I'm homebrewing a Mystic subclass for Sorcerer that I plan to share with the community. I'm trying to pack as much UA Mystic flavor in as possible while making it function like a Sorcerer subclass. This includes homebrewing all the Psionic Talents and converting the Psionic Disciplines into groups of homebrewed spells, all to be shared, as well.
My question is: How much of the flavor do I need to re-flavor to avoid infringing on WotC's intellectual property? I tried simply duplicating a talent verbatim as a spell and sharing it, and, as I expected, it was rejected as it was directly from the UA document.
Here's a for instance. Beacon is a Psionic Talent. I have a homebrewed spelled called Beacon with the following description:
"As a bonus action, you cause bright light to radiate from your body in a 20-foot radius and dim light for an additional 20 feet. The light can be colored as you like. The light lasts for 1 hour, and you can extinguish it earlier as a bonus action."
And the following settings:
LEVEL: Cantrip
CASTING TIME: 1 Bonus Action
RANGE/AREA: Self
COMPONENTS: None
DURATION: 1 Hour
SCHOOL: Evocation
The text, obviously, has to be changed since it's copied directly from the UA document. Do I also have to change the name of the spell? Its effects?
I'm also including the different Mystic Orders. Will I need to change their names? What features they get?
I want to be able to share everything for this subclass without breaking the copyright rules.
I think your problem is that you're trying to create something someone else made in another form, as opposed to trying to create something new. I would not recommend trying to publish a subclass that you are creating in order to make the UA Mystic work within the confines of another class. If you do get in past the automatic censors I can't imagine that human viewers will be as accepting-- As you are using someone else's work, whether you rephrase it or not.
I people who want to play a Mystic will be accepting. And that's kind of the point of the subclass. The UA Mystic is dead. I want to be able to play it on DDB and I'm sure others do, as well. So this is the solution I'm going for. I'm just trying to figure out what I need to change so that it's different enough that I'm not violating any IP.
I people who want to play a Mystic will be accepting. And that's kind of the point of the subclass. The UA Mystic is dead. I want to be able to play it on DDB and I'm sure others do, as well. So this is the solution I'm going for. I'm just trying to figure out what I need to change so that it's different enough that I'm not violating any IP.
The UA Mystic is in consideration for future looks by the WotC devs for a new UA playtest release.
You are fully capable of recreating whatever parts of it you want and use it privately. The problem is you want to publish it. You may be reworking it to use as a subclass instead of full class but you are, by your own admission, copying over the Mystic things into this subclass of yours and only rewording where necesarry to specifically avoid the filter and then publish it for the public under your own name.
You are using somebody else's idea. You are using their mechanisms and rulings. You are using their created parts and components. You are using their creation.
This isn't you coming up with your own Mystic subclass or basing your own thing off something already existing to ensure balance or reflavouring a spell for convenience or something. This is you copying a whole class and its mechanics - something somebody else has made - and trying to skirt copyright rules and site restrictions.
If people want to play Mystic then they can already. If they want to have it on their character sheet on D&D Beyond they can do this themselves. There is no need for you to publish somebody elses work in a slightly reworked way in order to bypass site rules.
And now it comes across, intentionally or not, as you going "hey, I don't like DDB's restriction, help me get around it so I can publish this directly copied thing!"
I can't speak for anybody but me but even as somebody who likes the idea of psychic classes (even if I think Mystic was very broken) my reaction to you is "nope".
Disclaimer: having been the victim of plagiarism before and having my work stolen, I am a tad salty on the subject.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond. Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ thisFAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
...and then publish it for the public under your own name... There is no need for you to publish somebody elses work... And now it comes across, intentionally or not, as you going "hey, I don't like DDB's restriction, help me get around it so I can publish this directly copied thing!"... having been the victim of plagiarism before and having my work stolen, I am a tad salty on the subject.
I didn't actually think about it like that. In my mind, I was putting out a knock-off product or off-brand generic. Not something that says, "This is *my* creation."
As a good general rule, if you find yourself at any point thinking, "How can I make sure this doesn't trigger the automatic filters of the publishing system?" then what you're thinking of publishing probably shouldn't be published. :)
As said above, you're welcome to create and use any homebrew you like within your own private campaigns, but when it comes to published content, we still take an active role in preventing content that shouldn't be published.
The best way to prevent copyright issues with published homebrew will always be to create content based on your own original ideas.
The core idea of the mystic, "A class that has spell like powers that are created due to psychic talent" is not something new - there have been psychic/psionic classes & subclasses in TTRPG for decades. Think about what core class you're adding to and how those powers can combine to create a set of features that give meaningful and interesting flavour to the subclass.
