Welcome to EGG 10. My hope is to get this out before Christmas, as sort of a christmas gift from me and mine. Hopefully we will all get the new wargaming gear we've been dreaming of for months. Happily I already have my big ticket item for the year. 2000 little plastic Normans and Saxons. Over the last month I've been mounting them on washers and experimenting with rules to use for them. Many thanks to my wife, Terri, for her tolerance of my slightly annoying hobby. Last Issue I put an ad in for my new game "Swashbucklers." An interesting article that seems related to this Just recently came to my attention. In the latest issue of "The White Dwarf" there is a sword fighting game that uses cards to run the fight. It is not a matrix game but the cards look remarkable like the ones in "Swashbucklers." Coincidence? Beats the hell out of me. If it was a copy, It didn't make a matrix game. They say that copying is the highest form of complement. Still it is disturbing none the less. Copying brings up a nuumber of interesting points for game makers. We all copy ideas from other games. Game making like art feeds off itself. The idea of ownership suddenly becomes a little sticky. I have a few Ideas on this to share. 1. Copyright protection is an important right we enjoy in this country. It Is not right for someone else to print my words verbatim and say they are their own. It is a sign of respect to the creator that he be asked proir to a reprint of material. Or if quoted, the author should be cited. This type of approach works well in academic writing, but it leaves many doors open in game writing. 2. Copyright only extends to the exact words and illustrations that are used in the game or article. It does NOT extend to basic ideas, such as: a. using dice or cards, b. a genre of game (such as role playing, or MGs), c. a game topic (such as pirate games, or medieval games). This is the area where games do the bulk of their cross fertilizing. It is not "stealing" to use cards with pictures to run a game. I got the idea of doing that from "Ace of Aces." Maybe it would be more respectful, if the games that influence a product were acknowledged in the credits. Not only would this honor the ground breakers, but It would also tell the consumer about what to expect from the game. 3. There are three basic rules about game making. 1. There is no money in game making. 2. There is no money in game making. 3. There is no money in game making. BUT the only reason to publish a game is to make money - since losing money ensures that a game will not be around for long. 4. Too much competition shuts down communication. Worry over who "Owns" what is competition. This is a zero sum game. I believe that the reality of the matter is that the hobby grows when more people are making things. This means we all benefit when -one gamer is inspired by another. 5. My last though is from an essay I read, by John Locke. Ownership grows out of the work someone puts in to something. I "own" my ideas because I made them. Some one else could "make" a matrix game, and "own" it. Neither they nor I would "own" the genre of MGs. In fact by having both of us making them we would be making BOTH of our "owned" games more valuable. So what ever is going on at GW, if their game looks like mine it can only make interest for both. If you have ideas on the problem of ownership of games and ideas please write in. Happy Christmas to everyone and their families. Back to Experimental Games Group # 10 Table of Contents Back to Experimental Games Group List of Issues Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 1990 by Chris Engle This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com