Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!nonh From: nonh@utzoo.UUCP (Chris Robertson) Newsgroups: net.games.frp Subject: Re: Re: "The AD&D Module Competition" Message-ID: <4373@utzoo.UUCP> Date: Wed, 26-Sep-84 23:20:47 EDT Article-I.D.: utzoo.4373 Posted: Wed Sep 26 23:20:47 1984 Date-Received: Wed, 26-Sep-84 23:20:47 EDT References: <3721@decwrl.UUCP> Organization: U of Toronto Zoology Lines: 41 I agree with Tim Lasko 100% -- I fail to see why we should all be creative for the dubious rewards of having our modules spread across assorted nets with no copyright guarantees, plus one, or maybe two, or pehaps just the first, or the second, or neither, programs for doing some of the things which are fun to do by hand (such as generating characters), which aren't witten yet! I'd feel rather more like trusting the judgement of people who could organize their thoughts and spell, too. Come on, guys -- this has to be the most transparent rip-off attempt at other people's ideas I've seen in a long time. If you really want to get some good, original modules, try something like the following: 1. Suggest a module sharing/rating arrangement -- someone acts as co-ordinator, collects 'subscriptions', does preliminary judgment (i.e., can this thing be played?) and mailing. People contribute modules in playable form (that is, regular AD&D(tm) glossy-module style -- map, description, DM notes, the works, though of course we can't expect TOO much gloss for amateur things...). Modules which do not have enough info to be playable are returned to sender, with explanation. 2. About once every 1-2 months, depending on how long the module-of-the-month is, a module is mailed to those on the subscription list. Their groups play it. The groups mail feedback to the co-ordinator, who re-mails it to the author. 3. Copyright is stressed. No one except the author is allowed to make a profit from the module in the future. Suggestions will be acknowledged, but as this is a mutual benefit system, reward for pointing out good/bad points in another author's module is to have him do it for yours later... Expanding something like this into a module-swapping club might work. It would be a lot of work for the co-ordinator, who needs to be an experienced DM, too, to do preliminary judging of adequacy. It's a lot of effort to write up a module, though, so I expect response would be very spotty. But let's not have silly "fame and fortune plus these great programs ... when we get them finished ..." lures, please. --Chris Robertson {decvax, linus}!utzoo!nonh