Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="HeapThaumaturgist" data-source="post: 3123941" data-attributes="member: 12332">Well, I don't know about unfair ... it's within the bounds of the OGL to do so.  I think people should continue to be aware of what a product contains and if they don't like products containing all-reprinted material, then they should vote with their dollar.I think a collection of feats could be useful, and I could understand wanting to be paid something for the collection, since most products with OGC feats don't have an SRD to copy/paste from, so there's some amount of data entry work to be done.  I'll say that reprint collections aren't tops for what I like about the OGL.  I like to see things taken and BUILT upon in OGL ... one product introduces a feat and another product reprints that feat and adds another three or four feats and turns it into a cool feat chain, for instance.  I like that better than, say, two or three products with "very similar" feats because the author wants to reinvent the wheel.  The OGL is most valuable when authors aren't having to reinvent the wheel all the time.As a writer, I'd be tempted to buy a product that was a comprehensive collection of d20Modern feats ... especially if that collection were presented in a copy-paste file type with full annotations.  Just so that, when writing product myself, I could consult the Feat Metafile and say:  "Ah, I see that RPGObjects created a feat just like this one I was going to write.  Instead of creating the same feat, only slightly different and with a different name, I will use their feat and credit them in my OGL Statement!"  Which, I think, would be fair of me to do and certainly within the letter AND the spirit of the OGL.--fje</blockquote>

Verification