In case you missed it in our latest news post, the content submission guidelines are available now! These guidelines apply to both publishers and community content.
Have fun creating!
Have fun creating!
Last edited:
-
Please note: In an effort to ensure that all of our users feel welcome on our forums, we’ve updated our forum rules. You can review the updated rules here: http://forums.wolflair.com/showthread.php?t=5528.
If a fellow Community member is not following the forum rules, please report the post by clicking the Report button (the red yield sign on the left) located on every post. This will notify the moderators directly. If you have any questions about these new rules, please contact support@wolflair.com.
- The Lone Wolf Development Team
Realm Works Content Submission Guidelines
- Thread starter BJ
- Start date
Great news! I bet a lot of the creators here were waiting for this!
Quick question from someone who a) didn't toy with import/export yet and b) doesn't have the time right now for more than a quick glance at the guidelines:
Can small things like an item or a single NPC be submitted for the content market or does everything need to be at least a questline, fully fleshed out location or campaign?
Personally, I would rather get such small things from the market when I lack the time to prepare every detail before a session than having to buy big modules of which I probably only use small parts.
Quick question from someone who a) didn't toy with import/export yet and b) doesn't have the time right now for more than a quick glance at the guidelines:
Can small things like an item or a single NPC be submitted for the content market or does everything need to be at least a questline, fully fleshed out location or campaign?
Personally, I would rather get such small things from the market when I lack the time to prepare every detail before a session than having to buy big modules of which I probably only use small parts.
Question:
I'm not all that great at writing detailed adventures or campaigns. I can write a detailed backstory, detailed characters and places. But in terms of a play-by-play to get from point A to point B, I'm not all that great.
My adventures tend to be frameworks. Here's the backstory. Here's the entry point for the PCs. This is their end goal. This is the list of people, places and things, along with the information they can discover from each.
How you use everything to get from point A to point B is entirely up to how you, as a GM, choose to run the game and how your group, as players, interact with the people, places and things.
Is this the sort of thing that would fit within the submission guidelines? Or should submitted adventures be more scripted and polished?
I'm not all that great at writing detailed adventures or campaigns. I can write a detailed backstory, detailed characters and places. But in terms of a play-by-play to get from point A to point B, I'm not all that great.
My adventures tend to be frameworks. Here's the backstory. Here's the entry point for the PCs. This is their end goal. This is the list of people, places and things, along with the information they can discover from each.
How you use everything to get from point A to point B is entirely up to how you, as a GM, choose to run the game and how your group, as players, interact with the people, places and things.
Is this the sort of thing that would fit within the submission guidelines? Or should submitted adventures be more scripted and polished?
If it is for official content, maybe having a word with LWD will allow them to either suggest the category, or add a new official category.
In terms of 3rd party content I think it's going to be quite common to find alternative category requirements. Due to OGL issues it's very common to not use official names for things. Now in the situation where content is being prepared for the market and that content is released under OGL we have to avoid using the original category right?
Currently my need is different. It's a supplement that adds new elements to the category and ideally I don't sent to create the tags manually for a large number of articles.
Currently my need is different. It's a supplement that adds new elements to the category and ideally I don't sent to create the tags manually for a large number of articles.
Or some nice person ensures that the official Paizo books have the OGL name as an alias of the same topic
Usually the names and things that are changed are not in the OGL at all thus the reason for changing the name on the first place.
For example. Official 5e stat block lists "Actions" as a heading. Primeval Thule couldn't use this and instead uses "Combat Actions". It's a common loophole.
For example. Official 5e stat block lists "Actions" as a heading. Primeval Thule couldn't use this and instead uses "Combat Actions". It's a common loophole.
The purpose of the OGL is to declare what third parties can use. Everything declared as open content for the OGL is usable "as is".
Some publishers have been criticized in the past for "crippled OGL" declarations because they basically kept the full text of Feats and the like closed instead of open when other content was open.
Paizo makes just about all rules content open... only some names that use proprietary names (such as Golarion countries, deities, NPCs, and such) are closed, and need to be re-named.
Terms like "Feat" and such.. I am not sure they can individually be protected. The overall stat-block format CAN be, but that would not affect the names of categories. If you're really concerned, consult a lawyer about it.
Some publishers have been criticized in the past for "crippled OGL" declarations because they basically kept the full text of Feats and the like closed instead of open when other content was open.
Paizo makes just about all rules content open... only some names that use proprietary names (such as Golarion countries, deities, NPCs, and such) are closed, and need to be re-named.
Terms like "Feat" and such.. I am not sure they can individually be protected. The overall stat-block format CAN be, but that would not affect the names of categories. If you're really concerned, consult a lawyer about it.
I havn't got into the nitty gritty legalities of it.
My concern though, if I'm entering data for 3rd parties (which I am) I need to replicate their current format. I don't have a right to change that and work on the assumption that they have already made all the checks and balances on their end to legally release their work.
Therefore I copy everything as it is. Just because I know where something should go doesn't mean that's where i put it. I have to assume that there's a reason it was not put there in the first place. I also post the legal agreement.
My concern though, if I'm entering data for 3rd parties (which I am) I need to replicate their current format. I don't have a right to change that and work on the assumption that they have already made all the checks and balances on their end to legally release their work.
Therefore I copy everything as it is. Just because I know where something should go doesn't mean that's where i put it. I have to assume that there's a reason it was not put there in the first place. I also post the legal agreement.
Isn't the point of having published information in RealmWorks that all the data is presented in a consistent manner?
The transition from paper/PDF to RealmWorks will always involve re-arranging the data to a certain extent, otherwise the data isn't much more useful than just remaining in a PDF.
Some time ago, I predicted that at least some publishers might have unreasonable expectations that their Realm Works content would look and be organized just like their PDF content. I think that represents not really "getting" the differences, because Realm Works is a different kind of delivery (living document vs. static PDF).
I gave an example about a year ago, in which I cited a paragraph in Rise of the Runelords that contained a mix of multiple bits of information as well as GM directions. All told, the one paragraph really should be broken up into about 10 snippets in Realm Works ... at least one of which was GM directions.
This is very true and is definitely true or was true of one publisher getting material ready for the CM. It contributed to my deciding to stop doing data entry for him.
The point that needs to be understood here is some 3rd party publishers have no choice. Again with Primeval Thule 5e as an example. This was published pre OGL and SRD. Same with fifth edition foes. They couldn't even write that it was a 5e supplement.
I think the content guidelines need to consider and address this in regards to categories at least. Unless the publisher re does the content with updated legal text it's not possible for them simply to adhere to the categories within Realm Works.
I think the content guidelines need to consider and address this in regards to categories at least. Unless the publisher re does the content with updated legal text it's not possible for them simply to adhere to the categories within Realm Works.