SRD Question (for Scott or Linae): 4e References or just Section Headings?

[jaldaen]

So I noticed a lot of people are reading the SRD section headings as 4e Refrences in addition to being a section heading. My question to Scott and Linae is:

Are the section headings in the SRD also 4e References, which cannot be defined, redefined, or altered in any way?

So are Dwarf, Human, Fighter, Wizard, Demon, Devil, etc... 4e references or intended to make it easier to use the SRD in conjunction with the Core Books?

This is a question I've asked in other threads, but I figure it deserves its own thread since this one difference in reading the SRD can make all the difference between a very restrictive SRD and a very open one.

Thanks for your response

[Yair]

It's an important question, but I'm not clear what is it based on in the GSL. What it the legal meaning of having headings in the SRD? Where does it say in the GSL that you can Reference headings, for example, in a way that seperates headings from the terms which you can't redefine or modify?

[jmucchiello]

Originally Posted by Yair

It's an important question, but I'm not clear what is it based on in the GSL. What it the legal meaning of having headings in the SRD? Where does it say in the GSL that you can Reference headings, for example, in a way that seperates headings from the terms which you can't redefine or modify?

You miss the point. He is asking if the headings in the SRD are also "4E References" as defined in the SRD.

[lurkinglidda]

Originally Posted by jaldaen

Are the section headings in the SRD also 4e References, which cannot be defined, redefined, or altered in any way?

Yes.

Edit - do not define or redefine. you may add to the items in the SRD though.

From section 4.1 of the GSL:
<snip> Licensee will not define, redefine, or alter the definition of any 4E Reference in a Licensed Product. Without limiting the foregoing, Licensee may create original material that adds to the applicability of a 4E Reference, so long as this original material complies with the preceding sentence. <snip>

Hope that helps!

[Zaister]

Originally Posted by lurkinglidda

Yes.

So this means, for example, I can have Demons in my licensed product, but they can't be Balors, Barlguras, Evistros, Glabrezus, Goristros, Hezrous, Immoliths, Mariliths, Mezzdemons, or Vrocks. I must make them up myself. Correct?

[lurkinglidda]

Originally Posted by Zaister

So this means, for example, I can have Demons in my licensed product, but they can't be Balors, Barlguras, Evistros, Glabrezus, Goristros, Hezrous, Immoliths, Mariliths, Mezzdemons, or Vrocks. I must make them up myself. Correct?

Yes.

[Alzrius]

Hm, this seems to be a tacit admission that the exclusion of specific demons and devils - and probably the other missing monsters too - was intentional, rather than accidental.

Oh well. Thanks Linae.

[lurkinglidda]

Originally Posted by Alzrius

Hm, this seems to be a tacit admission that the exclusion of specific demons and devils - and probably the other missing monsters too - was intentional, rather than accidental.

Yes. I will respond to the other threads asking this question as well.

[Drkfathr1]

Still don't see how the Succubus can be considered IP of WOTC.

[jaldaen]

Originally Posted by lurkinglidda

Yes.

Edit - do not define or redefine. you may add to the items in the SRD though.

Thanks, that clears it up... much more restrictive than I had hoped (especially with "Human" as a defined term), but thankfully there are synonyms one can use if you want to bring in a "cultural" aspect for a campaign setting.

Hope that helps!

Clarity is always a help

[lurkinglidda]

Originally Posted by jaldaen

thankfully there are synonyms one can use if you want to bring in a "cultural" aspect for a campaign setting.

True

[DiasExMachina]

That is an interesting theory. It was one I had an issue with. They have outlined and detailed "ELF" so you cannot make your own that is different.

But you have this:

Per Section 4.1 of the GSL, you can add functions to 4E
References as long as, in doing so, you don’t redefine that 4E
Reference.

...Which could indicate that you could. And elf is an elf...now its just your version of elf. And if that was not true and you really can't modify elf, one word in that quote used in a previous post not mentioned is the word "remove". So take it out entirely...

[Jraynack]

Originally Posted by Drkfathr1

Still don't see how the Succubus can be considered IP of WOTC.

It's not IP, but if you choose to accept the GSL, then you must follow the rules under that license. And the GSL states you cannot reference 4th Edition material not listed in the SRD or redefine them.

[Wicht]

Originally Posted by Drkfathr1

Still don't see how the Succubus can be considered IP of WOTC.

It can't.

But it doesn't have to be if you enter into a contractual agreement (GSL) which says you can't use it. As others have said, Contract Law is different from laws covering IP.

