I propose that we (DMs to start, players added once we're ready) set up a shared campaign setting for D&D 5e specifically for Play by Post.

I think there are a lot of problems with PbP that can be solved with a shared campaign setting. Play by Post is very slow, causing some DMs and players to drop out long before a 1-20 level campaign could possibly finish. Shorter, One-Shots have a better chance  of successfully finishing, but they don't leave much room for the long term character development. With a shared campaign setting, player characters live on after the end of the One-Shot and can start in another One-Shot by the same or a different DM. Player characters can develop relationships outside the short adventures. Experience, gold, magic items continue on with that character along with anything they build. Major events in the shared world are part of the story of all the player characters. While this could be reason enough for a shared campaign there are so many other possibilities that can be added as well. So how do we start?

We need to agree upon set of house rules for character creation so that characters created in the shared setting would be acceptable to all DMs in the group for their adventures.

Next a set of character advancement rules covering experience, gold, treasure, magic items and alike (for instance we don't want a lot characters in a small village to all have Robes of the Magi).

Then we pick or create a shared setting. Sigil would work. A place where characters can live between adventures, where adventures could take place and had portals to other places where DMs can run modules and other types of single shot adventures. We could instead homebrew a Demiplane in the D&D universe.

After that, the sky's the limit with coDMs, onboarding, best practices, feedback, etc.

This might wind up a small group of DMs who can work out managing the group with a private forum thread or it might wind up being dozens of DMs and hundreds of players and use something like GIT (an online, software versioning system) to keep track of everything.

One suggestion that has been made, that I like a lot is that there should be some rule giving priority to DMs playing in other DMs adventures. There should be some sort of rewards for the work involved and nobody should have to be a forever DM.

If you are interested, what you'd like to see become part of it?

It is definitely possible. One of the longest PbP was ran by just by a single DM and even allowed for player to player interaction. I feel that the problem with it lies with the large scale and need for everyone's participation. A DM can bot a player, but nothing can be done if the DM themselves are unable to post at the time. And the same problem can happen if the player is making crucial decisions for the campaign or one shot. A possible solution may be putting the campaign/one shot on hiatus until the player/DM comes back, but I feel like it is not a total solution.

And one thing to worry about is rewards. Currency can be solved through the shared settings, make it all possible to exchange different kinds of coins to the settings own. The real problem is when players have magic items. Magic items themselves can break the balance in DMs one shots/campaigns. One way to balance is to say 'There can only be one of its kind.' schtick, where if a player has a same item in the plane it can cause a hole and swallow them up. A ranking can be in place for the magic items, such as legendary can only be 1 of its kind, very rare to only 5, etc. More specific ones can be discussed before adding it as a possible reward.

And a possible setting...one way can be a demiplane tavern, serviced by unseen servants and npcs/players. Players can have rooms here, but it works as a separate place. For example, one player's key leads to a ornate mansion while another player's key can lead to a cave with their hoard of wealth. DMs can appear at the tavern as npcs from their campaigns or the tavern can have a notice board for fliers calling for help, adventurers, or more. 

As for character creation, I don't believe we should limit the races or classes. The only exception being homebrewed ones that obviously break balance. DMs can call or ban specific races but should be for obvious reasons. Like a Orc Shaman looking for people to help take back an artifact from humans or a Human explorer looking for protection from the drow as they explore the underdark. 

Interesting... That could be quite fun !
There are now a load of one-shots that are available.

Point 1: I would stick to official DnD published One-shot (adventurer leagues + some book that are made of small stories), as I usually am disappointed with home-made one (but maybe I didn't have much luck so far)

Point 2: One other way would be no rewards for DM'ing but everybody has to DM, taking turns. There will be no "just a player". I am sure you could gather 5 DM that would be keen on your experiment :)
Each DM could even try to fit their story in a greater Arc, but that might be hard.

Point 3: Finally I would not go more than 5 DM to avoid long wait in turns. A 4 PC party is usually good enough for most of the one-shot.

Here's an idea:

The overarching setting is an Interplanar University, based in the Astral Plane or what have you,  where the parties get sent on missions by the administration for real life experience.  Part of the agreement the students have is that all magic items are surrendered for research, but people going on missions can requisition appropriate equipment approved by the administration (DM).

I'd recommend using xp, keeping a stickied post with every characters xp total available.  Parties could contain players of differing level.

The university is a cool idea..

