[freeroleplay] Re: [Fwd: Free-Content Licensing of FUDGE]
- From: Jamie Jensen <yarvin@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: freeroleplay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 8 Dec 2004 17:59:42 -0600
Sigh. I guess I need to keep "learn DocBook" on my list of things to
do, then, because I don't need that sort of functionality.
Anyway, I'm playing in the beginning of a World of Darkness (using the
new rules) campaign right now. I'm playing a werewolf; there's also a
mage and a vampire. Only the vampire uses official rules; the mage
uses rules converted and modified by the player (he hates the
consensual reality and Avatar stuff), and my werewolf is almost
nothing like the old ones; again, the mage's player did the
conversion, but threw almost everything of the old system and setting
out.
I've already staked claim on the Changeling conversion, though, if I
ever get the book.
I don't know if we'll return to our D&D campaign any time soon, as the
mage's player was our DM and he's now throughly enchanted by the WoD
system. I have to say, it does seem quite nice.
On Wed, 8 Dec 2004 22:34:00 +0000, Samuel Penn <sam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wednesday 08 December 2004 21:39, Jamie Jensen wrote:
> > Good to hear I'm not missing much by not learning DocBook, though I
> > certainly wish there were a good, publishing-quality XML format for
> > books, considering how much simpler XML is than TeX.
>
> My problem with Docbook was that I was trying to document an
> XML file format. Documenting XML in XML is really nasty, and
> I hoped that there was a nice way of doing it. There wasn't,
> and the only way forward was to make use of lots of escaped
> XML within XML. I can't believe that I'm the only person who's
> had a need to document XML.
>
> It didn't take me look to come up with my own document format
> which did what I wanted, so I went with that instead. I can now
> document my XML without too much hassle:
>
> http://yagsbook.sourceforge.net/pagexml/xmlroot.html
>
> > > Hmm, we're starting to talk about licenses again rather than actual
> > > game content aren't we? Which is partly my point I suppose.
> >
> > Another good point, though one we can personally fix. Anyone want to
> > discuss some new game mechanic/setting/concept idea they've had
> > recently?
>
> Nothing at the moment, but I'm on holiday from next Wednesday, so
> hopefully I'll have some time to start doing some stuff again.
>
> Reuters have also decided to sack most of their development staff
> and ship development of the project I'm on out to India, so hopefully
> my contract there will end mid-February and I can go back to working
> closer to home, which means more time for gaming.
>
> Currently I'm running a brief spot of GURPS Conan (using GURPS 4th
> and d20 Conan setting). Out of all the d20 material I've seen, I
> think the Conan stuff is probably the best (and the Conan d20 rules
> are actually better than the core D&D rules in many respects).
--
J. Jensen
Other related posts:
