Search results

I looked at it and moved on. It looks good if AD&D is your game of choice though. I'd rather reduce complication more than anything though.

I have to say that every time I've tried to read a 5e adventure book that the lede has been buried, and frankly the type of reading involved in reading an adventure is more of a task than a pleasure. Very difficult for me to do with a 200 page book. It's much easier to do with a 32 page...

You are absolutely correct. Especially on my off the top of my head example choices.

For pure OSR, sure. But at the same time, at level 1, a fighter in basic D&D is a magic user with more hit points (maybe) and no magic and some armor. They get better eventually.

I think you're illustrating my point. WotC owns this, except for this portion of it, and doesn't own the ones it doesn't obviously own. My point is that there can be things that are non-obvious. There are things that can be non-obvious to WotC. There can also be things that are questionable...

I take what he's saying is being something resembling both TSR games and 5e. Think Shadowdark. Like a B/X with modern mechanics and some adjustments. I've been comparing TSR editions lately, and I'm a bit bummed that fighter/warriors/fighting men at level 1 are almost as terrible at hitting...

You undermine your own arguments by throwing accusation and insult at the head of them. You may want to ask yourself why you're getting so upset that someone thinks that WotC may not have clear ownership of all aspects of all the settings they and/or TSR have published. If we're using Dark...

Sorry I haven't responded sooner. I seem to have attracted quite a lot of vitriol and accusation for the last 24 hours or so when I've been sleeping, traveling, or otherwise occupied. How do you know - those who suggest that you know beyond a shadow of a doubt that WotC owns all settings...

Right now it's books nominated for this year's Hugo awards. I need to have an opinion if I am to vote.

I don't believe that they don't. I do believe that IP ownership is complicated and usually not settled until it's tested in court or stated by the creator of such to be owned by others. I do however believe that TSR had a bunch of legal BS happen under their management.

Burden of proof is on you. You made a statement about WotC ownership about all settings. I'm pretty sure they own Blackmoor, Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, and Eberron outright. I think they probably own Mystara. Really don't know past that.

It didn't occur to me that ustpo had a reasonable to search site. I'll believe you if you say you be checked them all there.

I wouldn't take someone non-authoritative's word on that. Do you have some proof on that like a statement from WotC?

And Diablo II for both 2e and 3e according to Wikipedia.

I'm planning on talking about these two and a 3rd when I do my post. Maybe tomorrow. Probably Sunday. I expect to be busy tomorrow. I think it's probably worth refreshing 3.x as well.

I'm under the impression that many of the settings are under exclusive license, but are still owned by their creators. Like I don't think Eberron can be used as an official setting for Pathfinder, but WotC has to pay Keith to use it on an ongoing basis.

Agreed on D&D. MTG is not a concern for the D&D company. I'm mostly thinking about what can be done better with D&D. I think it is still pretty central to central to a certain style of fantasy role play. I think Wizards has unintentionally spawned a bunch of competitors. I think most of...

I have no knowledge about what settings they own trademarks and copyrights for. I assume that they don't have all of them. If they're separated from WotC, they probably can't do anything with MTG settings. I suspect extensive legal research would have to be done on a lot of them.

You're not too far from my treatment of d&d myself and I'm not not going to go far into the media parts.

Current licenses carry over.