Is the Unearthed Arcana SRD online?

[Nellisir]

Plus he's right...people are treating this book differently because it's Wizards of the Coast. One could easily take the books made by the Game Mechanics, By Green Ronin, by Guardians of Order, by FFG, and everyone else and post almost the whole book on the web. With other companies, there is an acceptance this would be hurting them, but just because it's WotC, no one cares.

No one has done a book like Unearthed Arcana. Period. I'm using alot of OGC in my campaign setting, and the most influential book by far is UA, simply because of its scope. I'm still not sure why WotC so often manages to scoop the rest of the industry, or why, in this OGL era, they continue to set the bar for creativity and ingenuity(and I don't think it's just money, though it may be the larger pool of designers they can afford).

UA is the first book I've seen that really sets out a large number of optional rule-inserts without advocating a specific goal. There's stuff in UA for rules-heavy and rules-light, roleplayers and rollplayers, PC, NPCs, and DMs.

The closest thing to it yet may be the Advanced books coming from Sword & Sorcery and Green Ronin.

As for D&D 4.0 -- I wouldn't dare predict what WotC will do. Cease supporting the OGL (they CAN'T cancel it), and someone else will publish the SRD, plus character generation & stuff, inside of 6 months. Probably multiple somebodies. They also lose the free support products published by all the smaller publishers, putting the onus back on them to support their game line with adventures and the less profitable supplements they've so effectively farmed out now. If they did abandon the OGL, I strongly suspect they'd create a similar but more restrictive license combining the OGL and the d20 marketted specifically towards larger publishers, probably for a monetary payment. All I know for sure is, I wouldn't be buying it.

Wandering off topic,
Nell.

 

[woodelf]

No one has done a book like Unearthed Arcana. Period. I'm using alot of OGC in my campaign setting, and the most influential book by far is UA, simply because of its scope. I'm still not sure why WotC so often manages to scoop the rest of the industry, or why, in this OGL era, they continue to set the bar for creativity and ingenuity(and I don't think it's just money, though it may be the larger pool of designers they can afford).

Well, part of it could be your perspective. From my perspective, i'm continually appalled by the fact that WotC *doesn't* set the bar for creativity, ingenuity, editing, or artwork in the D20 System market. IMHO, of course. They are, IMHO, firmly leading the middle of the pack. Only place they are consistently leading is where raw economies of scale help them: production values. And while no one has done a book like Unearthed Arcana, perhaps as little as 1/3rd of it is really innovative--the rest has appeared (more or less) in other D20 System products already, or is old hat to RPGs in general and only new to D20 System.

As for D&D 4.0 -- I wouldn't dare predict what WotC will do. Cease supporting the OGL (they CAN'T cancel it), and someone else will publish the SRD, plus character generation & stuff, inside of 6 months. Probably multiple somebodies. They also lose the free support products published by all the smaller publishers, putting the onus back on them to support their game line with adventures and the less profitable supplements they've so effectively farmed out now. If they did abandon the OGL, I strongly suspect they'd create a similar but more restrictive license combining the OGL and the d20 marketted specifically towards larger publishers, probably for a monetary payment. All I know for sure is, I wouldn't be buying it.

Thank you: you said it much more clearly and succinctly than i'm apparently capable of tonight. You are absolutely right: the number of D20 System publishers out there, and the value of an open-content system that tons of publishers are supporting, are getting bigger every day, and the more time goes by, the harder it becomes for WotC to not take advantage of those effects. By the time D&D4E comes out, i don't think they could afford to jettison the OGL-based market, and if they did, i think D20 System could very well trump D&D for marketshare.

 

[jeffh]

Basically, you are saying that it doesn't matter if the gaming industry goes bankrupt because Wizards was stupid for releasing such a license agreement. Well congratulations then. This short term thinking will be the death of the hobby.

No, that's not "basically what he said", it is a strawman that's nothing like what he said.

I and, as far as I can see, those on the same side of the debate as myself, have thus far refrained from putting words in your mouth or casting aspersions on your motives. (A couple of us have questioned some of your ethical stands, but even that has been kept within the realm of civil debate.)