I was thinking of a mix of Umbrella Academy and The Adjustment Bureau
- PCs part of the Bureau. an organisation that has been created by the Lady of Pain (?) to keep the balance in the multiverse and the strength of Sigil.
- group of 4 PCs will go on adventures to "rectify" the course of history
- After each one-shot, change of DM. The character of the DM (that is resting in SIGIL) levels up as much as the PCs on the adventure in order to keep level balance and rewarding the DM.

- We could think of an Over-Arc... maybe a Evil entity that is trying to alter the course of the Universe. Each DM can add a bit into this EVIL Organisation/Cult

yay! were getting interest! 

one thing TechnoPagan forgot to mention is that there are 4 DMs other then them already interested/part of this: me, @Fitz_Coulson, @Smokehorn_knight_of_Cats, and @Halfastbracegirdle.

Oh nice, the plan is already in mouvement :)
How many DM were you aiming for ? 

Count me in if you need another DM. I'd love to try

This is a fantastic idea! One has to start small, but this could evolve into an "Adventurers' League for PbP", so to speak.

As far as rules are concerned, I believe that they should be better suited to PbP. Here's an idea: in order for the game to not grind to a halt whenever someone neglects to take their turn, we could allow for party members, acting as "agents", to have some very limited agency over the actions of other party members, with uniform strict rules governing this. Here's how this would work:

- All of the party members can act as agents, as well as the DM.

- In every post, each player can specify a number of conditional actions that they wish their character to take upon specific triggers. If a trigger occurs, the DM must describe the character taking the respective conditional action, and the effects of the action. 

- If a player has posted within the last 24 hours, then no other way to control their character is available. Otherwise, the inactive character can be controlled by an agent in one post. If the agent is a fellow party member, the description of the inactive character's action must be from the perspective of their character.  During this description, agents are not allowed to roleplay the inactive character; they can only use the inactive character for mechanical advantage. Moreover, agents are not allowed to take actions which drain resources (for instance, they can roll skill checks, make melee attacks, and cast cantrips, but they cannot spend money, use ammunition or cast spells). Another 24 hours must pass before the inactive character can be controlled again by an agent.  

- A character who has less than 50% of their hit points remaining, or who must react to a trap, hazard, or harmful magic effect, can only be controlled in this manner by the DM. The DM can use any of the inactive character's resources, including consumables, and must aim to keep the character alive above all else.

- If a player has not posted for a week, the player's character is retired from the adventure, and does not receive any rewards. 

Now, concerning advenures, I believe that we should homebrew a style specifically for PbP. So, fewer dungeons and more mysteries, sieges, and other situations which normally take days, weeks, or months to resolve. Also, fewer encounters and more intrigue and riddles. This will not only match the pace of a PbP game, but it will also rid the game of any sense of urgency, which means that characters won't often find themselves in situations where they have to take turns, and the game will run just fine even if some characters are not active all the time.

Quote from zpentomino>>

- If a player has not posted for a week, the player's character is retired from the adventure, and does not receive any rewards.

that seems really harsh to me. RL happens. maybe if they have not posted in a week, with no given reason. some times you might be really busy or something, and just say you won't be able to post for a week... it seems harsh to kick just because of that.

Right, I was thinking more of outright ghosting (and always in the context of relatively short adventures). I suppose that these time intervals should be discussed. 

This sounds interesting

Some of my ideas on character creation rules for the shared setting:

There's a problem in current D&D maintaining interest in characters and storylines. Campaigns rarely make it past character levels 10 or 11. These problems are even worse in PbP.

Underpowered characters just aren't a lot of fun to play. Slightly overpowered characters are more fun and engaging and will keep players invested in the story longer. 4d6 reroll 1s once dropping lowest is pretty popular in PbP. It gives an average ability score of 14 (possible tweaking to get a minimum score of 8 rather than 4).

Point buy is also popular. It gives an average ability score of 12 (as does standard array). These can be tweaked to average 14 as well: offer a score of 16 for 11 points, 17 for 13 points, 15 points for an 18 and give 42 points).

I'd also like to see an ASI at first level, including the option of Feats. It just doesn't make sense that a character can be decended from a Master of the dual scimitar, but not until 4th level. Or a born leader or born lucky, but not until 4th level. There should at the very least be a curated list of 1st level Feats that can be used to further define the character.

We should use the tools available at DnDBeyond, including forum die rolls and character sheets.

