Monte Cook Presents the Year's best D20

[Sir Elton]

Oh, yeah! The Book of Iron Might is available DRM Free from White Wolf. How silly . . .

 

[Turjan]

And, completely unrelated , the Demon God's Fane is available this week with DRM, but completely free, at DTRPG !

 

[Tav_Behemoth]

Year's worst d20, now there's a crackerjack idea, Phil. I think we'd need more than 96 pages for that one though.

I think it'd work best on a blackmail model:

Dear Publisher,

Your book The Power-Gamer's Guide to Awesome Sweetness has been selected for inclusion in the Year's Worst d20. By clicking on the attached PayPal link, you may choose to decline this nomination...
​

If all goes well, the book would be 0 pages - maximize profit, save on printing costs!

 

[JoeGKushner]

I think it's an interesting idea except that leaving it until Sep05 seems to be a mistake, IMO (particularly if 4E gets announced around about then!).

As for the other part about what Monte thinks etc..., why not ask him -privately- away from these messageboards? After all, he's not some sort of elected representative accountable to you or anyone else for his beliefs.

Eremite, that privately thing would've been a great idea and had Monte contacted the judges or Morrus privately last year perhaps TB would've returned the favor this year.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

The "criticism" I've read on this thread is:

* Malhavoc fans are hero worshipping fools who take everything Monte says as gospel.

* Monte isn't qualified to offer his opinion on what's best.

* Malhavoc should pay for entries, even though we could just mine the OGC for free, cut almost all ties to its source, and print the book without a single shred of evidence that clearly connects a given piece to its author.

Well, just to make certain that these words aren't being put in my mouth, what I actually said was:

1) Monte isn't by default in a better position to judge the quality of mechanics than the ENworld staff reviewers simply because he was involved in 3e.

2) I worry that Monte's audience-- call them fanboys if you like, but at any rate they are the target audience of this product-- are more likely to simply buy the Best of d20 book to be given "the best" than to seek out the original source.

If that concern is valid, then the issue becomes, "What's the upside for the contributor?" It's possible to address that risk-benefit concern from the premise rather than the conclusion.

Wulf

 

[Umbran]

So, what, just put you on the ignore list then?

What, if you can't engage in long-distance psychoanalysis of someone, you'd prefer to ignore them completely? And they say that rational discourse is dead!

Or should I read the words you post and then have the opportunity to say what "I think..." about them, as most old hands around this here internet thingy do?

Saying what you think is fine. Telling me why I think what I do is quite another. Doing so dismissively by claiming my thoughts are "worship" rather than rational is even worse. An old hand would know that.

An old hand would know that assessment of credentials is subjective, a matter of opinion, and that asserting that you have objective knowledge doesn't mean you actually have it. An old hand would know that being in disagreement doesn't mean the opponent is irrational.

An old hand knows those things. He may still behave and speak as if they weren't true, but he knows them.

 

[BryonD]

Oh, wait, you can buy the PDF from White Wolf.

Perhaps you missed the point.

 

[OregonGM]

And, completely unrelated , the Demon God's Fane is available this week with DRM, but completely free, at DTRPG !

Free? I'd go and get it and all, but I've been convinced that if I look at it or read a single word, I'll become Monte's slavering lapdog. I want to sit with the cool kids! I want to sit with the cool kids!

 

[BryonD]

Saying what you think is fine. Telling me why I think what I do is quite another. Doing so dismissively by claiming my thoughts are "worship" rather than rational is even worse. An old hand would know that.

You really should not be so certain that everything is about you personally.

At the community level, Wulf's "hero worship" comment was dead on.

 

[Umbran]

You really should not be so certain that everything is about you personally.

I'm not certain that everything is. I am certain that this particular comment was.

Go back and look at what he wrote. Wulf was not saying that the community worshipped Monte. He was saying that a very specific statement of mine indicated that I, as an individual, worshipped Monte, and therefore was not rational or objective on the matter. No real solid reason behind the claim, either. He just called it "transparent", as if he was an authority that could be trusted on such things.

And that is simply uncool. I thought Wulf was better than that.