Code Monkey Lose WoTC License (Merged)

[rob_nz]

Some interesting news for you (and vendors of OGL/d20 character generators like myself).

While this is undoubtedly good news for RPGXplorer (and others) I would like to wish CMP a commisatorial pat on the back, because I can imagine all too well how this must hurt like hell.

Hi Anurien, I curious as to why you perceive this as good news for yours and other products? On the one hand sure, a competitor who had an advantage is now in the same boat as you, so I can see it from that angle.

But I seriously doubt that this means you or anyone else will now have carte blanche access to Wizards copyright material.

As I understood it from previous threads on the subject (yours and others) there was nothing in the prior situation to stop you making a business case to WoTC for your own licencing agreement?

Do you have some new information on that front you can share?

Cheers, Rob_nz

 

[karianna]

Based on talking to some of my software developer friends, the cost of WotC developing a new application in-house is so prohibitive that I'm seriously starting to doubt that's what they're up to. There's also such a large installed base of PCGen users that I don't see why WotC would want to eliminate that potential revenue stream.

We're very proud that we have such a large user base (no-one has ever done the market analysis but we still get 1000's of unique downloads every time we do a release, so we know there are a few fans out there ;p). Regardless of that, I'm not sure that WoTC would become directly involved with an Open Source project, it just doesn't seem their style? As I've previously posted, we are approaching them about obtaining a license, but I'm not expecting a "Yes" at this stage.

 

[karianna]

Possible, but unlikely. PCGen has a crapload of man-hours in it, as does ETools. The cost to make an engine capable of the existing d20 complexities is really high.

It is more likely that they either a) tried to turn PCGen into an online java app that relies on WotC data or b) host the PCGen data files on their subscription website but require a PCGen plug-in that will log into the server and prevent data copying. (FYI: PCGen already supports accessing data files over the internet, an encrypted access plug-in is non-trivial but far less complex than a full featured app)

Even then, I would expect them to need an internal team to maintain a forked PCGen once the data files become incompatible. That may or may not be cheaper than CMP but if they can get enough of a userbase for their online subscription service, it becomes a steady revenue stream with only incremental upgrades required.

It may also be possible that the NWN character creation engine has been forked off and has had the classes added to it, possibly by translating the PCGen data files into NWNese. It's a pretty spiffy thing for a CRPG and is already basically d20.

We've had _zero_ contact from anyone associated with WoTC with regards to the PCGen code base. Yes its Open Source and freely available to be forked etc, however I would be incredibly surprised if WoTC were to use PCGen directly without having had to seek some assistance from us. PCGen is extraordinarily complex .

Again, we've had _zero_ contact about producing datasets, while easier than understanding the Java code base, again I'd be surprised if they hadn't approached us at some point to seek some assistance.

 

[karianna]

Let's not limit the talk of WoTC datasets just for PCGen...perhaps they plan on releasing datasets that can be used by any 3rd party application...DM Genie and NPC Designer come to mind. Release an XML-formated dataset that can be plugged into the subscriber's favorite DM-tool of choice. Not only would WoTC reap the revenue from the dataset, but they could also license the interface to parse the XML...

This has been tried by many groups before, I don't see WoTC cracking it, unless they were to support only a subset of the rules

 

[daan]

Hi Anurien, I curious as to why you perceive this as good news for yours and other products? On the one hand sure, a competitor who had an advantage is now in the same boat as you, so I can see it from that angle. As I understood it from previous threads on the subject (yours and others) there was nothing in the prior situation to stop you making a business case to WoTC for your own licencing agreement?

Regardless whats been said, I've always considered it implausible WoTC would allow more than one party rights to publish their IP. It might not have been an exclusive license, but given the situation it was as good as one.

In my personal opinion CMP acted as a roadblock for innovation in the field. They did fix many bugs in E-Tools, but never took it where it could have gone. RPG Foundry would've been nice in 2003 but it still isn't released. The retracted license has the potential of either delivering something better, or reviving the sourcebook sneakernet. Either way is preferable to the current situation.

