Search results

My last did start off snarkily and I apologize for the lack of civility. Of course that's me paraphrasing. If you accept my assertion that the two statements are not equivalent and were to read through the quoted sections of the filing with that in mind, I fail to see how one can find any...

Obviously too long for you to read either. There is no admission in the quoted sections and I believe section 64 (not quoted in the post you linked) amounts to GF9 denying that their sublicensors caused the breaches that WotC alleges. Saying "if there was a breach, then our actions remedied it"...

The above quotes (from Tenkars Taverns coverage of the lawsuit) seem to indicate that GF9 is saying there was no breach. The only source I have for the filing is at the above link, if there's a better source please point it out to me.

I'm not sure that GF9 have admitted any breach. Going by the information posted on Tenkar's Tavern, GF9 are trying to get a ruling that they are not in breach.

I'm pretty sure this is the photocopied map that Ed Greenwood sent to TSR. The labels "To Halruaa" and "To Semphar" are redundant on this map, but Halruaa and Semphar were left off the original published maps and those labels pointed off the edge of the map.

Bargle killed her.

Oh it's an adventure series rather than a campaign setting, that probably explains it.

Fourteen authors for a 96 page book seems a lot - I wonder if they all worked directly on it or if some of the credits are mechanics sections originally from other products?

Perhaps Castle Zagyg has found a new publisher? If they do a full setting for CZ it could be seen as "stealing" Greyhawk away from WotC.

I've haven't seen any mention of this here. There's a kickstarter for a new version of Ron Edward's Sorcerer running. Enworld won't let me link to it though - kickstarter.com/projects/847190685/sorcerer-upgrade

I think this looks really interesting. I can't immediately see when this would be desirable. In what sort of situations did people drop Engagement? Is there any reason not to use "Threatened/Threatening" rather than "Engaged"? It's a more familiar term and there doesn't seem to be a real...