PDA

View Full Version : 4th Ed. SRD Question



SpikeFightwicky
2009-11-05, 07:48 AM
I did a bit of looking around and found out that there's a 4th edition SRD out there somewhere. Was it released like the 3.5 one (in RTF documents)? If so, is there an HTML version of it? If not, are they letting people make their own (like I did for the d20 Modern SRD)?

I did a forum search and could not find any news pertaining to my question.

(Also, I can't access WotC from my current connection)

Kurald Galain
2009-11-05, 08:06 AM
In a deliberate move away from their procedures for 3.X, the SRD for 4E contains only a list of powers, feats, etc, not their actual content. It is (to my knowledge) only available from the WOTC website.

Kaiyanwang
2009-11-05, 08:21 AM
Welcome to the new WotC policy. Sorry. Really.

SpikeFightwicky
2009-11-05, 08:48 AM
Welcome to the new WotC policy. Sorry. Really.

Ugh... That's most unfortunate. Did they change the policy on their pre-existing SRDs, or are they still available as they were before?

Tiki Snakes
2009-11-05, 08:49 AM
I must say, though it is different, I do personally get a lot of use from the DnD Compendium. It helps I'm an insider, though.

Indon
2009-11-05, 09:00 AM
Ugh... That's most unfortunate. Did they change the policy on their pre-existing SRDs, or are they still available as they were before?

Wizards' can't un-release the 3rd edition SRD.

They just aren't releasing them for their new versions.

Dragonmuncher
2009-11-05, 09:16 AM
In a deliberate move away from their procedures for 3.X, the SRD for 4E contains only a list of powers, feats, etc, not their actual content. It is (to my knowledge) only available from the WOTC website.

Wait, so does it say what the powers DO, or is it just a list of powers and the like.


If the latter, what possible use would that be?

Indon
2009-11-05, 09:23 AM
It's not really meant to be of use. Wizards doesn't want people able to use their game content without buying things.

And they certainly don't want anyone building on their game content, Pathfinder-style.

Arguably, it's good business sense, so I guess I can't fault them. They are, after all, just a business, built to get people's money and for no other reason.

Kurald Galain
2009-11-05, 09:24 AM
Wizards' can't un-release the 3rd edition SRD.
Indeed. A common clause in open sourcing anything is that the original copyright holder cannot in any way revoke it.


Wait, so does it say what the powers DO, or is it just a list of powers and the like.
The latter. And no, it isn't very useful. I suppose it means that if you're a third-party source book writer (of which honestly there aren't all that many) you could print something like "Sample NPC: uses the <foo> power from the player's handbook" without being sued. Then again you could do that anyway. I suspect that the 4E SRD is mainly there so that WOTC can claim "yes, we still have an SRD just like in 3E, honest!"

Dragonmuncher
2009-11-05, 09:26 AM
It's not really meant to be of use. Wizards doesn't want people able to use their game content without buying things.

And they certainly don't want anyone building on their game content, Pathfinder-style.

Arguably, it's good business sense, so I guess I can't fault them. They are, after all, just a business, built to get people's money and for no other reason.

Yeah, I get that, I was just curious about the point of even releasing anything if it's just a useless list.

"Oh... let's see... ok, the SRD says that you can cast Toxic Cloud of Doom next level"

"What's that do?"

"I dunno."

Blackfang108
2009-11-05, 09:36 AM
Yeah, I get that, I was just curious about the point of even releasing anything if it's just a useless list.

"Oh... let's see... ok, the SRD says that you can cast Toxic Cloud of Doom next level"

"What's that do?"

"I dunno."

"It creates butterflies." :smallbiggrin:

Mando Knight
2009-11-05, 12:50 PM
The latter. And no, it isn't very useful. I suppose it means that if you're a third-party source book writer (of which honestly there aren't all that many) you could print something like "Sample NPC: uses the <foo> power from the player's handbook" without being sued. Then again you could do that anyway. I suspect that the 4E SRD is mainly there so that WOTC can claim "yes, we still have an SRD just like in 3E, honest!"

