No Dragons showing up in the 3.5e Monsters list

[Jwguy]

So, I was preparing for my campaign tonight, and while working on adding my encounters, ahead of time, I went to search for a Juvenile Red Dragon. As far as I could see, none are included in the default 3.5e Monsters list (though they do appear in the pay-for Complete SRD module via the shop, as does everything else in the default 3.5e Monster list).

This seems odd, to me, considering that that the metallic and chromatic dragons are all OGL and were released in the SRD, and therefore, much like the rest of the 3.5e Monsters list who also are OGL and were released in the SRD, should be available in the ruleset, by default.

[Griogre]

As I remember dragons in the SRD were not statted up, you were just given the rules to make them - which is why I don't think they are in the base MM. I remember it was a big deal when some companies made stat blocks for them. Its easy enough to stat them, just tedious. :(
https://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/dragonTrue.htm

[Callum]

I asked a similar question a while back. I ended up making one of each chromatic dragon in FG - at the ages shown in the 3.5E Monster Manual, as these are the ones most often referenced in other places. I exported them into a module, which you can find in my thread here (https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?20567-3-5E-dragon-stats&highlight=dragon).

[damned]

If its like Castles&Crusades which I suspect it is as C&C is OGL based.... then we dont have Dragons all statted out either - just the ranges and guidelines for colours and ages...

[Jwguy]

As I remember dragons in the SRD were not statted up, you were just given the rules to make them - which is why I don't think they are in the base MM. I remember it was a big deal when some companies made stat blocks for them. Its easy enough to stat them, just tedious. :(
https://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/dragonTrue.htm

If its like Castles&Crusades which I suspect it is as C&C is OGL based.... then we dont have Dragons all statted out either - just the ranges and guidelines for colours and ages...

Actually, Wizards released all true dragons as OGL content. You can verify this for yourself at their official revised SRD page (https://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/article/srd35) for 3.5e. The item is listed in the "Monsters (Dr-Dw)" document on that same page, and it begins, specifically, with all True Dragons.

The page begins with the following, with added emphasis being added by myself:

The System Reference Document is a comprehensive toolbox consisting of rules, races, classes, feats, skills, various systems, spells, magic items, and monsters compatible with the d20 System version of Dungeons & Dragons and various other roleplaying games from Wizards of the Coast. You may consider this material Open Game Content under the Open Game License, and may use, modify, and distribute it.

Furthermore, the fact that it was released as OGL for use, modification, and distribution is the only reason the subject monsters appear on both https://www.d20srd.org and https://dandwiki.com. The latter is especially strict about potential violations of copyright (I should know, I created homebrew there for many years before becoming an administrator), and is on instructions to remove all OGL violations on sight.

[damned]

@Jwguy - I think you will find that is what we are saying - they are OGL but they dont have fixed stats. The stats vary widely based on age so their is no single entry for a specific colour dragon.

[Jwguy]

I can appreciate that, then, but I would counter that they are stat'd based on age, and therefore each age can be a different version of the same OGL monster.

And for the record, this is already the way they appear to exist in Fantasy Grounds.... if you purchase a completely separate module labeled "Complete SRD" for it, anyways. I suppose I take more issue with the fact that the creature is being resold separately without so much as a mention in the default 3.5e SRD included with a license.

Just feels like it really ought to be included in some fashion or another, especially if the effort was made to include the OGL items in a paid-for SRD product.

[Trenloe]

Just feels like it really ought to be included in some fashion or another, especially if the effort was made to include the OGL items in a paid-for SRD product.
I don't follow this logic. If someone went to the effort to stat them all up and the arrangement was that they would be available in a paid product (more than likely get some reimbursement for doing this - probably a percentage of future sales) - why should this person's effort be taken and put in a free product for which they would get no reimbursement? You want something for free that others have been paying for?

