Community

Jinglehopper wrote:

Do any of these entries violate the GSL? If so, how do I reference the powers correctly?

Many thanks in advance for an answer.

As many of the responses to these types of post begin, if you have questions that require an "official" answer, you should probably not ask on a message board. Rather, you should contact WotC directly or consult a lawyer versed in such matters.

That being said, the way I read the GSL, and I think this part is pretty self-explanatory, is that if you provide information from any of the sources covered in the GSL that would allow the user of your 3P product to bypass the purchase of the related WotC product, then you are in violation.

For example, you can reference the names of the powers, but just giving the mechanical effects instead of the whole entry would be in violation because a person buying your product would not have to buy a Player's Handbook to find out what the powers do; if you have a PH, you can write out the power on index cards or whatever have you in order to use it, but with your statblock the PH is not necessary.

joydyhee wrote:

As many of the responses to these types of post begin, if you have questions that require an "official" answer, you should probably not ask on a message board. Rather, you should contact WotC directly or consult a lawyer versed in such matters.

What is an official forum, if not a conduit for communication between a company and its customers? Also, I believe that others have tried to contact WOTC customer service re: this issue and recieved no response. I'm not going to consult a lawyer for an issue that should have a clear policy by the designers of the GSL.

joydyhee wrote:

For example, you can reference the names of the powers, but just giving the mechanical effects instead of the whole entry would be in violation because a person buying your product would not have to buy a Player's Handbook to find out what the powers do; if you have a PH, you can write out the power on index cards or whatever have you in order to use it, but with your statblock the PH is not necessary.

In no way does having an efficient statblock prevent people from buying the PHB to create their own characters. I do not believe that anyone would try to reverse engineer a complete character from entries in an NPC statblock. If they are so hellbent on stealing content, they would just download the pdf which is readily available if you look for it.

What you're suggesting, that a simple power name reference in a statblock is the only allowable recourse, would be unfortunately clunky. I can't believe that WOTC is trying to sabotage 3PP so disastrously, by forcing DMs to make their own power cards for each NPC.

Again, I just want a clarification on what WOTC policy is regarding NPCs.

Jinglehopper wrote:

I am looking for an official response about how the GSL should be used in regards to NPCs.

In a product that I'm contributing to, we have several statblocks of NPCs which use powers from the PHB.  The GSL prevents reprinting of powers, I understand that, but does it violate the GSL if I include the mechanical effects of power in the statblock?

My interpretation is that all the information needed to "run" the NPC or monster should be allowable in the statblock without needing to reference other books.  Is that wrong?  I'd think that the GSL is there to foster well-written 3PP and requiring that a DM have 2 (or more) books open to run an encounter is counter-productive.

For example, here as some powers which are part of an NPC fighter's statblock:

Precise Strike (standard; encounter) • Weapon
    +17 vs. AC; 1d8 + 7 damage
Dizzying Blow (standard; daily) • Reliable
    +13 vs. AC; 3d8 + 9 damage, and immobilized (save ends).
Unbreakable (immediate reaction; when hit by an attack; encounter)
    Fighter reduces the damage by 8 hit points.
Combat Challenge
    Every time Fighter attacks an enemy, whether that attack hits or misses, Fighter can mark that target. The mark lasts until the end of Fighter's next turn. In addition, whenever an adjacent enemy shifts, Fighter makes a melee basic attack against that enemy (as an immediate interrupt).


Do any of these entries violate the GSL?  If so, how do I reference the powers correctly?

Many thanks in advance for an answer.

Everything looks fine except combat challenge since that is pulling the full text entry verbatim from the DMG.

Jinglehopper wrote:

What is an official forum, if not a conduit for communication between a company and its customers? Also, I believe that others have tried to contact WOTC customer service re: this issue and recieved no response. I'm not going to consult a lawyer for an issue that should have a clear policy by the designers of the GSL.

I would say a forum is a conduit for everyone to have input; the company may or may not respond. Scott seems to be pretty good at responding, which he did in this thread, but his response did not state official policy for all NPCs. It analyzes the one you have listed. From that, you may be willing to extrapolate that back to all NPCs. Not being able to get in touch with CS is a problem, I agree, but it is not a reason to not try that route.

Jinglehopper wrote:

In no way does having an efficient statblock prevent people from buying the PHB to create their own characters. I do not believe that anyone would try to reverse engineer a complete character from entries in an NPC statblock. If they are so hellbent on stealing content, they would just download the pdf which is readily available if you look for it.

What you're suggesting, that a simple power name reference in a statblock is the only allowable recourse, would be unfortunately clunky. I can't believe that WOTC is trying to sabotage 3PP so disastrously, by forcing DMs to make their own power cards for each NPC.

I stand corrected; I did not reference that you can use the specific mechanical expression for that NPC for the powers, as you clearly have. Writing out the power, flavor, and then showing the calculation would be invalid.

To address your other point about stealing, however, it is not about the consumer stealing the PH so much as the 3PP providing an avenue for the consumer to avoid buying the PH. for example, as Scott pointed out, your entry of Combat Challenge would not be appropriate. As written, someone who picked up your product would not need the PH to find out what CC does because it is spelled out. Actually, I believe the response given by thurak is how the GSL states the handling of such instances.

Jinglehopper wrote:

Again, I just want a clarification on what WOTC policy is regarding NPCs.

Hopefully you can get in touch with Scott and get your official response. Perhaps you would be so kind as to post it here as well so we can all benefit from it.