Quote:
Originally Posted by Silveras
@MaxSupernova: Yes, I expect that the notion of "standard topics" will probably not outlive publisher involvement. I think each of them will want to establish the topic definitions that match their print products, and 3rd parties/users will want to use those anyway in order to promote compatibility.
As a result, I expect each game system will wind up with publisher-defined category structures. I advocated in the past that whatever core mechanics package would be the best place to store the category definitions for re-use (assuming the OGL model.. that may not work for other setups). 3rd party publishers would then be able to use the category definitions to publish their add-on content with some assurance that it would integrate nicely with the original publisher's contents.
|
I respectfully disagree with you here. My expectation is that, for TOPICS, there will be VERY LITTLE customizing for a particular game system, with the tailoring that's done primarily being handled through tags. For ARTICLES, there WILL be customization for each game system (e.g. Feats and Archetypes for Pathfinder vs. Cybergear and Advantages for Shadowrun), but those will almost exclusively be ADDITIONS unique to each game system. There won't be wholesale changes to the provided structure IMO.
FYI, lots of people told us we were crazy with how we did Hero Lab when that first came out. They said it would never work with our approach. Eight years later, we're the only tool still standing other than PCGen. Folks said the same about Army Builder before that. We have a vision and we think it will work. Please give us the benefit of the doubt until it's proven we're wrong.
