Resistant to the idea of it being a Moral Obligation for Issaries to pick up this gauntlet, rather. It seems monumentally unfair that Greg is being pilloried for a decision that seems to me to be eminently sensible, and is even being threatened with mass mailbombing to ensure his compliance. That's what implied, though carefully not stated, when you simply say 'a PraxPack', given the rest of this thread.
> I see nothing wrong with this. As I've said privately elsewhere, I'm a darn
> good editor, but a truly lousy author. If there are others who are willing
> to re-publish Prax and who would not be working on new material, I do not
> see how republishing Prax hurts anyone.
You mean if it gets done using up _no_ resources that would otherwise be used to publish other material? In particular, Issaries resources, since it's a stated Issaries intent that's being heckled here, after all. Sure, by all means. But I don't think that's what you (plural, all the people agitating for 'HW Prax') are actually suggesting, is it?
> On the plus side, it provides new
> players (which is what this is all about, right?) more geographic scope and
> access to the most developed part of Glorantha.
This is basically the argument that says we have to keep republishing exactly the same thing, each 'incarnation' of Glorantha. *yawn* (Not so much a 'that's boring' yawn as an 'I'm tired stating the counterarguments to this' yawn...)
> Further, if people actually buy them, then Issaries will have a little
> more cash to pump into truly new materials.
But 'churning' material is not a good long-term strategy. In extremis people will just stop buying it, and much short of that, it uses up 'goodwill'. ("I just paid for _another_ KL cult writeup!") I refer you to Nick's reported retailer comments about 'who' is buying HW; if the people rushing to buy HW are largely 'old hands', then selling them the same old stuff is not in _anyone's_ interests.
Cheers,
Alex.
Powered by hypermail