Skip to main content

D&D 5e: More News is Bad News (for 3rd Party Publishers)

Mike Mearls released another tidbit on D&D 5e, this time supposedly answering some questions on D&D 5e.  Let me summarize some major points:

  • Basic D&D 5e won't be suitable for a basis for sharing material (adventures, etc).
  • DMG will be the book that explains the rules and how to generate your own stuff.
  • The licensing looks like it won't be addressed until 2015.
The comments on this announcement are worth a read, but basically can be summed up in a few short categories:  big fans saying hi, I hate/love GSL/OGL, I trust/don't trust WotC to get it right.  Clearly Pathfinder has been screwing with WotC's business model and the fans now have different expectations that before.

It is good to know that the expectation that Basic D&D 5e won't be suitable for creating stuff and distributing it.  It eliminates any false sense of hope that basic D&D 5e would be a basis for an SRD.  It is hopefully good news that the DMG will address how to make your own stuff.  Licensing uncertainty is a big problem.

Now, reading the tea leaves, this probably means that Basic D&D 5e won't be licensed to allow people to share their material based on it, at least not in a 3rd party publisher sense.  Though there is some hesitation on Mike to release the details, he seems to be purposely vague between the OGL and GSL approaches to licensing.  Maybe the decision isn't made yet; or perhaps the decision is made and he knows the community isn't going to like restrictive licensing.  Lawyers are in the way too, I am sure.  Maybe the conversation is still underway.  Only time will tell.  Leaving the community, which has already seen these rules for 2 years and which is already generating 3rd party fan content in legal limbo does seem like a recipe for backlash though.  This might be a big mistake, a 4e sized mistake for 3rd party content.

All of this slow progression seems to be part of the plan.  By slowing down releases and letting the community experience D&D 5e, maybe they are trying to let some positive momentum build after the disaster that was 4th edition.  I can understand that.  After all, I can't refuse to buy the 5e books because of their 3rd party licensing, if they haven't released the details yet.  They can make a lot of money off of just selling those 5e books, even if the licensing agreement deep sixes the entire 5e community.

This 5e announcement is bad enough that it makes me consider cancelling my preorders.  I guess I'll give WotC a bit more time to make things right and clear, since the books aren't out for a few more months.


Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

5E Starting Gold and Equipment for Higher Levels

The DMG has a rough recommendation for starting gold and equipment for higher levels, but with my groups running one-shots, we wanted to nail it down to level by level. Here's my DMG-inspired table. Generally I allow equipment to be traded in during character creation for half book value, where applicable. I also, as a GM, offer to make custom magic items for players who can't choose. A list of magical items by rarity can be found here  with stats available in the DMG. I also generally allow players to buy healing potions (2d4+2) for 50gp and greater healing potions for 250gp (4d4+4). PHB items are available at book cost at creation. I do not allow other equipment to be purchased except in game. This is generally based off the "high magic" campaign. Level Starting Gold Starting Equipment / Magic Items 1 - 160gp  OR Standard starting equipment 2 210gp Standard starting equipment 3 285gp Standard starting equipment 4 365gp Standard sta...
3 comments
Read more

Pathfinder without Armor Check Penalty: Avoiding Nude PCs

I like Pathfinder without Armor Check Penalty and here's why.  From the PRD: Armor Check Penalty : Any armor heavier than leather, as well as any shield, applies an armor check penalty to all Dexterity- and Strength-based skill checks. A character's encumbrance may also incur an armor check penalty. Armor check penalty is a big problem in Pathfinder.  It affects a number of critical skills: Acrobatics Climb Disable Device Escape Artist Fly Sleight of Hand Stealth Swim Clearly some of these seem relevantly affected, but what about disable device?  I can't move lockpicks because I am wearing armor?  That seems odd.  If I were to include ACP, which I currently don't foresee, I think I would limit it to affecting only Acrobatics, Escape Artist, Sleight of Hand, and Swim.  These seem reasonable... more reasonable than the full list.  Unfortunately, my experience with ACP is that is leads to unnecessarily ridiculous scenarios: Hmmm... ...
3 comments
Read more

Rules for Flying Creatures in 5E

I'm not one for just throwing my players willy-nilly into something new without an idea of how it would work.  Flying races are on the horizon for one of my games, so here are my clarifications for flying creatures: A flying creatures requires a minimum space of at least 3 times their height in all directions in order to flight. For example, a 6 ft tall flying creature requires a room to be at least 18 ft in all dimensions before they can fly in it. A flying creature can attempt to grapple a creature.  If the the target or grappler are flying, grapple attempts are at disadvantage. If neither are flying, grapples are per RAW.  The state of flying or walking is determined by the last square you have moved.  To change between walking and/or flying, you must use at least 1 space of movement.  Movement rules per RAW apply (PHB pg 190 "Using Different Speeds") A successful grapple check by a flying creature can allow the flying creature to potentially carry th...
Post a Comment
Read more