CB's biggest failing by far: No custom content possible

[Ryujin]

Then answer these two questions:

1. How will Hero Lab interface with WotC's Moster Buiilder and Virtual Table Top?

2. Does Hero Lab have to pass through compliance review before being released?

1. No, it interfaces with D20 Pro's Virtual Tabletop application. Asking if it interfaces to resources, that aren't available externally, is a bit of a stalking horse, no?

 

[Herschel]

No, it's not. The WotC Character Builder has interface requirements that simply must be met and must work with a product still in development.

 

[Ryujin]

No, it's not. The WotC Character Builder has interface requirements that simply must be met and must work with a product still in development.

And that applies to a 3rd party creation... how? As has been pointed out before, the data is behind the paywall.

 

[Herschel]

The WotC Character Builder isn't a stand-alone piece cobbled together by Norm and Bob on Tuesday nights, nor is it an add-on to an established program/system. WotC has a bigger, more complex vision for their product that's quite frankly a good business decision to go for. (And this coming from someone who does care one lick about a VTT).

 

[rjdafoe]

Then answer these two questions:

1. How will Hero Lab interface with WotC's Moster Buiilder and Virtual Table Top?

2. Does Hero Lab have to pass through compliance review before being released?

They do not have to. Any one that does this and knows they will be interfacing with other products makes an API that will allow the communication. Hero lab already does and I would say it is harder as they are working with another company that is out of their control.

As for compliance, I assume yes. They have their own internal compliance and the other datasets they offer most likely have their own from anotherr company.

I notice you leave out all the 3.5 edition builders that were available.

 

[Herschel]

1. WotC's building a complex, integrated product, something beyond what's already out there (otherwise they wouldn't bother). Great vision, but time consuming and exacting. Once people figure that out, maybe the really pointless griping will subside, but I doubt it. This is the internet afterall.

2. Because I never used or saw any of the 3.5 builders. I hated that edition and all but avoided it.

 

[jimmifett]

They do not have to. Any one that does this and knows they will be interfacing with other products makes an API that will allow the communication. Hero lab already does and I would say it is harder as they are working with another company that is out of their control.

As for compliance, I assume yes. They have their own internal compliance and the other datasets they offer most likely have their own from anotherr company.

I notice you leave out all the 3.5 edition builders that were available.

Not addressing you specifically rjdafoe, but using a generic "you" to address those that think data modeling and api design is a trivial matter...

Do you know how to make an API?
Do you know how to design an API?
Do you know how to reverse engineer an API?
Do you know how to design a robust dataset?
Do you know how to model 4e as a dataset in xml?
Do you know how to model 4e as a dataset in sql?
Are you familiar with the following terms: SOAP, xsd, xpath, xsl, RESTful, varchar, DOM, wpf, liveconnect, xmlbean, uuid, xsl:fo?

Those of us that can answer yes to all that and more can truly appreciate what goes into someone else's piece of software, tell good and bad design choices, and instinctively gauge the general challenge of modifying something.

3.x/PF is significantly easier to model than 4e. SW SAGA edition is easier to model than 4e (another pet project of mine). Gurps is easier to model than 4e. 4e is a down right PITA to model, specifically bc it's exception based. There are a bunch of corner cases that are simple to express on paper as a rule or in your head when your playing, but are actually very complex when you have to break it down for computers.

 

[the Jester]

If you want 100% customization, why don't you just go download PCgen? Then you can spend hours hacking together all the text files and working out the formulas to get exactly what you want.

The character builder outputs XML, so why don't you go learn XSL and write your own transformation to create exactly the character sheet you want?

It's easy to complain. It's much harder to actually do something for real.

If I was charging thousands or maybe hundreds of thousands of people a monthly subscription for a piece of software that builds characters, YOU BET I would spend the effort to allow at least minimal customization.

Since I am fine with using pencils and paper to create a character- in fact, it's my preference- I don't see the need to go to all that work.

However, given the complexity of the 4e, if I had access to a piece of software that would allow customization and still included all the 4e data, its convenience would outweigh my natural preference.

 

[Eridanis]

Let's leave off the name-calling and stay on topic, please.

 

[Squire James]

I suppose it might be useful to say "easy" and "hard" is not the whole issue. I don't see anything "hard" about any of the little pieces of the offline character builder, but there happens to be over 10,000 little pieces. Doing all of them myself would take years... very boring years full of work that's easy but still has to be done!

My main complaint about the character builder (online and offline) is that they've built this amazing castle, but forgot to install bathrooms! In fact, they designed the castle so tightly that putting bathrooms in there is a difficult undertaking! So the best we'll see in the near future is a bunch of plain rooms with Port-a-Potties. That's about as far as I will stretch this particular analogy...