BREAKING NEWS: This just happened! (DMsGuild)

[Gonzoron of the FoS]

Also of note: it's only 5e. Lots of people are still using other rulesets, and we'll continue supporting those here.

[alhoon]

And if you use your own, then someone else can use it.

Not unless you sell it for that purpose. I always use public domain though, so ...

[Le Noir Faineant]

Cause we like sharing our ideas with the world? The same reason this site exists I would say.

No. You shouldn't want to do that because it would be a bad deal for you.

I commented on the different issues I see with the DmsG over here (as Raphael Pinthus):

http://odd74.proboards.com/thread/11523 ... ters-guild

TLDR: The DMsG is, judging at least from the documentation that was available when I dug into this a month ago, more of a letter of intent than an actual public licensing contract. It sure facilitates the submission and publication of content, but nearly all questions concerning intellectual property rights, and author rights, in general, are either negative to the user, or still left open. - Unless WotC has supplemented substantial additional documentation that I am not aware of, that is. And that would have to be more than Tweets or Reddit posts, for me.

It is not profitable at all (but neither is giving things out for free) but it is very rewarding.

It's not about the act of sharing, or writing for a shared universe, in general. It's about this license agreement, in particular. I was actually pretty psyched when I first heard the news, but it's just simply no good. The new OGL, so-so. The DMsGL, as I see it, outright bad.

And as to the reward, I honestly don't know, old friend. If it's not about the financial aspect, how is what, say, the Frat does here, any different? The DMsG gives you a bigger platform, yes, but you need to *kind of* sign off your intellectual property rights, in exchange. So, I'd be very careful about it.

For Jester, for example, with his 5e conversion, the DMsG seems a viable option; but if you're an independent designer who has a publishing-worthy manuscript for an adventure, there are so many, way, way better ways than the DMsG to get it to the people. Probably, they require more energy, and are not as prominent, but at least you stay captain on your own ship.

[Jester of the FoS]

An edited version of my Ravenloft document is live:
http://www.dmsguild.com/product/176659/ ... -the-Mists

Cut a little extra text out, information that was fun in the free document but unneeded. Or content I might have already released (like the feats).

I guess I have to double down and get the monster book published now. That'll be harder since I should strip out any material other people have done, since I'm selling them.

[Jester of the FoS]

JUST ONE THING PEOPLE!
don't forget our home. I fully intend to keep supporting Quoth the Raven that has been here for ... is it 12 years? 13? During the good times and the bad.
And of course make free stuff for DMGuild. But my first and foremost loyalty is to our fraternity.

That.

Besides, the pay and the intellectual property rules for the DMsG are pretty miserable. Why would anybody really want to do that?!

At 50%, it's only 10% less what you get from DriveThru.

I've put up some content I made for fun on my website, selling for 50 cents, and I've made over a hundred bucks.

But second, because I think it will hurt the fans on the long run: Before, we were possible collaborators; now, we are all potential competitors. It's already difficult to assemble teams that work pro bono, and WotC's policy has just made it even harder.

We were *always* potential competitors. We were *always* giving away content they would charge for.
Ravenloft is THEIR playground. It's their toys we're playing with. This whole site and every issue of Quoth the Raven is problematic legally because we own none of the rights. It's the same quagmire as fanfic or fan movies.

But now they're not only letting us play with their toys, share that content without crossing "the line" but also potentially make money.
It's huge.

It doesn't change what we're doing here. It's additive. A new option. We can now keep doing what we're doing and keep out head down and hope we don't draw lawyer aggro (as always) and we can publish content for a wider audience, either giving it away or selling it.

[mason]

Ah, I see it. I might grab it since its only 3$ and might encourage others to do more quality content. I don't see how people expect to charge a dollar for a feat. How did manage to get to use the Ravenloft logo?

[Jester of the FoS]

How did manage to get to use the Ravenloft logo?

I made my own that was meant to look simmilar but evoke the 5e streak on the side. Designed it for Quoth the Raven back in 2014.
But, looking at it now, it's a little too similar... I might change it.

[alhoon]

but if you're an independent designer who has a publishing-worthy manuscript for an adventure, there are so many, way, way better ways than the DMsG to get it to the people. Probably, they require more energy, and are not as prominent, but at least you stay captain on your own ship.

Yeah, that's absolutely true. If you're a designer, DMGuild is no good. If you're a fan that throws some ideas and want to share them, DMGuild is good.

[alhoon]

I guess I have to double down and get the monster book published now. That'll be harder since I should strip out any material other people have done, since I'm selling them.

Ahem... before you do that, please remember that some of us contributed there.
I intend to use some of the NPCs and monsters I made for the FoS document of monsters.

[Jester of the FoS]

I guess I have to double down and get the monster book published now. That'll be harder since I should strip out any material other people have done, since I'm selling them.

Ahem... before you do that, please remember that some of us contributed there.
I intend to use some of the NPCs and monsters I made for the FoS document of monsters.

When I say "strip out" I mean "copy the file to my desktop and remove any monster I didn't write or rewrite". I'm not touching the original file and will likely be adding more monsters before I'm done.

[Jester of the FoS]

I think the fan sites (fraternity, areas.org, etc) should weigh out all the options before going whole hog on publishing everything to dms guild. It offers a lot of great opportunities (easier to get a print on demand copy, can charge for things, access to wotc ip) but everything you put in there can also be used by someone else. It's almost like an ogl for wotc ip.

I don't see a problem with that.

I get to write an adventure and use monsters someone else has written. I get to play in the settings without legal worries.
I retain my copyright and IP, but other people get to use them. Seems pretty win-win.

