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="Swanosaurus" data-source="post: 9272034" data-attributes="member: 7044220">Sorry to belabor the point, but this doesn't make sense. There's a lot of middle-ground between being a knock-off (which means a low-quality imitation) and being totally unrelated. Star Wars is not of knock-off of Dune, but it sure as hell has been heavily influenced by it.Or, in RPGs - leaving the OGL question aside, because whether there's a license for something or not has no bearing on its artistic merit: Would you say that 13th Age can only either be totally unrelated to D&D or a knock-off? Shadowdark? Everyday Heroes? What about the "re-statements" like Swords&Wizardry or Old School Essentials? You might argue that these are knock-offs, but I wouldn't call them that, because in re-organizing and clarifying the material, they bring a lot of value to the table. Is Mythras a knock-off of RuneQuest? It started as an edition of RuneQuest, but then struck it's own path, and like Zweihänder, it has obviously been built from the grounds up on some of the same principles of RuneQuest (and while I have other issues with the Mythras publisher, I still respect and will defend their great achievement).I respect the work of the people at Cubicle 7, but I also respect the work on Zweihänder, and fact is: Zweihänder and Warhammer 4 are two very different systems. WH2 and ZH are also very different systems (although maybe a little closer). There's room for all of them. Cubicle 7 invested in the license, which got them the name recognition of Warhammer, and they invested the work to create WH4. I certainly don't begrudge them that, but I also don't begrudge Daniel Fox turning a small profit on the years of work he put into his creation.</blockquote>

Verification