MM 4: Ask away, I have it

[Sammael]

There must be (or, rather, should be) an OGL attached if they're using classed OGL monsters such as gnolls and orcs.

 

[reanjr]

It's smart, actually. A lot of people hate how part of or half of a book is for them, yet the majority is not. Yet they have to pay full price for it, still. So they do things like share with their friends or photocopy what they need. I don't believe sharing is illegal in the US...yet. :\

Sharing? No. Photocopying and distributing to others (or in your case photocopying a shared volume)? Yes.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

There must be (or, rather, should be) an OGL attached if they're using classed OGL monsters such as gnolls and orcs.

If there are half-elf wizards in an Eberron adventure (as an example), does that make the adventure OGL?

 

[Mercule]

There must be (or, rather, should be) an OGL attached if they're using classed OGL monsters such as gnolls and orcs.

Not really. WotC is the actual IP holder. They aren't required to use the OGL for content they already own.

FWIW, yes, I find what the OP is doing to be reprehensible. But, I've seen enough of these sorts of threads that I know nothing I say with actually make him feel bad. I'll still listen to his review, especially if there is some intelligible data coming from it.

 

[Barak]

Indeed, it's not as if he had bought the book on Amazon!

 

[Odhanan]

Ask away, I have it in my hands.

Since I refuse to purchase the book for a number of reasons (not as many new monsters as there should be, the stupid classed monsters they have, and the new format they have takes up wayyy too much space, it lost the title "Monster Manual"), I did borrow it from someone I know because I am photocopying the 70-something new monsters I do want for my games without blowing $30 on such a horribly written book.

So, I have perused it, but haven't read it through entirely yet. The NEW monsters are pretty awesome, but the classed monsters should've never been in there at all. But I am at no loss since I didn't spend money on it so hah!

Ask whatever questions you want about it cause I get to hold on to it for quite awhile. That is, until I am done grabbing what I need from it.

I don't know how you expect people to react to that. "Oh my! He's photocopying the product, hates half of the product, so he must be a reference. I should ask questions about it" ?

I for one do not condone that kind of behaviour. I'm more of the "what you're doing is just plain wrong and unoriginal as far as pretending to be a smart gamer stands" opinion, here. Bottom line, if you want to answer questions, fine, but don't present photocopying a book like it's something okay. Thank you.

 

[Hussar]

The part I'm most confused about is bagging on a book and then saying that there are some SEVENTY useful monsters in it. Hell, IMO, that's a rousing success, not a bad book. If I can pick up a monster book and see three quarters of it as useful, how is that possibly a bad book, regardless of how many pages each monster takes up?

 

[Umbran]

EN World does not condone or support violation of copyright.

While Razz could quite legally give us some information about the content so long as he posesses the borrowed copy, it is quite clear that this thread is going to be more about the violation of coyright and the OP's stance, rather than discussion of the content.

Someone else who has a legal copy who isn't so obviously bashing on the book will come along soon enough to discuss the content, so I'm going to save everyone a headache, and close this thread.