It does mean if I have an awesome adventure idea, I do need to be sure where I want to publish it, since DMsGuild is exclusive (I can't put it anywhere else).
But it's pretty much a site for fans and fan products, i.e. people who cannot publish anywhere else.

Will you ever be able to use the ravenloft logo on there? And if not, why not?

If WotC adds that logo to any of the templates then yes.

But likely no. Because they don't want to create confusion between fan works and the actual official books released for 2e, which are also sold on the Guild.

Plus artwork considerations. You can only use what's on there unless you provide your own or public domain. And if you use your own, then someone else can use it.

They removed artwork and maps from that clause. Within the first week. Really, as soon as they could once that loophole was spotted.
You're no longer sharing art.

The DMsG is, judging at least from the documentation that was available when I dug into this a month ago, more of a letter of intent than an actual public licensing contract.

The full terms are in the Community Content Agreement, which you can read through and sign when you enter a title. The documentation released was really the non-legalese versions for people who were going to click "accept" without reading.

It sure facilitates the submission and publication of content, but nearly all questions concerning intellectual property rights, and author rights, in general, are either negative to the user, or still left open. - Unless WotC has supplemented substantial additional documentation that I am not aware of, that is. And that would have to be more than Tweets or Reddit posts, for me.

You retain copyright. The licence doesn't change that.
You just allow anyone else using DMsGuild to use your copyrighted content.

In exchange, you get to use any and all material for the D&D rule sets, not just the stuff in the SRD. And "portions and elements of Dungeons & Dragons campaign settings". And make money doing so.

The second part is comparable to Paizo's Community Use Policy, except it doesn't have to be free.
The first part means if you, oh, converting Red Hand of Doom to 5e and need to use a drake, you can use one from another product rather than making your own.
If you so desire, you can withdraw your work from sale, rework the document (i.e. strip out any WotC material) and sell it elsewhere. Anyone using the material gets to keep doing so, though.

The new OGL, so-so. The DMsGL, as I see it, outright bad.

There is no new OGL. They're using the old OGL from 2000.

And as to the reward, I honestly don't know, old friend. If it's not about the financial aspect, how is what, say, the Frat does here, any different?

The difference is what we're doing is technically illegal.
WotC has a trademark on the terms "Ravenloft" and copyright on related characters and story elements that we're using. They could shut this whole site down in a heatbeat if they so desired.
They don't because:
a) we make no money
b) we effectively advertisement for them for free
c) it would cause a negative reaction from the D&D fanbase

We can't even ask for donations to keep the site running. We've been operating at a financial loss for a decade.

but if you're an independent designer who has a publishing-worthy manuscript for an adventure, there are so many, way, way better ways than the DMsG to get it to the people. Probably, they require more energy, and are not as prominent, but at least you stay captain on your own ship.

If you're an independent publisher, you can post things on DriveThruRPG instead. Or host on your own website, as you might have storefront software.
But there's not many independent publishers like that, and most of them are already doing so. And they have their own settings and content and don't need to use WotC's stuff.
All the stuff that costs hundreds of dollars to set-up and maintain.

DMsGuild is really for new people. People who don't have the reputation. People who are building up to having a website. People who don't have a setting they can publish in.
The big advantages are you get to play with WotC's IP and the full rules. Which is great if you want to tell that Mind Flayer adventure or a side quest to Rage of Demons or write some campaign content for Ravenloft of Al Qadim. That's the big advantage.
Or just for those people who really don't understand the nuances of the OGL and don't want to be shut down.

[alhoon]

Eh... that probably got through wrong. What I meant was:
"Jester, although I plan to release them separately, feel free to include my stuff in your monster manual and I wish you all success to it. Please add a "thank you alhoon (Andy Pav)" in the end. If you'd be so gracious to put a "some parts of this document will be recreated by alhoon in one of his contributions" I would ever be thankful."

I never, ever meant to discredit your character or your work.
So you can tell Dru to back down. She's looking me way too funny.

[Jester of the FoS]

Eh... that probably got through wrong. What I meant was:
"Jester, although I plan to release them separately, feel free to include my stuff in your monster manual and I wish you all success to it. Please add a "thank you alhoon (Andy Pav)" in the end. If you'd be so gracious to put a "some parts of this document will be recreated by alhoon in one of his contributions" I would ever be thankful."

I never, ever meant to discredit your character or your work.
So you can tell Dru to back down. She's looking me way too funny.

That will make things much easier on me. Thanks.
I'll be happy to give you a co-author credit.

[alhoon]

The first part means if you, oh, converting Red Hand of Doom to 5e and need to use a drake, you can use one from another product rather than making your own.

Wait. Waaaait... is it legal to publish 5e adaptions of 2e stuff??? Are you sure?
Could one for example post a 5e adaption of Ravenloft adventure like Shadowborn or Death-adventures etc?
And if that's possible... can someone here with more time than me please do it?

[Jester of the FoS]

The first part means if you, oh, converting Red Hand of Doom to 5e and need to use a drake, you can use one from another product rather than making your own.

Wait. Waaaait... is it legal to publish 5e adaptions of 2e stuff??? Are you sure?
Could one for example post a 5e adaption of Ravenloft adventure like Shadowborn or Death-adventures etc?
And if that's possible... can someone here with more time than me please do it?

Kinda.

Updates have been confirmed as okay by Mike Mearls in a Reddit AMA. And it's mentioned here.

You can do anything with WotC's IP. Reference any adventure, sourcebook, character, novel, etc. So long as you stick to the graphics/art provided or provide your own.

So you could provide a conversion guide to an adventure, providing encounter-by-encounter changes along with stats for NPCs, new rules elements, and the like. But the original adventure has to be required for play. It's additive and shouldn't be a complete replacement.

But, really, since converting is pretty darn simple, you should probably add or improve the adventure with additional content.