Why is “Level Up Advanced 5e” NOT listed as a rules set?

[gamemasterbob]

I own the Level Up Advanced 5e FG books. Level Up Advanced 5e Is no less a rules set then Pathfinder is to D&D 3.5 it complete and does NOT need any other books to run it. Is there some reason why it’s not listed as one of your rules sets? I actually thought there was something wrong when it wasn’t one of my rules sets choices when wanting to start a campaign in it. Is anybody a little confused about this like me?

Just wondering if there’s a reason. May be a legal reason. Maybe somebody could post here and give me a clue.

I appreciate this forum very much. It keeps FG going.

GMB

[LordEntrails]

Maybe SmiteWorks or one of the devs can say, but I can make some good guesses.
Because if it was a ruleset you would not be able to use 5E resources within it without more effort?
Because Level Up is advertised as advanced 5E, not a different game system? (unlike 3.5 & PF that are advertised as different game systems)

[Zacchaeus]

Level Up is not a ruleset; it's an addition to 5e. It is based on the 5e ruleset - it is published under the 5e SRD. The vast majority of the mechanics come from 5e. The bits that don't are catered for by the extension which comes with the adventure guide. You can use any other 5e books with advanced 5e. In short it's 5e with some bells and whistles.

[gamemasterbob]

Level Up is a stand alone game. No less than Pathfinder first edition was to 3.5. I remember gamers calling Pathfinder “DND 3.75“. And for the most part they were right. But Paizo is a marketing machine! They created this art style for Pathfinder along with an amazing world with fantastic background and NPCs. You couldn’t resist but go exploring and conquering. If level up is going to succeed they need to copy that marketing strategy in my opinion. Level Up A5e is 5e’s Pathfinder. Or…it could be. I’ll wait to see how EN Publishing positions it.
Level Up is a ruleset I should be able to choose to create a campaign in it in FG.

These are my opinions and yours may vary. I present these thoughts light heartedly. Peace and happy gaming. :)

[LordEntrails]

The publisher of Level Up knows how it has been built in FG. If they wanted it a stand-alone ruleset, then they would have had the developer make it a stand-alone ruleset. Since they did not, you can know that, right or wrong, they chose for it to be an extension for 5E.

If you would like that changed, I suggest you reach out to EN Publishing/Morrus and tell him your thoughts :)

But does it really matter that much? Play and have fun :)

[similarly]

Because if it was a ruleset you would not be able to use 5E resources within it without more effort?


This, for me, is the most important consideration: the ability to use 5e mods, extensions, etc with Level Up 5e.

[Trenloe]

It's an interesting point...

Pathfinder 1e was built on the D&D 3.5E ruleset, but Paizo had a completely separate rulebook and system - it was (and is) stand alone, despite its similarities to D&D 3.5E.

Can you play a RPG game purely using Level up? Or do you need to use the base D&D 5e rules as the underlying infrastructure? The back of the Level Up Adventurer's Guide states: "Level Up is a standalone game. Everything you need to create your character
and start adventuring can be found in this rulebook"

Which suggests maybe it should be its own ruleset? But, knowing how Fantasy Grounds works and how this is so heavily reliant on D&D 5e gives me pause to recommend this being a stand alone ruleset. Ultimately, most of the points made above can be worked around - a new ruleset can be made to allow opening of 5E modules (https://fantasygroundsunity.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/FGCP/pages/996645499/importinfo) etc.. So, there's really not a strong argument for one or the other - except maybe if a group decides to convert their start using Level Up rules in their current 5e game - in which case keeping it as an extension makes more sense; although it's not an unsurmountable problem to change the ruleset a campaign uses, but it requires a little bit of technical know how, whereas enabling an extension is pretty straightforward.

[similarly]

It's an interesting point...

Pathfinder 1e was built on the D&D 3.5E ruleset, but Paizo had a completely separate rulebook and system - it was (and is) stand alone, despite its similarities to D&D 3.5E.

Can you play a RPG game purely using Level up? Or do you need to use the base D&D 5e rules as the underlying infrastructure? The back of the Level Up Adventurer's Guide states: "Level Up is a standalone game. Everything you need to create your character
and start adventuring can be found in this rulebook"

Which suggests maybe it should be its own ruleset? But, knowing how Fantasy Grounds works and how this is so heavily reliant on D&D 5e gives me pause to recommend this being a stand alone ruleset. Ultimately, most of the points made above can be worked around - a new ruleset can be made to allow opening of 5E modules (https://fantasygroundsunity.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/FGCP/pages/996645499/importinfo) etc.. So, there's really not a strong argument for one or the other - except maybe if a group decides to convert their start using Level Up rules in their current 5e game - in which case keeping it as an extension makes more sense; although it's not an unsurmountable problem to change the ruleset a campaign uses, but it requires a little bit of technical know how, whereas enabling an extension is pretty straightforward.

The other side is benefit.

Labeling LUA5e as D&D5e = Benefit: automatically allow 5e ext and mod.
Label LUA5e as separate ruleset = Benefit: ?

What's the benefit of labeling it a separate ruleset?

[Kelrugem]

This, for me, is the most important consideration: the ability to use 5e mods, extensions, etc with Level Up 5e.

As Trenloe wrote, this is no obstacle :) The existing PF1 ruleset for example also allows loading 3.5E modules natively :) (same for PF1 content in 3.5E)

Hence, being a different ruleset in FG doesn't necessarily imply that you could not use the other ruleset's modules; it is easy to tell the code to allow other modules :) (Damned's universal module extension is another example of that there is code doing that. If the dev decides to create a ruleset for the 5E advanced, then they may just need to care about not changing the data structure too much to avoid creating errors if a normal 5E module is loaded)

[Doswelk]

This bring to mind the "issue" people have had with Pathfinder for Savage Worlds being a different ruleset than SWADE.

The amount of people who "complain" that it isn't SWADE and therefore cannot load SWADE modules into it (you can but it requires an extension to do so).

The reason it is a different ruleset is because that is how the publisher wanted it, they also were happy to have extension to allow cross-compatibility to be released but could not be part of the "official" product.

The real question I find myself wondering is why OP is "offended" (not the right word but best I can come up with, no offense is meant by the use of it) that it isn't it's ruleset given the advantages that being treated as 5e grants it.

My understanding (not owning any 5e products) is that the 5e SRD is included for free with FGU and that is the most likely reason for making LevelUp a 5e extension to stop unnecessary duplication of code, any how I have rambled on long enough.

[Nylanfs]

irked is probably a better term. :)