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