Nicholas H.M. Caldwell wrote:
> If an environment develops where OGC users are "compelled to contribute
> OGC" as you would like, then I will jettison D20/OGL from the Guild
> Companion (both modules and magazine).
There is a slight, but important, matter of grammar here. "Compelled"
suggests that the person being "compelled" is somewhat (or completely) unwilling.
I think that's the interpretation you're using. If so, I agree with you.
Authors should be "encouraged." Not in any corporate double-speak manner or
semi-legal threatening manner. I mean, the climate of the marketplace, the
readers' and peers' reactions to products will hopefully get OGLed authors
excited to release their own OGC. If not, these authors are in no violation of
the OGL. They may not be considered peers in the OGF community, at least not in
the circles who enjoy OGC, but I doubt that is a serious concern to an author who
is not interested in releasing OGC anyway.
> As far as we are concerned, delivering high-quality content should be the
> primary means of winning the approval of the gaming community at large. If
> the content happens to provide material for the open gaming community as
> well, then that is icing on the cake.
You're saying, very clearly, what I was trying to say earlier. Essentially,
that a lot of product which utilizes OGC without contributing new OGC will not be
high-quality product. If such product *is* high-quality, then it is entitled to
its success and profits. It may just encounter one more hurdle in the OGC fans.
But, again, if the product really is one of quality, then that hurdle should be
easy to leap.
I am, of course, not attempting to apply a title of low- or high-quality to
any specific product mentioned in this thread. I'm just saying.
word,
will
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
