Monte Cook on Revised books

[Breakdaddy]

Re: Re: Re: Monte Cook on Revised books

I wasn't aware I was complaining. Perhaps you should read the entire passage rather than the single sentence.

For my part, Ive got the utmost respect for Monte, and own a great many of his products, while Im not the originator of the quote he is refuting, I want it made clear that my earlier post was a broad generalization about the great number of economic discussions Ive seen, not a direct dig against his opinion or quote (both of which he is entitled to as much as or more than I as far as D&D goes).

 

[Krug]

Who in the hell cares what Monte's opinion on the subject is anyway?

I do, coz he's a great designer and his products have benefited the whole community.

 

[Darrin Drader]

Who in the hell cares what Monte's opinion on the subject is anyway?

I don't. Isn't he revising it himself with Arcana Unearthed? His is just a more radical revision. Why isn't anyone coming down on him for this? Is he releasing Arcana Unearthed into an SRD that you can download for free? I didn't think so.

[No offense Monte.]

 

[hellbender]

I too will chime in with people who value Cook's comments on the revision. He was involved with 3e a bit.


h.

 

[hellbender]

I don't. Isn't he revising it himself with Arcana Unearthed? His is just a more radical revision. Why isn't anyone coming down on him for this? Is he releasing Arcana Unearthed into an SRD that you can download for free? I didn't think so.

[No offense Monte.]

No, and I also don't feel obligated to buy his book (I do buy all of his, except the Book of Mild Darkness) to keep up with the game. Sure, you can tell me I can stick with 3e, but in buying new WotC books, I will more than likely require the revisions.


hellbender

 

[Krug]

Um with the way things are going, I don't see anything productive being added to this thread. It's more a back and forth on what do I think of Monte and UA. Mods please close.

 

[hellbender]

Um with the way things are going, I don't see anything productive being added to this thread. It's more a back and forth on what do I think of Monte and UA. Mods please close.

Oh, we were supposed to be productive, sorry. In that case, Monte Cook is entitled to his own opinion, just like the rest of us. Which makes the entire thread (and about 90% of the threads here) redundant. I thought since it was related to DnD, it was relavent to EnWorld, as Monte Cook has written extensively for the third edition of the game.


hellbender

 

[Darrin Drader]

Um with the way things are going, I don't see anything productive being added to this thread. It's more a back and forth on what do I think of Monte and UA. Mods please close.

While I personally don't care what he thinks, I support his right to make comments about it, and for the rest of us to debate the signifficance of those comments.

 

[Krug]

Oh, we were supposed to be productive, sorry. In that case, Monte Cook is entitled to his own opinion, just like the rest of us. Which makes the entire thread (and about 90% of the threads here) redundant. I thought since it was related to DnD, it was relavent to EnWorld, as Monte Cook has written extensively for the third edition of the game.

hellbender

If we got back to the point that's been bought up that Monte raised in the interview, that it's a financial decision, rather than "who the hell cares what Monte thinks anyway", then perhaps this thread has a point of continuing.

 

[Chronosome]

Cool! An opinion!