D&D (2024) WotC Announces April 22 Release For 2024 System Reference Documents

The System Reference Document 5.2--the tool which helps developers create third-party content using the Dungeons & Dragons core rules engine--will be released under the Creative Commons license on April 22nd.

Additionally, Wizards of the Coast will publish a Conversion Guide for updating game content from the 2014 edition to the 2024 edition. This guide will arrive at a later date.

The Free Rules document on D&D Beyond will also be updated with new D&D Beyond Basic Rules (2024).

The older 5.1 SRD, which is based on the 2014 edition of D&D, will also remain available under both Creative Commons and the Open Game License (OGL).

More information will be available on April 22nd, when the new SRD is released.

A copy of each System Reference Document is stored independently at A5ESRD.com, which includes the 5.1 SRD, the revised 3.5 SRD, and other System Reference Documents (including the enormous A5E SRD).

 

[Alzrius]

I can compare them by weight, by color, by nutrition, we just need to agree on what the metric is

You're citing an article that uses its own metric, and then saying it's a completely different metric.

Ultimately you are just using ‘open’ differently, we will have to disagree about how it should be used, I will continue using it just like I have done

Okay, in the meantime I'll continue using it like the TTRPG community has done for the last twenty-five years, but you do you.

 

[mamba]

You're citing an article that uses its own metric, and then saying it's a completely different metric.

I cited two articles, maybe that gives you an idea about how it generally is used. I could find many more if I wanted to… Given that you cited exactly zero, I’ll take mine over yours.

 

[Alzrius]

I cited two articles, maybe that gives you an idea about how it generally is used.

You cited two articles that compared the CC-BY to licenses that weren't the OGL, and then tried to hold them up as proof that the CC-BY was more open than the OGL, which isn't how supporting evidence works.

I could find many more if I wanted to… Given that you cited exactly zero, I’ll take mine over yours.

You have cited zero reports that the CC-BY is more open than the OGL also. The difference is that I haven't misrepresented anything the way you have.

 

[mamba]

You cited two articles that compared the CC-BY to licenses that weren't the OGL, and then tried to hold them up as proof that the CC-BY was more open than the OGL, which isn't how supporting evidence works.

yes it does, it explained how open is used, and we can use the same principle for licenses not used in the article.

More open = less restrictive, given that, is the OGL more or less open than CC-BY? There is only one correct answer given the metric.

I find it funny that you claim we cannot say which one is less open based on the articles while simultaneously claiming that the OGL is more open…

This will not go anywhere, keep using open incorrectly, just like you apparently have for 20+ years

 

[Alzrius]

yes it does, it explained how open is used, and we can use the same principle for licenses not used in the article.

No it doesn't. It was a comparison between specific licenses; you can't just say "well one of those is kind of like the OGL, so it counts."

More open = less restrictive, given that, is the OGL more or less open than CC-BY? There is only one correct answer given the metric.

More open = makes more open content. Given that, is the CC-BY more or less open than the OGL? There's only one correct answer given the metric.

I find it funny that you claim we cannot say which one is less open based on the articles while simultaneously claiming that the OGL is more open…

I find it funny you claim that we can draw a conclusion about the OGL by looking at an article which compares licenses which aren't the OGL.

This will not go anywhere, keep using open incorrectly, just like you apparently have for 20+ years

I agree that you not using the term "open" correctly will not get you anywhere. But hey, keep trying to change a term that's been used a certain way for over twenty years!

 

[see]

Oh, I so did not miss 1990s Slashdot debates over whether BSD was freer because you could use the covered code any way you wanted, or GPL was freer because people couldn't take the covered code and lock away their versions.

 

[CleverNickName]

For me, the worst part of the internet debates here on EN World is the assumption that if I disagree with certain people, it's because I didn't understand the topic or what they were saying. So they keep repeating themselves, and getting more and more frustrated when I still disagree.

No my dude, I understood you...you're just wrong.

 

[pemerton]

I find it funny you claim that we can draw a conclusion about the OGL by looking at an article which compares licenses which aren't the OGL.

How do you think the OGL differs from CC share alike, as far as this discussion of openness is concerned?

(Yes, everyone knows it is technically different, particularly in the way it handles Product Identity carve-outs. But how is it different fro present purposes?)

 

[Alzrius]

How do you think the OGL differs from CC share alike, as far as this discussion of openness is concerned?

(Yes, everyone knows it is technically different, particularly in the way it handles Product Identity carve-outs. But how is it different fro present purposes?)

It seems like you kind of answered your own question there.

Given that, I'm curious if you think there's no (meaningful) difference between the OGL and CC share-alike? Particularly given that you highlighted a notable point where they're dissimilar?

 

[pemerton]

Given that, I'm curious if you think there's no (meaningful) difference between the OGL and CC share-alike? Particularly given that you highlighted a notable point where they're dissimilar?

In the context of the discussion - that is, how to measure "open-ness" - if someone thinks that CC-BY is more open than CC-share alike, then for exactly the same reasons they should think that CC-BY is more open than the OGL. Because the nature of the restrictions those two licences (OGL and share alike) impose on downstream users is much the same, except that OGL is even more restrictive (by prohibiting the use of product identity).