Community created 5e clone?

[Tales and Chronicles]

Ok, first vote:

Warlord: archetype or full-class?

I'll post the second vote in 2-3 years!



Joking aside, I'd be down to participate, but I dont think it would produce any results. There's a reason we all have a different bunch of houserules at our own table.

 

[Enrahim2]

Well, this is easy, once SRD is CC and ORC is operational. Just have people publish spells, classes etc compatible with that ruleset. Then have other people curate what they think give a good balanced selection of "all the stuff you need" and then have a third group of people vote with their wallet to find the best. Voila, community created 5ed "clone"

 

[Krachek]

Presumably, future non-Hasbro-WotC VTTs will include clone content.

Those improved immersive VTT look to me as another game.
So trying to link them with actual DnD rules designed mainly for table experience is more a burden than a benefit.
So for a serious super VTT project I would let the team innovate on the core mechanics.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

A proposal to design a community-created 5e clone essentially by a fan committee?

It would be amazing. The sheer re-litigation of every decision 5E's designers made would be truly beautiful/horrifying to watch.

Particularly any decision that didn't reflect the launch state of 3rd edition (no typo).

 

[Aldarc]

It would be amazing. The sheer re-litigation of every decision 5E's designers made would be truly beautiful/horrifying to watch.

Particularly any decision that didn't reflect the launch state of 3rd edition (no typo).

IME, there are always "while we're at..." changes in a lot of retroclones. These are often retroclones designed by one or maybe to designers. But in a committee? How many "while we're at" changes would there be and where? It really would be pure...

 

[Ruin Explorer]

How many "while we're at" changes would there be and where?

Now I really want to see it happen.

I want minutes from every meeting where they make design decisions. Maybe video. Grainy '80s video that gives the whole thing a "found footage" vibe. Give me a desperate to-camera tape of an exhausted guy in '80s office clothes talking about how he advocated for AD&D-style saves and now everything is falling apart interspersed among the meetings.

Also Bill Hader is the best and Stefon is my spirit animal.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Should we legally "steal" the game and take it into our own hands?

Make something as close as possible to 5e, able to be played at the same table as 5e, but legally owned by the community (creative commons license?)

you could, but without 1 voice being the guiding hand all you will end up with is 10 competing for 3rd and 4th place in the TTRPG market (maybe 6th and 7th place if we are unlucky)

Maybe call it "Dragons and Dungeons"?
Maybe "hire" Chris Perkins and some others via patreon?

lol... I'm sure he wants to quit the goodish paying mostly safe job for a big (the biggest) TTRPG designer to work month by month on patreon...

We will probably need some kind of voting system, so we don't have 10 different variations of "fighter" or "goblin". Some kind of constitution to govern changes would be good.

I can't wait to see how we get a consensus on anything...

 

[Jer]

For what it's worth, the names of all the classes are in the multiclassing rules, which are part of the proposed CC-BY content.

That's only if the pages they listed for their draft response document are actually what gets put into the final version though.

And the page listing is sloppy as heck and includes the phrase "excluding examples" as far as the text that is considered under CC-BY. So I'm positive the actual text will get extracted and rewritten before being put under any CC license which gives them opportunity to keep things out that they consider "examples" (and therefore give Wizards another opportunity to screw up and break even more trust). After all, is the listing of the class names in the multiclassing rules actually a set of rules, or just examples of classes that you can apply the multiclassing rules to? I know how I read it, but then I also know how I read the OGL and its promises of perpetuity, so I don't trust that me and Wizards are on the same page.

I'm also pretty sure there are rules they've left out that they didn't realize they left out. The chunk of rules between the magic items and the monsters are the rules for Diseases, Madness, Objects and Traps and I can't for the life of me see why they'd want to keep those rules out of the commons. So sloppiness to get something turned around quickly for discussion is expected, at least by me. But they really should clarify these things better.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

IME, there are always "while we're at..." changes

I mean while we are at it I would love to cut back the HP inflation that WotC editions have had
and while we are at it maybe we can make a setting that is set on modern designs instead of rehashing ideas form 70's 80's 90's and early 00's
wait while we are at it we should....

 

[irrg]

So, my first thought was jokingly saying "democracy is overrated", but…
Isn't anyone else concerned that a voting based system will possibly be awful?
I think a project like this would need a strong, opinionated leader with game design chops instead of letting the popular vote carry system design. Anything else just feels like populist decision making.