Greyhawk Now Open for 3PP on DMs Guild

[jamesmishler]

Apparently, with Greyhawk being used as the sample setting in the new 2024 5E they are opening the campaign setting for 3PP publication on DMs Guild.

5E only, of course, but basic stat inclusions also count.

Now I just need to wait another 10 to 20 years for them to open up Mystara...

[Finarvyn]

I like Greyhawk a lot better than the Forgotten Realms, so I see this as a good thing.

I like Blackmoor better than Greyhawk, so like you I will probably have to wait another 10 to 20 years.

[DungeonDevil]

Oct 17, 2024 4:58:44 GMT -6 Finarvyn said:

I like Greyhawk a lot better than the Forgotten Realms, so I see this as a good thing.

I like Blackmoor better than Greyhawk, so like you I will probably have to wait another 10 to 20 years.

I too like BM (slightly) more than GH. I don't think I'll live long enough though.

[Punkrabbitt]

I got the original Greyhawk boxed set back in the early '80s and I really plumbed the depths of those guidebooks. I've tried to similarly assimilate Blackmoor as an adult, but it just never generated the same enthusiasm as Greyhawk did. Apparently I got boring as I got older.

[thegreyelf]

Oct 17, 2024 18:21:36 GMT -6 Punkrabbitt said:

I got the original Greyhawk boxed set back in the early '80s and I really plumbed the depths of those guidebooks. I've tried to similarly assimilate Blackmoor as an adult, but it just never generated the same enthusiasm as Greyhawk did. Apparently I got boring as I got older.

Yeah, I find as I get older I don't have the patience or drive to do as deep a dive into settings as I did back in my teens and 20s.

Personally, I prefer the Hyborian Age to all of them, and I have yet to see a truly stellar Conan RPG (well, except the one I run with Wasted Lands for my home group ) though the quick start rules for the upcoming Monolith ones are the most promising I've seen yet!)

Honestly, about the ONLY thing that could get me back to buying WotC D&D products would be if they got Conan.

[Maximus]

I'm still an old school Greyhawk guy. From the reviews I've seen of this new stuff, I'll stay that way.

[jeffb]

Joe Bloch ("Greyhawk Grognard" on various forums and youtube, as well as author of Adventures Dark & Deep) has released his DM and Player books for GH on The DM's Guild. His free versions were excellent- I suspect the pay versions are cleaned up and more professional/polished- I do believe he's made some changes/tweaks/expansions to each.

I don't have any real use for 5E stuff, but I will probably grab print copies when they become available just to support him and all he does to support the setting. Most of the material is useable with non 5E games (obviously, there are some 5E specific rules, like new subclasses, etc)

His intention is to show players new to GH (through 5E) the setting as it was intended to be, and sticking to classic GH themes.

[tombowings]

I want to love 5e. Unfortunately, when I tried figure out what I'd need to house rule in order to tolerate running a game using the system, my list of things to chance was 6 pages long (single spaced). I'm certainly fine with rewriting chunks of systems, but that project didn't seem to be worth the time and effort.

[jamesmishler]

The changes to Greyhawk in the 2024 DMG are minor.

Blackmoor is now known as Arn. I expect that is a trademark issue.

The Tiger Nomads, Wolf Nomads, Rovers of the Barrens, and Plains of the Paynims are now known by endonyms rather than exonyms. Like calling Germany, Deutschland. Makes sense when a character can be from that land.

The Tilvanot Peninsula is known as the Land of Shar and North Province is known as Aerdiaak. Blech. I understand not pasting "Scarlet Brotherhood" on a map made for players to see, but "Shar"? And "Aerdiaak"?

The text is mostly from the old Gazetteer. The only significant changes are:

Mentions of aasimar, tieflings, goliaths, and dragonborn, without rhyme or reason or any attempt to integrate them into the history of the setting. I expect that's left up to the individual DMs and the DMG 3PP folks, as they plan no further official products.

