D&D General So what about the SRDs?

[Morrus]

If I decided to make a 4E or Cyberpunk Red or WoD compatible adventure, what is stopping me? (Assuming I am not violating any trademarks.)

Nothing. You can also make an iPhone-compatible phone case and a wheel nut which fits Ford cars. Many do.

You don't need to reproduce any copyrighted text to produce a compatible adventure or supplement for any game, so why do SRDs and licenses exist?

They give you large swathes of text you can literally reproduce (as in copy/paste). You can use their text verbatim, en-masse.

But you don’t need to be able to copy/paste several pages of the D&D rulebooks to make compatible products.

As I said, the exception might be a VTT or character builder which literally does copy/paste entire chapters, but adds functionality, but to make an adventure? A new monster? A feat? A class? A magic item? New rules? Nope. Those are your words.

(The secret weapon was always the compatibility logo—the d20 logo back in the day, whatever the current Pathfinder compatibility logo is, etc. These days every other compatible 5E product on Kickstarter literally just copies WotC’s trade dress and they don’t seem bothered about that, so a compatibility logo is no longer needed, but that’s an entirely different conversation).

 

[Reynard]

, but to make an adventure? A new monster? A feat? A class? A magic item? New rules? Nope. Those are your words.

So, again, why do we need SRDs or licenses at all. You could have produced A5E without reproducing any text at all (and a lot of it you didn't). So why did you choose to use an SRD and license to do so?

 

[Scribe]

You’re a publisher so of course you know what’s what. No doubt.
I’m saying there are a lot of Monday morning coaches that are trying to out expert one another.

That’s a sports metaphor so it’s probably wrong.

 

[Morrus]

So, again, why do we need SRDs or licenses at all.

I didn’t say that, did I? You’re not listening. My entire premise has been that the existing SRD is all you need.

You could have produced A5E without reproducing any text at all (and a lot of it you didn't). So why did you choose to use an SRD and license to do so?

I’m clearly saying it wrong.

Let me try one last time.

You can make any D&D compatible content using the existing SRD(s). Or using the existing SRDs you can make any compatible D&D content. Or compatible D&D content of any kind can be made using the existing SRDs. Like we did. Honestly, I’m running out of different ways to phrase this. If it hasn’t worked this time, I’m out.

(Now, I could argue, were I in a different conversation and trying to make a different point, that you don’t need any SRD to make a compatible product. But that’s waaaay beyond the scope of this conversation. My point is that you can make 2024 or 3.5 or whatever products with the 5E SRD (or any other D&D SRD). And many are.)

You seem to be pushing back really hard against this. I don’t really know what else to say to you. If you don’t believe me, or if you think you know better, that’s fine. I’m not your lawyer, after all, and I’m also not going to be taking your legal advice. I don’t think I’m going to keep repeating myself though. At some point you need to either decide “Russ knows what he’s talking about” or “Russ is full of crap.”

(It’s the former).

(It’s also the latter, just not in this case).

 

[Alzrius]

I may be misunderstanding some of the legalities of the SRD and its usage, but what if someone wanted to make a 3.5-compatible Prestige Class? The term "Prestige Class" is not part of the 5.1 Creative Commons release. One could argue that the term is generic enough to use safely, but if I was a small publisher, I would not want to risk a C&D letter from Wizards. There are other terms and phrases unique to 3.x play that were not carried forward into the current SRD. You could rely on the (as yet) untested-in-court notion that "game rules are not copyrightable," but who wants to be the first test case? One could get around it all by making up new terms like "Fancy Class" or some such, but that begins to feel silly.

While it is possible to create and publish material for older editions today, I understand the producers wanting clear and irrevocable SRDs for their favorite editions. They will sleep better at night.

There are a lot of things in the 3.5 SRD that aren't in the 5.1 SRD. For instance, monsters such as babau demons, winter wolves, nymphs, phase spiders, and quite a few others simply aren't there. The word "psionics" can be found a couple of times in the 5.1 SRD, but good luck trying to recreate things like power points and psicrowns using just that, let alone psionic classes.

Quite frankly, there's a lot of 3.5 that you can't recreate with 5.1, and that's even without getting into the areas of uncertainty that you mentioned.

 

[Spellslinging Sellsword]

I do want to say thanks to @Morrus for releasing things under under the Creative Commons, the Open Game License, and the Open RPG Creator (ORC) license.

 

[SlyFlourish]

I am very aware that they worry about it. But I reiterate that they don’t need to. That’s why I keep saying it. Maybe they’ll believe me or maybe they won’t, maybe they’ll worry less, maybe they won’t, but I’ve given the facts as best I can, and consider myself very qualified to do so. And I will say it again any time the subject comes up.

That’s nice for them.


Well, WotC’s marketing success is their thing. I’m
Not involved with that.

More specifically he intended it for D&D. And yes, it worked. Then, and forever.

Go ahead and make your 3.5/5e/2024 compatible products using the existing licenses. Or your 1e/2e products (plenty of people are—that’s the basis of the OSR movement. They aren’t using an official 1E SRD or an OD&D SRD? They understood this years ago.


Not really. They could support 2024. We do.


I can’t speak to WotC’s desires. All we can do is go by the letter of the licenses. The words they are legally using, not the ones we imagine they might intend or want. And those words let you do everything you need to.

yeah, I'm not disagreeing with anything you said. Just bringing up a point about why others are interested in it.

I want it to add D&D 2024 versions of monsters to my Artisanal Monster Database and Open5e.

 

[Uni-the-Unicorn!]

There are a lot of things in the 3.5 SRD that aren't in the 5.1 SRD. For instance, monsters such as babau demons, winter wolves, nymphs, phase spiders, and quite a few others simply aren't there. The word "psionics" can be found a couple of times in the 5.1 SRD, but good luck trying to recreate things like power points and psicrowns using just that, let alone psionic classes.

Quite frankly, there's a lot of 3.5 that you can't recreate with 5.1, and that's even without getting into the areas of uncertainty that you mentioned.

Actually, you can create those things (many have for 5e), you just can’t copy them verbatium from the 3.5 books or SRD

 

[Morrus]

Actually, you can create those things (many have for 5e), you just can’t copy them verbatium from the 3.5 books or SRD

You literally can copy them verbatim from the SRD.

 

[Reynard]

(Now, I could argue, were I in a different conversation and trying to make a different point, that you don’t need any SRD to make a compatible product. But that’s waaaay beyond the scope of this conversation. My point is that you can make 2024 or 3.5 or whatever products with the 5E SRD (or any other D&D SRD). And many are.)

So, let's focus on this because it is kind of where I am having a disconnect. Since the text is different between, say, the 3.5 SRD and the 5.1 SRD, but there are similarly names things in them, I am curious how you get to being able to produce, say, a 3.5 monster book with the 5.1 SRD when there are concepts like Damage Reduction (just by way of example) that aren't in the 5.1 SRD. Is it simply an example of derivative works?

My question about "why do we need SRDs at all" was not meant in bad faith. It comes back to the above example -- where does the value of the SRD released under a license come in?

To give a more concrete example: Let's say i create a monster supplement compatible with 2024 5E. What is the difference (not asking for legal advice, of course) between me using the 3.5 SRD under OGL, the A5E SRD under ORC, the 5.1 SRD under CC, or no SRD at all and just not replicating ay text?