Dave-
I'm agreeing with you for three reasons:
1. your post was too long to read, so I cant argue
with what I didnt read :)
2. the part I did read was hillarious
and most of all
3. you put my name with Monte. And, as we all know,
Monte is a "genius." So I feel all warm inside.
Clark
--- Davi
From: "The Sigil" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2006 12:50 AM
>Surely if the Wizards of the Coast bring out a 4E D&D that is not
>compatible with the SRD it will just make it economically viable for
>people to add character creation rules to the SRD and sell their own 3e
>PHB/
People didnt copy Monte's designations. Other
publishers were doing it that way for some time before
Malhavoc was even in existence.
Clark
--- The Sigil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Not at all. I think you are mostly right. You're
> >probably aware of my take on "crippled" OGC--I dont
> >buy in
Not at all. I think you are mostly right. You're
probably aware of my take on "crippled" OGC--I dont
buy in to all the claims, and I think that most people
are just trying to do stuff the best way they knew
how, but I know for sure that there were some
publishers who were trying to hoard content.
Clark Peterson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Now, there are lots of exceptions. I like to thinkTome of Horrors is an example of great sharing of opencontent. But even that product, as great as I (ratherbiased, I admit) think it is, wasnt exactly reusedthat widely. And I even put instructions in the t
On Thu, 10 Aug 2006, Doug Meerschaert wrote:
> > The bottom line truth is that there was very little
> > significant reuse of OGC.
> >
> I think I'll place blame for this most on a failing in the OGL -- there
> was no easy way to say "my book uses Monte Cook's rules" without
> actually asking
Clark Peterson wrote:
The bottom line truth is that there was very little
significant reuse of OGC.
I think I'll place blame for this most on a failing in the OGL -- there
was no easy way to say "my book uses Monte Cook's rules" without
actually asking Monte. Which puts you right back in t
> That little rant is not likely to endear me to
> anyone in the RPG industry,
> but there it is. The uglier the truth, the truer
> the friend that tells it.
Not at all. I think you are mostly right. You're
probably aware of my take on "crippled" OGC--I dont
buy in to all the claims, and I think
On Wed, 9 Aug 2006, The Sigil wrote:
> Enlightened
> self-interest would push most publishers together to adopt the same
> bug-fixes?
>
> It will NEVER happen. One of the "talking points" that had everyone excited
> about the OGL was that we were likely to see a whole bunch of rules and
> id
Surely if the Wizards of the Coast bring out a 4E D&D that is not
compatible with the SRD it will just make it economically viable for people
to add character creation rules to the SRD and sell their own 3e PHB/DMG/MM
clones.
Game companies would also have an incentive to do their own SRD bug-
10 matches
Mail list logo