D&D General Has the OGL/WotC debacle motivated you to create your own Fantasy Heartbreaker or homebrew?

[Benjamin Olson]

Not "now" AIUI; the whole document is Draft. Possibly at some point in the future, although I would not put it past WotC to claim that there was negative feedback on the CC thing and wriggle out of it.

(IANAL, TINLA.)

You are correct that the precise pages of the SRD being given over to the Creative Commons are in a draft subject to change. I think people like me jumping the gun on accepting the promise, outside the draft, of them making "the core content" (whatever that is) creative commons makes it exceedingly hard (public relations-wise and possibly legally) for them not to make make something creative commons, but its true they may pare it down to something actually meaningless (unlike the current draft where, despite some people's grumbles, it does make one substantially freer to create a game system built on or derived from 5e rules without legal doubt).

 

[glass]

You are correct that the precise pages of the SRD being given over to the Creative Commons are in a draft subject to change. I think people like me jumping the gun on accepting the promise, outside the draft, of them making "the core content" (whatever that is) creative commons makes it exceedingly hard (public relations-wise and possibly legally) for them not to make make something creative commons, but its true they may pare it down to something actually meaningless (unlike the current draft where, despite some people's grumbles, it does make one substantially freer to create a game system built on or derived from 5e rules without legal doubt).

You have much more faith in WotC than I do (which is admittedly not hard right now). Although, as far as I can tell it is already pretty meaningless (largely because it is so vague).

 

[Yora]

Screw it, I'm gonna do it!

I have so many house rules for B/X already, might just as well replace the other parts that "I would have done differently if I designed it", and put it all into a single tidied up document. I think I should be able to make it look as professional as Basic Fantasy.

Patrick Stuart and Kevin Crawford can do it, then so can I. Might not even use it myself and I don't expect anyone else to, but it's a fun exercise.

 

[Mind of tempest]

I have long had an idea of making my own fantasy setting, if a new open-source rule set came out I might be interested in doing it.

but I still got uni, finding a job and making those youtube videos whose scripts are done to do so I would not bet the farm on it.

 

[Vivificient]

I've been using homebrew rules for a few years, but the OGL debacle motivated me to clean them up and share them on my website under the OGL (while the license is still "authorized"). Here they are: Wizards With Crossbows

They are essentially my own stripped down version of Third Edition, designed for a West Marches campaign that I run for some friends at work. My goal was to have a game that "felt" like Third Edition, but which played a lot faster and was a lot simpler for me to run.

 

[Arakhor]

I've been using homebrew rules for a few years, but the OGL debacle motivated me to clean them up and share them on my website under the OGL (while the license is still "authorized"). Here they are: Wizards With Crossbows

They are essentially my own stripped down version of Third Edition, designed for a West Marches campaign that I run for some friends at work. My goal was to have a game that "felt" like Third Edition, but which played a lot faster and was a lot simpler for me to run.

So, I was looking at your rules (chiefly the simplified spells, to be fair) and noticed that in the magic items section, you mention persistent items such as gauntlets of ogre power, but the only items you actually define are all consumable. Why's that?

 

[Vivificient]

So, I was looking at your rules (chiefly the simplified spells, to be fair) and noticed that in the magic items section, you mention persistent items such as gauntlets of ogre power, but the only items you actually define are all consumable. Why's that?

Good observation! The simple reason is that these are only the player-facing rules. My GM-facing rules (including monsters, treasure tables, encounter tables, magic items, mutation tables, villainous character classes, and so on) are in a more fragmentary state that isn't really ready to be published. Basically I had to finish all the player-facing rules so players could play and make their characters, but I've only been doing the GM rules as I need them.

Likewise, you'll see under Creature Statistics, that it only includes the creatures for summoning spells, class features, pack animals, etc.