Player Handout: A Master Feat List?

[Old Gumphrey]

Ooh, controversy!

I'm not sure what copyright this is infringing on. If these were full feat writeups I could see the argument for infringement but these are more or less quotes taken out of context. If you don't own the book you can't even use this stuff unless you go out and steal the books or pirate them (which people are doing anyway regardless of a spreadsheet with partial functioning descriptions).

I guess to build on that Word example, this is sort of like installing a copy of Word that lets you type no more than 6 lines of text, and you can only use half the letters in the alphabet, determined at random each time you start up. Yeah, I guess technically it's Word, but you can't use it functionally.

Listing the title of and vague description of feats in a book is not copyright infringement. Pretend like the entire spreadsheet has a set of quotes around it, or we can call it a "Comprehensive Feat Overview". I can quote the hell out of any book I choose, but until I reprint an entire chapter and call it my own I don't think I'm infringing on anything.

If you have legal proof that what these spreadsheets are doing is infringing on copyrights then please make it known. I don't think "the ability to painfully reverse engineer" qualifies. Otherwise, I don't see why this is a problem.

 

[skippy_the_witch]

reanjr,

Long long ago in a time far far away there was a little known film by the name of Star Wars. It led eventually to a series, and naturally spawned a fan base. This fan base did what all fans do, created mountains and mountains of fan fiction and other unlicensed products. The Grinch Who Owned Star Wars and his lawyers proceeded to threaten, sue and otherwise close down every single source of such unofficial fonts of creativity they could find (note I said "creative" not "Good"), a process which was both easier and harder since this was before the internet. Except for the toys, look back into the 80s and you will see very few Star Wars books and other media around.

Now we go back even further, to a little known show called Star Trek, which was quite possibly kept alive for another season due to it's fan base. While not directly encouraged by the owners of this intelectual property, neither did they come done like a ton of bricks upon the fans. Thus, decades AFTER the show was cancelled, there is a whole "fan" industry, which led to a built in audience for new movies and later new tv shows based off the long dead original show. And, again unlike Star Wars, there are clubs all accross the country, complete with conventions, etc.

The same could be said between what TSR used to do and what WOTC does. I don't doubt that WOTC would agree with you "officially", because they have to, but I also don't think they would be stupid enough to go after some folks who created a few spread sheets and pass them about as dm aids, especially if those folks are not charging anybody for the databases.

Lastly, I know of NO ONE that would have bought the book who decided not to when they found such "free" information such as these feat spread sheets. The person who is going to use such info to reverse engineer rules would NEVER have bought the book in the first place. And the same holds true regardless of the situation and the merchandise (software, books, etc).

skippy
The Gm of The Cursed Earth

 

[eris404]

Here's mine...I took that download, added the XPH and the Epic feats associated with the listed books, and did some reorganizing. It's even color coded (see page 2) and super easy to change around.

Thanks for sharing Gumphrey - this sheet is awesome! I had a question though on your color coding scheme. Blue stood for "house-ruled or house feat" and I just wanted to know if the feats in blue were altered from their "official" versions.

Thanks again!

 

[MarauderX]

Also available online:

http://darkestwolf.freeservers.com/DandDfeatsAL.htm#featsa

 

[Old Gumphrey]

Blue means that it was either created by me or it was altered from the written rule. I realized after I began color coding that obviously not everyone is going to use the same feats I do...but I didn't feel like going back and changing everything.

 

[johnsemlak]

Not to hijack... But is the miniatures handbook worth using in normal D&D? I don't own it, and am not interested in the miniatures game at all, so I avoided it. But lately I've been seeing people using it in the RPG, so the question surfaced.

I think it's worth it.

The book has new classes, PrC, spells, feats, monsters, all usable in normal games. It saw heavy use in the last game I ran.

Also, the rules for mass combat, while only good for small armies (100 a side max, IMO), are usable if you want an official mass combat system for your campaign.

 

[reanjr]

reanjr,

Long long ago in a time far far away there was a little known film by the name of Star Wars. It led eventually to a series, and naturally spawned a fan base. This fan base did what all fans do, created mountains and mountains of fan fiction and other unlicensed products. The Grinch Who Owned Star Wars and his lawyers proceeded to threaten, sue and otherwise close down every single source of such unofficial fonts of creativity they could find (note I said "creative" not "Good"), a process which was both easier and harder since this was before the internet. Except for the toys, look back into the 80s and you will see very few Star Wars books and other media around.