It's exactly what it claims it is, though. It's a system reference document, an index of defined terms that you can call to and others will be able to look up. The Character Builder summary is basically that on a character level, as well...

lesser_minion
2009-11-05, 01:05 PM
The 4e SRD is deliberately designed to be of use solely in creating 4e-compatible products under the GSL. It cannot be used to create a standalone product (any more than that would be allowed)

WotC have now decided that they are not particularly keen on releasing their work under an open-source license, essentially.

Despite the need for open gaming possibly being greater than it was nine years ago...

SpikeFightwicky
2009-11-05, 01:12 PM
The 4e SRD is deliberately designed to be of use solely in creating 4e-compatible products under the GSL. It cannot be used to create a standalone product (any more than that would be allowed)

WotC have now decided that they are not particularly keen on releasing their work under an open-source license, essentially.

Despite the need for open gaming possibly being greater than it was nine years ago...

Did WotC release any kind of press release about the whole reasoning behind this? I always found the 3.5 SRD was a magnificient tool, and it never stopped me or anyone else in my group from purchasing any of their books. I never payed much attention to the 3rd party sourcebooks, so I don't know if it was cutting into profits. My group tried Arcana Unearthed (the Monte Cooke one, not the D&D Supplement), but after a few sessions, we decided it was too easy to break.

Does that mean that all non WotC 4th ed. products will have to be done through WotC, or that they just won't bother doing any of that at all? (So no more stuff like Call of Cthulhu d20, Dark*Matter d20 and others?)

Indon
2009-11-05, 01:18 PM
I'm not aware of any 4E-based games in the same sense as the D20 system.

lesser_minion
2009-11-05, 01:32 PM
Does that mean that all non WotC 4th ed. products will have to be done through WotC, or that they just won't bother doing any of that at all? (So no more stuff like Call of Cthulhu d20, Dark*Matter d20 and others?)

No, it doesn't. WotC have produced the GSL for that exact purpose.

However, to use it for anything but a campaign setting (or similar material) is likely to be a bad move - WotC have the right to instruct you to destroy your entire inventory, and if your work is of half-decent quality, the only way that is likely to happen is if you end up treading on their toes. That isn't going to happen when they don't have the rights to the IP you are using.

The main obstacle to this seems to be the clause that prohibits you from producing 3e and 4e versions of the same product line, because you have to procure a separate agreement from WotC to even have a chance of them not shutting down all of your 3e material.

Aron Times
2009-11-05, 01:36 PM
Most third-party 3.5 books were crap, anyway, so we're not missing much.

Akal Saris
2009-11-05, 01:44 PM
To be fair, the d20SRD.org site got me much more into D&D 3.5 rules than before I learned about it, since it was very intuitive for me to open up 5-6 pages in a web browser, rather than flipping through my PHB, DMG, and MM.

I went from vaguely knowing the rules to being a pretty solid expert on them, really - something that hasn't happened yet with 4E, because I don't really have all of the sources in a convenient place, and I'm not going to pay a monthly fee for the DDI. Though for those with the spare cash, I'm sure the DDI is a very useful resource, like an expanded SRD.

Project_Mayhem
2009-11-05, 01:44 PM
Does that mean that all non WotC 4th ed. products will have to be done through WotC, or that they just won't bother doing any of that at all? (So no more stuff like Call of Cthulhu d20, Dark*Matter d20 and others?)

oh god, 4th ed. style Call of Cthulhu would be so lame. I think I was just sick in the back of my throat. Blech

lesser_minion
2009-11-05, 01:46 PM
oh god, 4th ed. style Call of Cthulhu would be so lame. I think I was just sick in the back of my throat. Blech

I suspect that such a product would entail a pretty thorough modification of the game rules, and would probably be a little lighter and less gritty than normal CoC, but I don't think there are any technical (i.e. not legal) obstacles to creating it.

Project_Mayhem
2009-11-05, 01:52 PM
I suspect that such a product would entail a pretty thorough modification of the game rules, and would probably be a little lighter and less gritty than normal CoC, but I don't think there are any technical (i.e. not legal) obstacles to creating it.

