Breakdaddy
First Post
I think there is no harm done as long as the review states that its not D20 or 3E compliant. After all it IS AD&D, so why not??
Kenzer's marketing blurb... So what? What's the game itself like, though? That's the important question...Celestian said:
Well, obviously you ignored the the bits that CH pointed out that clearly label the game D&D.
Breakdaddy said:I think there is no harm done as long as the review states that its not D20 or 3E compliant. After all it IS AD&D, so why not??
Psion said:
Now this gets my ire. Like I said, if it gets down to splitting that hair, Everquest can go AFAIC.
Hackmaster has no excuse to be included. The SRD is MUCH more a reason to be included that some "based on" statement.
Salutations,
I recently added the Hackmaster items to the Enworld review database. This would make them open for reviews on the site.
It has caused a bit of situation due to them not being d20 products.
It has been decided to delete the HackMaster entries in a week.
I invite you to get involved in the discussion at the Enworld forums to argue against it.
http://enworld.cyberstreet.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=23492
Thank you
FD
Psion said:
So, what are you going to do when the HM fans put products on the "d20 top 20 list"
Psion said:
No, it's not. It bears no D&D logo. "Based on" =/= "is."
It has no interoperability (short of some serious hammering) with 3e or any other d20 product. Unlike Everquest.
Further, people who play it are largely people who disdain 3e and/or d20. I fear the same sort of schenanigans that poison so many of the d20 reviews over on RPGnet if you open that door.