Cubicle 7 Also Announces A New 'C7d20' System

Joining Paizo (which has hinted at plans to update Pathfinder), Kobold Press (with it's Black Flag project), MCDM (which is working on a new game), and--of course--Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition (which was released last year), Cubicle 7 has announced a new C7d20 System.

You heard it here first! C7d20, our brand new system, is in development. Building on the great d20 games we know and love, our system will offer all the exciting action-packed adventures players expect from a d20 fantasy game, as well as the broader styles of gaming that we’ve brought to 5e in Doctors and Daleks, Adventures in Middle-earth, and Uncharted Journeys.

C7d20 will be a complete rule set that is compatible with 5e — you’ll be able to use all of your favourite 5e books and supplements, including Uncharted Journeys and Broken Weave. A core rulebook for C7d20 will launch later this year and you’ll be able to see hints of what is to come when Broken Weave launches. We’re involved in discussions about open licensing and will have more news on this as the situation develops.

 

[overgeeked]

Lighter makes for maximum compatibility, so someone will be making one of those.

I hope so. And I hope one of them is by C7 because they clearly know their way around fiddling with the d20 system. A lighter d20 game with the Doctors & Daleks encounter design would be chef’s kiss.

 

[DMZ2112]

We'd love it to be! So we'll definitely be reaching out to the Kobolds as we develop ours and they work on theirs

Supremely glad to hear this!

This is all starting to remind me of the Cola Wars of the 1980s. I'm curious to see which one will end up on top (my money is on ORC, but time will tell.)

For my part I am going to do my best to stay invested in as many of them as possible and encourage cross-pollination as best one man can. The real strength of this movement won't be in a king of the hill, but in a library of compatible open content that can be used to construct a custom version of the ruleset tailored to the individual table.

If we ever decide this phenomenon needs a name, I am throwing my weight behind 'Benderization."

 

[Emmetation]

I hope so. And I hope one of them is by C7 because they clearly know their way around fiddling with the d20 system. A lighter d20 game with the Doctors & Daleks encounter design would be chef’s kiss.

One of my big design goals is faster combat, which is something we nailed in Soulbound IMO. But yep, plenty of folks looking to add complexity, but I think one of our pillars will be allowing for ease of use and flexibility while keeping it compatible with 5e

 

[Haplo781]

Supremely glad to hear this!


For my part I am going to do my best to stay invested in as many of them as possible and encourage cross-pollination as best one man can. The real strength of this movement won't be in a king of the hill, but in a library of compatible open content that can be used to construct a custom version of the ruleset tailored to the individual table.

If we ever decide this phenomenon needs a name, I am throwing my weight behind 'Benderization."

 

[Rabulias]

But will Black Flag and C7d20 be compatible?

I would think so. If Project Black Flag (PBF) is compatible with 5e, and C7d20 is compatible with 5e, then it's A = B and B = C, therefore A = C. I think the bigger issue may be a product like, say, an adventure, that references a "sorcerer" or a "troll" by name but not detailed. Do they mean PBF's troll or the one in C7d20? In the majority of cases it won't matter, of course, but there may be slight differences. Say hypothetically that PBF's troll is vulnerable to fire and acid and C7d20's is just vulnerable to fire, and the adventure writer includes of a wand of acidic spray in a treasure pile before the PCs meet the troll. A writer using PBF might include this wand to make a tough fight a little easier, but a DM using C7d20 would find the fight may be tough for their players.

I'm probably worrying over nothing. I think in such a world, adventure and supplement writers would cite the source for any references like that. Another reason the SRD is so nice to have.

 

[Haplo781]

Supremely glad to hear this!


For my part I am going to do my best to stay invested in as many of them as possible and encourage cross-pollination as best one man can. The real strength of this movement won't be in a king of the hill, but in a library of compatible open content that can be used to construct a custom version of the ruleset tailored to the individual table.

If we ever decide this phenomenon needs a name, I am throwing my weight behind 'Benderization."

Really hoping all the major 3pp have a powwow and come up with a set of core rules they all agree to use as a base.

 

[overgeeked]

Really hoping all the major 3pp have a powwow and come up with a set of core rules they all agree to use as a base.

They won’t have to. If WotC puts the core of 5E into the CC-BY license as proposed, many/most of the 3PP will use that as their base.

 

[Haplo781]

They won’t have to. If WotC puts the core of 5E into the CC-BY license as proposed, many/most of the 3PP will use that as their base.

They can do better.

 

[Xethreau]

I would think so. If Project Black Flag (PBF) is compatible with 5e, and C7d20 is compatible with 5e, then it's A = B and B = C, therefore A = C.

Different people have different definitions of compatibility. Tiny variations in rules re-writes can raise serious compatibility questions. Large rule overhauls all the more so.

Consider Level Up: A5E. We already have an extant 5e-spinoff system. Can and will Black Flag and C7d20 create something that is compatible with it? Morrus said "who knows" and he right about that. Yet I would point out that each designer will put forward their own design priorities, primarily because each group is introducing its own core system. Their primary priority will not likely be compatibility between competitors; instead they will do their best to take the throne as the new core engine.

 

[Rabulias]

This is all starting to remind me of the Cola Wars of the 1980s. I'm curious to see which one will end up on top (my money is on ORC, but time will tell.)

Hmmm.. they do like putting numbers in their name....

