3PP Release New Release: Single-Class Synergy, Volume 2: Singular Specialists

[Timespike]

It was in an older one that's apparently no longer valid, but yeah, not in the current ones.

 

[Pedantic]

I'm holding off on further support for the savant until EN Publishing puts it in an SRD. It's in kind of a weird legal limbo space right now, and I have plenty of other classes to keep me busy.

Honestly, I find the scholar fills the same space more comfortably anyway.

 

[Morrus]

It was in an older one that's apparently no longer valid, but yeah, not in the current ones.

For the record, there's no such thing as a no longer valid SRD. Once it's been released under an open license, an SRD cannot be unreleased under it. You have our written blessing to make savant-compatible material, and since it was released under an SRD, the legal right to use it anyway.

(I know you won't as we've had this and similar conversations several times before, but this information is just for anybody else reading and contemplating doing such a thing--go for it! You have our blessing!)

 

[Timespike]

For the record, there's no such thing as a no longer valid SRD. Once it's been released under an open license, an SRD cannot be unreleased under it. You have our written blessing to make savant-compatible material, and since it was released under an SRD, the legal right to use it anyway.

(I know you won't as we've had this and similar conversations several times before, but this information is just for anybody else reading and contemplating doing such a thing--go for it! You have our blessing!)

Since I have you here, there's a second component to my hesitancy beyond what my non-lawyer perspective sees as a class in a bit of a legal grey area: based on both the experience of one of my players (who has since converted his savant character to a rogue/marshal build) and various feedback I've seen online, it sounds like the class could use a post-release revision pass. The concept is good; there's a solid core idea in there, but the implementation can be frustrating at the table. I've seen that firsthand.

So I hold out some level of hope that if I wait for a bit, some future release or an update (like the one where you recently asked the community for common house rules) will fix some of that.

EDIT: Also, for the record, this line from a5esrd.com is the reason why I thought it might be best to stop using the old SRD document that contained the savant. Specifically the "or elsewhere" part.

The PDF documents below solely comprise the A5ESRD. Any other content on this page, website, or elsewhere is not part of the A5ESRD.

 

[Morrus]

Since I have you here, there's a second component to my hesitancy beyond what my non-lawyer perspective sees as a class in a bit of a legal grey area: based on both the experience of one of my players (who has since converted his savant character to a rogue/marshal build) and various feedback I've seen online, it sounds like the class could use a post-release revision pass. The concept is good; there's a solid core idea in there, but the implementation can be frustrating at the table. I've seen that firsthand.

So I hold out some level of hope that if I wait for a bit, some future release or an update (like the one where you recently asked the community for common house rules) will fix some of that.

Are you using the latest version of AiZ? It got a MASSIVE update earlier this year.

EDIT: Also, for the record, this line from a5esrd.com is the reason why I thought it might be best to stop using the old SRD document that contained the savant. Specifically the "or elsewhere" part.

The A5ESRD is the name of that document. The previous SRD was called the Level Up SRD. The old SRD is irrevocable, just like the DnD 3.5 one is. Besides, who’s going to sue you? Me? Nobody else has standing to. But if I do, show the judge this: I hereby give you written permission to make savant compatible material, not that you need permission.

(I jest to an extent—I’m not trying to pressure you into it, just want folks to be clear about the nature of the licenses we use and not see them as prohibitive)

 

[Timespike]

It has admittedly been quite some time since I reviewed the AiZ file. It's a really good setting, but not the one I'm currently running a game in, and I considered the class in it to be in a legal gray area so I didn't have much cause to return to it. I will have to pull down the new version and see what that does to address the concerns I've seen.

As far as the licensing confusion goes: good thing I don't purport to be a lawyer or I'd have clearly dishonored the profession with that interpretation. Message received, loud and clear; I'll see what I can do about re-integrating the savant into my third-party support schedule.