What kind of license or ownership does uploading content to D&D Beyond grant WOTC?

I remember when DM’s Guild first came out there were some concerns regarding the licensing terms you agree to when uploading homebrew content. At first it seemed like you granted ownership of your IP to WOTC. It seems like they’ve since clarified that in their FAQ.

Does Wizards own any unique IP that I create in my DMs Guild publications?

Wizards does not own any of the unique IP that you create in your publications. Wizards does own the IP that they contribute, plus the DMs Guild agreement will grant Wizards and other DMs Guild authors a license to use your IP.

That said, if your work merits incorporation into canon, Wizards will contact you about purchasing your IP outright.

Although they don’t really specify what “a license to use your IP” means, I haven’t been able to find any information on how licensing works for D&D Beyond. The Terms of Service link at the bottom of the page links to Twitch’s TOS, which don’t mention D&D Beyond.

I was wondering whether there has been announcements on what kind of license is granted to WOTC when you upload homebrew content to D&D Beyond, is it similar to DM’s Guild?

Beyond unauthorized data access, what security considerations should I have regarding a user-facing language based on SQL SELECT statements?

I’m considering making a new language based on SQL SELECT statements to allow users to export CSV data in the manner they please. I’m confident in being able to interface this with a permissions system by inspecting the resulting AST from parsing before turning it into a SELECT statement to execute, so I’m not really concerned about this leading to unauthorized data access.

This language would be pretty much a 1-to-1 mapping of SQL SELECT statements, except for a few changes regarding joins and a few other things.

Users are relatively few and can be easily traced and contacted. It’s not the public at large.

The underlying DB would be MariaDB.

What should I be concerned about from this idea? If it’s a bad idea, why?

I thought about the possibility of making a query that doesn’t terminate by using WITH RECURSIVE, so I’m not going to support that syntax, and I made the following question at the DBA SE to see what other ways a SELECT statement could be non-terminating (I thought of a few more while writing that question):

What are all the ways that a SELECT statement could be made to not terminate or take a very long time?

Besides that, is there anything more? Any particular risk? Is it possible to make some type of resource bomb with it, to consume all memory for example?

Access to this language could be put under a permission so only very privileged users could use it, but I wonder if that’s needed.

Module detail visibility to players on D&D Beyond

So, if I create a Master Tier account on D&D Beyond I can share the Monster Manual and other digital assets with players. If I purchase (say) Hoard of the Dragon Queen on Beyond, can the players view all the module details through the interface? Is there any way to limit their access to the module info?

There is a Compendium Content Only option on that same page. Exactly where does that fit in? Is that just the content that should be shared with the players?

Long time AD&D player, pondering 5th Edition. The digital options are intriguing.

Online D&D Module Purchase: Roll20, D&D Beyond or Both

I want to run Lost Mine of Phandelver online. I’ve looked at Roll20.net and D&D Beyond. Both sites sell the module for the same price.

My understanding is that Roll20 is a “tabletop”, whereas D&D Beyond is more of a digital “compendium.”

  • What are the trade-offs for purchasing an adventure module in Roll20 versus D&D Beyond?

  • Can content be shared / imported between the sites?

  • Would there be a reason to purchase the module on both sites?

  • Is there a common practice for using the two together?

What does the Death Ward spell do when a Zealot Barbarian’s Rage Beyond Death feature ends while they have three failed Death Saving Throws?

The death ward spell states:

[…] If the spell is still in effect when the target is subjected to an effect that would kill it instantaneously without dealing damage, that effect is instead negated against the target, and the spell ends.

One example of such an effect would be failing a third death saving throw. Ordinarily you would die immediately after failing your third death saving throw but this is not the case for the Zealot Barbarian currently Raging Beyond Death:

You still must make death saving throws, and you suffer the normal effects of taking damage while at 0 hit points. However, if you would die due to failing death saving throws, you don’t die until your rage ends, and you die then only if you still have 0 hit points

So what happens if the Barbarian has three failed death saves and then their Rage ends?
What instantaneously killing effect is the Barbarian being subjected to?
What exactly is negated by death ward?
Is the third death saving throw removed?

Does Rage beyond Death let you survive if you receive healing regardless of your death saves?

In Xanathar’s Guide to Everything, the Path of the Zealot gives a barbarian the “Rage Beyond Death” ability at level 14 (emphasis mine):

Rage beyond Death

Beginning at 14th level, the divine power that fuels your rage allows you to shrug off fatal blows.
While you’re raging, having 0 hit points doesn’t knock you unconscious. You still must make death saving throws, and you suffer the normal effects of taking damage while at 0 hit points. However, if you would die due to failing death saving throws, you don’t die until your rage ends, and you die then only if you still have 0 hit points.

RAW, this says that regardless of your death saves, if you receive healing before the end of your rage and have 1 HP, you remain alive regardless of the outcomes of your death saves.

Is that the case? And is that RAI?

How does increasing PCs’ wealth beyond the WBL table affect power disparity between character class tiers?

It’s well-known what happens when characters get less gold than they are supposed toaccording to the wealth-by-level (WBL) guidelines. Basically, the well-known power disparity between casters and non-casters becomes even stronger: money is Fighter’s access to magic, and magic is true power in Pathfinder. Without magic, the Fighter has significantly less power.

However, what are the consequences of the party getting significantly more money than it’s supposed to? E.g. doubling WBL, so a level 4 characters would get 12.000 gp worth of valuables instead of only 6.000.

Of course, this will make the affected characters more powerful, and they will require harder challenges to have meaningful encounters. But will the power disparity be affected in any way?

Are there rules for a character’s handedness beyond the dual wielding’s additional attack?

Is there an innate handedness to characters in Anima, or is it only something that applies to a specific situation? Here are all the applicable rules I could find on the matter:

Attacks with Additional Weapons
A character may try to add to his offense by wielding a weapon in each hand. If he does so, he may carry out an additional attack while paying a penalty of –40 only for the second weapon. If the combatant is Ambidextrous, the penalty for the second weapon is reduced to a mere –10.
Anima – Beyond Fantasy Pg.84

An ambidextrous person can use both hands equally well.
Effects: An ambidextrous character can perform maneuvers with either hand. In combat, he suffers only –10 to attacks with an additional weapon.
Anima – Beyond Fantasy Pg.15

The first rule reads that the game only cares about an ‘offhand’ when it is used to make an additional attack without incurring the usual additional action penalty, however the second rule seems to imply that all characters have an innate handedness (possibly needing to be specified at character creation) that if they make any action (action is used synonymously with maneuver in the book) with their off-hand they would suffer this penalty.

The question was brought up by the following situation:
A character has an ability to make multiple additional attacks through a ki technique and wants to distribute those attacks between the weapons in their two hands and finish it off with the additional weapon attack. The question is that if the normal attacks made with their second weapon are all affected by this penalty, or just the last additional one.