[Jwguy]

I don't follow this logic. If someone went to the effort to stat them all up and the arrangement was that they would be available in a paid product (more than likely get some reimbursement for doing this - probably a percentage of future sales) - why should this person's effort be taken and put in a free product for which they would get no reimbursement? You want something for free that others have been paying for?

Because the original product was free and stat'd up, just with variations accounted for. You're basically saying they should pay for the arrangement, which is fine - it sounds like it is incorporated into the cost of the license, after all, as each license gives you access to SRD content, of which this is. But then, in this scenario, you're paying twice for that item, though I concede the whole of Complete SRD's merits stretch further than just dragon monsters. I should know; I bought both, regardless.

I have respect for you, Trenloe, and for that reason, I'm not going to debate the obvious ethics of double-dipping on a product that has largely already been released to the public, information-wise. That's what I perceive your defense as. Simply put, if the true dragon creatures were released in the SRD by Wizards, for free, and the license purchase is supposed to include the SRD items, then why-for must a person pay for two separate items in order to gain access to them? There's not even a single mention of the original tables in the License-included SRD.

[Trenloe]

Because the original product was free and stat'd up
Sorry for pushing this, perhaps I just don't understand what you're referring to as the original product being free and did have all of the dragon stats? Are you referring to the SRD released by Wizards of the Coast? Or are you referring to a free Fantasy Grounds product that had the dragons fully setup, but this is no longer available? Or is there a statement somewhere on the FG website that says that the included 3.5e ruleset contains a module that includes all of the SRD material for free?

This is what is confusing me - where you get the impression that all SRD content is/should be included with the base FG 3.5e ruleset. Yes, the SRD data is free as provided by Wizards of the Coast, but if you want the whole SRD in Fantasy Grounds format then you have to purchase it: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/store/product.xcp?id=DGA044 The cost of the product is mostly due to the work required to put it all together in a format that can be used by Fantasy Grounds.

Think of this like the many applications that are available for mobile devices that contain all of this "free" SRD information, but the app is not free - you're paying for the time taken to put the application together. Just like you're paying for the complete SRD in a Fantasy Grounds module format - someone has taken the time to put it together and so there's a cost associated with it. This is completely allowed by the OGL under which the 3.5e SRD was released.

Ultimately, as you say, the data is available for free in the form of the SRD on the web. If you don't want to spend the time to enter all of the dragons into Fantasy Grounds yourself then you can buy the Complete SRD module in Fantasy Grounds format - essentially paying someone else for their time to enter and format all of the data, which they did to produce the product.

[Jwguy]

Free insofar as the information about the creatures and their statistics have been released to the public for most uses, effectively, including modification and distribution, and in the store, the license states the following as one of its features: Library modules with D&D 3.5E open gaming content typically found in the SRD. I grant the distinction between "Open Game Content" and "All Open Game Content", but I think that relying on that distinction is petty, at best, if only because every other OGL SRD item is included in the ruleset (Seriously. This is the first time I've ever encountered a single OGL SRD item not being already in there, in some manner). Indeed, it was because every other OGL SRD item was included that the peculiar omission of a single group of creatures, especially the titular creatures, was odd and may not have been normal expected behavior.

I also believe the argument that purely arrangement justifies their omission is flawed on a two points. Firstly, that all items included in the ruleset (read: the entirety of all other OGL SRD entries) were also arranged, and either did not cost additional fees or those fees were incorporated into the total cost of the license as a feature, making the specific omission of these creature tables suspect. Secondly, that even if the arrangement was more arduous and justified the separation purely because of the permutations that the tables would result in if making individual creatures for all ages and variations of the True Dragon entry, the table could be included with so little as a copy-paste function in order to meet the goal of including typical SRD content for 3.5e, which is also conspicuously absent. Finally, I also feel that dismissing these concerns with "they can be found elsewhere" is contrary to the purpose of this program; All features can be found elsewhere (Some for better result, and some worse; remember us talking about the individual sight thing?), but the program still takes those and attempts some level of consolidation in order to make it more efficient and easier on players and GMs.

