Darren said:
"If they always take, but never contribute, to the community, than I would
expect
nothing less. Also note that a person generally isn't going to be branded
until
quite a few products come out. Then it is obvious they are doing nothing
more
than raping the community for everything it is worth."
I don't agree "quite a few" . . . from what was tossed around here earlier,
it sounds like some people are ready to pull out the hot knives after every
product. I'd really prefer to avoid that syndrome if we can.
"Real easy to circumvent though, just give a product catalog type thing on
your
web page, then people won't mind, since they can see that your fifth product
will be all open."
People who work product to product may not know that their 5th will be
something like the compendium example. Not everyone is going to have an
"upcoming releases" catalog. I know for a fact *I* would not want one,
because that raises expectations of "this is coming" that may fall through
in a small venture like many of thse products will be.
"No one is saying it has to be every product. However, I also don't think it
is
unreasonable to ask everyone to contribute either."
Absolutely, ask them to contribute. Don't burn them as a witch them if they
don't.
"No, but that is the only way the community can grow and expand. If you
don't
contribute, then you are hurting the community. Since i happen to be part of
the
community, I take it fairly personal."
The "only" way is for everyone to produce OGC? I was pretty sure it could
grow if nobody did anything but write for d20, and use the 3 core rulebooks
for D&D . . . :) Your definition of what it takes to grow is a bit limited.
"Except, whether you sell it or not is immaterial to this discussion. It has
nothing, inherently, (although it does with me personally) to do with how
much
money they make. All it has to do with is whether or not they are helping or
hurting the community. If they contribute, they are helping. If they are
not,
but yet using the work the community has created, then they are hurting the
community as less people feel a desire to contribute. They not only hold
back
there own ideas, but we also loose the ideas that others might have had, but
no
longer contribute because of these people."
And the more people "berate" or "brand" others for differences in opinion
over what should be contributed, the less people will contribute. So where
do we go from here? I would think that if you produce OGC, you'd EXPECT for
it to be used. But you're trying to tell me people will be upset if this
happens . . .
"Ok, check out http://www.gamedistrict.net. Everything on that site will be
released under the OGL (once finalized). None of it is closed. With the
people
that are working on it on my phoenyx list, what is on the site doesn't even
begin to scratch the surface of the all the ideas we have."
Have you seen the d20 SRD? Looking at the site I see something I would
think would be disallowed. (Of course, that'd be the d20 SRD, not the OGL,
so all it would mean is no d20 system, I suppose.)
"In fact Korath just recently came up with a neat way to multiclass at 1st
level.
Keeps everything balanced without adding more than minimal complexity to
character creation."
Great, we're all looking forward to it.
""It was added by implication, not explicit statement." ;-)"
-Mathew Gray
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
