jmucchiello
Hero
IIRC, Mongoose use to habitually use an OGC statement similar to "Chapter x, y, z is all open content except for the actual text as written." (Not sure what they do now.) They received a lot of flak for this supposed attempt to end run around the OGL. Matt would post that you could use the material all you wanted in accordance with the license as long as you rewrote it. He then would add that you should rewrite it anyway so that your product doesn't switch voices as it moves between stuff you came up with and stuff you were reusing.philreed said:
I admit I thought he was full of it at the time. Now I see there's a certain beauty to such a declaration. The point is not to make you work to reuse the stuff. The point is to make you think as you reuse the stuff. If the transcriber of UA had had to rewrite the vitality and wound point system in his own words, he would never have made that mistake.
I can see where this would make casual reusers (I just want to make a campaign document for me and my 4 friends) complain about the declaraion. But such a declaration removes the scan and dump problem for the publisher.
), and a very different scene than now. One could argue that the DM's Guild has taken the idea of an OGL repository and monetized it - providing the kind of visibility to customers for 3pp that most never could have achieved back in 2005. 