Also it looks like they alternated genders of the various names leaders, changing about half to women. This is causing conniptions in some corners, but as you do not need to change anything in your own campaign if you do not want to, it is a non-issue.

And that's about it, really. They added in the big dragon conspiracy as one of the Big Three campaign options, but no one needs to use it, so again, no big deal.

Altogether a good job, with minimal changes to make it more palatable to modern gamers.

[DungeonDevil]

Blackmoor is now known as Arn. I expect that is a trademark issue.

Arn. Heh. Perhaps also they were concerned that modern SJWs would think the toponym a slur. *eyeroll*

[Punkrabbitt]

Can I write Greyhawk stuff for Swords & Wizardry Whitebox?

[howandwhy99]

Oct 16, 2024 21:41:35 GMT -6 jamesmishler said:

Apparently, with Greyhawk being used as the sample setting in the new 2024 5E they are opening the campaign setting for 3PP publication on DMs Guild.

5E only, of course, but basic stat inclusions also count.

Now I just need to wait another 10 to 20 years for them to open up Mystara...

So it you are saying fan-made Gygaxian era Greyhawk can openly be published as long as the default statistics are 5.5?

I assume tagging on 1e appendices (their own property) is not out of legal bounds?

[jamesmishler]

Nov 8, 2024 20:25:47 GMT -6 Punkrabbitt said:

Can I write Greyhawk stuff for Swords & Wizardry Whitebox?

For your own personal use, of course.

For publication on Dungeon Master's Guild, no.

All fan/3PP products published on DMG have to be designed for use with 5E.

How that will work between 5E 2014 and 5E 2024 I do not know.

Here is the link to the rules for publishing on DMG:

help.dmsguild.com/hc/en-us/articles/12776909822615-Dungeons-Dragons-Content-Guidelines#h_01HXW2P3NGM4NYF8SN4B8RMSPQ

[jamesmishler]

Nov 8, 2024 21:34:51 GMT -6 howandwhy99 said:

Oct 16, 2024 21:41:35 GMT -6 jamesmishler said:

Apparently, with Greyhawk being used as the sample setting in the new 2024 5E they are opening the campaign setting for 3PP publication on DMs Guild.

5E only, of course, but basic stat inclusions also count.

Now I just need to wait another 10 to 20 years for them to open up Mystara...

So it you are saying fan-made Gygaxian era Greyhawk can openly be published as long as the default statistics are 5.5?

I assume tagging on 1e appendices (their own property) is not out of legal bounds?

Ony 5E stats. Tacking on anything using an earlier edition rules format is strictly forbidden.

For example, they explicitly allow you to publish stats for earlier, classic-edition modules, such as Against the Giants and Keep on the Borderlands.

But you can only publish the 5E stats, not anything in 1E or B/X.

You would say, "And here are the stats for the encounter in Room 17," and maybe add some commentary, but cannot include anything rules-based from any other edition.

[howandwhy99]

DMsGuild is NOT for Classic D&D Edition(1e, AD&D, OSR, 3.Xe, 4e) products.

Dungeon Masters Guild titles can only be created for the current Dungeons & Dragons rules established with Fifth Edition (5e).

However, Classic Edition rules may be converted/redesigned for use with current Dungeons & Dragons rules.

So they are basically an anti-D&D company taking actions to quash the hobby? Are they actively attacking fan-made Greyhawk material for earlier editions?

[Punkrabbitt]

Well, boogers.

[jeffb]

Nov 9, 2024 18:35:10 GMT -6 howandwhy99 said:

DMsGuild is NOT for Classic D&D Edition(1e, AD&D, OSR, 3.Xe, 4e) products.

Dungeon Masters Guild titles can only be created for the current Dungeons & Dragons rules established with Fifth Edition (5e).

However, Classic Edition rules may be converted/redesigned for use with current Dungeons & Dragons rules.

