Questions about the new SRD [summon Orcus!]

[Orcus]

The license doesnt require OGC to be sorted into draft and non-draft OGC. In fact, that would be a total bitch to do.

BUT it isnt really that relevant. It isnt a problem for reuse, in my opinion, if you use a good source (like Tome) that you trust to be done right and use your common sense. For example, if you are a publisher and you see beholders and mind flayers, you know that is stuff that was draft content. Remember, your ability to reuse content doesnt begin and end with the product that contains the content. A publisher has to do their homework and get up to speed on things like the potential pitfalls.

Plus, email me if you ahve a question about our content and I will always answer it.

Clark

 

[Cergorach]

Or pretend you have a nose bleed and say you don't know this D&D stuff and thought that Beholder was original content... ;-)

Just kidding Clark, i really appreciate your attitude to these matters. It's always so refreshing to see some 'legal' advice that's in comprehendible english (note: there is supposed to be a space between in and comprehendible, so no sarcasm is meant). I'll most certainly contact you on matters concerning Necromancer stuff. Are you also still the person to contact if i (or anyone else for that matter) have questions regarding Relics and Rituals (etc.)?

I'm curious how Goodman Games does it. Doe they have permission from WotC for the use of the Beholder name?

The Complete Guide to Beholders:
http://www.broncosaurusrex.com/3004preview.php

How about using the stats (or something similar) and calling such a creature the "Sphere of Eyes" or the "Eye Tyrant"? I of course prefer the common name, but another name would be acceptable...

 

[coyote6]

I'm curious how Goodman Games does it. Doe they have permission from WotC for the use of the Beholder name?

IIRC, they were working on that book before WotC published the finalized, beholder-less SRD, and were thus able to get permission to publish the book. I know that was the case with Paradigm's mind flayer book.

How about using the stats (or something similar) and calling such a creature the "Sphere of Eyes" or the "Eye Tyrant"? I of course prefer the common name, but another name would be acceptable...

The stats aren't in the SRD anymore, either, so they'd be just as verboten as the name "beholder". You could try to create a similar creature, but you'd have to be careful not to end up with something WotC might find too derivative.

IIRC, a few folks were trying to come up with replacement critters for some of WotC's MIA monsters.

 

[Walter_J]

But there was a final 3.0 SRD. Now it seems that SRD has been replaced with the 3.5 SRD. I cant find the 3.0 SRD officially on line anymore on the WotC site (if you can find it, let me know).

But I think that is problematic. Once the SRD was released as OGC I dont think they can take it back. Meaning, I think we could cite to the 3.0 SRD just as readily as we could cite to the "revised" SRD.

Clark

When I originally tried to download the 3.5 SRD I downloaded the "all in one bundle" (i.e. SRD.zip). The files were actually the 3.0 SRD. That was Sunday or Monday. It might still be that way.

I don't know if this pertains to the conversation at all, but as far as referencing the 3.0 SRD, I'm going to use the original copyright statement. The "2000-2003" version no longer has the info I'm using.

Actually, as I'm comparring the two OGL's. The released 3.0 version is reffered to as the "system rules document". 3.5 is the "system reference document."

 

[Walter_J]

I downloaded the bundle again to check. It is now all 3.5