Unearthed Arcana SRD?

[d20Dwarf]

Won't be in the WotC SRD, you mean.



I have created the Plexus - SRD Revised. If there is a demand for it, there's a damned good chance that I can add in the OGC from Unearthed Arcana at some time in the future. It would be a big project and require a significant price increase but, of course, everyone who has purchased the bundle in the past would receive the updates for free.

Why wouldn't you make this a separate document?

 

[Mark]

Why wouldn't you make this a separate document?

I make all of the components available as separate documents, as well, but offer a savings on the "bundle" which the vast majority of people take advantage of as soon as they figure out how great a savings it is. I have very few people who have purchased one of the component parts who haven't gone on to purchase the "bundle".

 

[herald]

Won't be in the WotC SRD, you mean.



I have created the Plexus - SRD Revised. If there is a demand for it, there's a damned good chance that I can add in the OGC from Unearthed Arcana at some time in the future. It would be a big project and require a significant price increase but, of course, everyone who has purchased the bundle in the past would receive the updates for free.

When I asked if you would be making your own game, my tongue was in cheek.

I am under the opinion that when most people (gamers) say "THE SRD" they mean WOTC's SRD, since it does, indeed belong to them. It's the source of game rules that they provide to developers (and anyone else) to make their own games or game related material vis a vis the OGL or the D20 Licence.

Should another company state that they have thier own SRD, I kinda feel that their not being straight up. Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that that thier braking any rules, and I certainly don't think that they should be called on the carpet or anything like the sort. I just feel that saying I have my own SRD and and it's called... well, that just muddies the waters to a point.

IMHO, any dirivative document of the SRD is just a body of rules. I can perfectly understand that creating that body of rules and adding to it, and thenm putting it into a format that is pleasing to read is worth getting paid for, but is anyone really going to use that 3rd party SRD to publish a new game? (with the exception of the actual publisher, maybe?)

The SRD should be for the most part unobtrusive, we know it's there, but we shouldn't be that focused on it. We play D&D, not SRD. It's like asking someone what kind of car they drive and they answer a V-tech V8.

I think it would be better to move away from the gimmicky "custom SRD" names and move to other names that reflect a more true use of the material. They're rule books.

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

So, what's in Unearthed Arcana, anyway?

Inquiring minds want to know...

 

[WizarDru]

So, what's in Unearthed Arcana, anyway?

Inquiring minds want to know...

We always like to help inquiring minds.

This thread has plenty of luscious, rich detail. Enjoy.

 

[Mark]

When I asked if you would be making your own game, my tongue was in cheek.

I know.

I am under the opinion that when most people (gamers) say "THE SRD" they mean WOTC's SRD, since it does, indeed belong to them. It's the source of game rules that they provide to developers (and anyone else) to make their own games or game related material vis a vis the OGL or the D20 Licence.

I agree. And when I say "The Plexus - SRD Revised" I mean that same material in a revised format for easy access and usage. Ultimately, I am providing an organizational service in that particular product, not new material, which is why, despite the many hours that have gone into the project, it remains so utterly inexpensive.

Should another company state that they have thier own SRD, I kinda feel that their not being straight up. Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that that thier braking any rules, and I certainly don't think that they should be called on the carpet or anything like the sort. I just feel that saying I have my own SRD and and it's called... well, that just muddies the waters to a point.

Again, I agree. I find it confusing when a company other than WotC uses the term "SRD" in regard to their own material, as well. It would be wise to preface such material as supplementary in some way (when it is supplementary to the WotC SRD) or otherwise distinquish it as a separate entity (when it is completely separate from the WotC SRD) to avoid confusion. I think most companies who follow that model try to make the distinction as clear as they can.

IMHO, any dirivative document of the SRD is just a body of rules. I can perfectly understand that creating that body of rules and adding to it, and thenm putting it into a format that is pleasing to read is worth getting paid for, but is anyone really going to use that 3rd party SRD to publish a new game? (with the exception of the actual publisher, maybe?)

I dropped a complimentary copy of the Plexus - SRD Revised on d20dwarf and I believe he has found it invaluable in his gaming (he's mention so in chat rooms to me), and likely in his freelancing. I'll leave it to him to expound further on that if he feels it is warranted.

Whether it is cited in a section 15 reference in any work is of no matter to me, since I feel it is best to cite the original source whenever possible, when the material hasn't been changed from the original source to the secondary source. In the case of the SRD material, that's a very simple matter and one that I think is best done by original source to avoid confusion. In my own published products, I reference both the original and my Plexus, which is something I do not think anyone can blame me for doing. I find it is so useful that it warrants citing.

The SRD should be for the most part unobtrusive, we know it's there, but we shouldn't be that focused on it. We play D&D, not SRD. It's like asking someone what kind of car they drive and they answer a V-tech V8.

I do not drive.

I think it would be better to move away from the gimmicky "custom SRD" names and move to other names that reflect a more true use of the material. They're rule books.

In the case of the Plexus - SRD Revised it is not so much a rulebook as a reference document. It isn't meant to supplant the rule books, simply to be used as a supplementary way to reference the rules. I'm told it does a very good job in that regard.

 

[Chacal]

So, what's in Unearthed Arcana, anyway?

Inquiring minds want to know...

Does this help ?
http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=76681

[EDIT] Too late [/EDIT]


Chacal

 

[Alzrius]

UA won't be in the WotC SRD, but only because it doesn't need to be there. The entirety of the book, except for art and things already declared to be PI of WotC (slaad, githyanki, etc) will all be designated as Open Game Content. The book's materials can be used by anyone making a d20 product, presuming they follow the correct d20 License procedures.

 

[Mark]

UA won't be in the WotC SRD, but only because it doesn't need to be there. The entirety of the book, except for art and things already declared to be PI of WotC (slaad, githyanki, etc) will all be designated as Open Game Content. The book's materials can be used by anyone making a d20 product, presuming they follow the correct d20 License procedures.

...or by anyone releasing a product simply under the OGL, presuming they follow the OGL procedures, regardless of their interest in d20 Licensing.

 

[Alzrius]

...or by anyone releasing a product simply under the OGL, presuming they follow the OGL procedures, regardless of their interest in d20 Licensing.

Yeah. I didn't mention that because while I'm relatively clear on d20 License issues, the nature of an OGL product is still rather unclear to me, so I thought it best not to talk about something I don't understand.