I think there should be a limit to the number of characters a player can have in the shared setting at a time. I think 3 is a reasonable number.

ok, I also really like starting with feats. it let's you customize your character more, give it more flavor, make some seemingly unstable items/spells good, and can make combat more fun, with more coo abilities. but this increases power. although it works to have op characters, I think it is fun to have a less powerful starting stats (maybe only 4d6 drop lowest, no reroll ones once.), but get a feat level 1. 

what's are policy going to be on homebrew? I personally really like homebrew (it's even in my username), but I can see how it could cause problems when we have multiple different DMs. maybe it has to get verified by all DMs? or we have 1 DM elected as "the homebrewer" and only that person's content is allowed, so we can know it's all good?

edit: ok, so when I asked about homebrew, I was mainly taking about player controlled homebrew (feats, races, subclass, ect). but what about DM controlled homebrew? things like magic items and monsters, where the DM controls decides which ones to have, where, when, and everything about it. 

Quote from _Grimnir_ >>

Oh nice, the plan is already in mouvement :)
How many DM were you aiming for ? 

Count me in if you need another DM. I'd love to try

 As for how many DMs, I'm thinking, let's see how many are interested and accommodate. If it's a half dozen or so we could probably manage it with a single, private discussion thread. If it winds up being dozens (or more) there are a lot of free, collaborative software tools that can be brought into play

Quote from zpentomino >>

This is a fantastic idea! One has to start small, but this could evolve into an "Adventurers' League for PbP", so to speak.

As far as rules are concerned, I believe that they should be better suited to PbP. Here's an idea: in order for the game to not grind to a halt whenever someone neglects to take their turn, we could allow for party members, acting as "agents", to have some very limited agency over the actions of other party members, with uniform strict rules governing this. Here's how this would work:

- All of the party members can act as agents, as well as the DM.

- In every post, each player can specify a number of conditional actions that they wish their character to take upon specific triggers. If a trigger occurs, the DM must describe the character taking the respective conditional action, and the effects of the action. 

- If a player has posted within the last 24 hours, then no other way to control their character is available. Otherwise, the inactive character can be controlled by an agent in one post. If the agent is a fellow party member, the description of the inactive character's action must be from the perspective of their character.  During this description, agents are not allowed to roleplay the inactive character; they can only use the inactive character for mechanical advantage. Moreover, agents are not allowed to take actions which drain resources (for instance, they can roll skill checks, make melee attacks, and cast cantrips, but they cannot spend money, use ammunition or cast spells). Another 24 hours must pass before the inactive character can be controlled again by an agent.  

- A character who has less than 50% of their hit points remaining, or who must react to a trap, hazard, or harmful magic effect, can only be controlled in this manner by the DM. The DM can use any of the inactive character's resources, including consumables, and must aim to keep the character alive above all else.

- If a player has not posted for a week, the player's character is retired from the adventure, and does not receive any rewards. 

 

Now, concerning advenures, I believe that we should homebrew a style specifically for PbP. So, fewer dungeons and more mysteries, sieges, and other situations which normally take days, weeks, or months to resolve. Also, fewer encounters and more intrigue and riddles. This will not only match the pace of a PbP game, but it will also rid the game of any sense of urgency, which means that characters won't often find themselves in situations where they have to take turns, and the game will run just fine even if some characters are not active all the time.

A lot of good ideas here. I like the general idea of an Adventure League for PbP as long as we're not trying to copy outright. I agree with you about setting up with the emphasis on PbP. I'd like to see character rewards more generous than AL (I understand the need for balance,  but my few experiences with AL in many ways felt less like an adventure and more like working for minimum wage). 

Having rules and preferences for ragdolling a character for an AWOL player is a great idea. If a player has to be absent for a time, the game continues and the player has a say in how their character will be used in their absence. 

There's a problem in current D&D maintaining interest in characters and storylines. Campaigns rarely make it past character levels 10 or 11. These problems are even worse in PbP. Underpowered characters just aren't a lot of fun to play. Slightly overpowered characters are more fun and engaging and will keep players invested in the story longer. 4d6 reroll 1s once dropping lowest is pretty popular in PbP. It gives an average ability score of 14 (possible tweaking to get a minimum score of 8 rather than 4).

I agree with this

Point buy is also popular. It gives an average ability score of 12 (as does standard array). These can be tweaked to average 14 as well: offer a score of 16 for 11 points, 17 for 13 points, 15 points for an 18 and give 42 points).

Yep, point based is usually my preference

I'd also like to see an ASI at first level, including the option of Feats. It just doesn't make sense that a character can be decended from a Master of the dual scimitar, but not until 4th level. Or a born leader or born lucky, but not until 4th level. There should at the very least be a curated list of 1st level Feats that can be used to further define the character.

