NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="patrickmallette" data-source="post: 1131085" data-attributes="member: 14309">So, I didn't feel like answering every minutia. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f644.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":rolleyes:" title="Roll eyes    :rolleyes:"  data-smilie="11"data-shortname=":rolleyes:" />I don't recall saying I was the only one to write in.I guess a kid with a ball does have that right, but should he be doing it just because he's not winning as much as he wants. It's not very sportsmanlike to change the rules (like where the out of bounds line is - like this new quality clause) just because it gives him a temporary advantage (don't want anyone else making monster manuals with the occasional nipple now do we?). <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />Regarding the Marvel/DC analogy, it would be better suited if Marvel made an open world license where others could write/sell stories of Spiderman and then change the rules so that Spiderman could never be depicted in a bed with Mary Jane. I was not suggesting companies were plastering the Wizards trademark on their products. They are publishing to an "open" license and using a trademark that is not Wizards main identifying logo.The company that obtained rights to display it took an artist's expression and bastardized it for their market. Perhaps a better example would have been the statue of David with his willy hanging out being covered up by a bunch of prudes so no one else could view the statue as it was meant to be viewed (a real world example here). Would you like being an artist only to have your artwork, your life's blood being altered or reworked by someone else. I think Michelangelo would be pretty miffed seeing his statue garbed and hiding the full details of his work and expression just to be displayed in a particular country.Yes exactly, a line that they can and have just shown they are willing to redraw. This week it is real world religions, and explicit sexuality. Fine. But what will it be next year? Will they change it so that even a fictitious married couple could not be shown in bed together? Maybe not, but they could just like the Flintstones couldn't be drawn in the same bed even though that show was for adults originally.Just hypothesize for a moment that the Midnight campaign setting becomes more popular than the Forgotten Realms, Wizards could change their rules to prevent any evil person from being depicted in the role as the leader of a nation or continent. Poof, there goes that campaign setting from the d20 product list. If the publisher is lucky they might still be accepted and popular under the OGL, but things don't always work that way. So, Wizards current ruckus could just be an escape route to prevent a company from publishing an adult title for a mature or at least adult audience; and tomorrow they could just as easily use it as a dirty underhanded maneuver in an attempt to regain market share.A change to an "open" license like this to close a loophole that would make it unenforceable is one thing. A change in a license to stifle creativity and expression is quite another, as is making changes in an attempt to regain market share because there are many high quality competing products (Sword and Sorcery). While wizards does not seem to be making a change for this last reason (yet), after seeing what they were willing to change in this latest version of the license I can easily see them employing that tactic at the first sign of a Q4 loss.That is my point and those are my concerns. I'm sorry if you disagree or still don't see it, but at least one other person has understood my message. To that person, I thank you and I am looking forward to learning more about the FGA.It was nice chatting with you Harry. It would have been nicer to have the same conversation with you in person.</blockquote>

Verification