Well, being serious for a brief second, it would need such a massive rewrite that you would be basically using a different system. Yeah, you could do it, in the same way that if you modified any system enough you could get there. It would just be silly to use a system that fits the concept so poorly

Oracle_Hunter
2009-11-05, 01:56 PM
To be fair, the d20SRD.org site got me much more into D&D 3.5 rules than before I learned about it, since it was very intuitive for me to open up 5-6 pages in a web browser, rather than flipping through my PHB, DMG, and MM.

I went from vaguely knowing the rules to being a pretty solid expert on them, really - something that hasn't happened yet with 4E, because I don't really have all of the sources in a convenient place, and I'm not going to pay a monthly fee for the DDI. Though for those with the spare cash, I'm sure the DDI is a very useful resource, like an expanded SRD.
Actually, DDI is a fantastically useful resource - and one that can effectively be used by anyone with $10 in their pockets.

Why? Because $10 gets you one month's access to DDI - which includes an up-to-date Character Builder which remains on your computer even after your DDI license expires. This is important because all of the features used in creating a character (feats, powers, magical items, class mechanics) are now at your fingertips - all you need now are the core mechanics (PHB I) and maybe DMG I, and you've got yourself a game.

As a player, this is all you'd ever need. If you want to take advantage of newly released sourcebooks, you just pay another $10 and upgrade your Character Builder. Now, if you're a DM, you'll probably want to just buy Core I and maybe pay $10 for access to DDI's Monster Builder and similar resources whenever you're designing a campaign - but really, is that so unreasonable?

Mando Knight
2009-11-05, 02:09 PM
Now, if you're a DM, you'll probably want to just buy Core I and maybe pay $10 for access to DDI's Monster Builder and similar resources whenever you're designing a campaign - but really, is that so unreasonable?

Well, those, and perhaps the monster splats, like the Draconomicons or Open Grave, if you want to include a lot of those kinds of monsters in your game, simply because they're useful beyond just their statblocks.

Kurald Galain
2009-11-05, 02:09 PM
Well, being serious for a brief second, it would need such a massive rewrite that you would be basically using a different system. Yeah, you could do it, in the same way that if you modified any system enough you could get there. It would just be silly to use a system that fits the concept so poorly
Precisely. It would be very weird having Eldritch Abominations do 2d6 psychic damage + dazed (save ends). Cthulhu's stats in Chaosium are that every turn, 1d3 player characters die automatically...



Why? Because $10 gets you one month's access to DDI - which includes an up-to-date Character Builder which remains on your computer even after your DDI license expires.
Is that intentional, or is it a side effect that actually contradicts the EULA?

Mando Knight
2009-11-05, 02:19 PM
Precisely. It would be very weird having Eldritch Abominations do 2d6 psychic damage + dazed (save ends). Cthulhu's stats in Chaosium are that every turn, 1d3 player characters die automatically...

Perhaps not as godawful, but Tiamat is ridiculously hard for a standard party to even bloody, and the party I used was level 30, as in not the people normally driven insane by contact with an Elder Evil. If Tiamat fought a Heroic tier party, then she would be pulverizing at least one party member every turn, perhaps three or four depending on how they're clustered, which is roughly what you'd expect of an Elder Evil against a typical bunch of CoC characters.

Oracle_Hunter
2009-11-05, 02:20 PM
Is that intentional, or is it a side effect that actually contradicts the EULA?
If it's not intentional, then it was pretty dumb of them to have you install the client on your system rather than just access it over the internet. It shouldn't be that hard to put some sort of cut-out on the Character Builder that locks it if your account is expired - if that's what they wanted to do.

Duke of URL
2009-11-05, 02:55 PM
Wait, so does it say what the powers DO, or is it just a list of powers and the like.


If the latter, what possible use would that be?

It lists the 4e game terms that 3rd party publishers are allowed to reference for their GSL products. It is not intended to be a reference for players or referees.

Trog
2009-11-05, 04:29 PM
Here (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/welcome) is where you can download a copy of the 4e Game System License (GSL) and System Reference Document (SRD).

I've mostly abided by this to create an adventure (see link in my sig below to get to the blog where it's available for a free download) and I can tell you it is a bit of a pain. I had to make up a dozen new monsters instead of one because of the SRD.

