Quote from: Aos;458782Are you referring to the retro-clones here?

Yes.

Keep in mind I'm not involved in any of them but I was around many of the "avatars" involved. So it seems like I know "Axe Mental", "Bones McCoy" or others. Heh, honestly I think they are all the same person!

Quote from: thedungeondelver;458779Wow.  So Johnathan Tweet was an asshole, who didn't understand the Greyhawk material - and apparently so were the majority of the 2e TSR staff.

That explains some things.

It seems more like they wanted to do their own thing, mgmt told them no for some bullshit reason, so they changed bits and pieces instead so they could at least have some creative input since they weren't allowed to create their own pantheon.

Sounds like bad mgmt and office politics to me more than misreading the Greyhawk material.

Quote from: Gene Weigel;458788Yes.

Keep in mind I'm not involved in any of them but I was around many of the "avatars" involved. So it seems like I know "Axe Mental", "Bones McCoy" or others. Heh, honestly I think they are all the same person!

Sorry for the additional questions, but I'm trying to get a handle on what you're saying here.

When you say, "act like its theirs exclusively." Do you mean they don't give enough credit to the original designers (i.e. Gygax) or to those that helped them put together the clone itself?  I'm only thoroughly familiar with one of the clones (Swords and Wizardry White Box) and the author hints broadly at where the initial inspiration comes from, and, indeed, dedicated the project to Gygax and Arnson [and Jerry Mapes]. He also acknowledges and thanks a bunch of other people on the ttile page.  I think to go further may have created trouble with the OGL. I don't know for certain though.

Quote from: Aos;458790Sorry for the additional questions, but I'm trying to get a handle on what you're saying here.

When you say, "act like its theirs exclusively." Do you mean they don't give enough credit to the original designers (i.e. Gygax) or to those that helped them put together the clone itself?  I'm only thoroughly familiar with one of the clones (Swords and Wizardry White Box) and the author hints broadly at where the initial inspiration comes from, and, indeed, dedicated the project to Gygax and Arnson [and Jerry Mapes]. He also acknowledges and thanks a bunch of other people on the ttile page.  I think to go further may have created trouble with the OGL. I don't know for certain though.

No I mean universal without someone saying the system is theirs all the time. Thats why I can't get into it.

Its my fault I should have finished what I started but too distracted (real life).

Quote from: Gene Weigel;458799No I mean universal without someone saying the system is theirs all the time. Thats why I can't get into it.

Its my fault I should have finished what I started but too distracted (real life).

If by universal, you mean that people get all angry when someone does something unorthodox with the game and tend to consider certain sorts of house ruling to  be akin to blasphemy. I can't but agree.

Quote from: Peregrin;458789It seems more like they wanted to do their own thing, mgmt told them no for some bullshit reason, so they changed bits and pieces instead so they could at least have some creative input since they weren't allowed to create their own pantheon.

Sounds like bad mgmt and office politics to me more than misreading the Greyhawk material.

Actually, beyond the point of personal preferences and whether the changes were cool or uncool, whether 'I' like them or not, whether I like 3rd ed or not, strictly speaking of marketing and how that translates into the game's design here, I think it's pretty fucking obvious that keeping the Greyhawk pantheon for the 'implied' setting was one of the shrewdest moves you could make in designing 3rd edition, because it appealed to D&D's shared experience and meant something to the fanbase, while at the same time allowing the game to go nuts in terms of change in other areas of the design.

It was smart, honestly.

Quote from: Aos;458802If by universal, you mean that people get all angry when someone does something unorthodox with the game and tend to consider certain sorts of house ruling to  be akin to blasphemy. I can't but agree.

Alright, I mean not public domain and subject to the whims of the developer. Thats the vibe I got off the D&D versions anyway.

Frankly, I've burned my last road back to the various "D&D militia groups" (Dragonsfoot, Grognard's Tavern, etc.). I tried to do a FACEBOOK D&D site recently and it was just pathetic. I'm sticking with the blog for content as a vehicle and putting it out for the public instead of going on forums and collecting "friends". Honestly, I've been on D&D forums for over ten years and havent had players from it. Brief con meets but none were really memorable good times. Many forum fiends over the years have approached me with: "Remember that thing you wrote about Monte Cook? That was classic!" and I'll have no idea what they're talking about!

Quote from: Gene Weigel;458824Alright, I mean not public domain and subject to the whims of the developer. Thats the vibe I got off the D&D versions anyway.

