D&D Basic Rules Website - A Handy Browseable Resource!

A decade ago, we had online System Reference Documents. Paizo has its online Pathfinder Reference Document. And now there's the brand new official D&D Basic Rules website! That's right - the 5th Edition basic rules online for free in an easily navigable web format. (Thanks to Jester Canuck for spotting it!) That's not the PDF you already have - it's browseable online resource.

I don't know how long it's been there; I assume it's brand new. You can find it right here! And it's a marvellous thing, indeed! It even appears to have a nifty mobile device format, making the D&D rules accessible at a moment's notice just like we've become accustomed to with other games.

(This post originally by Jester Canuck; promoted to article and edited by Morrus).

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Now for the full PHB...

I don't know that they would release that...

 

[BoldItalic]

You can also use Save Page As .. in your browser and download the whole HTML for reading offline if you want to,

There are 5 broken links. I've tweeted Greg Bilsland about them. They point to janscarton.com which belongs to a web designer called Jan S Carton. Presumably that was the development version and the links got left in by mistake. I don't know who Jan S Carton is, but from reading the HTML, I can tell that he definitely knows what he's doing.

There is some coding in there that suggests to me that there is something else in the pipeline - perhaps a Basic character generator (I'm guessing) - that will cross-link to the new file for definitions, descriptions and so on. Interesting.

 

[doctorhook]

There is some coding in there that suggests to me that there is something else in the pipeline - perhaps a Basic character generator (I'm guessing) - that will cross-link to the new file for definitions, descriptions and so on. Interesting.

Nice! I didn't look at the source, but that's an encouraging discovery.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

You can also use Save Page As .. in your browser and download the whole HTML for reading offline if you want to,

There are 5 broken links. I've tweeted Greg Bilsland about them. They point to janscarton.com which belongs to a web designer called Jan S Carton. Presumably that was the development version and the links got left in by mistake. I don't know who Jan S Carton is, but from reading the HTML, I can tell that he definitely knows what he's doing.

There is some coding in there that suggests to me that there is something else in the pipeline - perhaps a Basic character generator (I'm guessing) - that will cross-link to the new file for definitions, descriptions and so on. Interesting.

man today is the day people are getting me to believe in WotC

 

[Mark CMG]

I may have to eat my hat. This almost looks like the beginning of an SRD like page, so maybe OGL like info coming soon

Seems like the opposite. Why go to the trouble of converting the free PDF to a Players' HTML version without the OGL? We already know they are limiting their workload by farming out some areas of system support with limited, targeted individual licensing. If they were planning to use the OGL, they'd have to effectively go over this whole process again, it would seem. This is just the sort of online support that should have come in tandem with an OGL announcement, as part of such an effort, rather than separately and without any sort of OGL acknowledgement.

With each passing opportunity to setup OGL support, they reduce the potential for the OGL to have any helpful effect on their own bottom line. That mentality speaks to a corporate mindset that not only doesn't want an OGL but also doesn't want one to succeed if any faction within WotC manages to make it happen down the road. Then those responsible for the delays and the gutting of it can point to the results and claim a victory for those who say it would be bad for business (despite evidence to the contrary). It seems like a self-fulfilling business strategy for OGL failure.

 

[lkj]

Seems like the opposite. Why go to the trouble of converting the free PDF to a Players' HTML version without the OGL? We already know they are limiting their workload by farming out some areas of system support with limited, targeted individual licensing. If they were planning to use the OGL, they'd have to effectively go over this whole process again, it would seem. This is just the sort of online support that should have come in tandem with an OGL announcement, as part of such an effort, rather than separately and without any sort of OGL acknowledgement.

With each passing opportunity to setup OGL support, they reduce the potential for the OGL to have any helpful effect on their own bottom line. That mentality speaks to a corporate mindset that not only doesn't want an OGL but also doesn't want one to succeed if any faction within WotC manages to make it happen down the road. Then those responsible for the delays and the gutting of it can point to the results and claim a victory for those who say it would be bad for business (despite evidence to the contrary). It seems like a self-fulfilling business strategy for OGL failure.

While I see what you are saying, I don't really agree. If they are preparing to release an OGL, it seems perfectly natural to be working on the various trappings as well and not at all odd to release the parts of those trappings that might be useful to their customers. If they are going to release some sort of OGL, I wouldn't be surprised to see more signs and bits here and there as we approach the announcement.

That said, I have no idea what sort of license they will release, and it might end up being nothing more than a 'fan sharing' template. I wouldn't be surprised to see any shade of gradation from the 'no real OGL' to a 'full OGL'. Just too many things I don't know to really make a good guess (internal politics, lawyers, business plans, etc.).

