RE: [Open_Gaming] single most valuable equity asset?

[Kal Lin]

On Fri, 12 May 2000, Brad Thompson wrote:

> But compatible means different things to different people, and any solution

Great points, especially about balance and optional mechanisms (psionics,
n-dimensional physics, combat rules, prestige classes, etc).

> Perhaps there is a neutral phrase that WotC would approve beyond the
> "Requires the PHB", something like "intended for use with D&D" would be

How would you solve the problem of "intended" meaning different
things to different people?  What if someone thinks their n-dimensional,
psionic wielding, classless, levelless, super-inflated, prestige class
was intended for use with D&D and someone else disagrees?

Or are you suggesting that phrase to mean "100% Pure SRD" meaning
all the SRD and no more.  Balance might still be a problem but at least
you can define that to eliminate the most troublesome innovations from
a traditional RPG consumer point of view.

Regards,
--Kal