Brad:
Just about everything you said makes sense. I think that the better
able we are to explain our positions, the better our understanding of
them will be. :)
I think Lizard raised an interesting point ("can d20 be level-less."),
but it's one that only Wizards can answer. Sadly, there's no way to
know for sure what they'll do until they've done it, so anyone wanting
an answer to this or other d20 ambiguities has a choice:
1: Chance it.
2: Find a different logo and use that.
ok, enough soapboxing for me today. I've only got one point to rebut.
Brad Thompson wrote:
>
>I guess I'm just tired of discussions aimed at finding loopholes the
>license, especially when the loopholes can be closed the instant they are
>found (if WotC cares to do so). I don't recall the last time a major d20
>publisher raised one of these questions; they usually come from low-volume
>or fan authors who's work will never be in wide distribution. I just don't
>see why the d20 logo is so attractive to these folks that they feel they
>need to subvert the license in order to get their unique product to market.
>
>
People who aren't on top, and want to be, look for an edge. People who
are on top look for the safe way to stay there. Whenever someone finds
an edge, they have a limited window of opportunity to act on it before
all the large, agile businesses copy their edge.
You'll never see SSS skirting the edge of the license, simply because
they can't take as many risks as "Game Store publishing." Be assured
that if a small company finds an edge that Wizards condones (or leaves
alone), then it's only a matter of time before a large company does the
same thing, and the edge ceases to be any real advantage.
(Sorry. I'm just biased towards the little guy.)
DM
_______________________________________________
Ogf-l mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