Also, on a factual matter raised by the above-quoted paragraph: First of all, the death of the hobby has been predicted a million times. I'll believe it when I see it. Moreover, considering sales are as high as they've ever been (barring the huge spike that was the year 2000, which I think we all recognize for the special case it was) and vastly better than in the period just before the advent of the OGL, I think it's little short of ridiculous to assert that the OGL, which by all visible evidence has breathed new life into the hobby, will somehow become a problem for it, much less kill it.

 

[woodelf]

There is a key distinction between OGC and OGL that isn't addressed. Software under the OGL isn't sold. The OGC in published books is. OGC has as its main use, the ability to reuse materials from other publishers in your own works and this is what we currently see it used for. Unlike OGL software, making it freely available will hurt them.

Well, assuming you meant "...between GNU and OGL...", somebody should really tell RedHat that they aren't selling software. Plenty of open-source software is also commercial. Now, admittedly, there are nsignificant differences in the media that make the case not an exact analogue. For starters, it is the source code, not necessarily the software, that is free, while for RPGs there really is no such distinction: an RPG book *is* the "source code". Secondly, while both have development costs, software has almost-zero production costs, while a book has pretty significant production costs. But these are all issues that should've been considered, or were considered, before the WotC OGL was finalized. And one of the "solutions" to the dilemma was pointing out that (1) people like books, and production values matter, and (2) in general, by the time someone gets around to stripping all the OGC out of something and formatting it into a decent document, the book will have already sold a significantn %age of its life--especially if you're trying to address point 1, and make something that has a quality presentation, in hardcopy.

When discussing the PDF works of some companies like The Game Mechanics, the entire book is pdf and could be converted into OGC redistributable in under an hour. So I guess my question is, when OGC is included liberally, what should really be considered fair? For me that's respecting the publisher and author's wishes, but how do other people feel about it?

I agree that it's not as clear-cut as republishing the whole thing, for free, online being either ok or not ok. That is clearly legal, and i think it may even be ethical--it depends on the circumstances. To take an extreme, i see nothing wrong with doing this if the book has been out of print for a while and the company has said they aren't going to reprint it (and the content is OGC, of course). At the other extreme, there's a world of difference between the publisher saying "please don't just put all the OGC online for free until the book has mostly sold through" and "you are a bad person if you put the OGC online for free while the book is still new". And how much reworking does it take to make a difference? Does it matter whether the resulting work is free or commercial, PDF or hardcopy? Do you consider the Pocket Players' Handbook to be unethical? Does it matter that one of the things WotC said right from the start [paraphrasing their FAQ] was that "anybody could take the entire contents of the D20SRD and publish their own players' handbook, but we're confident that our products' production values will still be better, and they won't hurt our sales"?

 

[Bendris Noulg]

Breakdaddy...

Please drop me an email: jdomsalla@swfla.rr.com. Even if a UASRD never gets done, you'd be saving me hours and hours of transcription (and I only need parts, not the whole thing).

Thanks.

On topic...

I think most publishers would love fans using the OGC to create new material. Most of them see that's what it's for (beyond the few publishers who try to render an abstruse as possible license.) There's a big difference between that and putting the whole thing stripped of PI on the web.

Personally, I don't even dislike the idea of an online respository. Having access to a large amount of OGC in one place would be really cool. But a single document listing all the free content from one product...I don't care if it is legal, it still bugs me.

Actually, I was thinking about this earlier. This is the kind of project that can actually be taken further, expanding on it.

For instance, UA only includes 4 Environmental Races (Aquatic, Arctic, Desert, Jungle), but I can think of a lot more: Mountain, Swamp, Forest, Island, etc. Why not create/add more?

Why not include newly created Incantations?

Wounds & Vitality and Armor DR... We've seen dozens of different "takes" on this since the system was introduced in Star Wars. Why not round up a few of these versions, ones that have proven themselves in gameplay during the past 2 years, and add those as additional options?

There are several Sanity-type mechanics. Why not, using UA's system as a base, bring in some of the concepts introduced by these other books?

Oh, and Classes, Classes, and more Classes...

Submitted Legendary Weapons and their Prestige Classes.

Tainted Monsters and related Templates.

Different Codes of Honor.

Additional Backgrounds.

Tests for Prestige Classes can easily be expanded: If you create a test for any OGC Prestige Class, send it in and we'll add it to the list.

Would a project like this, to build upon and expand the OGC from UA, be more acceptable? 'Cause the more I think of it, the more interested I get.

 

[jgbrowning]

So I don't see a downside to people obeying the law. I don't see it as unethical. And I certainly don't see it as sleazy.

As someone with 2 books (300 pages) of completely open material, I'd like to chime in...

I completely agree that using the license to it fullest (included ripping out PI and reprinting the entirety of a work) is legal, ethical, and part of my accepting the license. However, part of my using the license (beyond it's benefit in my sales) is for the benefit of the gamers to whom I'm writing. Were someone to actually rip one of my books wholesale without providing me a period of sell-through, my production of OGC material would decrease.

Bluntly, I have to make enough money to keep writing/publishing material, be that OGC or not OGC. If forced, I will release the minimum amount of OGC to fulfull my obligations. By forced, I mean if someone decides to not be nice and allow me adequate sell-through time. This would be detrimental to both myself and the reader. I want to release a lot of OGC, but I won't do so if it's fiscally damaging. I publish under the license because it's fiscally beneficial. When it ceases to be more beneficial than detrimental, I'll stop writing/publishing anything but a minimum of OGC.

Regardless of what people think morality-wise, ethics-wise, or legally-wise, this is one possible repercussion of ripping a book en toto right after it comes out.

Obviously, I'm not WoTC. For them, IMHO, they have no reason to publish any OGC, ever again. People may think that publishing more OGC material may help in their goals of selling more Core books, but I don't think that's true (at least under this edition). There are now smaller companies (Green Ronin, Malhavoc, MEG, Bastion, Goodman, me ) that support off the OGL, and who release much more OGC than WoTC could produce. There's no "need" for more OGC from WoTC's view (In other words, how much would more OGC material increase sales of the core books, and more importantly, would the material's being OGC increase sales more than it being closed?). Again, IMHO, I think UA is a gift to the smaller publishers out there, and I for one, appreciate it.

I like Cregorach's 6 month waiting period. That's very kind of him. In fact, its very kind of all of you so far to not pull out a new books OGC and put it up for free, en toto. I really think we (publishers/authors/readers) all benefit from some restrait in the migration process from printed book to freely available OGC. It helps support the creation of more OGC, and hopefully, better OGC. Thus, the kindness shown by the readers to the publishers in this manner is also a kindness shown to themselves in the long run.

And again, let me reiterate in case my message is a bit muddled. Under the license, the material is open. Also, just because it's open, don't assume that treating it as such has no consequences even when such treatment is legal, ethical, and moral. As a publisher, I agree to the license because it benefits me and I extend my work to %100 OGC because I want to increase those benefits for the reader and other publishers. Once this becomes detrimental, my OGC %'s will have to change, or I have to stop publishing under the liscense. There's benefit to us all through a little kindness.

joe b.

 

[Ranger REG]

Couldn't agree more. It is not only Not-Bad to make OGC easily reusable, it is Good. IMHO, the point of it is the game, not the publisher.

Perhaps the idea of "Open Source" is what scaring publishers and authors. They fear it may be counterproductive to have to lose control of their own IP if they associate it with the open source.

Can you balance the two?

 

[Wasgo]

Well, assuming you meant "...between GNU and OGL...", somebody should really tell RedHat that they aren't selling software. Plenty of open-source software is also commercial. Now, admittedly, there are nsignificant differences in the media that make the case not an exact analogue.

Right, meant GNU. And I won't attack your analogue too much because you do admit it's flawed, but keep in mind the majority of Red Hat's money doesn't come from casual users, it comes from business users. It's primarily an enterprise platform. Compare that to Mandrake which targeted casual users and they nearly went bankrupt twice. They had to beg for money online. Users buying from Red Hat aren't buying the software or the source code; in most cases they're buying the tech support.