And in any case, I have both an Ultimate License and the Complete SRD, and have had them since I originally joined the forums a long while back. I am just pointing out what initially appeared to be a bug, and now appears to be an omission, whether intentional or not.

[Trenloe]

Well, we're just going to have to disagree on this as we see it completely differently.

Just including copy/paste tables (a direct translation from the SRD) would, quite frankly, be of very little use - effectively you couldn't use this to create a Fantasy Grounds NPC entry on the fly (Callum has mentioned how long it took him to do 5 dragons using such a method).

Read this thread: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?20567-3-5E-dragon-stats&highlight=dragon If someone wants to take the time to do it Smiteworks will include them in a future release.

Yes, it would be great to have all of the Dragons included, we can all agree on that - but someone has to do it and as Callum has stated it takes a lot of time.

[Jwguy]

I would be more sympathetic to your point if the statted creature entries didn't already exist in the module, and I wasn't under the impression that they could be ported from that, easily.

[Trenloe]

I would be more sympathetic to your point if the statted creature entries didn't already exist in the module, and I wasn't under the impression that they could be ported from that, easily.
Which module? The one that you pay for? The one that someone put together on the understanding that their extensive data entry work would be sold and they would receive payment for said work?

Are you suggesting that person's extensive data entry work is plagiarized and put into the version that is included with Fantasy Grounds?

[Callum]

Full stat blocks for every dragon at every age aren't provided in the SRD - in fact, the SRD has no dragon stat blocks at all! The 3.5E Monster Manual has one, solitary stat block for each color of dragon, but these don't form part of the SRD. The SRD does have tables stating how to calculate stats for each dragon type, but these don't form part of the monster stat blocks provided in FG because they're not stat blocks - they wouldn't fit info that format.

I built FG versions of one of each chromatic dragon, which took a surprisingly long time. I'm sure it must have taken an age to build every single permutation for the Complete SRD, and I don't blame whoever did that for charging for it. If you'd like to do the same and provide it for free, or even port the tables from the SRD into a FG module (if you think people would find that useful), I'm sure the community would gratefully receive them.

[Jwguy]

Which module? The one that you pay for? The one that someone put together on the understanding that their extensive data entry work would be sold and they would receive payment for said work?

Are you suggesting that person's extensive data entry work is plagiarized and put into the version that is included with Fantasy Grounds?

Yes, it would be great to have all of the Dragons included, we can all agree on that - but someone has to do it and as Callum has stated it takes a lot of time.

You seemingly implied that they didn't exist already in the suggested form with that sentence; I don't sympathize with that point, as they already do. That is the only thing my comment addressed. You can attempt to dress the argument up all you want into some analogue of "Wants free stuff" or "Wants to plagiarize" but if so, I just find that to be dishonest and a lack of faith on your part. You clearly see nothing wrong with the status quo, as per usual, and I do, seemingly as per usual, that's been established and we're clearly not getting anywhere if all you're going to do is attempt to cast me in a negative light.


Full stat blocks for every dragon at every age aren't provided in the SRD - in fact, the SRD has no dragon stat blocks at all! The 3.5E Monster Manual has one, solitary stat block for each color of dragon, but these don't form part of the SRD. The SRD does have tables stating how to calculate stats for each dragon type, but these don't form part of the monster stat blocks provided in FG because they're not stat blocks - they wouldn't fit info that format.

I built FG versions of one of each chromatic dragon, which took a surprisingly long time. I'm sure it must have taken an age to build every single permutation for the Complete SRD, and I don't blame whoever did that for charging for it. If you'd like to do the same and provide it for free, or even port the tables from the SRD into a FG module (if you think people would find that useful), I'm sure the community would gratefully receive them.

