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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="woodelf" data-source="post: 1489327" data-attributes="member: 10201">Would i? Maybe. If i didn't it wouldn't be because of codling the publisher, however; it'd be because i didn't think it was worth the effort. You seem to be taking releasing OGC in a reusable format as a personal insult. I see it as just the inverse: a compliment. Nobody's gonna take the effort to do this (whether retyping or OCRing) unless they think the rules are good.For example, i'm working on (on and off--it's not the top priority right now) a complete free D20SRD-based fantasy game that will significantly change most of the elements of D&D3E. At this point, it looks like the skill/combat mechanics will be based on Spycraft, and it will incorporate significant elements of Dynasties & Demagogues, Book of Distinctions and Drawbacks, and Net Book of Feats. Why? Not because i want to "screw over" the producers of those (ok, NBoF doesn't count, since it's free to begin with), but because those are the "cool bits"--the best things i've found out there for their respective elements of D20 System rules. Now, as for the spirit of open-content development. First, as someone else mentioned, it's Ryan Dancey himself who suggested a couple months ago making an expanded SRD available online, incorporating as much worthwhile OGC as possible. Second, i don't think you can put the D20STL and "open gaming movement" in the same category, WRT their spirits/attitudes. Open-content game development is, or should be, about using open-content development models to make the best RPGs possible. That means maximal reusable content, and minimal barriers to reuse. The D20STL is about boosting D&D3E sales by licensing out trademarks. This necessitates barriers to reuse, or, more precisely, barriers to the nature of content so as to minimize competition between WotC products and others' products. IMHO, the WotC OGL itself fails to conform to "the spirit of open-content development", by the inclusion of trademark-use restrictions and, much more importantly, by failing to require making reuse practical. IMHO, *requiring* the release of OGC as actual, functionally-reusable content is a necessary element of open-content development. Just as, in the software world, one of the defining characteristics is releasing the source code, in the RPG world i believe that you should release your OGC in a reusable digital format (ASCII, HTML, RTF--something like that). If there is anything that is against the spirit of open-content game development, it is complaining when people reuse your content, even if that reuse is to make it available for free.</blockquote>

Verification