Hello,
A very well thought out argument, thank you.
Christopher DeLisle wrote:
> >Darren wrote:
> >
> >Personally i couldn't care less about the gaming community as a whole, or
> even
> >the D&D community. On the other hand the Open Gaming community has my
> attention.
> >But then, I'm not here to make money, only games.
>
> How can you not care about the gaming community as a whole? The more of the
> gaming community that accepts the OGL, the more successful it will be.
By successful, I am sure that you mean how many people play. I think that Ryan
even views it's success in the same way. But, by using that definition only, it
will never be as successful as it could be. The reason being, there are quite a
few people out there who just don't like the D&D game mechanic. Hit Points seem
to be the big thing, but there are also others.
I personally view the success as a quality issue. If you are giving the player
the best playing experience possible, then there is not much point in having a
million players playing. The best way to give quality is to expand the base so
that the game is actually the one the player wants to play, and not the one he
is stuck playing because there is nothing else.
> To
> only concern yourself with the Open Gaming Community and not care about the
> rest of the gaming community you are defeating the purpose of the Open
> Gaming Community.
I'm not sure that is accurate. Since the Open gaming community hasn't been given
a charter, I don't think we can defeat the purpose of it by making it stronger.
> It's all well and good to keep improving on a system and
> adding to it but if no one plays it, it's not a game, it's a thought
> exercise.
Since i will be playing it as long as I am developing it, I don't think we have
to worry about that happening.
> The goal of the Open Gaming Community should be to increase its size.
See i disagree with this. I believe that the goal of the Open Gaming Community
should be to make itself strong and versatile, so that it can stand up to the
pressures of everyone using it to expand the gaming community as a whole.
> I have to disagree with your statement. The Open Gaming Community is a
> subset of the Gaming Community. Anything that benefits the Gaming
> Community, benefits the Open Gaming Community.
I don't think i agree with this either. Some of the bigger stuff that happens to
the Gaming community may affect the Open Gaming community. At the moment
however, the Open Gaming Community is too small to be bothered by much that goes
on in the Gaming community as a whole. After all, how affected is the Open
Gaming Community if 50 new people start playing GURPS?
Now I can see it being affected more by the D&D community, however i would thing
the Open Gaming Community will have more of an effect on the D&D community than
the other way around.
> Several years back while I was was in a local gaming club, I was given the
> task of organizing small, local gaming convention. Everyone in the club
> wanted to go to the convention but few of them wanted to put out the effort
> to make the convention happen. They wanted to get all the benefits of the
> con without contributing anything to organize it. According to your
> definition, these people would not have been members of our local gaming
> community, or at the very best they would be considered leeches..
Not at all. The type of exchange is different in your example than it is in an
Open community. With your example the exchange is you provide the entertainment
and they provide the money to make it happen while agreeing to come over and
have fun with you.
In an open community, if it to thrive and grow, the exchange has to be an
exchange of ideas. Otherwise it doesn't grow, and is relegated to a fad.
> Your view of who constitutes a member of a community is too narrow. Not
> every member of a community takes the role of a contributor. Simply by
> being there and lending support a person can be a member of a community
> without giving anything tangible to it.
I tend to disagree with this as well. I think being there and lending moral
support *is* a tangible and very important part of the whole process. It is what
sustains and gives motivation. However, giving back to the community in the form
of rules, is what makes the community become more flexible. It is the influx of
ideas that makes the core stronger and growing.
> I don't think that it's right to
> expect every member of a community to make a major contribution to the
> community, but they should be encouraged to.
I don't think it is unreasonable to expect every member to contribute. If they
don't, why be part of the community?
Contributing can be as simple as moral support, a little "this is a good idea"
every once in a while, a new monster here and there, new equipment, historical
accurateness, math abilities, typesetting, editing, ideas, etc.
All of those things contribute to the Open Gaming Community. By their addition
they make the community stronger.
What concerns me, are the people who have no intention of contributing, and are
just using the work of the community to further their own ends. Those people I
have absolutely no use for.
Making adventures is great, and quite frankly sounds like fun, and if I thought
i could actually make a living at it, I would be interested in trying. However,
it is important that those using material from the Open Gaming Community also
contribute back to the Open Gaming Community so that we can grow and thrive.
Especially considering that all the adventures i have seen so far are directed
at the D&D community, not the Open Gaming Community. Not a big difference at the
moment to be sure, but the difference will grow over time, I have no doubt.
> >The absolute biggest benefit in Open Gaming is the ideas. I share my ideas
> and
> >return others share their ideas. In that way, the core material grows,
> expands,
> >and becomes better.
>
> I disagree here. The sharing of ideas goes on every day in the gaming
> community, even outside of the blanket of Open Gaming. I see the greatest
> benefit of Open Gaming to be the legal freedom to act upon these ideas to
> change and evolve the OGC.
Which can't be done if no one contributes.
> But the core CAN grow and flourish with EVERY member of the community taking
> a contributor role. Only if the community as a whole stops contributing
> does it stagnate. Knowing gamers as I do, I think that there will always be
> enough people out there who want to contribute that this will never happen,
> so long as they are not driven away from Open Gaming by those who would
> brand them with derogitory labels for not contributing.
Or they are driven away by the fact that everyone is willing to take the work
that they have done, but yet not willing to contribute back.
Have Fun,
Darren
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
