D&D 5E Expected Additions to SRD 1.2

[DEFCON 1]

I'm honestly wondering just how close to the line someone could tread, with regards to trying to clone existing sub-races/sub-classes, etc. If the name of them isn't anything that's closed, and you can use whatever game mechanics are in the 5E SRD, then so long as it's not word-for-word the same I suspect you could recreate quite a bit of what's not there.

Although the real question would be why anyone might want to bother? I mean, unless you just felt like you HAD to have a Wood Elf using PC stats rather than a monster statblock in an adventure you were writing ... would anyone actually buy a non-5E-SRD "Wood Elf" subrace created and posted onto the DM's Guild? Who would do that? What would be the point?

 

[Mark CMG]

Although the real question would be why anyone might want to bother? I mean, unless you just felt like you HAD to have a Wood Elf using PC stats rather than a monster statblock in an adventure you were writing ... would anyone actually buy a non-5E-SRD "Wood Elf" subrace created and posted onto the DM's Guild? Who would do that? What would be the point?

Someone might want to create their own setting book and have one in there, I suppose. It's not so tough to do under the current setup.

*Edit* There's a brief Wood Elf description in the 3.5 SRD for instance, and adding language in categories using the High Elf subrace as a template is easy enough.

 

[Alzrius]

Although the real question would be why anyone might want to bother? I mean, unless you just felt like you HAD to have a Wood Elf using PC stats rather than a monster statblock in an adventure you were writing ... would anyone actually buy a non-5E-SRD "Wood Elf" subrace created and posted onto the DM's Guild? Who would do that? What would be the point?

The same people who'd want to reprint an SRD as a book, I suppose (though that'd be for the OGL folks, rather than the DM's Guild).

 

[Tony Vargas]

For the most part, missing sub-classes aren't a big deal. A 3pp player-focused product should be about adding new options, new classes, new sub-classes, etc, not old ones. But, a few sub-classes have unique mechanics that could have other uses, and could have been a better choice for inclusion. Going with Champion rather than Battlemaster, for instance, means CS dice and maneuvers are out of bounds. Which is too bad, they had a lot of potential to 'build off,' either to add more meaningful options for the Battlemaster at higher level, or to expand into more interesting martial classes. The last UA used variations on CS dice in two fighter sub-classes, for instance. A 3pp couldn't do anything similar, with just the Champion to work from. Same goes for Wild Magic, it's only found in the missing Sorcerer sub-class, but it has a lot of potential uses - magic items, artifacts, magical accidents, chaos zones or whatnot - D&D magic is usually very dependable and predictable, locking away the best example of the opposite we have in 5e is unduly limiting. I suppose the Wand of Wonder could always be an alternate starting point for that though.

Backgrounds, OTOH, don't seem like a problem. Can't use the Soldier background? Substitute an Officer or Legionnaire or Mercenary or Militia background.

 

[Nagol]

Although the real question would be why anyone might want to bother? I mean, unless you just felt like you HAD to have a Wood Elf using PC stats rather than a monster statblock in an adventure you were writing ... would anyone actually buy a non-5E-SRD "Wood Elf" subrace created and posted onto the DM's Guild? Who would do that? What would be the point?

You want to make a campaign/character tracking tool for people to use.

You want to make a large set of well-drawn NPCs DMs can include in their campaigns as foils, allies, or colour.

 

[Nagol]

For the most part, missing sub-classes aren't a big deal. A 3pp player-focused product should be about adding new options, new classes, new sub-classes, etc, not old ones. But, a few sub-classes have unique mechanics that could have other uses, and could have been a better choice for inclusion. Going with Champion rather than Battlemaster, for instance, means CS dice and maneuvers are out of bounds. Which is too bad, they had a lot of potential to 'build off,' either to add more meaningful options for the Battlemaster at higher level, or to expand into more interesting martial classes. The last UA used variations on CS dice in two fighter sub-classes, for instance. A 3pp couldn't do anything similar, with just the Champion to work from. Same goes for Wild Magic, it's only found in the missing Sorcerer sub-class, but it has a lot of potential uses - magic items, artifacts, magical accidents, chaos zones or whatnot - D&D magic is usually very dependable and predictable, locking away the best example of the opposite we have in 5e is unduly limiting. I suppose the Wand of Wonder could always be an alternate starting point for that though.

Backgrounds, OTOH, don't seem like a problem. Can't use the Soldier background? Substitute an Officer or Legionnaire or Mercenary or Militia background.

It does mean tools for PC creation/management are still locked up though. That's one area where you really need access to the player options to properly make a go of it.

 

[Tony Vargas]

It does mean tools for PC creation/management are still locked up though. That's one area where you really need access to the player options to properly make a go of it.

Sure. Those were originally going to be a partnership (remember project morningstar?). Maybe they'll get one together eventually. But, yeah, an SRD is never going to have /everything/ so a 3pp CB isn't ever going to be comprehensive - it'd have to have plenty of 'enter custom element' buttons.

 

[Tony Vargas]

You want to make a campaign/character tracking tool for people to use.

You want to make a large set of well-drawn NPCs DMs can include in their campaigns as foils, allies, or colour.

You might want to have a number of pregenerated characters for your adventure - something old-school 'modules' often had.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I'm honestly wondering just how close to the line someone could tread, with regards to trying to clone existing sub-races/sub-classes, etc. If the name of them isn't anything that's closed, and you can use whatever game mechanics are in the 5E SRD, then so long as it's not word-for-word the same I suspect you could recreate quite a bit of what's not there.

The safest things is just not to go there, if you can at all avoid it. Don't try and publish some rules that are like that. Do something else.

IANAL, but what you could probably get away with, legally speaking, is some sort of text swap. If you really need, say, the Wood Elf, for your product to be complete for whatever reason, and you can't go with the DM's Guild, you could re-write the wood elf from the PHB and as long as it wasn't a copy-paste job, you'd likely be OK. Change a few cosmetic things if you want to be extra-safe.

But I think the key question would be, why do you need the wood elf? If you're just self-publishing your homebrew setting, do you need to be explicit about wood elves and reproduce their abilities? And is it important that they are exactly the same as the WotC's wood elf?

I'd hope that the lack of a wood elf would inspire people to think about what they could use instead of wood elves, and add interesting and creative new ideas to the world. I get that that's not always possible, but I'd really hope that folks would seriously examine the elements that they'd like to reproduce (but for SRD not including them) and ask themselves if it's something that's really all that vital to what they're writing. Polishing the serial numbers off the WotC wood elf should be a last resort.

 

[bmfrosty]

The safest things is just not to go there, if you can at all avoid it. Don't try and publish some rules that are like that. Do something else.

IANAL, but what you could probably get away with, legally speaking, is some sort of text swap. If you really need, say, the Wood Elf, for your product to be complete for whatever reason, and you can't go with the DM's Guild, you could re-write the wood elf from the PHB and as long as it wasn't a copy-paste job, you'd likely be OK. Change a few cosmetic things if you want to be extra-safe.

But I think the key question would be, why do you need the wood elf? If you're just self-publishing your homebrew setting, do you need to be explicit about wood elves and reproduce their abilities? And is it important that they are exactly the same as the WotC's wood elf?

I'd hope that the lack of a wood elf would inspire people to think about what they could use instead of wood elves, and add interesting and creative new ideas to the world. I get that that's not always possible, but I'd really hope that folks would seriously examine the elements that they'd like to reproduce (but for SRD not including them) and ask themselves if it's something that's really all that vital to what they're writing. Polishing the serial numbers off the WotC wood elf should be a last resort.

Is there any problem saying please reference the PHB page X for information on the wood elf?