 

[Xethreau]

Hmmm.. they do like putting numbers in their name....

Don't forget the new MTG set. Phyrexia: All will be One D&D

 

[Haplo781]

Don't forget the new MTG set. Phyrexia: All will be One D&D

Damn it was right in front of us all along

 

[overgeeked]

They can do better.

Yes. There are hundreds of better games and systems out there and they could design a new bespoke system to share. Something like 90% of the RPG market is D&D 5E. So if they want to survive and not splinter into nothing there are three choices. 1) Make a new game and pray enough of the market goes with them; 2) Switch to supporting other existing game like Pathfinder or Savage Worlds, or; 3) Keep supporting 5E because the market is already there.

 

[Dungeonosophy]

– Wikipedia

I will leave it as an exercise for the reader to determine if this is offensive.

hi, i’m not saying it’s offensive. i haven’t and wouldn’t report it to a moderator. the term ‘balkanization’ does have valid figurative uses.

i’m saying that in this gaming context, the word rings with the tonality of a negative exaggeration to my ears. not a big deal.

 

[numtini]

This is all starting to remind me of the Cola Wars of the 1980s. I'm curious to see which one will end up on top (my money is on ORC, but time will tell.)

ORC is a license, not a system.

On what compatible means, I'm primarily a Call of Cthulhu and CoC Adjacent GM (Delta Green, Cthulhu Eternal). These all share stat blocks that are similar enough that you can run basically anything from 1st edition CoC to Delta Green without any real adjustment, despite the fact that the games might have somewhat different procedures for building a character or adjudicating a round of combat or increasing skills. I suspect that's the kind of compatibility we're going to see here.

However, I have run into people who really can't just roll with this. The only difference might be a different name for a skill that's obviously the same skill or that Call of Cthulhu has stats on a decimal where the others have it on 3-18 and tell you to roll for stat times 5, but some people feel the need to sit down and start marking up a scenario to "convert" it. Those people are probably going to have the same issue with "compatible" post-5E games while others of us will just pick it up and run.

Stat blocks also don't account for things like character classes or subclasses or player races. Those may be more difficult to make completely compatible.

 

[dave2008]

Who knows?

@Morrus , I realize this can't really be in the works now, but would you be willing to work with KP and C7 and to make a unified 5e compatible core system?

 

[Richards]

Sounds cool, but C7d20 doesn't roll of tongue.

"C7d20," when vocalized, sounds very much like "C-70-20."

Johnathan

 

[Von Ether]

Here’s to hoping this one is lighter than all the other not-5E but totally compatible with 5E games in the pipeline. We already have the heavier-than side well and truly covered.

I am chuckling because Free League is currently beta testing a new rules light BRP/Y0 game and there is vocal gamers who are already demanding more complexity.

For some, "heavier game mechanics" will never be truly well covered.

 

[Jaeger]

You heard it here first! C7d20, our brand new system, is in development. Building on the great d20 games we know and love, our system will offer all the exciting action-packed adventures players expect from a d20 fantasy game, as well as the broader styles of gaming that we’ve brought to 5e in Doctors and Daleks, Adventures in Middle-earth, and Uncharted Journeys.

C7d20 will be a complete rule set that is compatible with 5e ... A core rulebook for C7d20 will launch later this year ...

That is a quick turnaround time.

But they have lots of 5e content that they can quickly leverage into a full game.

I'd expect to see lots of AiME in the new C7d20 RPG...

But will Black Flag and C7d20 be compatible? That would seem to be the element that will determine whether we see a flourishing of Open Gaming or a balkanization of competing 5E-alikes.

While in the short term a balkanization of competing 5E-alikes will happen. Eventually one will emerge on top.

The hobby is balkanizing a bit already with PF2 grabbing more market share off of the current OGL madness. But I believe that the ceiling is limited For PF2 because most will want to play a non-wotc version of 5e. And PF2 is a different beast in many ways.

So in the short term it seems that the balkanization of the anti-Wotzi 5e audience will be among the 2-3 5eish announced games so far.

C7 has announced a 5e game. (C7D20)
Kobold and Frog God seems to be going Black Flag. (BF5e)
MCDM RPG is a non factor as it will not be 5e based.

So far we are only looking at a 3 way balkanization between C7d20 , BF5e, and PF2. All eventually competing for the #2 RPG spot behind D&D.

My totally worthless predictions:

Pf2 will eventually hit a ceiling of how many former 5e players it will attract.

So the real fight will be between C7d20 & BF5e. The one that becomes ascendant will depend on a few factors:

1- Who will release a complete game first? (This will be a BIG deciding factor)
2- Who will have the best support?

I don't expect the balkanization to last more than 3-5 years. Eventually the hobby will coalesce around a favored 5e substitute that will then shoot it out with PF2e for the #2 spot.

Or maybe more depending on what happens with the OneVTT...

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Their primary priority will not likely be compatibility between competitors; instead they will do their best to take the throne as the new core engine.

That would be exceedingly stupid to try. The big dog will be D&D, as it has been since 1974.

Some companies will decide that they are happy owning 100% of a smaller pie that's all theirs, but the ones who still want to sell to D&D customers are going to want to make it as easy as possible to do so. LevelUp, for instance, is modular in nature. I can pick up the monster book and just use the monsters, rather than going all-in on LevelUp. Other groups might add more crunch on the players side and let their DM run what he wants from the other side.