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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dr_Rictus" data-source="post: 565466" data-attributes="member: 850">Or that the book could have been less expensive, and a better value for the money, if it didn't include as many monsters that I didn't need because they were already available.I'm aware they tried to coordinate.  But OA has been out for quite a while now, and they can't have been unaware of it if they were really trying.  Whether Scott's version of the Yeti on the website existed first is, to me, beside the point.  Unless the point is that the author included it because he happened to have the content, not because he saw it as fulfilling any perceived need, and that most definitely is padding.   (Note, I'm not saying that's what happened, and please understand I mean no offense to Scott - just that the only way I could consider the issue of precedence relevant would be in a way which did not count in Necromancer's favor).Plus, if they're going to say that they're not duplicating WotC's published material, then that is what they should do.  I don't see what's so puzzling about my expecting that.  As a game designer, I'm sympathetic with the difficulty of what they tried to do.  But as a consumer I still expect value for my money, and if someone fails to deliver that because they tried something that was too hard, well, they failed.  Saying they tried holds them to no particular standard whatsovever, and in fact this is not an isolated exception.Like I said, though, I admit that I'm being hard about this.  I have a very high standard when it comes to these things.</blockquote>

Verification