I don't disagree with some of the facts you mention, but my point is that it is a very large omission of a titular item from the SRD, even if it wasn't in the form of pre-generated, individual monster npcs. There's literally nothing there for them, and while I personally do think they should be present in both items in that form, simply because of the inclusion of the SRD as a feature in the License, and the average user's expected presentation of the SRD, I made this topic with the intent of addressing the omission, itself. Simply not having anything on them, at all, appears to be a glaring oversight, in my opinion.

[Trenloe]

OK - you've completely missed the point a few of us have been making for a long time in this thread. Smiteworks cannot copy/paste the dragon details from the existing Complete SRD module ($7 from the store) and include this in the already available 3.5e Bestiary as this would be breaking whatever commercial agreement they made with the person who spent all of the time putting that module together. You suggested that Smiteworks simply take some of that hard work and make it available for no additional charge in the base product - taking someone's hard work and depriving them of potential revenue, essentially passing it off as someone elses work/not recognising the original person's work - hence plagiarism. It's not dressing it up - it is quite simply what it would be.

I am trying to protect the hard work done by someone else - how is that dishonest on my part? Taking their hard work and going against the original agreement of selling it and providing some percentage payment, now that would be dishonest.

That is what we are defending - you can't simply take the work that was put into the Complete SRD Product (https://www.fantasygrounds.com/store/product.xcp?id=DGA044) and put portions of it in the base 3.5e product without working out a new agreement for the original work or providing normal reimbursement.

I'm not defending the status quo - I'm defending someone's hard work and the agreements around that. I fail to see how that is dishonest on my part.

[damned]

hey @Jwguy - I dont know if this helps - Castles&Crusades treats dragons exactly the same way. It has all the info on how to Stat a dragon but no Dragon stats.
Other Monsters from OGL/SRD are all in there.
I believe that there would be no issue in you creating a fully statted out selection of dragons and sharing the module as the source material is in the SRD, but you would have to actually stat them out as they dont exist in fully statted out form as far as i know - other than in other peoples compilations.

https://www.fg-con.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/dragons.jpg

[Nylanfs]

Another option would be to use the default dragon kit/monster option from PCGen and import into FG. :)

[Moon Wizard]

Just to settle issue. If someone works up the stats and/or instructions, I'll include in the 3.5E bestiary. As mentioned, I can not take from SRD add-on. You can add to wish list for us to address, and I can prioritize with other requests.

Regards,
JPG

[Trenloe]

Just to settle issue. If someone works up the stats and/or instructions, I'll include in the 3.5E bestiary. As mentioned, I can not take from SRD add-on. You can add to wish list for us to address, and I can prioritize with other requests.
Thanks JPG - as most of us have been saying in this thread. :)

[Jwguy]

OK - you've completely missed the point a few of us have been making for a long time in this thread. Smiteworks cannot copy/paste the dragon details from the existing Complete SRD module ($7 from the store) and include this in the already available 3.5e Bestiary as this would be breaking whatever commercial agreement they made with the person who spent all of the time putting that module together. You suggested that Smiteworks simply take some of that hard work and make it available for no additional charge in the base product - taking someone's hard work and depriving them of potential revenue, essentially passing it off as someone elses work/not recognising the original person's work - hence plagiarism. It's not dressing it up - it is quite simply what it would be.

I am trying to protect the hard work done by someone else - how is that dishonest on my part? Taking their hard work and going against the original agreement of selling it and providing some percentage payment, now that would be dishonest.

That is what we are defending - you can't simply take the work that was put into the Complete SRD Product (https://www.fantasygrounds.com/store/product.xcp?id=DGA044) and put portions of it in the base 3.5e product without working out a new agreement for the original work or providing normal reimbursement.

I'm not defending the status quo - I'm defending someone's hard work and the agreements around that. I fail to see how that is dishonest on my part.

