OGL Community created 5e clone?

mellored

Hero
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?)

Maybe call it "Dragons and Dungeons"?
Maybe "hire" Chris Perkins and some others via 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.e. 70% to make a class/monster, and 80% to change something.

And again, keep it compatible, so we can all play together.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


MoonSong

Rules-lawyering drama queen but not a munchkin
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?)

Maybe call it "Dragons and Dungeons"?
Maybe "hire" Chris Perkins and some others via 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.e. 70% to make a class/monster, and 80% to change something.

And again, keep it compatible, so we can all play together.
It would require a wiki space with a crowner system similar to tvtropes's. Each main class, and kin would need to go throygh the process to gain approval and become the community's version of that class.
 

Yaarel

Mind Mage
Should we legally "steal" the game and take it into our own hands?
Ethically, yes.

The intention of the Open Gaming License 1.0a in the first place is to empower gamers to play D&D "in the wild" beyond the capricious whims of any corporation. The game belongs to the gaming community.

When Chris Cao of Hasbro-WotC tries to terminate the OGL 1.0a, he is trying to steal the D&D game from the gaming community.

It is ethical to perpetuate the gaming culture in the wild.

Indeed, by cloning D&D, the gaming culture is continuing the customs of D&D without using the brandname "D&D", which is precisely the original intent of giving the D&D SRDs to the gaming community in the first place.

The theft that Chris Cao is trying to do is unethical.

Any cloning of the SRDs by the gaming community in response, is ethical, to ensure the perpetuation of the liberty of gaming culture.
 

Yaarel

Mind Mage
We will probably need some kind of voting system, so we don't have 10 different variations of "fighter" or "goblin".
I think we can have "10 different variations" of Fighter and Goblin.

The voting system determines which of the variants is the "default". Whichever gets the most votes is the default, and the rest of the variants are "options" that a Game Master can choose for ones own setting.

Note, "Goblin" is public domain. Any version of a goblin is fine.



"Fighter" is public domain too, but I would probably call it a "Warrior" anyway, since this name is closer to what the concept is. Or, I would split it into two separate classes: a tough heavy-infantry "Knight" versus an agile light-infantry "Skirmisher".
 

Yaarel

Mind Mage
I wonder if there is a way to track "auto-voting" based on the number of views − or better yet, the number of actual uses to build characters or settings?
 




mellored

Hero
I think we can have "10 different variations" of Fighter and Goblin.

The voting system determines which of the variants is the "default". Whichever gets the most votes is the default, and the rest of the variants are "options" that a Game Master can choose for ones own setting.
Sounds good.
Note, "Goblin" is public domain. Any version of a goblin is fine.
Most of the monsters are public domain.
 


"Fighter" is public domain too, but I would probably call it a "Warrior" anyway, since this name is closer to what the concept is. Or, I would split it into two separate classes: a tough heavy-infantry "Knight" versus an agile light-infantry "Skirmisher".

I suspect that most of the common character classes and races that exist would be public domain.

Most of the D&D races are from folklore long predating D&D, or are genericized versions of literary characters that also predate D&D.

You can show inspiration from literature, history and folklore for most of the major D&D classes. Amusingly, the 2nd edition PHB explicitly listed various sources from history, literature, and folklore all the core classes of that edition were based on. (For example, Archbishop Turpin from Song of Roland as a source for the Cleric class)
 


Yaarel

Mind Mage
I suspect that most of the common character classes and races that exist would be public domain.
Yeah, several lawyers mentioned this, but for me the implications are starting to sink in.

Most of D&D is a relatively straightforward import of public domain concepts and noncopyrightable systems.

By undermining the OGL 1.0a, and causing the gaming community to no longer sign onto it, WotC actually loses its own contractual protection of the SRD property.

All of the SRD is trivially clonable.



Compare the "Drow" that Gygax pieced together from disparate public domain sources:
• Norse Dvergar
• Scottish "Drow" (a kind of small troll)
• Jewish "Lilith" (whence Lolth)
• and curiously a Norwegian folkbelief that identifies "Lilith" as the mother of the hiddenfolk
• Greek Arachne (whence Spider)
• Tolkien adopted the scholarly speculation that some nature beings were tales about human ethnicities of flesh and blood

In my eyes, this particular "alteration" is distinctive enough that Gygax can copyright his own version of a drow.

But the elements that construct it are strictly public domain.

It is trivially easy to rewrite a new version of a "dark elf" or "unseelie elf", while drawing from the public domain.
 


Thourne

Explorer
I imagine that Pathfinder 2 and other non-D&D games will need to go thru a "scrub" to doublecheck to remove residual SRD copy-pasting, if any, so the versions of the concepts can stand on their own.
I would think PF2 being written from the ground up would make that a relatively quick task.
 


Making a clone won’t be that much difficult.
If they keep up with OGL 1.2 the core rules will be available by Creative common licence.
there is still a lot of work to do for classes, spells and monsters, but it’s a reasonable work.

and for a clone game, I won’t worry too much for problems by Wotc.
For now they seem obsess by improved VTT and recurring subscription.
 


Yaarel

Mind Mage
Making a clone won’t be that much difficult.
If they keep up with OGL 1.2 the core rules will be available by Creative common licence.
there is still a lot of work to do for classes, spells and monsters, but it’s a reasonable work.

and for a clone game, I won’t worry too much for problems by Wotc.
For now they seem obsess by improved VTT and recurring subscription.
Presumably, future non-Hasbro-WotC VTTs will include clone content.
 

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top