta Green, and all its progeny. SDLeary Edited April 18, 2022 by SDLeary Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nerun Posted April 18, 2022 Author Share Posted April 18, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, SDLeary said: Also excludes Delta Green, and all its progeny. SDLeary I didn't know Delta Green, thank you! I have fixed "SIZ" issue in 3rd Draft. Edited April 18, 2022 by Nerun 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mugen Posted May 10, 2022 Share Posted May 10, 2022 On 4/18/2022 at 2:43 PM, Nerun said: Hmm... Maybe Characteristics list should be removed? Other alternative that comes in mind is to consider POW and SIZ as optional. Because i think that some Characteristics should be present. SIZ ok, not fundamental, and POW is essentially a stat for magic (or Will) and not all settings use both. But STR, DEX, INT, CHA and CON are a minimum. Note that most BRP games from the 80s and 90s had APP instead of CHA. Your definition also excludes the second french edition of Nephilim, which had Wound Levels instead of HP. Why would the presence of HP be so important when MP presence is not ? Same for Aquelarre, because it has a different set of stats. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RosenMcStern Posted May 11, 2022 Share Posted May 11, 2022 Nerun, this is a very interesting initiative. But a charter/logo that encompasses all "open" D100 systems makes sense only if it is approved/used by all publishers and/or maintainers of said system. I am not necessarily against the initiative, but we should involve more publishers if we want to make it significant. Also, that logo becomes illegible once you shrink it. The simplicity of peterb's logo is better. 1 1 Quote Proud member of the Evil CompetitionTM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nerun Posted May 11, 2022 Author Share Posted May 11, 2022 4 hours ago, RosenMcStern said: Nerun, this is a very interesting initiative. But a charter/logo that encompasses all "open" D100 systems makes sense only if it is approved/used by all publishers and/or maintainers of said system. I am not necessarily against the initiative, but we should involve more publishers if we want to make it significant. Also, that logo becomes illegible once you shrink it. The simplicity of peterb's logo is better. To be honest with you all, I don't know why I resurrected this idea. It didn't work in 2008, it wouldn't work now. Although it's a good idea. The only unified logo that really worked was the Wizards d20 System. Maybe it sounded like a good idea to me, and I got excited designing logos. That's it. But I know it will never be adopted. Companies have no reason to do so. About logo size/text you are right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mugen Posted May 11, 2022 Share Posted May 11, 2022 1 minute ago, Nerun said: To be honest with you all, I don't know why I resurrected this idea. It didn't work in 2008, it wouldn't work now. Although it's a good idea. The only unified logo that really worked was the Wizards d20 System. Maybe it sounded like a good idea to me, and I got excited designing logos. That's it. But I know it will never be adopted. Companies have no reason to do so. About logo size/text you are right. And the d20 logo was successful because it meant "D&D" for the customer, and "money" for the editor... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nerun Posted May 11, 2022 Author Share Posted May 11, 2022 On 5/10/2022 at 3:14 AM, Mugen said: Note that most BRP games from the 80s and 90s had APP instead of CHA. Your definition also excludes the second french edition of Nephilim, which had Wound Levels instead of HP. Why would the presence of HP be so important when MP presence is not ? Same for Aquelarre, because it has a different set of stats. About APP and CHA, please read 1.1 in charter: Uses the following Characteristics. They may, however, use other names... So one can name CHA as APP, no problems. About Wound Levels vs. HP: minimum compatibility is needed. If it becomes too open, logo lost sense. About MP... Well I just forgot about it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Absentia Posted May 11, 2022 Share Posted May 11, 2022 6 hours ago, RosenMcStern said: The simplicity of peterb's logo is better. Though it has some serious kerning issues. !i! 1 Quote ...developer of White Rabbit Green Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.