Where is the Unearthed Arcana SRD?

[Pbartender]

...or perhaps it's the Law of Unintended Consequences rearing it's ugly head.

I think you've hit the nail on the head. The Unintended Consequence was that people like to get things for free. The part I find dissapointing, and almost ludicrous is when some people start expecting to get SRDs for everything floating around out there.

The way I look at it, if a gaming company provides a free, publically accessible SRD, then that's an unexpected bonus... but it's up to them to publish it, not me. If they wanted people to have free access to their rules, they would have done it themselves, and it's not my place to do it for them. That's just common courtesy.

Of course, should they publish an SRD... It's all fair game.

I really like the free SRDs, and I use them extensively, when available. For example, when the D20 Future SRD came out, I downloaded a copy and passed it around my gaming group. We're going to try the rules out, and if we like them enough to play regularly, I'll go out and buy at least one copy of the book... Hard copies are a lot handier for me to reference than electronic files. If we don't like them, I delete the files from my computer, and we forget about them.

Otherwise, I buy the book, type out my own copies of the OGL rules that my players need and hand them out to my players only.

 

[Erratic K]

As philreed stated earlier, the OGC and OGL is for content-sharing among publishers, much like the GPL regulate sharing computer codes among programmers.

That analogy doesn't quite work. It is too narrow. The GPL helps all users of open source programs not just programmers. GNU/Linux (argueably the most popular GPL'd software) is available free in source and binary form. It is available to all, programmer or user not withstanding. The license does protect the programmers from having their work co-opted without giving back the source (or other remuneration if somebody wants to license something under a different license).

I think a more accurate restatement of your point is:

The OGC and OGL is for sharing among gamers thereby popularizing the game and making the game bigger. It doesn't allow others to profit from your work without giving the work back to the community.

The linux community has re-packagers that take Redhat's Enterprise Linux (which although open source, is pay to get the original copy of the source) and package it as White Box Linux. The repackagers must remove references to Redhat and the copywriten art work that is not GPL (sounds very parallel to OGC/OGL repackaging now huh?). This is not popular with some at Redhat but is strictly legal. The reason White Box Linux doesn't overtake RHEL is 1) support, 2) White Box has no active development and 3) the polish and artwork of RH. Redhat would not ask them to cease because the white box crew is reaching a market that RHEL would never get to otherwise (those that don't want or can't afford the full product with support).

There are re-packagers of OGL/OGC as well (the guys that sell SRD repackages on RPG Now). Someone could easily repackage AU and sell it or give it away for free. It would have to done without being called AU and the art work and couldn't say WotC (or Hasbro) on it etc... but it is totally legal and ethical.

If rpg publishers that release material under OGL as OGC don't want people to repackage or re-use, then they shouldn't use that license and go proprietary. I think the best part of OGL/OGC is the best part of GPL as well (can you tell I'm a GPL supporter?)- and that is the good part stays, the mediocre gets improved and the weak gets cut- and when somebody tries to exert too much control over a project, the project gets forked, this flexibility inevitably grows the number of people using GPL software.

-E

for more on the GPL check out www.gnu.org

 

[Halivar]

Regardless of want you'll use it for, there are certainly others who'll use it to get the rules without paying for the book. That could feasibly make for a pretty big hit in profits... And game designers have to pay bills too.

Theoretically, what you say makes perfect sense. Put into practice, though, we see that the publically available SRD does not keep the core rulebooks + psionics from being wildly enriching for WotC. I, for one, certainly didn't buy the core books just so I could have beholders and mindflayers.

Remember, the purpose of the OGL is not to provide free rules to the players, but to give third party publishers the ability to produce material using the same set of basic rules.

I don't like the idea that something is free only if you make money off of it. For one thing, it still doesn't make a return for the original producer (WotC), and seems to place 3rd-party publishers above "end users". I also find it telling that, at least on these boards, the idea that legally putting out material for free that might otherwise be sold by a 3rd-party publisher is somehow "unethical" is propounded by the 3rd-party publishers themselves.

As philreed stated earlier, the OGC and OGL is for content-sharing among publishers, much like the GPL regulate sharing computer codes among programmers.

The GPL isn't for regulating sharing of computer code among programmers. It's for keeping Free Software free. See the Free Software Foundation (creators of the GPL, www.fsf.org) for more info.

The legal mechanics behind the two licenses are very similar, but apparently the respective philosophies behind them are not even remotely alike. GPL means it free the modify, copy, and distribute. Your interpretation of the philosphy behind OGL is only freedom to scavenge, incorporate, and sell, and I disagree with that. I do not consider your use of OGL content more "ethical" just because you're making money off of it and I'm not.

But then, I'm a supporter of Open Source in computing, so I'm probably biased (it's also the reason I refuse to purchase or use 3rd-party content that isn't OGL).

 

[Pbartender]

Theoretically, what you say makes perfect sense. Put into practice, though, we see that the publically available SRD does not keep the core rulebooks + psionics from being wildly enriching for WotC. I, for one, certainly didn't buy the core books just so I could have beholders and mindflayers.

Yeah, but WotC is a bad example... They've got brand name recognition, and they're a part of a large corporation. That gives them a certain amount of security profit-wise. For the small publishers, it makes a much bigger difference, and those are the guys I worry about.

To make an analogy... There is an oft repeated arguement on this board and others about large on-line retailers selling large quatities of RPG books at huge discounts in order to undercut the competition. This tends draws customers and profits away from the small, local game store owners who can ill afford to lose the income.

Essentially, for a small RPG publisher, this is exactly what you are doing if you create a public free SRD of their material. You are providing for free what they are trying to sell.

