Search results

yes it does, it explained how open is used, and we can use the same principle for licenses not used in the article. More open = less restrictive, given that, is the OGL more or less open than CC-BY? There is only one correct answer given the metric. I find it funny that you claim we cannot say...

I cited two articles, maybe that gives you an idea about how it generally is used. I could find many more if I wanted to… Given that you cited exactly zero, I’ll take mine over yours.

I can compare them by weight, by color, by nutrition, we just need to agree on what the metric is no, it is open content either way, but the licensee cannot be the licensor of content they do not own. That is true under the OGL as well, regardless of what gets carved out as IP I did not forget...

there is no contradiction, a license with less restrictions on the material licensed under it / the licensees is more open, that is the definition of ‘open’. That a more restrictive license can force the licensee to release their content under that more restrictive license does not change that...

they are not redefining it under CC-BY, they either release it, or they don’t. If anything it is the OGL that defines anything it wants as IP so just like the CC-BY then… what happened to your ‘they have to open their content’ idea?

that is exactly how it is being used, that you use it differently does not change that, but it certainly adds confusion the principle is still valid. If I compare 1 < 5 and 5 < 7 to establish that principle, then you can also arrive at 1 < 3 even when it was not one of the examples used to...

the ‘problem’ is that both the steak and the omelette in my analogy are called a sandbox in this thread, so to stick with the analogy he in effect was saying ‘dish’ when he meant ‘omelette’ and others were thinking ‘steak’

no, more open = less restrictive, I am not wrong, that is how it is generally being used when comparing the openness of licenses. That you use it differently does not make me wrong The license is more open, the publisher and what they release under it is irrelevant to this they don’t have to...

ah, I read that more as an ‘it would enable people / 3pps to create that’ while WotC would stick with their current approach of class-specific subclasses

the of Everything books are the next best selling after the core however

how so? We already have class specific spell lists, what is missing is general ones. All classes advancing at the same levels does not affect complexity at all

I read it as ‘it doesn’t matter how good / fast it is at creating an omelette when I want to eat a steak’, i.e. if it is fast at creating a sandbox I have no interest in, then it being fast at doing so by sacrificing the things I do have an interest in does not help it one bit.

the book is almost done, no idea about accessories

you are using ‘open’ differently from anyone else. Usually more open = fewer restrictions, which makes CC-BY the more open license. “CC-BY or Creative Commons Attribution is considered the most open of the CC licenses” https://libguides.hartford.edu/c.php?g=887688&p=6380445 “[CC-BY] This the...

that certainly did not help, but if people buy 50% more printed books, why do people not also buy more of them on DDB? Ultimately we cannot say whether contributing 1 to the 46% growth means it did not grow or whether digital did grow but is that much smaller compared to print. That could be an...

I mean, if I can come up with it in a minute, I hope 3pps have at least as good an idea :D

no, I was referring to the 'ask the oracle' part to determine details of the quest / location / whatever. There are plenty of books you can use for that, that 5e does not cover this in its core books does not mean you cannot play 5e that way, it only means that WotC had other priorities. Here...

yeah, that already is not how AI does it… EDIT: for something closer to what AI does look at ‘Praise You’ by Fatboy Slim You can jump to 17:30 where they have constructed the song from the various samples. Every color is a sample taken from a different track

Right now, probably, which actually means something along the lines of making sure to fulfill the rest of the world without the product going through the US and delaying the US shipment until this nonsense has ended

it’s definitely a bump as you have people ‘upgrading’ in addition to the new players coming in that D&D always had. What the numbers will look like after the upgrade phase, no one knows, they could stay higher than the 2014 ‘baseline’ due to continued growth or not. We won’t know for at least...