Firstly, I'm going to bypass all the "Am not, Are too" potential in this argument and just state that I think this might be a case of tunnel-vision. Yeah, I did talk about the Complete SRD store item; I already own it, and while I think there's some questionable logic in saying that putting free OGL information in the 3.5e Bestiary (Or anywhere, really; The monster list just makes the most sense) would deprive a reseller of profit from said free OGL information plus arrangement (By that logic, the entire 3.5e Bestiary does, too. As does OGL content existing in the ruleset, at all), I'm just going to say that the point of this topic isn't necessarily to make you or anyone plagiarize anything. As I stated quite a few times, my goal in making this topic is addressing the complete omission of a titular item. I did mention that I was under the impression that those npcs could be ported over, and that I liked the arrangement in the Complete SRD, but those were minor points in my attempt to address the omission. I stated that I was less sympathetic to a point you made because the arrangement already existed, and you painted it as if I was suggesting you plagiarize. While I don't blame you for your strong feelings on plagiarism, I consider that a bad faith argument, but you know, maybe it was also a bit on me: I recognize that I tend to wander in my topics from point to point and that it may be confusing trying to keep up with me when I'm inherently disorganized in applying my thoughts to my posts. I also have a habit of being completely literal in my posts. Sorry for that, but I will stand by my assertion that they should be there in some form, if nothing else.

That said, Damned's post comes to the crux of the issue. Let's move to that.


hey @Jwguy - I dont know if this helps - Castles&Crusades treats dragons exactly the same way. It has all the info on how to Stat a dragon but no Dragon stats.
Other Monsters from OGL/SRD are all in there.
I believe that there would be no issue in you creating a fully statted out selection of dragons and sharing the module as the source material is in the SRD, but you would have to actually stat them out as they dont exist in fully statted out form as far as i know - other than in other peoples compilations.

https://www.fg-con.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/dragons.jpg

That's a fantastic example, Damned. It is a great example of what is missing completely from the 3.5e Ruleset. In this manner, Castles&Crusades does not treat them the same. It treats them better, as they actually exist in original table form. Let me point you to 3.5e's counterpart:

7355
7356
7357
7358

As you can see, it doesn't exist. Just to make sure I'm not selling you a steaming pile, I poured through all the links in the ruleset I could find, but there's just nothing there. Yes, I do personally like the way the Complete SRD handles them, and yeah, I'm all-in if they would be that way in the 3.5e Bestiary, but even something like your own example would be nice. Not for me; I'm good. I think that it could be a big deal for other users, though. Fantasy Grounds is a nice program, even if it doesn't have all the features I (or, from the looks of logs dating back to 2009, a lot more than just 'I' /funpoke X3) would like it to. That said, it is good policy to make an effort on these types of things, as it shows a level of professionalism and quality, as well is consistent with the purpose of the program. And if you'll mind my saying so, omitting a titular creature so completely and blatantly, with no mention whatsoever, just seems like a really wonky way to go about things.

But, as I said, these things deserve the effort, so I'll move to the next one.


Just to settle issue. If someone works up the stats and/or instructions, I'll include in the 3.5E bestiary. As mentioned, I can not take from SRD add-on. You can add to wish list for us to address, and I can prioritize with other requests.

Regards,
JPG

While I don't really like how this kind of feels like an "Other people's problem" stance, I appreciate the window of opportunity, and I'll take you up on that. I've already parsed half of the damn things before I found them in the Complete SRD and I've got a number of the individual monster stats already worked out on one of the dandwiki pages.

[Moon Wizard]

It's not an other people's problem stance; just a statement that we have limited resources (2 people part time to run a company and keep it alive in a niche market). Without the help of our community to work out these items on lesser used game systems, FG wouldn't exist.

Regards,
JPG

[Jwguy]

It's not an other people's problem stance; just a statement that we have limited resources (2 people part time to run a company and keep it alive in a niche market). Without the help of our community to work out these items on lesser used game systems, FG wouldn't exist.

Regards,
JPG

Hm. That's just how it seemed. I'll withdraw my comment, though. In any case, I believe this thread can be considered tabled, for now. I'll post the module and additions at a later date.