Revised GSL TODAY!

[Scribble]

How about the "No reposting monster statblocks in your adventure"?

Does not appear to have changed. You can only publish the mechanical effects on a statblock. If you're yusing one of the standards you can still only refference it.

Is that still a big deal though? Even the "Official" published adventures tend to use "new" monsters... With how easy it is to make a monster it kind of seems lazy to just use a standard monster in a published adventure? Why not make monsters that fit the situation of your adventure?

 

[Urizen]

Does not appear to have changed. You can only publish the mechanical effects on a statblock. If you're using one of the standards you can still only refference it.

Is that still a big deal though? Even the "Official" published adventures tend to use "new" monsters... With how easy it is to make a monster it kind of seems lazy to just use a standard monster in a published adventure? Why not make monsters that fit the situation of your adventure?

I agree with you to a point. It's not complicated to make cool new monsters for an adventure, but what if you really need, say, a Tiefling warlock for an NPC?

Then you run into issues.

 

[Vanuslux]

So after they made all the changes, people are still not happy?

It doesn't appear that anyone here is saying that it's not a vast improvement over the original. That doesn't mean it cures cancer and makes perfect panini sandwiches. There's always room for criticism.

 

[Mouseferatu]

I agree with you to a point. It's not complicated to make cool new monsters for an adventure, but what if you really need, say, a Tiefling warlock for an NPC?

Then you run into issues.

I agree, actually. Much as I love and support all the other changes, I do wish this could've been dealt with as well. Sometimes, an adventure just needs an orc or a red dragon.

It's not even remotely a deal-breaker, though. (And it's not like there's no precedent, in gaming history, for modules that require you to flip open the MM now and again.) I don't find it to be that big of a deal; just a slight itch, really.

 

[Jasperak]

Does not appear to have changed. You can only publish the mechanical effects on a statblock. If you're yusing one of the standards you can still only refference it.

Is that still a big deal though? Even the "Official" published adventures tend to use "new" monsters... With how easy it is to make a monster it kind of seems lazy to just use a standard monster in a published adventure? Why not make monsters that fit the situation of your adventure?

Don't quote me on this, but I don't think the problem is with using standard monsters from the MM. The problem is as I read it you cannot reprint ANY of the powers from either the PH or MM in an adventure you write. What I think will end up happening is that 3pp will have to create new powers or the DM will have to print out the powers himself if he wants to quickly reference them without have to go into any manuals.

Thanks to Scott for his hard work in getting the GSL out.

 

[Rechan]

It doesn't appear that anyone here is saying that it's not a vast improvement over the original. That doesn't mean it cures cancer and makes perfect panini sandwiches. There's always room for criticism.

I'm not saying that.

It's just the impression I get is "This is a great improvement, it's fixed lots of problems! But you won't catch me signing it because it's not good enough."

 

[Nylanfs]

It is a definite improvement. Don't like the non-computer generator section, but nobody expected that to change really, at least not yet.

 

[Scribble]

I agree with you to a point. It's not complicated to make cool new monsters for an adventure, but what if you really need, say, a Tiefling warlock for an NPC?

Then you run into issues.

Well... NPC is a mechanical effect right? (I think thats one of the examples it has if I remember)

I agree, actually. Much as I love and support all the other changes, I do wish this could've been dealt with as well. Sometimes, an adventure just needs an orc or a red dragon.

I think I didn't explain what I meant as well as I should have...

I didn't mean to say instead of an orc use ike the Goober Monster or soemthing... Just instead of an Orc Eye of Gruumsh, you could make your own Orc Fire Shamman or soemthing... All you're "really" doing is changing the powers it has. The stats themselves are generated using the monster class stuff...

If worse comes to worse just drop or raise it a level? The mechanical change comes into play...

I agree it's not as simple as just being able to use the stats wholesale... But not really as big a stumbling block I think then it first appeared before we knew much about the system? (Because changing monsters seems more routine then just picking monster X out of the book...)

 

[Urizen]

I agree, actually. Much as I love and support all the other changes, I do wish this could've been dealt with as well. Sometimes, an adventure just needs an orc or a red dragon.

It's not even remotely a deal-breaker, though. (And it's not like there's no precedent, in gaming history, for modules that require you to flip open the MM now and again.) I don't find it to be that big of a deal; just a slight itch, really.

I understand why they did it.

They want to see creative development from 3rd party publishers.

