|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
addict
Joined: Jan 2021
|
Correct me please if I'm wrong, but Pathfinder was based on the 3.5 SRD, which was complete enough to look like D&D still, and Pathfinder can now stand alone. The 5.1, is very bare bones.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Mar 2020
|
Your information may be better than mine, Pathfinder may now standalone. My source for Pathfinder pays WotC a percentage of sales was someone who sounded confident on a forum 
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Jan 2021
|
Your information may be better than mine, Pathfinder may now standalone. My source for Pathfinder pays WotC a percentage of sales was someone who sounded confident on a forum I'd have to get a copy of the book but I'm almost positive (after researching the SRDs) that the 3.5 SRD creating D&Ds largest competitor was an oops.
|
|
|
|
|
|
old hand
|
|
old hand
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Your information may be better than mine, Pathfinder may now standalone. My source for Pathfinder pays WotC a percentage of sales was someone who sounded confident on a forum I don't think this is true, though I have no proof. Pathfinder was as far as I know based on the 3.5 SRD, which was free. At your table the rules can deviate as much as your group wishes.
The license is for the Forgotten Realms. Isn't the license also for the non-SRD rules? Most of the subclasses, all the feats except for Grappler, etc? E.g., the only Fighter SRD subclass is Champion, so the license allows Larian to use Battlemaster. This is especially relevant since Larian wants to give the players options, and Champion Fighter is the complete opposite of this... It is and it isn't. Mechanics like subclasses and feats and such are in a very grey area, legal-wise. I don't think there's a lot WotC could do if somebody were to recreate the Eldritch Knight subclass or the Lucky feat, for example. But the IPs and trademarks are much more legally "tangible" if you get what I mean. They're defensible and easily recognisable. They're big selling points.
Optimistically Apocalyptic
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Jan 2018
|
Your information may be better than mine, Pathfinder may now standalone. My source for Pathfinder pays WotC a percentage of sales was someone who sounded confident on a forum I'd have to get a copy of the book but I'm almost positive (after researching the SRDs) that the 3.5 SRD creating D&Ds largest competitor was an oops. I actually read an article once that stated WotC considers SRD a success because it did exactly what it intended to do, expand the tabletop audience. I can’t vouch for the validity of that, but D&D has expanded significantly since than so there might be something to it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Sep 2020
|
At your table the rules can deviate as much as your group wishes.
The license is for the Forgotten Realms. Isn't the license also for the non-SRD rules? Most of the subclasses, all the feats except for Grappler, etc? E.g., the only Fighter SRD subclass is Champion, so the license allows Larian to use Battlemaster. This is especially relevant since Larian wants to give the players options, and Champion Fighter is the complete opposite of this... It is and it isn't. Mechanics like subclasses and feats and such are in a very grey area, legal-wise. I don't think there's a lot WotC could do if somebody were to recreate the Eldritch Knight subclass or the Lucky feat, for example. But the IPs and trademarks are much more legally "tangible" if you get what I mean. They're defensible and easily recognisable. They're big selling points. Makes sense. I imagine it strongly depends on the amount copied. If someone recreated a Eldritch Knight without D&D 5e license and called it a "Mage Knight", WotC probably couldn't do that much about it. But if someone recreated ~all of the 5e subclasses and feats, then WotC would have a good copyright infringement argument even if all the names were changed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
OP
addict
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Let’s hope some game journalists jump on here soon and see what people really think about Patch 4 and how much Larian is listening to us.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Feb 2020
|
Let’s hope some game journalists jump on here soon and see what people really think about Patch 4 and how much Larian is listening to us. I guess they had proven that they just don't listen anyone else than those saying "best game ever". Sorry about that, frustration.
Last edited by Maximuuus; 17/02/21 08:28 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|
addict
|
|
addict
Joined: Dec 2020
|
Let’s hope some game journalists jump on here soon and see what people really think about Patch 4 and how much Larian is listening to us. I don’t read articles for their opinions. A lot are bought and paid for. I do read for features and technical aspects but even that I don’t take it seriously.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
