Conversions

[malraux]

Thanks! I think to be on the safe side, you'd need to remove the directly copied box text, perhaps just makes notes where someone should substitute a town name, and the map that is lifted is a definite no-no under the current situation. Any place where a stat block is a complete reprint would need to be removed, I think, and replaced by a line referencing where to find it, such as see MM pg XX, though any stat blocks you constructed yourself should be fine enough, I guess. Otherwise, I do not think there should be problems with this. The alternative, I think, is that a mod/admin will simply come by a remove the link which does no one any good.

I'll possibly worry about it once WotC releases a fansite policy. Until then, I see it as chasing a moving target.

 

[Mark]

I'll possibly worry about it once WotC releases a fansite policy. Until then, I see it as chasing a moving target.

That's too bad. Making those changes would make it proper, fansite policy or no.

 

[Jack99]

Well, for this thread we'll go with those precautions and feel free to start up another thread that plays fast and loose with WotC IP. It'd be interesting to see where the middle ground turns out to be.

Just for argument sake, could you take a look at the RHoD conversion (or part thereoff) that I have done (see sig) and explain what might be a problem (if any) with it?

 

[Dragonblade]

I am completely converting Paizo's Rise of the Runelords adventure path to 4th Edition, and offering all of the conversion materials on a running blog. As of tonight, the first two adventures in the path (Burnt Offerings and The Skinsaw Murders) will be completely converted. Work will start on The Hook Mountain Massacre next week. The conversions include full 4th Edition stats for all monsters presented in the adventure path's bestiaries, including those which aren't used in the adventure itself.

You can find the blog at Tales from the Rusty Dragon.

Wow! Fantastic work there.

Too Paizo isn't actually doing a 4e Adventure Path. I like their design and writing, but I have no interest in Pathfinder or 3.5.

 

[caudor]

Wow Jack99, your RHoD conversion is coming right along. I especially like how you have setup the various skill challenges.

Thanks for your effort in doing this!

 

[Dannager]

Wow! Fantastic work there.

Too Paizo isn't actually doing a 4e Adventure Path. I like their design and writing, but I have no interest in Pathfinder or 3.5.

Thanks!

I'm in the same boat, and decided that I'd tackle the conversion myself (originally because I'd been itching to run a Paizo AP for a while, and because I figured converting adventures would be a great way to familiarize myself with 4th Edition while using what I know of 3rd Edition). I very quickly decided that it would be worth turning it into a community resource and I think there are now somewhere on the order of ten distinct games that are making use of the conversion material in some capacity.

Both Paizo and WotC have been talking about putting up fansite guidelines soon, and I'll be one of those rare few who will have to make use of both, I'm sure.

 

[renau1g]

Wow Jack99, your RHoD conversion is coming right along. I especially like how you have setup the various skill challenges.

Thanks for your effort in doing this!

Yes, definitely great. I wish I could give out more reputation for this

 

[Jack99]

Yes, definitely great. I wish I could give out more reputation for this

No worries. I am just happy that you like what I did.

 

[Mark]

Just for argument sake, could you take a look at the RHoD conversion (or part thereoff) that I have done (see sig) and explain what might be a problem (if any) with it?

I'll just restate, in another way, what I stated above so that I don't become a pseudo-mod. Anything that is directly copied, would need to be removed (artwork, text, etc.). Anything created by you would need to be in its own format, but that format could be similar though not identical to ones used that have become a more-or-less standard structure. Formatting that comes too close to being identical risks using tradedress, which is off limits. Trademarks should be off limits, too, which might include particular, proper names, so be careful there, as well. Use something similar instead of the actual name where possible. That should mostly keep things safe even without a fansite policy.

 

[Jack99]

I'll just restate, in another way, what I stated above so that I don't become a pseudo-mod.

I didn't mean for you to become a mod, I was asking you to look at what I had done so I could make sure I understood what you meant, with some examples.

Anything that is directly copied, would need to be removed (artwork, text, etc.).

Obviously

Anything created by you would need to be in its own format, but that format could be similar though not identical to ones used that have become a more-or-less standard structure. Formatting that comes too close to being identical risks using tradedress, which is off limits.

Do you mean that we can not set up monsters the same way as they do in the MM?

Trademarks should be off limits, too, which might include particular, proper names, so be careful there, as well. Use something similar instead of the actual name where possible. That should mostly keep things safe even without a fansite policy.

Do you mean we can't use terms like Castle Ravenloft or Vraath Keep? Or are you talking about monster names, like Mindflayer?