Now we go back even further, to a little known show called Star Trek, which was quite possibly kept alive for another season due to it's fan base. While not directly encouraged by the owners of this intelectual property, neither did they come done like a ton of bricks upon the fans. Thus, decades AFTER the show was cancelled, there is a whole "fan" industry, which led to a built in audience for new movies and later new tv shows based off the long dead original show. And, again unlike Star Wars, there are clubs all accross the country, complete with conventions, etc.

The merits of fan-created material doesn't really matter. What matters is that both of those franchises are fully within their right to squash the fan-created material. And the fans have no legal or even ethical right to create it in the first place.

[edit]: IIRC Disney actually was going through some problems of how to handle this in the near past due to the fact that they would quash derivative pornography but not other derivative works. By doing so, they were legally approving derivative works and weakening their copyright. I can't seem to find the story on google. Looking up something like that is difficult (looking up anything related to pornography other than pornography is difficult).

The same could be said between what TSR used to do and what WOTC does. I don't doubt that WOTC would agree with you "officially", because they have to, but I also don't think they would be stupid enough to go after some folks who created a few spread sheets and pass them about as dm aids, especially if those folks are not charging anybody for the databases.

I think you have hit on the point. It is not worth Wizards time to go after minor offenders like this. It doesn't mean that they do not want to or that they agree with the author. It simply is a weighted decision. The cost of going after this sort of minor infringement doesn't outweigh the benfits. But this sort of minor infringement that is so rampant is what has led to the current state of affairs where most people don't even understand the copyright laws. And this leads to even greater offenses.

Lastly, I know of NO ONE that would have bought the book who decided not to when they found such "free" information such as these feat spread sheets. The person who is going to use such info to reverse engineer rules would NEVER have bought the book in the first place. And the same holds true regardless of the situation and the merchandise (software, books, etc).

I didn't buy the 3.5 books because any info not covered in the SRD, I can make up myself (or use the 3.0 books for). If the SRD were not so conveniently referenced on web pages and downloaded RTF documents, I probably would have bought them. Now I am a collector, so I'll buy pretty much whatever trash Wizards puts out. I also am not a fan of feats. But if neither of these were true (and I think I am in the minorty on both of these points), a document like this (a legal one) would easily cause me to pause before looking at those books.

I think you are falling into a misconception that people who pirate stuff were only doing it because it was available. That's a fallacy propogated by all those WaReZ kids. That usually only holds true for very expensive media (like $3000 3d design suites). Even then, you often will find professionals who will pirate software that they otherwise would be forced to buy.

I am surprised at the audacity of it all, primarily. On such a site (a leading site with lots of professionals) I would expect a much higher standard. I am also surprised that the site admins don't care about EN World's culpability in the copyright infringement of its posters (assuming the admins delete or modify posts; I assume they do because I have never seen a blatantly innapropriate post or pic; by doing so, the Messageboard becomes a publication of EN World and is therefore their responsibility to maintain for purposes of libel, copyright, and indecency).

By NOT telling the admins about this sort of thing, one actually insulates them legally as they have no obligation to read the posts, but if read or notified about them, they have the responsibility to delete them.

 

[Yair]

The merits of fan-created material doesn't really matter. What matters is that both of those franchises are fully within their right to squash the fan-created material. And the fans have no legal or even ethical right to create it in the first place.

Legal right - you are probably right. Moral right - I am sure you think you are right, and I am sure "they" don't think you are right, and there is really no objective way to decide the matter. So why not just back up from the moral high ground, shall we?

[edit]: IIRC Disney actually was going through some problems of how to handle this in the near past due to the fact that they would quash derivative pornography but not other derivative works. By doing so, they were legally approving derivative works and weakening their copyright. I can't seem to find the story on google. Looking up something like that is difficult (looking up anything related to pornography other than pornography is difficult).

IIRC, you need protect only Trademarks, not Copyrights. Copyrights are yours regardless of how little or capriciously you enforce them. So disney's problems are not pertinent to the issue.

But this sort of minor infringement that is so rampant is what has led to the current state of affairs where most people don't even understand the copyright laws. And this leads to even greater offenses.

Frankly, I doubt if anyone but a copyright-lawyer understands copyright law. From the little I gathered, it is a thorny issue. Regardless, I reckon that most copyright infringement does not follow from not understanding copyright law, but rather from not caring about it. You do what you because you feel you should have a right to do so, regardless of the legal situation.
I certainly do believe that making and sharing a table summarizing and indexing the feats is fair use, if not even free speech. I don't know if that's what it is, but I do know I feel it should be. (Of course, there is a fine line here - if you put in too much information, then it does infringe... but as long as it is done in good faith, I don't think it will get out of hand.)

