Ive been giving my 5e PHB a good read (with a glance or two at the new MM), and it seems like it has a lot of campaign IP (FR, Dragonlance, etc) blended in there really, really deep.
If I put on my marketing beanie, I can see how that would be a good thing since it builds enthusiasm in new players for the various settings, and maybe gives us some hope those campaign settings will get some nice updates.
But from an OGL / SRD perspective, maybe not such a good thing. The campaign IP is so deeply blended in there, it makes me think that we won't be seeing much if any "open" 3rd party stuff. Am I just imagining it?
Sure, with the Basic rules.
Fully? Probably and hopefully not.
I would not be surprised to see someone write a "clone" of 5e using various existing games released under the OGL.
Quote from: JeremyR;795865I would not be surprised to see someone write a "clone" of 5e using various existing games released under the OGL.
There are several OSR games that have various elements of 5e in them already. Blood & Treasure, Castles & Crusades, my own Majestic Wilderlands, etc.
The mechanics I haven't seen in a OSR ruleset are the prepared spells/spell slot system and the advantage/disadvantage system.
There are several OD&D clones that can be used as a starting point due to similar power curves. Just have to make sure when writing it that you keep a firm grip on the maximum bonuses that can be gained.
Quote from: JeremyR;795865I would not be surprised to see someone write a "clone" of 5e using various existing games released under the OGL.
I'd be surprised if anyone did this while 5e was still in print and actively supported, because what would the point be? Instead we'll just see more of the unofficial but compatible products that WotC hasn't shown any interest in shutting down.
Quote from: estar;795903The mechanics I haven't seen in a OSR ruleset are the prepared spells/spell slot system and the advantage/disadvantage system.
Whitehack has the double positive (= advantage) or double negative roll (= disadvantage).
I don't know about the spells/slot system but there are
so many OGL games out there...
Quote from: Dirk Remmecke;795922Whitehack has the double positive (= advantage) or double negative roll (= disadvantage).
That good to know thanks.
One possibility is some 5e microlite ideas (something I've been poking at).
5e streamlines a lot, but I think there's definitely room for using the bulk of the rules but simplify classes a lot.
Quote from: Will;795924One possibility is some 5e microlite ideas (something I've been poking at).
5e streamlines a lot, but I think there's definitely room for using the bulk of the rules but simplify classes a lot.
I made two class (one is just a reskin)
http://www.batintheattic.com/downloads/MW%205e%20Berserker.pdf
http://www.batintheattic.com/downloads/MW%205e%20Halfling%20Shadow.pdf
One thing I noticed trying to write up my MW Berserker to a 5e Berserker is that the "class template" had a lot of slots to fill easily can get up to 4 dozen entries for a single class. A 5e mircolite or OSR 5e lite could simplify this greatly.
Quote from: hexgrid;795906I'd be surprised if anyone did this while 5e was still in print and actively supported, because what would the point be? Instead we'll just see more of the unofficial but compatible products that WotC hasn't shown any interest in shutting down.
At least one company (maybe more) literally just published the SRD even though 3.x was being actively supported.
And then you have GORE, which is basically a CoC clone, minus Cthulhu.
But I wasn't expecting it from a publisher, maybe more something semi-anonymous just in case WOTC does get mad (sort of like Dark Dungeons)
Quote from: JeremyR;796105At least one company (maybe more) literally just published the SRD even though 3.x was being actively supported.
And then you have GORE, which is basically a CoC clone, minus Cthulhu.
But I wasn't expecting it from a publisher, maybe more something semi-anonymous just in case WOTC does get mad (sort of like Dark Dungeons)
GORE was based on the open content of 1st edition Mongoose Runequest
From it's Section 15
QuoteSystem Reference Document Copyright 2000, Wizards of the Coast, Inc; Authors Jonathan Tweet, Monte Cook, Skip Williams,
based on original material by E. Gary Gygax and Dave Arneson.
Modern System Reference Document Copyright 2002, Wizards of the Coast, Inc.; Authors Bill Slavicsek, Jeff Grubb, Rich Redman,
Charles Ryan, based on material by Jonathan Tweet, Monte Cook, Skip Williams, Richard Baker, Peter Adkison, Bruce R. Cordell,
John Tynes, Andy Collins and JD Wiker.
RuneQuest System Reference Document Copyright 2006, Mongoose Publishing; Author Matthew Sprange, based on original material
by Greg Stafford.
RuneQuest Companion System Reference Document Copyright 2006, Mongoose Publishing; Author Greg Lynch et al., based on
original material by Greg Stafford.
The SRD was also open content. Whether it was a wise thing for Mongoose and other to spend the time and money in making a print copy is another issue but they were perfectly within the rights granted by Wizards to do so.
In contrast 5e does not have a open content system reference document. The only thing mitigating this is the fact that 5e shares a lot of elements with 3.X and classsic D&D. This situation will relegate any clone or peusdo SRD to undeground publishing.
Hopefully the demise of Dungeonscape along with other hints will mean that Wizards will have a decent third party license.