On the same note, as for whether it's 'too late' or whether there's some insidious group inside the company trying to hobble any license, I couldn't say. It requires way too much speculation or inside knowledge or market information that I simply don't have. Perhaps, as a publisher yourself, you have more insights. But, on the face of it, I'm not really convinced that they have as narrow a window as you suggest.

Shrug. But I don't really know. So, there it is.

AD

 

[Mark CMG]

On the same note, as for whether it's 'too late' or whether there's some insidious group inside the company trying to hobble any license, I couldn't say. It requires way too much speculation or inside knowledge or market information that I simply don't have. Perhaps, as a publisher yourself, you have more insights. But, on the face of it, I'm not really convinced that they have as narrow a window as you suggest.

I think it is fairly common knowledge that some factions inside WotC haven't wanted the OGL to be used, even while it was in use. I wouldn't use the word "insidious" but I also think it would be naive to expect those who do not want something to happen in an organization to not be delaying and working against it happening. I don't think it requires insider knowledge to understand that people will do what people will do, within a business environment or elsewhere. As to the window, it's a matter of degrees. They've had a period of time from the point at which they announced 5E through now, so far, and onward through the life of 5E (however long that turns out to be). It's my opinion that the OGL would help 5E and that the less of that period from announcement to it's end that it is in use, the less help it will be.

 

[lkj]

I think it is fairly common knowledge that some factions inside WotC haven't wanted the OGL to be used, even while it was in use. I wouldn't use the word "insidious" but I also think it would be naive to expect those who do not want something to happen in an organization to not be delaying and working against it happening. I don't think it requires insider knowledge to understand that people will do what people will do, within a business environment or elsewhere. As to the window, it's a matter of degrees. They've had a period of time from the point at which they announced 5E through now, so far, and onward through the life of 5E (however long that turns out to be). It's my opinion that the OGL would help 5E and that the less of that period from announcement to it's end that it is in use, the less help it will be.

Fair enough. And I'll agree that 'insidious' was too flippant a word to use. I have heard that there were those in WotC that didn't like the OGL in the past. But I guess I don't know what their relative strength is now. I mean, you may well be right. But the delay might simply be the fact of WotC moving very slowly and deliberately with everything in this edition, as opposed to the result of an internal struggle (whether that slow deliberation is good or bad I'll leave to history). But I don't really have anything to say one scenario is more likely than another. So I suppose I should just leave it at that.

Cheers,
AD

 

[Mark CMG]

I have heard that there were those in WotC that didn't like the OGL in the past. But I guess I don't know what their relative strength is now.

True, though it is worth pointing out that the OGL was abandoned and the widely-disliked GSL came into being, widely enough as to cause Paizo to jump ship and take a large portion of the market (while using the OGL). We know there is no OGL currently in effect though it could have been announced with the announcement of 5E, could have been used during the playtesting to help in creation / design, and could have been used during initial release to have many, many more oars in the water propelling the edition forward. WotC clearly felt they needed help as they granted a number of project licenses to specific outside entities. WotC's own 5E support has been met with mixed feelings at best.

I appreciate your continued discussion of this situation. I hope it all works out well for D&D and the hobby as a whole. I thought the same thing when they delayed using the OGL for the last edition then came up with the GSL. That's the history, and the successful history 3.XE had using the OGL, that has informed much of my thinking regarding the current situation, FWIW. I'm sure in five years I'll be having discussions informed by those situations past, and this current situation.

 

[lkj]

True, though it is worth pointing out that the OGL was abandoned and the widely-disliked GSL came into being, widely enough as to cause Paizo to jump ship and take a large portion of the market (while using the OGL). We know there is no OGL currently in effect though it could have been announced with the announcement of 5E, could have been used during the playtesting to help in creation / design, and could have been used during initial release to have many, many more oars in the water propelling the edition forward. WotC clearly felt they needed help as they granted a number of project licenses to specific outside entities. WotC's own 5E support has been met with mixed feelings at best.

I appreciate your continued discussion of this situation. I hope it all works out well for D&D and the hobby as a whole. I thought the same thing when they delayed using the OGL for the last edition then came up with the GSL. That's the history, and the successful history 3.XE had using the OGL, that has informed much of my thinking regarding the current situation, FWIW. I'm sure in five years I'll be having discussions informed by those situations past, and this current situation.

Indeed. It's interesting. From various comments, it seems like they've been thinking about it for awhile. I'm hopeful they have a good plan and the strategy will become clear as they roll it out. Perhaps the success of the edition roll out and the problems with the 4e strategy will empower pro OGL individuals. But who knows. I'm not naive enough to think that the best laid plans can't get tripped up by lawyers.

Shrug. As you say, we'll have some other interesting tidbits to yammer about when this is all done.

AD