Basically they've set it up so there is a core of things you can use and refer to and beyond that you have to make it all yourself. So they give you a few monsters out of the MM and MM2 to play with but not many. They give you enough material to be able to make an adventure, basically. Which is good. The bad bit is then you have to do just as much work as they do to create something you can sell. As my blog explains I've opted not to do this for future installments for reasons that mainly involve my fun at home running my own gaming group.

In this sense WotC has stifled much of their competition in the 4e DnD business. This is, naturally, good for their own business. And I have to say I've been very impressed with the quality of stuff being put out for 4e as well as the incredible quantity of stuff. I cannot even hope to keep up as a player and DM much less an independent publisher of the stuff. So smart move on their part and, frankly, a good thing for the majority of people who play DnD since so much stuff is being produced out of a top notch game design house.

Not such a good thing for publishers though. Which is why I am doing the free publish by blog thing instead. More of a private DM to DM exchange of what I am doing with the 4e stuff regardless of license without giving away the farm. The SRD is way too restrictive imho. I mean I can say "use a Human Mage from the Monster Manual" but cannot say "use a Human Hexer from the Monster Manual 2" for example because the Human Hexer is not listed in the SRD. And if it's not listed there you cannot even refer to it by name. At all.

Oh and the clause that states you cannot continue to produce 3.x stuff and 4e stuff was, I believe, removed from the current document. They do make sure to catch anyone using 4e though in stating that they will stop publishing 4e things when 5e comes out. Or something like that. Again a smart business move on their part. Bit of a pain for everyone else I'd imagine. But it's their game and if you don't play by their rules I imagine they pick up their ball and go home with it. Bleh.

Mando Knight
2009-11-05, 05:12 PM
They give you enough material to be able to make an adventure, basically. Which is good. The bad bit is then you have to do just as much work as they do to create something you can sell

Which they give you to sell DDI (and the Adventure Tools, of which the Character Builder was the first), which is good because this time, it's a really sweet deal... but even better for WotC, because they're selling you stuff that has an extremely small per-unit cost...

Kurald Galain
2009-11-05, 06:08 PM
If it's not intentional, then it was pretty dumb of them to have you install the client on your system rather than just access it over the internet.
Well, yes. But given WOTC's overall lack of competence relating to things Internet, I wouldn't put that past them. For instance, look at what happened to Gleemax, or to the Electronic Gaming Table, or just look at their abhorrent new forums. So my question stands - is that intentional, or is it actually against the EULA? Because in the latter case, they may at any time decide to terminate it and sue people for ludicrous amounts of money.

Katana_Geldar
2009-11-05, 06:14 PM
Don't a lot of groups share a DDI subscription anyway and then just give each other the updates? I know this may be not very legal, but it's not that hard to do either despite Wizards paranoia recently.

Trog
2009-11-05, 06:17 PM
Which they give you to sell DDI (and the Adventure Tools, of which the Character Builder was the first), which is good because this time, it's a really sweet deal... but even better for WotC, because they're selling you stuff that has an extremely small per-unit cost...

Well as a player, yes.

As a publisher, no.

Basically you can only refer to and thus effectively use, as a publisher of 4e compatible anything, ONLY the things listed in the SRD. Period. No saying "get this off of DDI" or even "look in your Manual of the Planes" because you cannot say that and not violate the GSL agreement.

As a player or a DM at home, however, you can do whatever the hell you want.

Katana_Geldar
2009-11-05, 06:21 PM
You have heard what happened in Poland, trog?

Trog
2009-11-05, 06:26 PM
You have heard what happened in Poland, trog?
"Er... no? What happened in Poland?" he asked, not sure he wanted to hear the answer as the question sounded foreboding.

Katana_Geldar
2009-11-05, 06:49 PM
Wizards sued a guy over copyright and pulled a bunch of stuff off his PC.

Mystic Muse
2009-11-05, 06:57 PM
linksys required! by the way awesome Avatar Katana

Kurald Galain
2009-11-05, 06:58 PM
Wizards sued a guy over copyright and pulled a bunch of stuff off his PC.

Got a link? Wasn't this one of those cases where they sued for $100k or more?

