PC Gen data sets

[jaerdaph]

Thanks for the input, guys.

And *nobody* on the Yahoo group, especially the most vocal complainers, ever volunteered to put their money where their mouths were.

Ain't that always the truth.

 

[Glyfair]

a) If WotC had complained to Yahoo that their IP was being infringed, *most* likely, the groups would have been deleted.

Especially since we know that Yahoo groups that shared WotC datasets for other character generation programs have either been deleted or had their data removed.

 

[Graf]

A lot of people have posted. I'll pick off a few of the absurd claims.

PcGen isn't open source in spirit.
*It's staffed and controlled by people who work for Code Monkey
*It constantly changed formats, invalidating everyone's previous work and denying them bug fixes, etc.
*(as others have pointed out) refused to move to shared standard (XML, etc)
I don't really mind anything else that CM did. They made bad choices and damaged the community but I think it was more a lack of business sense than any real attempt to do harm. But the "we're really open source and work for the good of the community" stuff is, if you have -any- idea what open source is about, patently absurd.

A program that is open but crippled and controled by a private entity is open source only in name.

c) Merton Monk (PCGen originator) might have been taken to court if the data had not been removed, and at least in the US, being right does not always mean you win.

The reverse way of saying this is that Merton Monk couldn't have started a company and generated revenue off the PcGen project without having WotC hit him like a ton of bricks.

If it'd stayed open source and worked under fair use clauses nobody would have gotten a cent.
No business cards, no fancy titles, no money.

The whole "wizards made us do it", "we didn't want to start a company" stuff is fairly silly.

 

[kingpaul]

*It's staffed and controlled by people who work for Code Monkey

No, its not. Not one silverback is an agent of CMP.

*It constantly changed formats, invalidating everyone's previous work and denying them bug fixes, etc.

Which is part of the evolving code/data structure to handle new rule changes

*(as others have pointed out) refused to move to shared standard (XML, etc)

We looked at it. It would've necessitated completely scrapping the code to support it.l

A program that is open but crippled and controled by a private entity is open source only in name.

PCGen is not controlled by CMP. They are 2 separate entities.

The reverse way of saying this is that Merton Monk couldn't have start a company and generated revenue off the PcGen project without having WotC hit him like a ton of bricks.

Hunh? Bryan started PCGen to a) learn java and b) create a chargen for 3.0

If it'd stayed open source and worked under fair use clauses nobody would have gotten a cent.

PCGen is still open source. The code is under LGPL and the datasets under OGL.

The whole "wizards made us do it", "we didn't want to start a company" stuff is fairly silly.

How is the truth silly?

edit that last bit sounds snippy, sorry.

However, it is the truth that PCGen thought it was operating under fair use when it distributed datasets based upon their books. When PCGen sat down with Anthony Valterra, then brand manager of D&D, he informed PCGen that what we were doing was infringing upon their IP. With that, PCGen removed the WotC based datasets and version 3.0 was born.

Bryan McRoberts, Jason Buchanon and Robert Reed started CMP and they were told to fix 40-odd bugs for eTools. They were later offered a dataset license.

 

[TheYeti1775]

2 Questions for ya KingPaul or Karianna

1st question:
Can I pay a monkey to enter in data/lst for me?
Cause if so how much to make those Alpha Dawnforge ones into a true Production.
I've been trying my hand at it in my spare time since downloading the new versions. And I'm getting pretty good at banging my head into a wall.

And second one:
What all is needed in securing permission of product to be added? Just the Author or the Publisher too? It's a D20 product and I've gamed with the Author. But wanted to know your all's needs for permission.

And for all you out there with those 'illegal' copies shame on you. You can dispose of them to this address..... Can't blame a player for trying. haha


Thanks,
Yeti

 

[kingpaul]

Can I pay a monkey to enter in data/lst for me?

All the PCGen data monkeys typically work on things that interest them. Though a few "squeaky wheels" have made enough noise for a source to get added.

Cause if so how much to make those Alpha Dawnforge ones into a true Production.

Alpha means they haven't been thoroughly tested. You can still use them though.

What all is needed in securing permission of product to be added? Just the Author or the Publisher too? It's a D20 product and I've gamed with the Author. But wanted to know your all's needs for permission.

We ask the publishing house if we can do datasets based upon their material.

 

[mosat]

1st question:
Can I pay a monkey to enter in data/lst for me?
Cause if so how much to make those Alpha Dawnforge ones into a true Production.
I've been trying my hand at it in my spare time since downloading the new versions. And I'm getting pretty good at banging my head into a wall.

And second one:
What all is needed in securing permission of product to be added? Just the Author or the Publisher too? It's a D20 product and I've gamed with the Author. But wanted to know your all's needs for permission.

Hi Yeti
As Paul said there's nothing preventing you from using the sets in the Alpha folder, the Alpha datasets are designated as such either because they have not had a complete review since they were entered or they is some outstanding issue that is as of yet unresolved. In the case of Dawnforge they are still in Alpha because we have not yet found a decent way to handle the Racial Talents and Transformations. There is new code which in place which will allow us to have a separate tab from which these abilies can be selected the same way feats are (as opposed to pop up choosers) which means it will be possible to change your selection of these abilities at any time. The Dawnforge sets are going to be the testbed data for this new code before we use it on the core sets so look for that early in the next cycle if it does not make it into the next production release.

