I understand, but not everyone uses a content producer's behavior to determine whether or not to buy their product, but instead bases that decision on whether or they like and find useful the product itself. There's also a spectrum for this sort of thing, and you can't expect everyone to have the same line you have, and there's nothing wrong with having a different line.
I'm pretty sure I said 'I think I'm', not 'every one better'.
You're not holding people to account. You’re just complaining on social media. More fake outrage to add to the stew. Nothing is as simple as you pretend/would like it to be.
Okay, let's start with how you don't know what I do and go from there not making false assertions about people.
Really, no irony in this statement at all ‘….more original while borrowing heavily from WotC’s work’
None. If I take 100% of your generic work that is blah, alter 30% of it to be unique and interesting, my work will be more original while still borrowing heavily. Especially given the fact that very little in 5e is even original. The overwhelming majority of it is just stuff rehashed from prior editions.
The most astonishing thing to me is the claim that the mere existence of an appendix n encourages gatekeeping. That's like claiming the mere existence of a rifle encourages murder, rather than hunting or target practice. Or the existence of a hammer encourages hammer assaults, rather than hitting nails.
I'll have to look at it. As a whole, though, D&D has been getting blander and blander since 5e came out.
