"Ryan S. Dancey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Here is a proposal I would like to consider and receive feedback on:
>
> The D20 System Reference Document does not need to be released all at once.
> Instead, we release it in stages based on the release schedule of various
> works in progress.
This sounds good from *MY* point of view; of course, as I'm not a publisher
and have about as much experience with the publishing buinsess as I do with
British Government, that mgiht not count for much.
OTOH, wanting to get a fan-based world up and running on DND-L, along with
numerous "conversion" ideas, I can think of one slight problem with the
staggered release: Duplicate Effort.
The addition of a slight list of just what the DMG is going to comment on
might be of use; while the DMGRD (ugh) might not be ready until June, I don't
see a reason that the first release of the D20SRD cannot include a brief
listing of the topics covered in the 3e DMG.
Such a list would be of invaluable help to those of us aching to add on such
rules-variations as "classless / custom-class" and a "spell point" system.
> The fourth portion would be tied to Star Wars and doesn't need to be
> released until after we ship the core Star Wars book (there are so many
> legal issues here that I have no idea if or when we'll >ever< be able to
> release the Star Wars stuff as an Open Game, but we should try anyway).
Would the Star Wars rules actually be tied up in the trademark contract? It
seems to me that a distillaiton of the rules, indipendant of Lucas's
trademarks, shouldn't infringe on the SW game at all.
(If the SW game's rules WERE to be folded into the D20SRD, would the Star Wars
book be an acceptable substitute for the PHB? Could the phrase "This product
requires the use of a complete d20 rulebook from WotC" be placed on a d20
product?"
> In addition to the staged release outlined above, we would "hold back"
> certain elements of the 3E design for marketing purposes and not add them
to
> the D20SRD until the that material is on sale. These elements would
include
> certain new spells, magic items, and monsters that are new to 3e and
unique.
> Stuff that already exists in the 2e game would not be held back.
*I* have no problem with this; new items, spells, and monsters are fine and
dandy to be held back, just as long as they aren't world-shaking changes to
the rules bundled along with them.
> Also, there's a headache with not having the D20 Logo
> available for use by GenCon, but I see no good way around the problem at
> this time.
You could have a "conditional d20" ran through, or organize some demos of what
various companies are planning on doing with d20...
DM
Looking for a game? I DM in Upstate NY, twice a month at Artemis Games in New
Hartford, NY (a suburb of Utica)
Even better, I've got irregular games where I live, in Charlton (near Albany).
Drop me a line and we'll game!
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
AIM: Planesdragon ICQ: 26106342
____________________________________________________________________
Get your own FREE, personal Netscape WebMail account today at
http://webmail.netscape.com.
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
