philreed said:I want to hear how this idea helps the game industry more than it hurts it.
As a publisher resource, I think that it would help the industry. As something freely available to the general public, it is more problematical, but I think that the cons outweigh the pros (as far as publishers are concerned). The only thing that I can see that might ease the mind of some (but not all) publishers is that with the wiki, all of their OGC will not be available in a single lump, but as many separate pages (one page per feat, one page per PrC, etc.).
However, I do think that the one post from the rpg.net thread had an interesting hypothesis/question which I have quoted below
Calithena said:Everything Mearls has done makes sense from a self-interested point of view, Joe.
Making the OGC designation in Iron Heroes totally unclear on purpose helps protect Malhavoc against what he's now advocating. It helps keep that content quasi-proprietary even though some of it technically is not.
Advocating the Wiki now that he's working for WotC, who doesn't open anything they make any more, is a way to get a convenient reference for everything else others have done so that he can use it to design stuff, taking from the community while giving nothing new back - and also weaken all of WotC's competitors for the d20 market by encouraging them all to cannibalize each other.
Just something to think about.....