It's completely legal, if you want to do it. I wouldn't even say that it's really unethical to do it. But you certainly won't make any friends amongst RPG publishers and designers, if you do.

I care if you do it... go right ahead. I my very personal and long considered opinion, it's just Bad Form, and I won't do it myself unless the publisher specifically gives me permission.

I don't like the idea that something is free only if you make money off of it. For one thing, it still doesn't make a return for the original producer (WotC)...

Actually, it does make a return for WotC, because they were clever enough to be very careful about what was not included in the SRD, and they were very clever about what you could not include in your 3rd party publication, if you wanted to put that little "D20" logo on your cover.

Namely, ability score generation, experience charts and level advancement. Those three key things can only be found in WotC products. If, for example, you want to play a Spycraft game, technically, you still have to buy a Player's Handbook.

Realistically, you can figure ability generation and experience out yourself, but originally that was the business plan behind the idea.

 

[takyris]

Honestly, as of right now, there is not one single SRD (3.5 books, d20 Modern, Urban Arcana) that I consult that my gaming group does not possess. That hasn't always been the case -- the SRD convinced us to get Urban Arcana, and somebody buckled under and got the 3.5 core books after we all realized how different some elements were. But the SRD helped sell.

I can see the argument against making an SRD that effectively makes 90% of somebody's product free when their intent was to make it usable by other companies, not available in such a form that no one need buy their book.

Personally, I would be the world's happiest camper if folks would make an SRD for their stuff that was protected in an area that only people who owned the book could get to. Now, as someone who's used a computer a few times, I know that user/password information would get out quickly, and there's not much of a compelling reason for companies to do this, since it doesn't earn them any more money than they already have. But it would be nice.

On the other hand, I've gotten scarily good at sussing out M&M power costs at work, sometimes from reading threads and sometimes from just crunching it in my head. "Well, Cosmic Power gives what, again? Flight, Immunity, Force Field, Energy Blast, Transmutation(which is 3, right?), so that's 2 plus... okay, I'm going with 8..."

 

[Halivar]

Yeah, but WotC is a bad example... They've got brand name recognition, and they're a part of a large corporation. That gives them a certain amount of security profit-wise. For the small publishers, it makes a much bigger difference, and those are the guys I worry about.

What you've just said is a good argument for why small 3rd-party publisher's should not open their content. The discussion, however (wink wink nudge nudge), was about whether it was ethical to publish a (an?) UA SRD, from a WotC product that will still sell on brand recognition, as you state.

 

[Pbartender]

What you've just said is a good argument for why small 3rd-party publisher's should not open their content.

That's not really up to the 3rd-party publisher...

OGL, 1.(d) "Open Game Content" means the game mechanic and includes the methods, procedures, processes and routines to the extent such content does not embody the Product Identity and is an enhancement over the prior art and any additional content clearly identified as Open Game Content by the Contributor, and means any work covered by this License, including translations and derivative works under copyright law, but specifically excludes Product Identity.

So, anything you use from WotC's SRDs is automatically OGC whether or not you want it to be. Any original rules you add are up to you to decide if its OGC, but you must make a clear delineation between what is and what isn't.

Not only that, but if you want to use the D20 logo, at least 5% (by word count or letter count) of the product's material must be OGC.

The discussion, however (wink wink nudge nudge), was about whether it was ethical to publish a (an?) UA SRD, from a WotC product that will still sell on brand recognition, as you state.

Actually, the original question was whether or not someone had planned on publishing a free UA SRD actually had. He hasn't, because he was asked not to by Andy Collins.

 

[Verequus]

I've discussed the topic with a friend and I had an idea. Like it has been stated, free distribution of OGC could result in loss of revenues. But on the other hand, everything, what is OGC, should be somehow available and this means also free distribution. Logically, there is a contradiction - which could be solved in this way:

After a certain period of time (two or three years?) it is implicitly allowed by every contributor, that his OGC can be accessed freely. Why that? The value of the OGC for the publisher doesn't stay constant - it becomes less and less because of two reasons. 1. If the material is popular, then other publishers will use it and thus there are more sources available, which reduce the income further. 2. If the material is not popular, then it has not much value per se. The period of time should be around the amount, which it takes to reduce the value three times by half.

The content, which will valuable after five or ten years, seems to a good candidate for IP. For example, Elminster from the Forgotten Realms is a good IP, but his stats aren't - they changed in every reincarnation of D&D and have some inherent date of expiry.

What do you think?

 

[Crothian]

Why should OGC be availible for free? It just seems you are making this assumption without reason.

 

[Halivar]

So, anything you use from WotC's SRDs is automatically OGC whether or not you want it to be. Any original rules you add are up to you to decide if its OGC, but you must make a clear delineation between what is and what isn't.

Emphasis is mine. That's exactly what I mean. You are not required to OGL any original material that does not derivate from the SRD.

Why should OGC be availible for free? It just seems you are making this assumption without reason.

Because the OGL says so. It's the rule that applies to all OGC. The OGL is the bible on OGC etiquette, because that's what the court is going to use if you get dragged into it over improper use of copyrighted materials. I also don't think for a second that WotC somehow "missed" that part of the license when they wrote it.

Besides, if it's not free for me to copy, modify, and distribute, then it shouldn't be free for 3rd-party publishers, either. Chances are "end users" do more for the game (from WotC's perspective; e.g. making them money) by inducting new players into the game (who go buy core rulebooks) than most 3rd-party publishers do filling a rack at the gaming store with cruft nobody wants or needs*.

Okay, okay; we can moot this argument. How about this: make up the UA SRD, and sell it for a penny. "Hey! They're publishers; it's okay, now!"

* Glittering generalization. May not apply in some cases. Restrictions may apply. Offer good while supplies last.