Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Brasswatchman" data-source="post: 4281923" data-attributes="member: 36967">Let me see if I can answer some of the concerns voiced in this thread.I understand. Thank you very much for your feedback. <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=":)" /> Thank you!Fixed. Thank you for reminding me.Actually, according the OGL/SGL forum on the Wizards website, the d20 System logo won't be officially retired for several months now, thereby allowing third-party developers to clear out their remaining stocks. Furthermore, the current version of the OGL still requires the use of the d20 System logo. When Wizards updates the license, I will replace the d20 System logo in my e-publications with the new equivalent.Thank you for recommending the OGL logo. I will remember to keep that in mind in the coming months.As I recall, that particular portion of the license is intended to assure full and clear Product Identity. Since the d20 System logo appears in full within the same graphic, I cannot help but think that the point is moot.If Wizards of the Coast contacts me and orders me to use the exact terminology and phrasing as dictated in the d20 License, I will do so. I can be contacted at <a href="http://MAILTO:aff@tinwatchman.com" target="_blank">aff@tinwatchman.com</a>.<a href="http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=d20/oglfaq/20040123g" target="_blank">According to this document</a> on the Wizards website, other licenses with compatible terms can be combined with the OGL. I believe the particular Creative Commons license I have chosen - the <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/" target="_blank">Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported</a> - covers all of the stated requirements. Actually, I think the creation of the GSL has more to do with the fact that the current OGL allows people to publish the vast majority of the core rulebooks online, for free. Which is a pretty big loophole, all things considered.If I am reading this correctly, sir, then I understand you have taken my publication as a personal affront of some sort. I'm sorry you have chosen to take it as such, and I'm not really sure what I can say to correct it. So let me just say this: I am doing this project for fun. I'm not doing it to cut into anyone's profit margins. I'm not doing it to compete with anyone. I'm not doing it to turn a profit - of any sort - personally. I had a lot of fun creating and writing this campaign setting, and I'm hoping that others will enjoy it as well. That's it. That's my only motivation here.If you don't mind my asking, what's yours?</blockquote>

Verification