I'm homebrewing a Mystic subclass for Sorcerer that I plan to share with the community. I'm trying to pack as much UA Mystic flavor in as possible while making it function like a Sorcerer subclass. This includes homebrewing all the Psionic Talents and converting the Psionic Disciplines into groups of homebrewed spells, all to be shared, as well.
My question is: How much of the flavor do I need to re-flavor to avoid infringing on WotC's intellectual property? I tried simply duplicating a talent verbatim as a spell and sharing it, and, as I expected, it was rejected as it was directly from the UA document.
Here's a for instance. Beacon is a Psionic Talent. I have a homebrewed spelled called Beacon with the following description:
"As a bonus action, you cause bright light to radiate from your body in a 20-foot radius and dim light for an additional 20 feet. The light can be colored as you like. The light lasts for 1 hour, and you can extinguish it earlier as a bonus action."
And the following settings:
LEVEL: Cantrip
CASTING TIME: 1 Bonus Action
RANGE/AREA: Self
COMPONENTS: None
DURATION: 1 Hour
SCHOOL: Evocation
The text, obviously, has to be changed since it's copied directly from the UA document. Do I also have to change the name of the spell? Its effects?
I'm also including the different Mystic Orders. Will I need to change their names? What features they get?
I want to be able to share everything for this subclass without breaking the copyright rules.
I think your problem is that you're trying to create something someone else made in another form, as opposed to trying to create something new. I would not recommend trying to publish a subclass that you are creating in order to make the UA Mystic work within the confines of another class. If you do get in past the automatic censors I can't imagine that human viewers will be as accepting-- As you are using someone else's work, whether you rephrase it or not.
I people who want to play a Mystic will be accepting. And that's kind of the point of the subclass. The UA Mystic is dead. I want to be able to play it on DDB and I'm sure others do, as well. So this is the solution I'm going for. I'm just trying to figure out what I need to change so that it's different enough that I'm not violating any IP.
The UA Mystic is in consideration for future looks by the WotC devs for a new UA playtest release.
You are fully capable of recreating whatever parts of it you want and use it privately. The problem is you want to publish it. You may be reworking it to use as a subclass instead of full class but you are, by your own admission, copying over the Mystic things into this subclass of yours and only rewording where necesarry to specifically avoid the filter and then publish it for the public under your own name.
You are using somebody else's idea.
You are using their mechanisms and rulings.
You are using their created parts and components.
You are using their creation.
This isn't you coming up with your own Mystic subclass or basing your own thing off something already existing to ensure balance or reflavouring a spell for convenience or something. This is you copying a whole class and its mechanics - something somebody else has made - and trying to skirt copyright rules and site restrictions.
If people want to play Mystic then they can already. If they want to have it on their character sheet on D&D Beyond they can do this themselves. There is no need for you to publish somebody elses work in a slightly reworked way in order to bypass site rules.
And now it comes across, intentionally or not, as you going "hey, I don't like DDB's restriction, help me get around it so I can publish this directly copied thing!"
I can't speak for anybody but me but even as somebody who likes the idea of psychic classes (even if I think Mystic was very broken) my reaction to you is "nope".
Disclaimer: having been the victim of plagiarism before and having my work stolen, I am a tad salty on the subject.
Click ✨ HERE ✨ For My Youtube Videos featuring Guides, Tips & Tricks for using D&D Beyond.
Need help with Homebrew? Check out ✨ this FAQ/Guide thread ✨ by IamSposta.
That's awesome.
I didn't actually think about it like that. In my mind, I was putting out a knock-off product or off-brand generic. Not something that says, "This is *my* creation."
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
D&D Beyond FoundersAs a good general rule, if you find yourself at any point thinking, "How can I make sure this doesn't trigger the automatic filters of the publishing system?" then what you're thinking of publishing probably shouldn't be published. :)
As said above, you're welcome to create and use any homebrew you like within your own private campaigns, but when it comes to published content, we still take an active role in preventing content that shouldn't be published.
The best way to prevent copyright issues with published homebrew will always be to create content based on your own original ideas.
The core idea of the mystic, "A class that has spell like powers that are created due to psychic talent" is not something new - there have been psychic/psionic classes & subclasses in TTRPG for decades. Think about what core class you're adding to and how those powers can combine to create a set of features that give meaningful and interesting flavour to the subclass.
Pun-loving nerd | Faith Elisabeth Lilley | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
I hadn't viewed the shared homebrew as solely original creative content.
So I won't share any form of this unless I go with an original Mystic idea. Thank you for clarifying this for me.