I didn't buy the 3.5 books because any info not covered in the SRD, I can make up myself (or use the 3.0 books for). If the SRD were not so conveniently referenced on web pages and downloaded RTF documents, I probably would have bought them.

Interesting. I bought these books mianly because they were for me better than the PDFs et al (you do know they contain a lot more then dry rules, right?), but also because I wanted to support their publisher. Not for any legal reason. Not purchasing a product from the publisher because you can get a product from another at cheaper prices that puts out all the original's goods... well, to me that is immoral.
I am not claiming the moral high ground or trying to condemn you or anything - I just find it interesting that our concepts of morality are so different. It seems yours are grounded in legalities, while mine in "fairness".

I am surprised at the audacity of it all, primarily. On such a site (a leading site with lots of professionals) I would expect a much higher standard. I am also surprised that the site admins don't care about EN World's culpability in the copyright infringement of its posters (assuming the admins delete or modify posts; I assume they do because I have never seen a blatantly innapropriate post or pic; by doing so, the Messageboard becomes a publication of EN World and is therefore their responsibility to maintain for purposes of libel, copyright, and indecency).

I have been told that there is a US court ruling that messageboards ownerrs had the right, but not the legal duty, to censure the posts, and are not to be held liable legally for the posts - the posters are. I am not sure of just how solid this information is, however.

And about the actual thread's topic - thanks for the tables! [insert download sound here]

 

[reanjr]

Moral right - I am sure you think you are right, and I am sure "they" don't think you are right, and there is really no objective way to decide the matter. So why not just back up from the moral high ground, shall we?

That's why I didn't say Moral, but Ethical. There is a slight difference.

IIRC, you need protect only Trademarks, not Copyrights. Copyrights are yours regardless of how little or capriciously you enforce them. So disney's problems are not pertinent to the issue.

Ah, yes, you are correct. I was misthinking (kind of like misfiring).

Interesting. I bought these books mianly because they were for me better than the PDFs et al (you do know they contain a lot more then dry rules, right?), but also because I wanted to support their publisher. Not for any legal reason. Not purchasing a product from the publisher because you can get a product from another at cheaper prices that puts out all the original's goods... well, to me that is immoral.
I am not claiming the moral high ground or trying to condemn you or anything - I just find it interesting that our concepts of morality are so different. It seems yours are grounded in legalities, while mine in "fairness".

Not true. I support Wizards all the way. Unless they try to abuse their customers by releasing an uneccessary update to a game 2 years before they were scheduled to release redesigned-only books (no rules changes, just errata). Even if I wanted the books and had all the money in the world, I wouldn't buy them on principle.

I have been told that there is a US court ruling that messageboards ownerrs had the right, but not the legal duty, to censure the posts, and are not to be held liable legally for the posts - the posters are. I am not sure of just how solid this information is, however.

And about the actual thread's topic - thanks for the tables! [insert download sound here]

In my understanding, they have no duty to censure their posters. But if they exercise their right to do so, they waive their own rights as a forum, and instead are treated as publishers (who are responsible for their content, no matter who actually writes the content). I think you may be referring to Zeran vs. AOL, in which they held that AOL was not responsible for NOT censoring an anonymous third party and could not be held accountable for the poster's comments. As the third party was harassing Ken Zeran (not to mention slandering; or libeling; I don't know which it is considered on a message board), I do not believe this case would be applicable.

 

[Yair]

That's why I didn't say Moral, but Ethical. There is a slight difference.

This is starting to remind me of a course in philosophy
Alright.

Not true. I support Wizards all the way. Unless they try to abuse their customers by releasing an uneccessary update to a game 2 years before they were scheduled to release redesigned-only books (no rules changes, just errata). Even if I wanted the books and had all the money in the world, I wouldn't buy them on principle.

Ahh, yes, I can relate to that. I see the 3.5 Edition as a Dwarfish Hop Forward (not quite a Giant Leap...), so I support it - but I can see where you are coming from.

In my understanding, they have no duty to censure their posters. But if they exercise their right to do so, they waive their own rights as a forum, and instead are treated as publishers (who are responsible for their content, no matter who actually writes the content). I think you may be referring to Zeran vs. AOL, in which they held that AOL was not responsible for NOT censoring an anonymous third party and could not be held accountable for the poster's comments. As the third party was harassing Ken Zeran (not to mention slandering; or libeling; I don't know which it is considered on a message board), I do not believe this case would be applicable.

Sounds sensible.
I can only hope no one sues these boards. Ever. I kind of like the fact that there are no serious limitations on speech here, and I am sure a lawsuit (even if it fails) will force the moderators to exert more control, if not close down the site completely.