On Mon, 15 Apr 2002, Clark Peterson wrote:

> POLL
>
> OK, I want producers to tell me what you want:

I'm not a producer, but by now you all should know I just don't shut up.

If it's only about six more names I'd go with your option 2.  It just
seems easier and more keeping with what's gone before.

I've also thought some more about including an optional credit statement
for individual entries.  Re-users wouldn't be required to include this
material, but they'd be kindly asked to include it.  Essentially with each
creature rather than have an independent s.15 you'd include something like
this:  (I took names from one of Clark's posts, so I hope I have a
creature correctly matched to the author.)

Kamadan
****
info on creature
*
*
*
****

Credit: Authored by Scott Greene, based on original material by Nick Louth


In the introduction to the book or where ever you talk about using OGC,
you could simply ask that anyone using a creature from Tome of Horrors to
please include the credit line in their product.  Perhaps with the first
stat block of the creature or on their own acknowldgements page.  This
could probably be included in the OGC aspects of the creature (I can't
think of any negative effect of doing so at the moment), but it would also
be easy to simply claim the Credit line as PI and then give permission to
use that line only for the purpose of properly crediting the authors.

The obvious problem with this idea is that it doesn't require that proper
credit is given when a creature is re-used by someone.  But if you
combined this with #2 from the poll, you'd make sure that
authors/originators were always given some credit (from s.15) as well as
providing a way to give specific credit for each creature.  Just another
idea to throw into the pot I guess.

alec

_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l

Reply via email to