Frankly, I've burned my last road back to the various "D&D militia groups" (Dragonsfoot, Grognard's Tavern, etc.). I tried to do a FACEBOOK D&D site recently and it was just pathetic. I'm sticking with the blog for content as a vehicle and putting it out for the public instead of going on forums and collecting "friends". Honestly, I've been on D&D forums for over ten years and havent had players from it. Brief con meets but none were really memorable good times. Many forum fiends over the years have approached me with: "Remember that thing you wrote about Monte Cook? That was classic!" and I'll have no idea what they're talking about!

Hmmm. Okay. S&W WB is all OGL and yours (and far, far, far more importantly, mine) to fuck with.  

Quote from:  Swords and Wizardry White BoxPublishing Your Own Materials
Swords & Wizardry is all Open Game Content under the terms of Wizards of the Coast’s Open Game License version 1.0a, with the exception of artwork and the trademarks “Mythmere Games,” “WhiteBox,” “Swords & Wizardry,” and “S&W.”

What does it mean that this game is Open Game Content?

It means you can (under the rules of the OGL) copy whatever parts of it you want, add your own content, change the content around, and publish the result. You have to comply with the terms of the Open Game License, which is reproduced below. If you don’t care about mentioning any of the game’s trademarks, that’s all you have to do.

Also, with certain conditions, you can even mention the Swords & Wizardry trademarks (S&W, WhiteBox, and Swords & Wizardry) to indicate that your work is compatible with the game. As long as you follow the requirements below, you can state that your resource “is compatible with the rules of Swords & Wizardry: WhiteBox” or, “with the Swords & Wizardry WhiteBox rules.” Here are those requirements:

Sure its OGL, and not public domain, but the stuff used to put it together is also OGL and has to be made available that way under the terms of the license.  
There is even a .rtf (text) file made to make modifying the game easier for you to do.
You can get that file here for free.

I think making it open is great, I think providing a document I can cut and paste from, and/or modify at will, goes above and beyond, really.

QuoteWhat do you get out of D&D edition wars?

Fun! Plus laughter...


...especially when it is lampooned in KODT...

Quote from: Aos;458827Hmmm. Okay. S&W WB is all OGL and yours (and far, far, far more importantly, mine) to fuck with.  





Sure its OGL, and not public domain, but the stuff used to put it together is also OGL and has to be made available that way under the terms of the license.  
There is even a .rtf (text) file made to make modifying the game easier for you to do.
You can get that file here for free.

I think making it open is great, I think providing a document I can cut and paste from, and/or modify at will, goes above and beyond, really.

Honestly, I wouldn't touch that with a ten-foot pole as the main developer seems to have issues.

Quote from: Gene Weigel;458829Honestly, I wouldn't touch that with a ten-foot pole as the main developer seems to have issues.

Well played?

Anyway, that's a shifting goal post, Gene. You stated you were unhappy that the stuff wasn't freely available.  I demonstrated otherwise; you switched your criteria.  That is a bit disingenuous.

Welcome to the internet, Aos.  
 
Best of luck with your blog and other creative endeavors.

What do I get out of them?

A lowered estimation of gamers.

Quote from: Aos;458830Well played?

Anyway, that's a shifting goal post, Gene. You stated you were unhappy that the stuff wasn't freely available.  I demonstrated otherwise; you switched your criteria.  That is a bit disingenuous.

Welcome to the internet, Aos.  
 
Best of luck with your blog and other creative endeavors.

Heh, I'm just trying to put it as gently as possible without inciting a riot. These people already are sick of me, I don't need them on the warpath... AGAIN. But I'm perfectly willing to burn all ties at this point. Not that I ever had any in this instance.

Take an old game, shift a few numbers and then act like you created it or are somehow the "gatekeeper". Then market it as a brand.

This is whats going on right now with that stuff. If you can believe that I was once the forebear of the OSR then its not what I envisioned.

Recently, someone actually said that specific term to me that I was not the "gatekeeper" because I was trying to stir up the rabble to do something along creative lines. There are a lot of people who convert things and think they've done something. I've seen so many conversions but not people willing to do original fantasy. THIS IS THE OSR. The same converters that I reviled with a new name.

Quote from: Gene Weigel;458908Take an old game, shift a few numbers and then act like you created it or are somehow the "gatekeeper". Then market it as a brand.

You mean like Ruinquest?


Anyway, you can use the txt document for swords and wizardry without mentioning Swords and Wizardry. If you want to use the name for some reason (which would really be beyond my understanding) there are indeed rules for that.
None of this seems quite so dramatic to me as you make it out to be.

It works fine if you want to promote non-collaboration while they reap the benefits of any user's success story for doing essentially nothing.

DIY is what I'm saying. They did why can't you?  Its "Z&Z" a forthcoming ruleset that does everything that never reveals exactly what the similarities are... but you still can publish...