>>From: woodelf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>agreed. the problem isn't the use of a system, it's the style of >>presentation that specifically catering to one system tends to >>engender. look at the Citybooks--ultimately, they used >>slightly-genericized AD&D for their system bits, but, they weren't >>designed as "AD&D supplements" but rather "fantasy supplements that >>are being marketed to AD&D players". > >Because like it or not D&D players make up the majority of the >purchasing audience. Most of them like the "traditional" fantasy >tropes and most really only want to see products that use those >tropes with a few additional kewl ideas (usually powers or items).
i think you misread me. i was arguing that "fantasy supplements that are being marketed to AD&D players" are *good* from the POV of this non-D&D player, and preferable to "D&D supplements". it's not the content i'm objecting to, it's the presentation. -- woodelf <*> [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.home.net/woodelph/ My day today? Nothing major, just Xenon base gone, Scorpio gone, Tarrant dead, Tarrant alive and then I found out Blake sold us out. _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
