Publishers Opinion Of PCGen

[Knightcrawler]

Since I was unable to make it to GenCon I figured I'd ask the question here on the boards.

What are publishers opinions of PCGen. Most of what I heard from GenCon was extremely good. Basically what you think of it. And why or why not you gave your permission for use of your books as source materials.

Just interested in what everybodies opinions and reasons are surrounding PCGen. Heck with more understanding we might be able to convice more publishers to give us permission to use their books.

Thanks.



Knightcrawler
PCGen LST Monkey

 

[2WS-Steve]

Personally, I avoid using PCGen because I'm overly anal about hand-checking NPCs I put in a published product and because I often include weird, engine-breaking abilities or formats.

However, I definitely support the project and I'm just about ready to send you guys an MS Access table with something over 300 feats from Masters of Arms slotted into it.

 

[Leopold]

However, I definitely support the project and I'm just about ready to send you guys an MS Access table with something over 300 feats from Masters of Arms slotted into it.

feats!! Can never have to many! Send them on over Steve! I coded up the netbook of feats and there were 200+ in there and boy was that a bear! Can never have to many feats!

 

[DPGDarrin]

I too check for accuracy, but I feel that can be done easily after the character has been generated. I have used PCGen in the past, I will probably use it in the future, but right now I'm giving E-tools a chance.

I think that PCGen is an incredibly generous gift of time and convenience to the community, and we should all be grateful for the work they've done.

Kudos!

 

[smetzger]

I think PCGen is a great tool and I will fully support it as soon as it becomes OGL compliant.

 

[Orcus]

You asked...

I think PCGen has been blatantly non-compliant for a long time and there is no excuse for it. I dont support it now for that reason and most likely wont even if they finally become compliant because they were forced to.

Was it useful to people? Sure. So was Napster. But "useful" does not equal "good."

Clark

 

[Knightcrawler]

You asked...

I think PCGen has been blatantly non-compliant for a long time and there is no excuse for it. I dont support it now for that reason and most likely wont even if they finally become compliant because they were forced to.

Was it useful to people? Sure. So was Napster. But "useful" does not equal "good."

Clark

Thanks for the opinion. Even bad stuff I want to hear. Just testing the waters to see what the publishers are thinking.

Knightcrawler
PCGen LST Monkey

 

[Mynex]

You asked...

I think PCGen has been blatantly non-compliant for a long time and there is no excuse for it. I dont support it now for that reason and most likely wont even if they finally become compliant because they were forced to.

Was it useful to people? Sure. So was Napster. But "useful" does not equal "good."

Clark

Clark,

I'm sorry you feel that way. I'm sorry you feel the need to hold a grudge. Especially considering that the whole issue has not/will not ever see the light of a court room as we (the PCGen Team) would rather work with WotC now that we have dialog, rather than duke it out in court, which would be really really bad for everyone, not just WotC or ourselves.

It's a shame that you feel the need to close off an avenue of marketing for yourself, but that is most certainly your choice to do so. And you most certainly have the right at any time in the future to change your mind, and we'll be more than happy to include your material at such a time.

 

[Mynex]

You asked...

I think PCGen has been blatantly non-compliant for a long time and there is no excuse for it. I dont support it now for that reason and most likely wont even if they finally become compliant because they were forced to.

Was it useful to people? Sure. So was Napster. But "useful" does not equal "good."

Clark

Upon further reflection of you message I wish to address 2 points

1) We were not 'forced to' do anything. we were asked and we agreed. Since we'd been trying to gain dialog for for 18 mos, it was not a problem to agree to that, Also, since we had already done so with our 3.0.0 production release, it was a simple matter of removing the older data sets from Source Forge.

2) The napster comment I feel is out of line. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, and certainly entitled to be voiced. However it comes across as more than a little rude to me, and seems as if you have a a personal bone to pick with PCGen. And whatever that may be I have no idea.

You and I have exchanged emails, politely at that, and I asked you what issues you felt needing addressed. you didn't bother to reply, and I took that as you were too busy at the time adn would get back to it.

I see now that was a false assumption on my part. that you have no some issues with PCGen on a personal nature, and no desire to address such issues.

I made a good faith effort to talk with you about whatever those issues were, to try and work them out, so we could, to your satisfaction, get necromancer games materials included into PCGen. I'm sorry that was not good enough for you.

I wish you all the luck with necromancer games, and your future endeavors, I hope all goes well for you and yours.

And have no worries, I personally will never bother you again seeking your permission for anything from Necromancer games, though others may.

Then again, after your post, they may not.

 

[Orcus]

Dont ask for opinions if you dont want to hear them.

I dont have a personal problem with PCGen at all. If I didnt answer your emails its because I get 150 a day.

Frankly, I thought PCGen filled a screaming need in the gaming community. I was just disappointed that PCGen took such a cavalier attitude towards compliance.

And let's be honest. You werent even close. You had material in there that has been stated over and over again is not open content. You cant possibly claim that you didnt know what you were doing was improper.

I dont see PCGen as a marketing avenue for me, and I think if you know me you know I will state my opinions--good or bad--regardless of marketing.

I would have no problem discussing issues about PCGen with you. In fact, I think I was one of the people who long ago emailed you and told you you werent in compliance and that you should get compliant. I know I was.

I dont mean to be rude. You asked publishers opinions and I said that I dont like that you guys werent compliant and that scares me off from supporting you.

Clark