Trog
2009-11-05, 07:02 PM
*Finds the press release (http://ww2.wizards.com/Company/Press/?doc=20090406) after a quick Google search. Reads it.*

And they should sue for something like that. That's pirating, basically. So good for them.

I'm not doing anything of the sort. If I mention anything on my blog that is outside the SRD it will simply be "use [monster name] found in [WotC book or publication you will have to pay WotC to see/use just as I am/have]. I would never reprint a monster or anything like that as I know that would be a lesser version of the same sort of crime. What I am doing in no way is going to hurt their business or violate any copyright laws any more than, say, discussing 4e DnD on these forums do. Which is to say not at all.

So no worries. :smallwink:

Boci
2009-11-05, 07:28 PM
*Finds the press release (http://ww2.wizards.com/Company/Press/?doc=20090406) after a quick Google search. Reads it.*

And they should sue for something like that. That's pirating, basically. So good for them.

I agree with this, but:

“Violations of our copyrights and piracy of our products hurt not only Wizards of the Coast’s financial health but also the health of whole gaming community including retailers and players,”

I mean come on. How do free sourcebooks hurt players? I know its illegal and that they deserve to be sued, you do not have to tell me what they are doing will be bad for me to get my support on that issue.

Katana_Geldar
2009-11-05, 07:31 PM
Poor quality sourcebooks maybe? Some of the pdfs I have seen leave much to be desired.

Boci
2009-11-05, 07:33 PM
Poor quality sourcebooks maybe? Some of the pdfs I have seen leave much to be desired.

Its free. Unless they actually edited pages to give misleading information bad quality is not going to be bad for you as player. Is the illegal copies are so bad quality they are unusable you can just buy a legal copy.

lesser_minion
2009-11-05, 08:03 PM
Well, being serious for a brief second, it would need such a massive rewrite that you would be basically using a different system. Yeah, you could do it, in the same way that if you modified any system enough you could get there. It would just be silly to use a system that fits the concept so poorly

You'd be keeping the game engine and re-writing powers, classes and monsters.

That's enough to completely avoid "Cthulhu does 2d6 psychic damage and ongoing 5, save ends".

It would be a lot less gritty, because dropping powers would mess things up a bit, but it would work fine.

Trog
2009-11-05, 08:05 PM
I agree with this, but:

“Violations of our copyrights and piracy of our products hurt not only Wizards of the Coast’s financial health but also the health of whole gaming community including retailers and players,”

I mean come on. How do free sourcebooks hurt players? I know its illegal and that they deserve to be sued, you do not have to tell me what they are doing will be bad for me to get my support on that issue.
Well as I recall at Gen Con a couple of years back when they announced 4th Edition they were going to be allowing anyone who bought a book to get an online version of that book... PDF was likely the format they were considering? Not sure. I think they had PDF versions of their books available at first? Maybe? Anyway what with the pirating and all now no one can get them from WotC as they have put a halt to offering those. So that hurt the players.

Not that WotC shouldn't have seen that coming in the first place. Heck -I- saw that coming minutes after they announced it. "Technically savy antisocial nerds who are (for the most part) cheap cheap cheap is our consumer base. I know! Let's distribute our product electronically! Surely no one will torrent them" is what I imagine the WotC board room conversation went like prior to this decision. Oh well. :smalltongue:

At least they seem to be getting it right now with the DDI content. Needing to log onto their server through a program downloaded to your hard drive probably keeps a much better lock on things. ... I hope. I wouldn't want that to go away too. :smallfrown:

Plus I applaud them on their model for electronic distribution of Dungeon and Dragon magazines. They seem to be one of the few publishers who have pulled off going from print to electronic and getting cash for it. Bravo!

Roderick_BR
2009-11-05, 08:18 PM
Yeah, I get that, I was just curious about the point of even releasing anything if it's just a useless list.

"Oh... let's see... ok, the SRD says that you can cast Toxic Cloud of Doom next level"

"What's that do?"

"I dunno."
"Buy the book".

Really, the new SRD is nothing more than a tables content for their products now.

Kurald Galain
2009-11-06, 04:41 AM
“Violations of our copyrights and piracy of our products hurt not only Wizards of the Coast’s financial health but also the health of whole gaming community including retailers and players,”
That's propaganda, of course.

Interestingly, a recent study (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/illegal-downloaders-spend-the-most-on-music-says-poll-1812776.html) suggests that people who pirate music also spend more money buying music.

lesser_minion
2009-11-06, 07:58 AM
That's propaganda, of course.

Interestingly, a recent study (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/illegal-downloaders-spend-the-most-on-music-says-poll-1812776.html) suggests that people who pirate music also spend more money buying music.

The only way in which it did hurt players was by making WotC ridiculously paranoid about allowing their material to be distributed in electronic format.

While that study makes some sense to me, I'm not sure if it really 'shows' what you infer. The basic point that "we don't actually know how much piracy costs the industry because pirates actually might also make an effort to obtain the same music legally".

An interesting point about the music industry is that they seem to have actually switched to a mature solution, instead of using excessive digital restrictions management.

I'm not sure how WotC could really apply the same sort of solution here though - you can't exactly stream gaming materials.

oxinabox
2009-11-06, 08:08 AM
I'm not aware of any 4E-based games in the same sense as the D20 system.

There are some being worked on ... unless they've been abandoned; some company bought the liscence to project a game based on seven erikson's Malazan book of the fallen
(which was itself based on a game of ADnD and latter GURP - it's never m,ore aparent than when one of the mages uses create water to assinate a guard.)
ANd they were planning to uses the 4e system as a base.

idk where that artical is...

oxinabox
2009-11-06, 08:16 AM
"Cthulhu does 22d6 psychic damage and ongoing 15,save ends and you become prone and dazed (cowering),
afteraffect: you take 50 psycic damage, and are stunned".

.

fixed it for you.

also: once perencounter: cthulhu may eat 1/3 your party, this action autiomically succeeds. special: cthulhu may do this more than once per encounter.

SpikeFightwicky
2009-11-06, 08:27 AM
I was using CoC and Dark*Matter merely as examples :smallsmile:

Personally, I don't think 3.5 really did CoC justice (though I liked many of the changes they made to make PCs less epic and more down to earth), and I don't think either of them would really work in a 4th ed. system.

I guess a good thing (as has been mentioned) is that high quality stuff's being released. I remember when Warlord: Saga of the Storm d20 came out, I was happy as a clam (played the card game, and had 6 of my card ideas published in their 'player designed' set). They had a lot of interesting ideas, but when it came to crunchy stuff, it was all terrible. The monsters in their version of the MM all had incorrect stats (it was like they were confused with 3.0 and 3.5). And there were a few balance issues...

lesser_minion
2009-11-06, 08:39 AM
fixed it for you.

also: once perencounter: cthulhu may eat 1/3 your party, this action autiomically succeeds. special: cthulhu may do this more than once per encounter.

I said "Cthulhu does 2d6 psychic damage, ongoing 5, there is no ending" was something that would be avoided.

It would take some effort, and the tone of the game would be shifted some way away from surviving and probably closer to investigating, but I think it would be possible to create something that was recognisably d20 Call of Cthulhu for 4th Edition.

In any event, there was never any point statting up Cthulhu. This isn't WitchCraft.

Mando Knight
2009-11-06, 11:20 AM
At least they seem to be getting it right now with the DDI content. Needing to log onto their server through a program downloaded to your hard drive probably keeps a much better lock on things. ... I hope. I wouldn't want that to go away too. :smallfrown:

It doesn't require you to log onto their server unless you want to update the data, which, IMO, is fair, as you don't return your print magazines after you cancel the subscription, do you?

Trog
2009-11-06, 01:29 PM
It doesn't require you to log onto their server unless you want to update the data, which, IMO, is fair, as you don't return your print magazines after you cancel the subscription, do you?

Oh, it doesn't? Hmm... well I guess I have only used it the one time, actually (doing most of my foe building off of the guidelines in the DMG and comparing that to other monsters of the same role/level) and it did an update then and I had to log in so I assumed it required it every time... oh well. I guess that makes sense. It'd be cool if the program could still be used afterward, yes.