I think a lot of my concern on this project is the nature of Unearthed Arcana itself. In the case of most books, production value is vital. But since AU is full of all sorts of things that can be taken in pieces, this is more of an issue. Since no one group will use all the rules (or even most of them), printing off what they need beceomes more convient. And out of all the projects to hurt, this is WotC's first major OGC product. Considering they don't have to acknowledge the OGL at all, it's a solid step in the right direction and I personally wouldn't want to discourage it.

Do you consider the Pocket Players' Handbook to be unethical? Does it matter that one of the things WotC said right from the start [paraphrasing their FAQ] was that "anybody could take the entire contents of the D20SRD and publish their own players' handbook, but we're confident that our products' production values will still be better, and they won't hurt our sales"?

Quick point, there's a big differnce between the SRD and standard content. In terms of the core books, WotC is simply what most gamers will purchase. Even if there was an alternative Player's Handbook, with just as good production values and $10 cheaper, most with go with the original; they buy the brand name. On the other hand, take something like Green Ronin's Shaman's Handbook. The entire book was OGC and when it came out, someone republishing it would almost certainly hurt their sales. In the same vein, people don't need UA. It's a variant rules book, and if they could just download the rules they want online, there would be very little incentive to buy it. There isn't that same must own feeling the core books have.

Also, I personally think it's not exactly the nicest thing to do to put any of the PDF'd files into republished form. If they can still be bought, that still takes away (even just a little) income from the publisher. On the other hand, books that went into print, I think eventually putting their OGC online after they are no longer in print is a good thing. It's nice that this material might not fade into obscurity the way past editions did.

 

[barsoomcore]

Great perspective, joe b.

If the system doesn't work, it doesn't work. The world doesn't end. If publishers can't make money because people are republishing their material for free, they'll stop using the license. And that's okay. That's what we had before, and the industry managed to survive this long. The license and the material released under it isn't going anywhere, so people who still find it beneficial will still use it.

There'll probably always be a mix of OGC and closed content in the marketplace, and that's a good thing, and it's pretty early days right now to be able to tell what percentage of which is optimal. Time will tell.

There's a world of difference between the publisher saying "please don't just put all the OGC online for free until the book has mostly sold through" and "you are a bad person if you put the OGC online for free while the book is still new".

This very ably sums up my stance. Pointing out marketplace realities is not only fair, it's welcome. I WANT d20 creators to do well. I'm one myself. I want to know what I can do to help other creators do better. I just don't want the law getting confused with what's best for the hobby, and I definitely don't want murky moral judgements clouding what are crystal-clear legal issues.

 

[Wasgo]

Actually, I was thinking about this earlier. This is the kind of project that can actually be taken further, expanding on it.

For instance, UA only includes 4 Environmental Races (Aquatic, Arctic, Desert, Jungle), but I can think of a lot more: Mountain, Swamp, Forest, Island, etc. Why not create/add more?

Why not include newly created Incantations?

Wounds & Vitality and Armor DR... We've seen dozens of different "takes" on this since the system was introduced in Star Wars. Why not round up a few of these versions, ones that have proven themselves in gameplay during the past 2 years, and add those as additional options?

There are several Sanity-type mechanics. Why not, using UA's system as a base, bring in some of the concepts introduced by these other books?

Oh, and Classes, Classes, and more Classes...

Submitted Legendary Weapons and their Prestige Classes.

Tainted Monsters and related Templates.

Different Codes of Honor.

Additional Backgrounds.

Tests for Prestige Classes can easily be expanded: If you create a test for any OGC Prestige Class, send it in and we'll add it to the list.

Would a project like this, to build upon and expand the OGC from UA, be more acceptable? 'Cause the more I think of it, the more interested I get.

This type of project is far more interesting. It adds value to the content and isn't just republishing it. Doing tainted monsters sound really quite cool. OGC is great in that it allows for these types of projects. This is the thing though, where I see the use of OCG, is projects that encourage people to buy the original books, and I think this idea is great and very much keeping with that idea. The only other thing is I'd probably go a step further and not use any of the original text from UA, only the mechanics. Though I have to admit, that's less because I feel it's misused, and more because I like having only one tone in my documents.