NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="The Sigil" data-source="post: 861298" data-attributes="member: 2013">If it's an argument you're looking for on that point, you won't find one here... de facto (due to the time requirements), such a database would always "lag" the latest and greatest d20 material by a good amount... months if not years.The first reason, to me, is not valid IF a publisher decides they want to support such an endeavor.  I may be wrong, but I have to believe that publishers have electronic versions of the text of their documents somewhere - an .rtf, .doc, .pdf or what have you.  You guys likely wrote it and edited it on a computer, and somewhere is that approved editors copy.  If a publisher wants to help, I've volunteered to "strip mine" the OGC - all that company has to do is forward an email with the file attached.  That is not going to put a serious crimp in anyone's schedule save my own. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />This, on the other hand, I will give you without argument.  Such a database would in point of fact be extremely threatening to sales.  No dissent here. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />This is an attitude ("don't use my OGC") that I flat-out just don't get.  *shrugs*  I guess I find it odd that WotC has given people the D&D sandbox to play in and they don't want to share - and an attitude like this seems to say, "well, even though the d20STL/OGL says I have to, I'm not happy about it."  Weird.Agree with you on all points.  I see where they're coming from, I don't think their fears carry much weight, and it's courtesy to respect their wishes.  Kudos to you. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Instead, people scan them in with a big vacuum cleaner and just OCR all the books and chuck them on file-sharing networks for free. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f641.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":(" title="Frown    :("  data-smilie="3"data-shortname=":(" />  (I monitor networks from time to time to ask those sharing my stuff to stop and I've seen Mongoose stuff floating about too - as I'm sure you know).  The *really* dishonest folks are going to reproduce the material regardless of the OGL or copyright or anything else... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f641.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":(" title="Frown    :("  data-smilie="3"data-shortname=":(" />  A sad reality of the world we live in today.I understand your viewpoint - that you don't want people to "cut and paste" their way to fame and glory with your stuff.  But I feel compelled to mention that such a stance seems just a touch hypocritical given the "cut and paste" nature of the Ultimate Feats and Ultimate Prestige Classes books and the whole brouhaha that came out of not properly crediting folks for some of the stuff in there in Section 15... but that's another thread entirely. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />I feel OGC is free - but that doesn't mean free as in "free beer" but does mean free as in "free speech." However, it is a point of fact that as a consequence of the OGL, OGC can "become" free as in beer if anyone chooses to do the work required to make it become so... though they certainly may have to pay in the first instance, they could then conceivably distribute it freely (as in free beer).So it doesn't inherently mean "free as in beer," but the mechanism exists in the OGL to allow it to become so - and I think this is what Mongoose' OGC declaration stance is trying as hard as it can to prevent.I happen to think you're proceeding forth from flawed premises, since we have multiple examples of products - including award-winning ones - that are 100% OGC and I know I haven't seen a PDF version of, say, Death in Freeport or any of Bastion Press' stuff (other than the stuff released by Bastion themselves) for sale at RPGNow.com yet. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />  I think the fear is unfounded, but I'll grant you that it IS a possibility and that if you feel strongly about it, making the OGC declaration difficult is a way to do it.  I'm not sure it flies as "clear designation" but again, this is not the thread to argue that. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />  IOW, I see where you're coming from, and I respect it, but I think your fears are unfounded.*applauds*  Well put. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Nobody said you had to have a popular opinion. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />I fail to see why publishers wouldn't want a great library of material to draw from to help them avoid re-inventing the proverbial wheel... you mentioned yourself you had to spend money to buy other books to get the OGC out of them... wouldn't it have helped your budget not to have had to buy them? <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> Oh, and I DO expect publishers to be IMPRESSED by such a database, should it ever show up - because they'll know the amount of work involved - they of all people should be most impressed.  But I don't necessarily expect them to be HAPPY. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />That was what I had in mind... not wholesale text or PDF copies of books, but, say, a database of every spell out there.  Every monster out there.  The mechanics for Fighting Styles (i.e., XP cost, name of style, and benefits at each "rank") from Quint Fighter - basically a progression table plus a description of the special abilities acquired.  The analagous mechanics for the Guilds in Guildcraft.  A master compilation of PrCs - their name, requirements, and benefits at each level (only).... no flavor text, no illustrations, etc.  Just the crunch, ma'am. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />  Think Ultimate Prestige Classes without the flavor description of the class and the "classic play" boxes or AEG's Feats book. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />And I for one appreciate your candor.  I'd much rather know where we agree and disagree up front. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />  I think I know where you're coming from, and I'll respectfully disagree with you on some points - but it is respectful disagreement - I'll agree to disagree with you. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />--The Sigil</blockquote>

Verification