Database of Feats

[Staffan]

[h3]Passwording[/h3]
The most complicated way is to have the user provide some proof that they own the book before viewing the material. This password would be something like "Open your book to page 123 and enter the 3rd word at the top of the 3rd paragraph." Alternately, the user could be required to enter the book's UPC code (the number beneath the bar code on the book for those unfamiliar with the term).

Problems:
Against a dedicated hacker this is more gesture than effective measure, but then again so is everything. A technical problem is that an extra datafield will have to be added to the users database (not so much of a problem, but it will require a shutdown of the server for about an hour to implement - updating 13,000 user fields is not a walk in the park).

Well, if you do a password like that as a "runtime" thing, it would be totally useless - what good is the ability to check a feat online if you have to get your book out to do it? But you might mean a one-time check rather than one done whenever you check the feats themselves.

An alternative to adding a field to the user table is adding a new table. That way you'd have:
User Table: {ID Number, User Name, Postcount, Whatever}
Feat Table: {Name, Description, Prereq, Source, Whatever}
FeatViewingPermissions Table: {FeatSource, UserID Number}

Then the software checks if there is an entry in the FVP table for the right intersection of FeatSource and UserID Number.

 

[Conaill]

Netbook of Feats, version #10

Yes, it's a start. Not quite an easily accessible online database, of course.

More importantly, I think a collection of fan submitted feats is not the way to go to get the publishers on board with this project. Just like it took DTRPG to get those print-only publishers on board that weren't willing to publish their pdfs on RPGNow. The "legitimate" and "professional" labels count for a lot with them, regardless of what your and I might think about it. Many publishers just don't like seeing their work mixed in with what they might consider "amateur" material. (Not casting any aspersions on the FaNCC's wonderful work here, but there is at least a perceived difference of quality between published and fan-based work, which leads publishers to steer away from being associated with such projects.)

Sure, if they're publishing OGC we don't really need their permission for anything, but I think it would behoove us greatly to be on good terms with them. Ideally, we want to get to the point where they come to us to submit their feats, because of the visibility and goodwill it buys them...

 

[kreynolds]

And implementing a password or subscription service to access *open* content would rub an awful lot of people the wrong way.

No more so than selling the SRD, I'd imagine.

 

[afstanton]

If you're doing this in such a way that a query into the database returns a dynamically created webpage with one or more feats on it, you probably should include the OGL (in small type, preferably) at the bottom of the page. Most of that would be static, but you need to dynamically adjust the output for section 15 to be updated correctly, which means that each feat needs to include the correct section 15 info as an entry in your system.

I am not a lawyer, but that would probably go a long way to CYA. Also could be really handy for people who want to use the database.

Aaron

 

[Conaill]

No more so than selling the SRD, I'd imagine.

Ah, but the SRD is already available for free. The feats we're talking about here are largely not yet available in a free format.

For example, I don't think too many people would complain about a subscription-based database that allows you to access the NBoF feats, because you could just as easily check the NBoF itself for free. Having a subscription-only database of Mongoose's "Ultimate Feats" or AEG's "Feats" would raise more hackles, because this is material that should by all right be free, yet the only way to get it would be to pay for it...

 

[kreynolds]

Ah, but the SRD is already available for free.

Precisely, which is why some people actually get up in arms about others trying to sell what is already free. Sure, it's repackaged and had a makeover (sometimes), but it's still the same free product with a price tag.

Besides, as you point out, the feats that would be entered into this database are already free. Whether or not they are currently available in a free source, however, is irrelevant, as they are OGC, thus they are free.

So, really, what we're talking about isn't a matter of right or wrong, but of who's got the gusto to be the first to point out the obvious.

 

[Mark]

Precisely, which is why some people actually get up in arms about others trying to sell what is already free.

For the record, I don't sell the SRD but rather sell my work on the formatting and the usability I add to the materials that are also available in the SRD. Reviews and sales have both been very good and no one has ever begrudged me for putting a price on the vast amount of work that I have put into it. I'm glad that you don't feel that way yourself, kreynolds, and I hope you inform those "some people" when they bring it up next time as to the distinction. Seems kinda silly that it even needs to be explained, IMO. Surely someone can easily check out the demo that I have available (see link in sig) and decide for themself if they wish to use the free versions that are out there or if they feel the added work I have done over countless hours and months will make the materials more useful and worth the price. My own experience is that a lot of people prefer the latter, including myself.

As far as the database of feats on EN World is concerned, I think some folks are a little unclear on the legalities suggested above in this thread. I'm sure Morrus will check with someone who knows what his liabilities are before creating such a thing. Since the OGL is a contract/license, it hardly falls under the suggested disclaimers of a message board operator's protections against what can be posted and who is legally responsible. Seems like a huge headache for very little practical gain, IMO.

 

[Conaill]

For the record, I don't sell the SRD but rather sell my work on the formatting and the usability I add to the materials that are also available in the SRD.

Exactly. Very different from charging for the *content*, when said content is supposed to be free.

Just like a toll road is not a big issue, as long as there are alternative non-toll roads you can take instead. Or a voting booth where you have to pay to enter, but once inside they treat you real nice, offer you some hors-d'oeuvres, a cushy chair, etc... not a big deal, as long as you can cast you vote next door for free.

 

[Michael Morris]

No, I haven't been chased from doing this - but I'm preoccupied with more important things - ENnies for one, which looms close.

 

[Mark]

[h3]Legal Issues[/h3]
I am not a lawyer, but I am keenly interested in what steps must be taken to make sure that this database will comply with the OGL license.

No, I haven't been chased from doing this...

I don't believe that you are being chased from the project. It's one thing to propose making your own material available in this fashion, and a much different thing to be doing so with other people's material, OGC or not. Consult with a lawyer before you proceed. At the least you should be examining Morrus' potential risk as the owner of this site and part owner of EN Publishing should things be mishandled.