Why are the XP Tables Different from Classic D&D?

[Jonathan Miller]

Hi, I recently purchased a copy of LL to use with a Moldvay-Cook D&D campaign. Most of the rules seem the same, but I noticed that there are small changes to many of the XP tables. Does anyone know why this was done? Thanks.

[Jonathan Miller]

And, while I'm at it, why is the thief ability table for LL slightly different from that of Moldvay-Cook?

In both cases, I can think of two reasons: (1) small changes were made to avoid copyright infringement; (2) small changes were made for the sake of game balance. But which is it?

[Blood axe]

I think I remember this being brought up before. The changes are only slight. I think the answer was #1. lol.

[kipper]

Yeah, Dan obviously cannot comment directly on this, but it is reason (1) .

[Jonathan Miller]

Thanks for the replies. People in the OSR community have said that game rules can't be copyrighted, just the presentation of rules, though I wonder how true this is, if Dan Proctor felt the need to fiddle with the XP and thief skill tables.

[Blood axe]

Thanks for the replies. People in the OSR community have said that game rules can't be copyrighted, just the presentation of rules, though I wonder how true this is, if Dan Proctor felt the need to fiddle with the XP and thief skill tables.

Game rules cant be copyrighted? Really? Who came up with that idea? I never heard of that. You just cant go out an sell an exact copy of someones game. Maybe after the rights expire. Otherwise what would be the point of the "open gaming license" that some RPGs have? They wouldnt need to state that if anyone could just do it.

[kaomera]

Game rules cant be copyrighted? Really? Who came up with that idea? I never heard of that. You just cant go out an sell an exact copy of someones game. Maybe after the rights expire. Otherwise what would be the point of the "open gaming license" that some RPGs have? They wouldnt need to state that if anyone could just do it.

"Copyright does not protect ideas, only their expression", and there are a lot of "limitations and exceptions" to copyright. From my strictly layman's understanding: when you're dealing with RPG rules things get a bit sticky because the copyright laws weren't specifically designed to handle them. The OGL, etc. provided a remedy to the fact that smaller 3pp publishers would likely not have the resources to contest any copyright claims made against them - a lot of copyright stuff (like open-source licenses and creative commons) are somewhat sketchy, legally (in no small part because the copyright laws themselves are a mess), because their purpose is simply to establish criteria under which legal proceedings can be reasonably assumed to be avoided...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limitations_and_exceptions_to_copyright

[Blood axe]

So you can copy 4th ed or Magic card game? Seems weird. How bout Warhammer or a GW game? Im not a Lawyer so beats me......

[Jonathan Miller]

Game rules cant be copyrighted? Really? Who came up with that idea?

"Copyright does not protect ideas, only their expression", and there are a lot of "limitations and exceptions" to copyright.

Umm, what he said.

My understanding is that the particular presentation and wording of a rule is subject to copyright, but that the rule itself is not. On the other hand, as Kaomera noted, the copyright law is tangled and murky. I am not an expert, so I can say no more.

[kipper]

I think the difference comes about when (for example) a table doesn't follow a precise mathematical algorithm, but instead has certain arbitrary values in addition. An algorithm itself cannot be copyrighted, but the presence of arbitrary values is part of the "presentation" and can be a copyright issue. So in certain cases, Dan has either introduced his OWN arbitrary values (which differ from the original) or has changed the tables so that they DO follow an exact algorithm without the arbitrary values. (The combat and saving throw tables are also altered slightly, in addition to the XP and Thief tables).