Set 1:
Quote:
Dropping lowest= 1812 14 9 13 12 Quote:
16 128 16 14 14 I'll go for "what is set three?" thanks Alex.
1. Golarion: The Quickening. 2. Golarion: Our Movie Will Be Way Better Than That Last Atrocity. 3. Golarion: This Time, We Won't Play It In Your Mom's Basement. 4. Golarion: Make a Spot Check! 5. Golarion: The "Dark Heroic Fantasy" Computer Game. 6. Golarion 2: The "Dark Fantasy" Computer Game. 7. Golarion 3: The "Dark" Computer Game.
The books are predictable. Not only do I know Drizzt will win, I know that he will do it with his scimitars, accompanied by paragraphs of dreary text, none of which is really distinct or more interesting than the last fight scene described. I know the good people will come to Drizzt's side and the bad will die. Worse, the characters in the book are either irreducibly evil or undoubtedly good. No line is drawn between them. The Drizzt series makes for tedious, uninspired reading.
WotC can licence its products as it wants, but through this method, it would at least gain free advertising for its work. It's the same principle as OGL: everyone has to go back to get the core books anyhow, so what does WotC lose? Example Scenario 1: A 3rd party developer mentions Elminster or Halaster having a tea party with Mystra, and creates an adventure out of it. The adventure is his own writing and work, not FR's. Example Scenario 2: Golarion, or some other 3rd party developer introduces some FR monster into its game, stat blocks and all. It puts up a nice big sticker next to the stat block, or on the book cover, for its trouble. What distinguishes these 'campaign setting' licence scenarios from the 3.5 OGL licence today?
The biggest issue with copyright in gaming systems it that it restricts development options with respect to monsters, races and sub-types that are easily capable of being transferred from game setting to game setting. WotC for example has 'copyright', or some form of ownership over' FR' monsters. Now FR isn't great, but its monsters are creative, interesting and well worth a look. Question is--why on earth would you stop other people from using this property so long as they let you say, put a nice "FR" sticker somewhere on the cover? Or the same for "Golarion", "White Wolf", etc etc. Whether its game mechanics or thematic description, this allows for (a) honesty, so you don't need to rename your "illithid" into "squids" (b) promotes the other game system, whether it be FR, Golarion, or what have you. Currently, WotC and Pathfinder have 'game system licences.' Why not introduce 'campaign system' licences, with regards to either (a) flavour, history, text, etc or (b) game mechanics? One possible objection I can see to a game licence with respect to 'flavour' or the setting in general is that it creates inconsistency. However, this is something that can be worked out either by making it clear that the publisher isn't writing canon, or by prior agreement with Wotc/Pathfinder/White Wolf, etc.
If anyone can recommend fantasy books, I would deeply appreciate it. I have read Salvatore's Drow books [not a fan]; Cunningham's Baenre book [not a fan, but better than R A Salvatore]; most of the early Dragonlance stories and short stories [not a fan, but better than R A Salvatore, in my opinion]. Otherwise I've also read the R R Martin books, which I quite enjoyed. Also, Richard Knaak's story on Huma [dragonlance setting] was good in as much as it portrayed the main character as a human being, even though the side-characters were not. And obviously, Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter. But mainly I'm looking for good books in the fantasy genre, and preferably of the D&D-style persuasion. I'm a masochist, I know :(. Regardless, many thanks in advance.
Thanael wrote:
Link? I've read Salvatore and Cunningham and have not been impressed with either of them. Salvatore is boring; his writing rams the plot down your throat until you gag at how forced, awkward and predictable it all is. Cunningham simply fails to compel you to read further. She falls into the usual Sci-Fi/Fantasy exposition trap and depicts her characters without any life in them whatsoever. I've read the Dragonlance books and was impressed with a few of those. Most notably Richard Knaak managed the impossible in Legend of Huma by depicting a three dimensional, well written main character. This is simply not found anywhere in D&D literature--at least based on my readings. Granted Knaak's side-characters were poor, but for this achievement alone he gains my relative approval and recommendation.
True--NWN2 can never really accurately reflect every element of a pnp game. There are two options I guess:
Both would be great, if done properly. Besides, I'm tired of Elmo's forgotten realms adventures and the +5 swords the local clerics of Lathander must hand out at baby showers. If Golarion [is that the name of this setting?] injects a bit more sense into the format and I'd be gladder for it.
Does the OGL allow computer games? Pathfinder-style computer games may well be the only sane successor to D&D, now that 4e is simplified. Thing is, simple games are well and good for table top, but on the computer 'complex games' such as Pathfinder/3.5 can shine cos the computer does all the work for you.
|