Daan van Yperen
Redblade SRD, coming soon! www.redblade.org

 

[kigmatzomat]

We've had _zero_ contact from anyone associated with WoTC with regards to the PCGen code base. Yes its Open Source and freely available to be forked etc, however I would be incredibly surprised if WoTC were to use PCGen directly without having had to seek some assistance from us. PCGen is extraordinarily complex .

Yes and no. I've seen on the Y! group how the coders find it slow going to streamline things and they know what they're doing. However it seems that an encrypted remote access plug-in is quite viable and requires virtually no contact with PCGen's messy viscera, has a much smaller code-base to support, and could be done with minimal contact with the PCGen team.

It could be a gateway step since they they only need to decide if they are going to fork or maintain their LST files once PCGen fails to support the WotC LST files. PCGen updates roughly annually so they'd have roughly a year to see if their online service succeeded or failed, which could moot the whole question.

Again, we've had _zero_ contact about producing datasets, while easier than understanding the Java code base, again I'd be surprised if they hadn't approached us at some point to seek some assistance.

While I am merely speculating abou the terms of the CMP-WotC agreement, I think it is plausible that WotC has the rights to those data sets. It could even be set up so that WotC cannot "distribute" them, protecting CMP from direct WotC competition. However if WotC hosts those files on their own servers and never lets them go, it may bypass the "distribution" clauses.

As for supporting other programs, they could implement PCGen support incredibly quickly if they have the rights to the LST files. And I suspect that WHasbrotC is highly unlikely to do anything that would make the data easier to pirate and XML would definitely do that. Plus, LST->XML is a nightmare, as the PCGen folks have argued over time and time again. Redoing that work would be even more manual effort than a LST->XML conversion. Highly unlikely.

 

[karianna]

Well it certainly is interesting speculation! I guess we'd be kind of flattered if something like this did occur (if WoTC sees us as having the largest user community). Well I guess we'll just have to wait and see what they do next. If it did occur, I sincerely hope they did have the courtesy of contacting us, we are in regular contact with them over SRD Q's, so they know who to talk to

 

[kingpaul]

The retracted license has the potential of either delivering something better, or reviving the sourcebook sneakernet. Either way is preferable to the current situation.

Are you saying distributing closed-content without a license is better than CMP having the license?

 

[Vascant]

As for supporting other programs, they could implement PCGen support incredibly quickly if they have the rights to the LST files. And I suspect that WHasbrotC is highly unlikely to do anything that would make the data easier to pirate and XML would definitely do that. Plus, LST->XML is a nightmare, as the PCGen folks have argued over time and time again. Redoing that work would be even more manual effort than a LST->XML conversion. Highly unlikely.

It wasn't that much of a nightmare (and a lot easier then expected), Evolution does almost exactly this, just I am not converting to XML. The Code Gen converts to .Net Classes which are then compiled at run time based on what datasets the user wants to work with at that moment. The SRD has gone without a hitch and I did a few test cases on some datasets I purchased that went equally as well.

 

[daan]

Are you saying distributing closed-content without a license is better than CMP having the license?

I prefer the way things were pre-IP craze. Things went from hobbyists giving others a way to use their sourcebooks efficiently into a nonsensical IP debate about the legal and moral difference between someone typing in your sourcebooks or doing it yourself. And no, its not a debate i'm interested in holding at this time.

As a believer of Chargen sourcebooks being an extension to your already purchased sourcebooks, I could do without the reinforcement of that blasted license halting both innovation and killing the desire of the hobbyist scene to put any work in.

I'm just saying that if there happens to be no official way to obtain sourcebooks it'll provide a reason to get them elsewhere, which is good in my eyes. I realize WoTC could just end up playing a CMP surrogate on us, but at least now there's an option of things changing.

Daan