To answer your last question: we usually get permission from the publisher.

To answer the first question: I'll take your money ;-)

 

[thpr]

[PcGen is] staffed and controlled by people who work for Code Monkey

I believe this has been addressed, but as one of the most active committers I would note I haven't worked for CMP and have no intention of doing so.

More importantly, I am one of the critical people driving the direction of PCGen, and if CMP or anyone else tried to hijack the project, I'd fork it so fast their head would spin... just as I would expect the Board of Directors to revoke my commit access if I became a liability to the project. The board of directors _can't_ stop a fork of the code, nor can CMP. Even _I_ can't stop a fork of the code unless the fork attempts to violate the license the code is under (LGPL). The only thing limiting a fork of the data is permission from the publishers. With good cause and a well written description of the reason for a fork, I doubt that issue would last more than a few weeks.

It constantly changed formats, invalidating everyone's previous work and denying them bug fixes, etc.

The PCGen formats have changed. That was recognized as a problem some time ago. Since that time, effort has been made to deprecate items across revisions, so that older data does not break. We are making efforts to ensure a smooth transition from 5.10 to 5.12 (and to future versions going forward).

I highly doubt anyone has been denied a bug fix. Given that the code is open source, I don't even comprehend how a fix could be denied to someone. The production versions are maintained and criticial items are fixed (we just released a 5.10.2).

(as others have pointed out) refused to move to shared standard (XML, etc)

You're seeing a conspiracy where there is none. What happens on open source projects is that developers turn over. Some of them have had children, others have encountered new jobs, others have simply disappeared. This is not evil, but I think it's a testament to PCGen that there are other developers who have picked up the project and continue developing.

As someone who started coding on the PCGen project in late 2005, I think there is a major problem of knowledge concentration. There is a bunch of undocumented code that performs what can only be described as 'deep magic'. There are undocumented features in the LST files as well, and that has made it difficult for us to actually make a conversion to a different data format, because we can't explicitly define the new format using our documentation.

Yes, this is a problem... we know that. We have slowly been tightening the rules on the LST syntax to eliminate some items that are not used or are old syntax (Go look at my code checkins and the posts I make to the pcgen_experimental Yahoo! group). We have been improving our documentation (go look at the number of documentation bugs I have opened in the last 6 months). This helps us reduce the quantity of code we are dealing with and the complexity of the LST format... this opens the possibility of another data formats.

These issues make changing some parts of the current code an extremely difficult proposition. It's fragile and highly tangled (those are both technical terms, fragile code being code where small changes tend to produce many problems, and tangled code being code that has circular dependencies, which leads to huge complexity to make simple changes).

This has led to challenges in doing major conversions like you describe. It is HARD (I resist stronger language because enWorld tries to produce a "family show"). I am one of the most active committers to PCGen, and I wouldn't go NEAR an XML conversion today, and that has NOTHING to do with my like or dislike for XML. (I WILL note here that my other project, RPG-MapGen, entirely uses XML for its data storage). I would LIKE to see a data format that is usable across tools, I would LIKE to see a saved character format that could be opened by other tools, and I think XML is a great candidate.

If it'd stayed open source and worked under fair use clauses nobody would have gotten a cent.

Nor would anyone have had access to WotC data.

The problem is that WotC didn't feel it worked under the fair use clause. The resources to line up a defense in federal court do NOT exist for PCGen, and never have. The ONLY option as a response to WotC was exactly what happened (ceasing shipment of the closed content data)

I would note fair use is a general concept, and the realm of data for role playing games is NOT clearly defined. The fact that the datasets were free (as in beer) did NOT mean they are not "commercial in nature" (the exact words in 17 USC 107(a)). What would have happened is that WotC would have sent a cease and desist letter, and the project would have become history.

[edited to add clarity to the fork comment]

 

[2WS-Steve]

Honestly, the case for fair use would have been incredibly thin -- even if the PCGEN volunteers somehow had enough money or were composed entirely of Ivy League Law School grads, they'd have an uphill battle arguing that PCGEN data files were "criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research". And rightfully so.

Gamers on the internet try to hang an awful lot of responsibility on that "cannot copyright game rules" business. That guideline means that people could write a game like D&D -- such as Rolemaster, HARP, or any of the myriad knockoffs with various rules changes that we've seen.

It does not mean that you can copy Tome of Magic just so long as you leave out the flavor text.

I was under the impression -- and I think this is legitimate -- that the original PCGEN team was operating under more of a "don't ask, don't tell" policy. It benefits the players of D&D to have a character generator. WotC knows this but, at first, might not have been planning on official support. WotC, however, can't give explicit approval to such a thing since doing so might weaken future claims they have to enforce their IP or trademarks. But if everything is done off the books, everyone can be happy.

I suspect this might be the way things are effectively working now, at least until WotC comes out with a new generator. And I know it's the way things work with the various support software (such as Card Vault) for games like Magic the Gathering.

 

[Michael Morris]

These issues make changing some parts of the current code an extremely difficult proposition. It's fragile and highly tangled (those are both technical terms, fragile code being code where small changes tend to produce many problems, and tangled code being code that has circular dependencies, which leads to huge complexity to make simple changes).

If the code is really in that bad a shape it's time to dump it and start the 6.0 branch guys. Seriously.