• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

WotC 2024 D&D Core Rules Will Be Added To SRD In 2025

SRD 5.2 will be released under Creative Commons next year.

Status
Not open for further replies.
IMG_3469.webp

The 2024 version of the D&D core rules will be included in an expanded version of the System Reference Document, and available to third parties via Creative Commons (though there is no mention of thr Open Gaming License). The new SRD 5.2 will be available early 2025 after the new Monster Manual has been released.

The new SRD will be localized in the languages which WotC supports.

Regarding the long-awaited SRDs for previous editions, WotC says that they will start reviewing those documents once the 2024 rulebooks are out.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Alzrius

The EN World kitten
Paizo was (and remains) extremely supportive of Open Gaming and are kind of an outlier in that regard.
I meant everyone else who made a Pathfinder product.
we seem to have a different understanding of what the point of making something Product Identity is. To me it simply means others cannot use it as Open Game Content and if they want to use an Orc Overlord, then they will have to come up with their own stats rather than copying mine.
The stats aren't yours, though. They're existing OGC that you're remixing and repurposing. They were OGC before you came along and fiddled with them, but they're game rules from the SRD.
If I wanted no one to be able to have an Orc Overlord, then I would need a trademark, which is something else entirely.
And because it's something else entirely, it's not really germane to this discussion. There's more to a trademark than just a name anyway (hence things like "trade dress").
it does when you want to stop others from using the name
Which isn't an issue when it comes to game mechanics, which are Open Game Content under the OGL.
well, you clearly are reading this very differently then because it says the opposite of what you claim, it says OGC can at most be what I do not tag as PI (I actually have to declare it as OGC in addition)
The "have" part of "you have to declare it OGC" is referring to something you're compelled to do when you use the OGL. As in, you're not in compliance with the license if you don't declare what's OGC and what's PI. And if it's game mechanics, then it has to be OGC, since those were already OGC before you used them (even if you tweak the mechanics in the stat block so that they're not like an existing stat block).
none of which I am using here, so.... as I said, you basically have to claim that I cannot use the 6 attributes for my monster without it becoming derivative, good luck with that
If you present a stat block, then you are using game mechanics. It's really that simple. And yes, using the six attributes of "Strength, Dexterity, Constitution, Intelligence, Wisdom, Charisma" (in that order), each with a numerical rating after them, probably means that you're using WotC's copyright (though if that's all that you're using, that's nebulous enough that you might be able to win in court on that alone...but if you're also using all the other aspects of an OGC stat block, then there's no ambiguity).
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
More nonsense. You're not saying it is legal, you are just saying no one gives a damn.

You CANNOT write a 3.5 supplement using the SRD released under the OGL and release it under CC.

For 5E, you wouldn't bother: the 5E SRD is already released under CC.
It's the reverse. Why couldn't you take something from the CC and release it into the OGL. What's the legal argument that you cannot do that?
 

Reynard

Legend
Supporter
It's the reverse. Why couldn't you take something from the CC and release it into the OGL. What's the legal argument that you cannot do that?
In order to release something into.the CC you are required to own the copyright to it. If you published something under the OGL you have by definition licensed some portion of it. You don't own it. Therefore, you can't release it under CC.

Do people think that the OGL somehow makes D&D rules public domain? Because that's not true.
 

Cadence

Legend
Supporter
In order to release something into.the CC you are required to own the copyright to it. If you published something under the OGL you have by definition licensed some portion of it. You don't own it. Therefore, you can't release it under CC.

Do people think that the OGL somehow makes D&D rules public domain? Because that's not true.

Right. @Mistwell isn't saying that. He agrees with you.

He is asking about the opposite. Taking something CC-BY and putting it also into OGL. So, for example, taking SRD 5.2 material and mixing it with PF 1e under the OGL, as long as you give proper credit/links that you also used the CC-BY material. Anyone using it would be under OGL, and would have to give CC-BY credit if they used the part of it that had CC-BY material.
 

Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
In order to release something into.the CC you are required to own the copyright to it. If you published something under the OGL you have by definition licensed some portion of it. You don't own it. Therefore, you can't release it under CC.

Do people think that the OGL somehow makes D&D rules public domain? Because that's not true.
What part of this are you not understanding. STOP mentioning releasing something INTO the CC. You're not grokking what's being said.

WOTC releases 5.5 into the CC. Get it - not you, not a third party, the actual copyright owner of the material releases it into the CC. Got it now?

You now use the CC, write something with that CC material, and add it to the OGL.

What is the legal argument that you cannot do that?
 

Reynard

Legend
Supporter
What part of this are you not understanding. STOP mentioning releasing something INTO the CC. You're not grokking what's being said.

WOTC releases 5.5 into the CC. Get it - not you, not a third party, the actual copyright owner of the material releases it into the CC. Got it now?

You now use the CC, write something with that CC material, and add it to the OGL.

What is the legal argument that you cannot do that?
I'm sorry I misunderstood you. But, go ahead, yell.
 


Mistwell

Crusty Old Meatwad (he/him)
I'm sorry I misunderstood you. But, go ahead, yell.
It was the fourth time we (Cadence and myself) said it. After you repeatedly rudely said what I was saying was nonsense. Felt pretty appropriate after four times.

So what's the legal argument that you can't do that? You said "The point is we should want to have both" in response to WOTC just releasing stuff into the CC. So what's the legal argument that someone cannot then take what WOTC puts into the CC for 5.5e, and releases it into the OGL for others to use so that you can then use both?
 

Reynard

Legend
Supporter
Right. @Mistwell isn't saying that. He agrees with you.

He is asking about the opposite. Taking something CC-BY and putting it also into OGL. So, for example, taking SRD 5.2 material and mixing it with PF 1e under the OGL, as long as you give proper credit/links that you also used the CC-BY material. Anyone using it would be under OGL, and would have to give CC-BY credit if they used the part of it that had CC-BY material.
I don't think CC gives you right over the thing? It isn't a declaration that it is in the public domain. That's a different thing. It just means whatever the license says, and CC-BY is a license.

Feels like a question for an actual IP lawyer, but my guess is that no random person is authorized to enter something released under CC into another separate license.
 


Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Remove ads

Top