Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Orcus" data-source="post: 1130833" data-attributes="member: 1254">I will say this (and I dont know if this is Monte's thinking or not) but one day d20 will go away. Maybe 3 years, maybe 30. And if you want to keep control over what you as a publisher believe is a unique rules approach, you want to keep that content closed. So I do see why some publishers are closing or attempting to designate as PI some rules content that others might think should be open (again, see my post above about what we mean by "should". Do you mean "should" as in "can vs. cant" as in referring to permissible versus impermissible or do you mean "should" as in "you should have done it this way because I think this way is better" as in referring to preferable versus not preferable).You have to remember that different publishers (WotC included) has different business interests in using the license. For example, WotC on the one hand provided the most valuable OGC when they released the SRD. But they dont make open content products. Is that supporting open gaming? Monte is perhaps one of the most successful third party publishers and has released a lot of open content and some that is not so open. But he has paved the way for more third companies to be successful in the market. Is that supporing open gaming? That is only one small fraction of the business decisions we all have to make. And it isnt just as easy as "well, just make it all open." That isnt always a realistic decision. It is, when possible, a good decision if there are no counterveiling principles saying you shouldnt open content. There is alot more to supporting open gaming that just how much you release as open content.Clark</blockquote>

Verification