Hello,
Mathew Gray wrote:
> "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.
<Sigh> That's the way, next you'll be telling be to take the tar off the fire
and all those chickens were plucked in vain. :-)
> "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.
Probably. :-) Of course i also have a hard time viewing the D20STL as part of
the community. All that is for me is a way for WotC to make money. (not
necessarily a bad thing.)
> And the more people "berate" or "brand" others for differences in opinion
> over what should be contributed, the less people will contribute.
Pretty much. Which is why you won't see me calling anyone names. At least not on
the lists. :-)
> 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 . . .
Not at all. What upsets people, which I tend to understand, is when there isn't
a proper exchange. You take a little, you give a little. That is not too much to
ask for, or expect.
> 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.)
There are some on my list that are making sure that there stuff is D20 STL
compatible. I just worry about the OGL myself though.
Have Fun,
Darren
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
