Quote from: Shasarak;1088711So you think that Paizo just copied 3e from WotC?  o_O

Pathfinder is 3.5  with a few houserules and changes. It is what they built their company and infamous "3.5 Thrives" slogan around. Wotc had to oay for the privilege oc using their rules. Paizo took Wotc rules added some small changes  and paid nothing to do so thanks to the OGL.

So yes they did.

Quote from: Shasarak;1088711So you think that Paizo just copied 3e from WotC?  o_O

You made that statement, not I, and no, I do not think so.

I think there was a fair amount of their own work that went into it - I think it's pretty obvious that PF1E isn't the 3E/3.5 SRD with chargen.

Quote from: Toadmaster;1088717In the Married with Children boycott, initially there was a loss of commercial revenue as the big name companies pulled their ads, but they were soon replaced by smaller companies who were less risk adverse to activism. Of course it paid off for them when the show took off, and eventually most of the lost commercial accounts also came back as it became apparent that nobody cared. That would fit with Spinichcat's point about private vs companies with shareholders.

Sorry, but that's not entirely accurate. It irks me when people take the wrong lessons from events. The Married With Children boycott wasn't about getting the show off the air; it was about moving the show to a later timeslot, which Fox did. In the end, it seemed that nobody cared because the people that did care got what they wanted - which frankly, wasn't unreasonable - and the producers even said that moving it out of the traditional family hour opened up a lot of room for the show to explore.

Quote from: Motorskills;1088456I'm not making any public comments at this time. Thanks.

For what it's worth, the kook who took over the RPGnet FB group labeled me a Nazi, so I feel your pain (such as it is).

Quote from: sureshot;1088730Pathfinder is 3.5  with a few houserules and changes. It is what they built their company and infamous "3.5 Thrives" slogan around. Wotc had to oay for the privilege oc using their rules. Paizo took Wotc rules added some small changes  and paid nothing to do so thanks to the OGL.

So yes they did.

WotC did not have to pay to use the rules.

Quote from: kythri;1088760You made that statement, not I, and no, I do not think so.

I think there was a fair amount of their own work that went into it - I think it's pretty obvious that PF1E isn't the 3E/3.5 SRD with chargen.

So then whats your point in your words?

Quote from: Dan Davenport;1088774For what it's worth, the kook who took over the RPGnet FB group labeled me a Nazi, so I feel your pain (such as it is).

Who isn't (supposedly) a Nazi nowadays?

Quote from: Shasarak;1088790WotC did not have to pay to use the rules.

Yeah since I think 3rd and 3.5 came out after WOTC bought out TSR (Someone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong?)

It could have been worse, Motorskills could have violated their new "Avengers Spoiler Policy". :rolleyes:

Quote from: Shasarak;1088790WotC did not have to pay to use the rules.

They did not have to pay to publish their own artistic interpretation of the mechanics.  Given no OGL at the time, if they wanted to make a game with all of the material now classified as non-open intellectual property, yes, they in fact had to, or, if they wanted the entirety of the Monster Manuals without having to re-skin monsters, again, yes, they had to.

Quote from: Shasarak;1088790So then whats your point in your words?

That your point is retarded, and that WotC didn't "copy D&D".

Quote from: Shasarak;1088790WotC did not have to pay to use the rules.

So the 3e developers worked for free then?

WotC absolutely paid to use the rules. That's how business works.

People designed and wrote up the d20 system rules and WotC paid for their work.

Paizo duplicated that work without paying for it because a licensing agreement allowed them to. It doesn't make them evil, it just makes them the China of game design.

Quote from: Chris24601;1088815Paizo duplicated that work without paying for it because a licensing agreement allowed them to. It doesn't make them evil, it just makes them the China of game design.

I agree this is a factor, but it's not as much of a factor as some might think. First, I don't think the main cost of producing a mainstream RPG is the mechanics. The illustrations, layout, editing, and so forth are a lot of work. Note that since Pathfinder uses the OGL, anyone can just take Pathfinder and copy it too - but no one has successfully done so.

Second, the OGL isn't a complete shift. Prior to the OGL, there were tons of games that were close to D&D, like Palladium Fantasy or Arduin Grimoire. *All* RPGs use ideas and mechanics from other RPGs, and even D&D took many ideas from prior wargames. Copyright requires that you rewrite the text into your own words, but ideas and mechanics are frequently copied - legally so. It is easier to create an OGL game like Pathfinder than a game like Palladium Fantasy - but the difference isn't that huge.


So I'll buy that Pathfinder is more derivative than other games, but it's an incremental change in degree. Also, China is often accused of illegal copyright violation - but Paizo worked with legal permission, so I think the parallel is off.

Quote from: Kevin197;1088805Yeah since I think 3rd and 3.5 came out after WOTC bought out TSR (Someone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong?)

That is my understanding as well.

Correct.

Most of the final throes of 2E product has the WOTC symbol on it.  The Dragon Magazine blackout lifting was the line of demarcation for WOTC 2nd edition AD&D, as it was their purchase of TSR that provided the cash to put out Dragon again.

Quote from: EOTB;1088846Correct.

Most of the final throes of 2E product has the WOTC symbol on it.  The Dragon Magazine blackout lifting was the line of demarcation for WOTC 2nd edition AD&D, as it was their purchase of TSR that provided the cash to put out Dragon again.

   Although the transition took a while--WotC started producing product in the summer of 1997, but it was all stuff that had been designed under TSR, of course. (I actually wrote and got a contract for a Dragon Magazine article primarily during the 'limbo' period of early 1997.) The first products that started being conceived and designed under WotC's auspices started hitting shelves in mid-1998, and the TSR logo wasn't retired until January 2000.

Quote from: Fergurg;1088769Sorry, but that's not entirely accurate. It irks me when people take the wrong lessons from events. The Married With Children boycott wasn't about getting the show off the air; it was about moving the show to a later timeslot, which Fox did. In the end, it seemed that nobody cared because the people that did care got what they wanted - which frankly, wasn't unreasonable - and the producers even said that moving it out of the traditional family hour opened up a lot of room for the show to explore.

If you can find even one source supporting that I'd be interested in seeing it. I've looked at a good 1/2 dozen just now and none say she was just asking them to move the time. She didn't like the response to her complaint and was looking to hurt the network.

Fox did move the show from 830 to 9pm in an effort to appease her. Of the 42 sponsors she wrote to, Fox claims only one, Coca-Cola actually pulled their ads.

This was also the time of Tipper Gore and her crusade against "porn rock". John Denver made their list of inappropriate music...  Yeah, that John Denver.

The "anti-big government" Reagan years were a busy time for those in favor of a nanny state providing parental regulation.