I know but... e-tool = crap

[Darrin Drader]

I found that when I first had gotten E-tools, I had exactly the same opinion of the program that noretoc has. But then I replaced the picture of the Athach background with the nifty demonic skull someone posted a while back, and now I like it at least 300% more than I did then.

But hey, lets see your masterwork generator. I'm sure it will only take a couple hours to slop something together that is more versatile and just as accurate as E-tools. You've got my vote!

 

[gregweller]

Remind me that if I ever post anything about the starter on my Kia Sportage being a piece of crap to *never ever* suggest that I could build a better one even if I don't know anything about automobile mechanics, even though I probably could.

 

[Vicegrip]

--For all the folks repeating the same joke, how many of you are actually experienced programmers?
--I haven't seen e-tools, and I don't know if it's any good or not, but without a good mapping program, it's really not what it should be. Even if it does exactly what it claims to with alacrity, it's still just an overly complex webtool.
--Take a look at Jamis Buck's character generators. They're very quick, very easy, and very accurate. They've also been available for quite a while, while e-tools (or whatever the name used to be) was screwing around in production.
--The fact is, using a database and a web scripting language, you can rapidly crank out stuff that can do anything e-tools purports to do.

--If the $35 tag is on the game content included with the disc, I can see that. However, if it's supposed to be for the other features, that's a bit of a rip.

 

[Therigwin]

I am a programmer. Like I said, give me two years, and I could program something. But why???

Screw the map. I don't need a map maker. I use mastermaze by dwarvenforge. For big area printed maps, I use autorealm, which is free.

Jamis Buck did a great job, but some of the randomness was too random for my tastes.

Another thing is the table generator in eTools is probably worth a good 50% of the cost of the product. It is very powerful.

eTools is not perfect, but it is a good program. When it is all patched up, my guess is a good majority of people will want to buy it.

 

[Vicegrip]

[[ I am a programmer. Like I said, give me two years, and I could program something. But why??? ]]
--It's not so much that you should do it, as that you can. Personally I think two years is a bit excessive to create this software. More like 6 months, and that's for one person working at an average pace.
--But the point remains. Jamis Buck's stuff might not be totally up your alley, but it's free and it works nicely. Why is it worth $35 for something that's basically rehashing what Jamis does, and requires you to install and patch it to get it to work?

 

[Fast Learner]

--For all the folks repeating the same joke, how many of you are actually experienced programmers?

I am an experienced programmer, nearly 25 years now.

--I haven't seen e-tools, and I don't know if it's any good or not, but without a good mapping program, it's really not what it should be. Even if it does exactly what it claims to with alacrity, it's still just an overly complex webtool.

Clearly you haven't seen it, since it's not a webtool at all.

It doesn't do everything you want it to. Gotcha.

--Take a look at Jamis Buck's character generators. They're very quick, very easy, and very accurate. They've also been available for quite a while, while e-tools (or whatever the name used to be) was screwing around in production.

And Jamis will tell you in a second that his generators don't do near what eTools does. In addition, "screwing around in production" has nothing to do with the final tool, now does it?

--The fact is, using a database and a web scripting language, you can rapidly crank out stuff that can do anything e-tools purports to do.

No, the fact is that duplicating the functionality of eTools would be a bare minimum 3-month fulltime project, and only for a very talented programmer. The average programmer would take at least 6 months. And those are "programmer estimates." The reality is probably double those two numbers.

Where do you get your "fact"? If you're so in the know, why then haven't you produced the thing yourself, and ages ago? Trust me, it seems very easy until you actually try it.

--If the $35 tag is on the game content included with the disc, I can see that. However, if it's supposed to be for the other features, that's a bit of a rip.

Says you. I appreciate the fact that you don't think its worth $29.95 (the actual "tag"), but that's the only part of your post that is correct, and it's only correct in that it's your opinion.

 

[Therigwin]

Because it does more.

Like I said, the table generator is incredible.

I programmed in my complete encounter for my players next big battle.
It show the init score of each of the opponets, what the rolled to hit, and how much damage they did.

It took 10 minutes to set that up, but in combat, I just hit the button each round and I am all set.

Secondly, I said 2 years, since I have 2 kids and a newborn coming in Dec, so my time is limited that I could develop it.

I think it is worth it. But that is just my opinion.

 

[Cergorach]

WOW! Another one who thinks that he can do better...

Buddy, just because you say you can do something doesn't mean e, unless you actually make something you don't have my respect on this subject.

Yeah, i actually also think i could do better, but it would take me far to much time to get it done, and frankly that's not worth it to me. So i don't throw that idea in everyones face...

 

[CRGreathouse]

For all the folks repeating the same joke, how many of you are actually experienced programmers?

Well, I am.

Yeah, i actually also think i could do better, but it would take me far to much time to get it done, and frankly that's not worth it to me. So i don't throw that idea in everyones face...

I feel exactly the same way. If I was working with another programmer or two with reasonable skill and knowledge of D&D rules, and could devote full time to the project (i.e. as a primary job), I *do* think I could have done better, likely in less time.

I don't blame Fluid - WotC changed its mind many, many times, forcing Fluid to change midstream. This is never good for the company.

 

[Sm!rk]

--It's not so much that you should do it, as that you can. Personally I think two years is a bit excessive to create this software. More like 6 months, and that's for one person working at an average pace.

I think the point which many supposed intelligent humans fail to see and is standard fair for engineer types is that "the proof is in the pudding." Make the pudding and then say how good your pudding is, don't guess you could make tasty pudding in 6 months and expect anyone to consider that evidence of good pudding.

There is no such thing like "oh I could do that", if you haven't done it, you can't or won't, both are equally useless as supportive argument.

Saying you can build it better only shows that you have an inflated ego and doesn't help any of us that do want a better product.