[jaldaen]

Originally Posted by lurkinglidda

True

One more question:

If you do reference "Human" do you have to use the exact human racial traits as is, no changes? I would guess yes, because it is a defined term.

However, I could create a "Mankind/Mortal" race that uses some of the Human racial traits, but changes things as needed for a particular campaign setting (such as adding cultural options).

Thanks

[Cam Banks]

I'm having a hard time understanding the difference between redefine and adding to.

Dragonlance has elves that are not fey, for instance. Their version of the eladrin—high elves, likely the Silvanesti for instance—don't teleport. Is removing the fey origin and so forth a redefinition?

What about something like this:

ELVES
<Insert Worldname>'s elves have all of the traits of elves in the 4E Player's Handbook except for the following:
Blah Blah: You have blah blah. This replaces the standard elf's blah.

?

If not, then does the GSL expect new campaign settings to essentially drop the core D&D cosmology and background into every world whole cloth? Not even the various official D&D campaign settings do that.

Cheers,
Cam

[HyrumOWC]

Originally Posted by Cam Banks

I'm having a hard time understanding the difference between redefine and adding to.

Dragonlance has elves that are not fey, for instance. Their version of the eladrin—high elves, likely the Silvanesti for instance—don't teleport. Is removing the fey origin and so forth a redefinition?

What about something like this:

ELVES
<Insert Worldname>'s elves have all of the traits of elves in the 4E Player's Handbook except for the following:
Blah Blah: You have blah blah. This replaces the standard elf's blah.

?

If not, then does the GSL expect new campaign settings to essentially drop the core D&D cosmology and background into every world whole cloth? Not even the various official D&D campaign settings do that.

Cheers,
Cam

IANAL, but that sounds like redefining them to me. You'd have to call them Silvanesti as the racial name, much like eladrin are eladrin and not high elves.

So... Dragonlance characters races would be:

Silvanesti
Qualanesti
Hill Dwarf (and this is dicey, since dwarf is a restricted term)
Human (humans can't be any different than the core, otherwise you have to rename them along cultural lines)
Kender (the easiest, since they're unique to DL)

Basically you can't change anything found in the core books in any way, shape, or form. You can invent new stuff, but not alter it.

Hyrum.

[Cam Banks]

Originally Posted by HyrumOWC

IANAL, but that sounds like redefining them to me. You'd have to call them Silvanesti as the racial name, much like eladrin are eladrin and not high elves.

So then the question raised is, can you use aspects of those defined rules when designing new races? The Kagonesti are almost identical to the 4e Elf, for instance. Could I simply say "In the world of Krynn, the elven race described in the 4E Player's Handbook is known as the Kagonesti" and then carry on? Or is that redefining?

If I use some of the various eladrin traits for the Silvanesti and Qualinesti, do I have to refer back to the 4E Player's Handbook or can I reprint that information (the text under Trance, for instance)?

I see the intent behind all of this, but I am also seeing that in protecting that intent there's a confusing and nebulous area that remains unclear and counter-productive to what I believe the purpose of the SRD is (publish new campaign settings, adventures, and sourcebooks to support the core rulebooks.)

Cheers,
Cam

[jaldaen]

With some further reading I am also wondering if the "fluff" of a race/monster cannot be altered either... at first I assumed the 4e references refered to the rules, probably because the 4e references beneath the section headings are rules related, but some have posted that they think even the change of fluff is forbidden.

My question for Scott and Linae is:

1) Are the 4e references only for rules-related material or also the "fluff" text of each race/monster?

Thanks

[HyrumOWC]

Originally Posted by Cam Banks

So then the question raised is, can you use aspects of those defined rules when designing new races? The Kagonesti are almost identical to the 4e Elf, for instance. Could I simply say "In the world of Krynn, the elven race described in the 4E Player's Handbook is known as the Kagonesti" and then carry on? Or is that redefining?

If I use some of the various eladrin traits for the Silvanesti and Qualinesti, do I have to refer back to the 4E Player's Handbook or can I reprint that information (the text under Trance, for instance)?

I see the intent behind all of this, but I am also seeing that in protecting that intent there's a confusing and nebulous area that remains unclear and counter-productive to what I believe the purpose of the SRD is (publish new campaign settings, adventures, and sourcebooks to support the core rulebooks.)

Cheers,
Cam

You can't call an elf anything but an elf. You'd be better off writing the Kargonesti as a completely new race that looks incredibly similar to the elf in the PHB.

As for referring, it looks like you can just say "Trance, see chapter XX in the PHB" and you can't write out what it does. You also can't change it any way.

And yep, it's confusing and counter-productive. To me at least.

Hyrum.