Infinite Possibilities wrote:
> If all of those that are producing, contribute back. It will set a precedence
> that will allow the whole movement to expand extremely fast.
"precedent", I believe. (sorry, knee-jerk reaction.)
> If the precedence is to use without though of contributing back, then the Open
> Gaming Community will be reduced to a fad and a novelty, as no one will be
> contributing.
I disagree. Let's say we're doing something called X. We let people either just
take X and give it away as-is, or modify X into their own version of X and givve
that away. Whether or not the other people modify X, the popularity of X increases
due to usage.
Even better, those who tinker with X will soon produce the best possible X. Once
that's done, and barring a shift in X's market, X will suddenly be tinkered with
much less.
> > 2) More material for the players who support OGL developers.
>
> What is better for the players of the OG community. An adventure they can do
> nothing with besides use once or twice, or an adventure they can only use once
> or twice with a little bit of new OGC that may inspire them to contribute there
> own material to the OG Community.
The question was one of benefit, not one of "more benefit." No one is questioning
that an accessory is more valuable than an adventure. The debate is on if they guy
who is only doing and adventure with no new rules is a "leech."
DM
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
