> Doug Meerschaert > > That's not what this thread suggested, oddly enough. > > A feat in Tome & Blood--say, Persistent Magic--is desired to be used as > a prerequisite for an OGL'd PrC. The *only* words that would be in the > PrC work would be "Persistent Magic", under the > Requirements/feats: section. > > It's not making a new feat. It's not releasing a very-similiar feat as > OGL. It's simply listing the name of a non-OGL feat to designate that > feat as a requirement for an OGL'd Prestige Class.
I'll grant you it is a different approach, but it is still derivative for similar reasons. The trouble is that by making a non-OGC feat a prerequisite, you are essentially saying that "this feat builds on the prerequisites in some way". Maybe it doesn't extend it directly, but you certainly have set up a chain of dependence between your feat and material that you do not have the authority to derive from. The latter is what bites you, because of the "authority to contribute" clause. Only the owner of that non-OGC feat in your prerequisites list has the authority to create game elements that are dependent (derivative) of their work. Note that I think this is only true in certain circumstances. It applies if you build on something in any way, but I think is possible to refer to other game elements in other ways and not be derivative (such as a spell saying that a particular game element is not available for a particular situation). -Brad _______________________________________________ Ogf-l mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.opengamingfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ogf-l