So they are basically an anti-D&D company taking actions to quash the hobby? Are they actively attacking fan-made Greyhawk material for earlier editions?

You can only publish 5E compatible materials on DMs Guild. No other editions. DMs Guild is run by DriveThru/OBS.

If you are selling your 5E compatible materials on DMs Guild, you can not sell it/publish elsewhere. E.g. Joe Bloch had to remove the free 5E GH books he was offering on his website in order to sell the improved/expanded versions on DMs Guild.

They are not attacking any fan made materials for any edition/setting that I'm aware of. I'm guessing like always, if you try to push them (like selling your 1E modules using WOTC IP, for example) you are going to get a C&D (at best)if they find out.

You can buy all editions of official D&D materials from WOTC/TSR on DMsGuild (OD&D through 5E).

If you want to buy/sell OSR materials, the regular Drive Thru site is loaded with it. But you cannot use WOTC IP on those OSR products.

You can make 5E compatible products (OGL/CC or whatever license they have now) and sell them on DRiveThru, but they cannot use the WOTC trade dress and IP that you are able to use on DMs Guild. But you can sell that OGL 5E compatible product wherever you want: on Drive Thru, print products at FLGs, etc (Like Goodman Games does). And you could make a S&W version too, or Pathfinder, or whatever.


Bottom line- use their IP, it has to be on DMsGuild (exclusively) and has to be 5E compatible. No other editions are supported.

[jamesmishler]

Nov 9, 2024 18:35:10 GMT -6 howandwhy99 said:

DMsGuild is NOT for Classic D&D Edition(1e, AD&D, OSR, 3.Xe, 4e) products.

Dungeon Masters Guild titles can only be created for the current Dungeons & Dragons rules established with Fifth Edition (5e).

However, Classic Edition rules may be converted/redesigned for use with current Dungeons & Dragons rules.

So they are basically an anti-D&D company taking actions to quash the hobby? Are they actively attacking fan-made Greyhawk material for earlier editions?

Mostly what Jeffb said.

As to publishing stuff on, say, your blog or other website, there is a Fan License that allows for that option here:

company.wizards.com/en/legal/fancontentpolicy

This is how Joe Bloch and Oerth Journal publishes stuff for Greyhawk, how Pandius and Threshold publish stuff for Mystara, and a myriad other sites publish stuff for all the other campaign settings, official or homebrew.

The options are thus (do not take this as advice, check the licenses yourself):

1) Hobbyist: If you want to publish your stuff using WotC IP (i.e., Campaign Worlds or Older Editions) for fun on the WEB and NOT make money off of it, use the Fan Policy.

2) 3rd Party Publisher WITH WotC IP: If you want to publish your stuff using WotC IP (i.e., Campaign Worlds) on the WEB to make MONEY, publish on DMG (MUST be 5E).

3) 3rd Party Publisher WITHOUT WotC IP: If you want to publish your stuff that is effectively compatible with D&D in ANY edition and make MONEY, publish using the OGL (CANNOT use WotC IP).

Frankly, that is an AMAZINGLY wide and open set of licenses for something they do not need to license at all. Mostly thanks to the guys at WotC who started the OGL back in 2000. Before that, TSR would send a C&D to ANYONE ANYWHERE who did ANYTHING with D&D online or otherwise, even non-profit fan sites.

Today, with the OGL having opened up OD&D (S&W), BX (Labyrinth Lord, Old School Essentials), and AD&D (OSRIC, ADD), and so many other variants, any claims of WotC having an Anti-D&D policy means you just haven't looked enough into all the options.

THAT SAID: Yes, they tried to kill the OGL a few years ago. They failed. I am pretty sure it would also fail if it went to court. Those with a lot of money into it all, though,  like Paizo and Kobold Press and Troll Lord Games hedged their bets and moved off from the OGL.

[howandwhy99]

I see... this is about who can publish what for profit, which is not what I would be worried about for the maintenence of the hobby. Thanks for the posts.