Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="The Sigil" data-source="post: 713728" data-attributes="member: 2013">For those who haven't done so, please read the original article.IMO, Sanguine is expressing disappointment on two counts:1.) That d20 products are getting a double-standard.  The Origins rules explicitly state that a "Best RPG" candidate must not require use or knowledge of another book/system.  As Sanguine noted, by default, almost all d20 products refer back to the PHB, thereby requiring knowledge of another book/system.This is a "technicality," I suppose - I happen to agree with them in this case, but will admit that it is a technical point.  I can see why this might be perceived as a temper tantrum.  The problem is that the d20 license's restrictions force games such as Spycraft to refer to the PHB when Spycraft is, IMO, not a "D&D" book.  IOW, the rules do not adequately account for the d20 license.  That's a problem with the letter vs. the spirit of the rules.However, these were the rules that were in place during the submissions period.  That's nobody's fault but Origins - if Origins really felt the need to change them, they should have done so before the submissions period.  You have to play by the rules in place at the time.2.) That the rules are being changed ex post facto - the submissions period is over now.  Suddenly, an exception is made and even though "the submissions period is closed" it is suddenly opened up again for d20 products only.This, IMO, is a valid complaint and just grounds for their rant.  If the committee had said during or before the submissions period something to the effect of "because of the intricacies of the d20 license, an exception to the 'no other works' rule is made for those works that reference XP rules in the PHB," that's fine - that's IMO within the spirit of the rule.  But you don't do it AFTER the submissions period ends.  Obviously, the Origins should try to anticipate these problems and change the rules prior to the submissions period.  Even if they don't realize it until someone brings it up to them during the submissions period and then change it during the submissions period on grounds of "following the spirit of the rules" (which I think their ruling does, BTW), that's fine with me.  But you don't change it after the period is over.If they did not come to a decision until after the submissions period, I think an acceptable solution would have been, "make the d20 exception and products that were ineligible to this point are granted a one-year term of eligiblity in the next submissions period."  IOW, because of the wording, Spycraft, Dragonstar, et al were not eligible this year.  They ARE eligble for consideration - as best RPG only - next year (but not after that).I'm okay with Origins rescinding a technicality to stay within the spirit of the law - just not AFTER the fact.  It falls under the same principle as the inability to watch someone commit an act, then pass a law to make that act illegal, and THEN prosecute them for committing the act in the first place... it wasn't illegal when they committed the act.  In the same way, d20 submissions were not "legal" during the submissions period.  Changing it after the fact is the wrong way to go about it.So, I agree with Sanguine's complaint - based more on point 2 than point 1.--The Sigil</blockquote>

Verification