You_can_apply the mathematical values for powers without reprinting the power verbatim, but some powers need to be reprinted to be fully understood. Those, you'll still have to refer to.

here's a sample statblock I_think_is going to be just fine for my upcoming book: Scarrport, City of secrets.

---------------

Talfordinate Wicking, Thunder Priest of Velun Level 16
Controller (Leader)
Medium Humanoid (Human) XP 1,400
Initiative +8
Senses: Perception +11
Aura of the Sky God Aura 5; all enemies in the aura gain vulnerable 5
thunder.
HP 131; Bloodied 66
AC 28; Fortitude 28, Reflex 28, Will 33
Resist 10 thunder
Speed 6
Action Points 1

m Mace (standard; at-will) +23 vs. AC; 1d8 + 6
r Holy Thunder (standard; at-will) * Thunder
Range 5; +27 vs. Reflex; 1d6 + 12 thunder damage and the target is pushed 5 squares.
R Plague of Doom (standard; encounter) Range 10; +27 vs. Fortitude; 3d8 + 12 damage; (Level 13 Cleric Encounter Attack Prayer; see the D&D 4E Player's Handbook); -3

R Thunderbreak (standard; encounter) * Thunder
Range 10; +27 vs. Will; 2d8 + 12 thunder damage, and the target is
deafened and dazed until the end of Wicking's next turn.

A Purifying Lightning (standard; daily) * Lightning
Area burst 2 within 10; +27 vs. Reflex; 3d10 + 12 lightning damage and
ongoing 10 lightning (save ends)(See the D&D 4E Player's Handbook.).

A Thunder Cloud (standard; daily) * Thunder
Area burst 2 within 10; +27 vs. Reflex; 2d10 + 12 thunder damage and
ongoing 5 thunder (save ends); Miss: half damage.

Divine Fortune (free; encounter)
(Cleric Class Feature; see the D&D 4E Player's Handbook)

C Healing Word (minor; twice per encounter)
Close Burst 10; (Cleric Class Feature; see the D&D 4E Player's
Handbook); +4d6

C Mass Cure Light Wounds (standard; daily)
Close Burst 5; (Level 10 Cleric Utility Prayer; see the D&D 4E
Player's Handbook); +3

M Cure Serious Wounds (standard; daily)
Melee touch; (Level 6 Cleric Utility Prayer; see the D&D 4E Player's
Handbook)

Alignment Good

Skills Religion +15, Insight +18, Diplomacy +16, History +15

Str 14 (+10) Dex 11 (+8) Wis 21 (+13)

Con 14 (+10) Int 14 (+10) Cha 16 (+11)

Equipment robe of thunderbolts +4, symbol of the storm +6

 

[Orcus]

Just took a quickie look at it, and please don't take this as legal advice, just observations:

They can cancel the GSL at any time.

They can change the GSL and/or SRD at any time.

Therefore, anything people didn't like from the first version that was taken out can be put back in.

Plus, if there are any legally questionable claims of right WOTC makes in the GSL (9.1), you can't fight it if you sign the GSL.

Also, it looks like they can put out stuff similar to yours and compete against you.

Not something I would feel comfortable making long-term business decisions with.

If you are a guy who wants to put out a supplement once a year or so for 4e, and make a hundred bucks here and there, no major loss.

If you're a guy basing a business and livelihood around 4e products, seems risky to me. Your livelihood is in the hands of the Hasbro corporate executive of the month in charge over there.

I wouldn't put all my eggs in one basket if I were a 3pp. develop your business broadly, support Pathfinder, C&C, etc., in order to have options if Goober the future new VP of WOTC who never rolled dice before has a brain fart and screws over all 3pp's.

Just my gut take on it from a fast read. Again, not legal advice, so don't take it as such. Consult a lawyer who specializes in IP and/or business contracts. I do not work in those areas.


Joe

That is terrible advice.

Everyone please disregard it.

The revised GSL is a huge improvement and includes many of the changes and suggestions that I specifically, and I am sure others as well, have been calling for for a long time.

One of the biggest changes is the "opt out" clause which the old GSL didnt have. In other words, if they change something you are bound by it. Now, if they change something you can opt out. Can they still change things? Sure, but that is the nature of just about any license and it was the nature of the d20 license that we all used for many years.

Plus, think about this. As I told Scott--wouldnt it be cool if the first revsion was an expansion that allowed us to do more with more freedoms and more content? what would the naysayers say then? Shure, they "could" make it more restrictive, but look what they have done.

This is a big WIN for all involved.

Clark