In article <1ibzu2z.ac7ub5jmenzuN%dalef@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
Dale Friesen <dalef@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>Del Rio <delrio@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>> I bet the
>> idea behind the GSL is going to be, "let's let people create
>> stuff that requires you to own D&D 4e books to play." I'm
>> betting that the only version of the 4e rules that anyone will
>> be allowed to publish will be in the D&D 4e core books, thus
>> making them requirements in order to play any game that is
>> based on the 4e equivalent of d20.
>
>Yes, I expect that to be the case, too.
>
>But is that so unreasonable?
I think it's shortsighted.
>It's costing them a bunch of money to
>create 4e, so if people are going to be playing it then why shouldn't
>Hasbro require them to use the Hasbro edition of the rules?
I still feel there's an analogy with the music industry.
Trying to control these things more tightly doesn't expand your
potential market, it shrinks it. And that's not even to mention
the bad feeling it generates.
--
"I know I promised, Lord, never again. But I also know
that YOU know what a weak-willed person I am."
|