Why not, I don’t see much problem. Maybe you will have to increase the CR of monster.

We should use the tools available at DnDBeyond, including forum die rolls and character sheets.

Yes, totally. DnDbeyond tools are very good. I’m pleased with everything except the Private Chan that I think is not top (e.g when you click on the notification it always brings you to the first post and not the last post)

I think there should be a limit to the number of characters a player can have in the shared setting at a time. I think 3 is a reasonable number.

I'm not sure I follow on this one. Do you mean one player will have different character to play ? I'd prefer one player = one character. 1. It makes you care about your character much more. 2. easier to identify the Player

ok, I also really like starting with feats. it let's you customize your character more, give it more flavor, make some seemingly unstable items/spells good, and can make combat more fun, with more coo abilities. but this increases power. although it works to have op characters, I think it is fun to have a less powerful starting stats (maybe only 4d6 drop lowest, no reroll ones once.), but get a feat level 1. 

Yes, I think that could be good. Could balance the Feat very well. Similarly you could block the point system to 23 instead of 27 points for example.

what's are policy going to be on homebrew? I personally really like homebrew (it's even in my username), but I can see how it could cause problems when we have multiple different DMs. maybe it has to get verified by all DMs? or we have 1 DM elected as "the homebrewer" and only that person's content is allowed, so we can know it's all good?

For this, I’d be less keen. In my experience, Homebrew always bring some problem of balance.  But maybe I had only bad home-brew so far… :)
I’d be more keen on DM home-brew than player home-brew as DM can force any balance problem. (But since everybody will be player and DM, I’m not sure this would pan out)

If it's a half dozen or so we could probably manage it with a single, private discussion thread.

Important point, for me at least. To be honest, If you were to take me on your adventure, I’d prefer 6 players. In my experience over than 6 player is starting to be quite hard to follow (for rounds initiative, but also if everybody post a lot in a short amount of time)

Sorry for the LONNNNGGGG REPLY :)

Quote from TechnoPagan >>

Actually I was thinking something a bit harsher. I've been kicking around an idea for a player rating system that would include the percentage of games that the player dropped out of without saying anything. Yes, things happen, and I'm sure nobody would penalize a player for an occasional slip, but if it were a chronic problem, that player might find it difficult to get into adventures in the shared setting.  

 

  Ah ah, I was thinking the same but for DM !!!

I have seen so many people launching a story and stopping after 1 week, that's crazy. Also saw a few starting 5 campaign simultaneously. I know that these one are usually gonna stop pretty quick.
I know that life happens, but that is annoying at a player level also :)

Quote from _Grimnir_ >>

Quote from TechnoPagan >>

Actually I was thinking something a bit harsher. I've been kicking around an idea for a player rating system that would include the percentage of games that the player dropped out of without saying anything. Yes, things happen, and I'm sure nobody would penalize a player for an occasional slip, but if it were a chronic problem, that player might find it difficult to get into adventures in the shared setting.  

 

  Ah ah, I was thinking the same but for DM !!!

I have seen so many people launching a story and stopping after 1 week, that's crazy. Also saw a few starting 5 campaign simultaneously. I know that these one are usually gonna stop pretty quick.
I know that life happens, but that is annoying at a player level also :)

 I tried and failed and now know where I went wrong. I really shouldn't have started a huge multi-campaign on my own.

 I mean I have also a mix feeling for the DM failing...

As a DM myself, I understand how hard it is sometime to create a world. And I also am happy to see people trying to DM. So I would always encourage people to try to start a campaign.
It's just that it give a bad feeling on the forum when there's a big chance that the story you're trying to invest yourself in dies after 1 or 2 week 

but well , such is life :)

I like the idea of one feat for each starting character from a curated list. For the sake of fairness, I believe we should have all characters beginning with a (generous) standard array. How about 16,15,14,13,11,9?

Another idea. I mentioned before that encounters can really put a halt to a PbP game. Also, I think that we should make sure to allow for character death only in appropriately dramatic moments, since PbP characters can be quite long-lived and important to their players. These two matters can be adressed simultaneously by only introducing lethal situations in appropriately climactic moments. We should put an end to run-of-the-mill traps and mobs of goons which are really only time- and resource-consuming, and might result in inglorious deaths. The pace and mood will pick up a lot if we instead focus on powerful villains or unique monsters. Sure, villains might command armies, or set traps. But if something can kill you, even by proxy, it must a) have a personality, and b) be there to watch you die.