Publishers Opinion Of PCGen

[Wulf Ratbane]

[EDIT]

I'll edit my comments down (based on the above post from PCGen and a desire to be progressive, and not another obstacle):

I WANT to include my stuff in PCGen, but I MUST be confident that it is in responsible hands. As a publisher I want my involvement in PCGen to be "fire and forget:" I want to be able to give them the material, and not have to worry about it after that. I don't want my involvement in PCGen to extend to doing their d20 compliance homework for them. I have little enough time to write my little books, let alone police the PCGen monkeys to make certain that they are correctly following the licenses and respecting my copyrights.

"We're programmers, not lawyers!" may be a reasonable excuse, one I can empathize with-- but it's still an excuse.

Lastly, I'll just say that based on this thread, I think my stated "publisher's opinion" is reasonable and fair.

Wulf

 

[smetzger]

Wow, no wonder you were confused. I definitely sheds more light on the subject. The first two are completely incorrect. I mean, totally, and completely. I'm not sure who posted them, or where you read them, but I'll bet they weren't Bryan or Mynex, or any other part of the inner circle of PCGen. That's the problem with an all volunteer project. You can't tell people what to do/say, and they go out and say something they think is true, but it's not, because they don't know all the facts. There are a lot of PCGen people out there saying things, but they don't always know what's going on. Bryan, above all, is the one heading up the project, and I'm sure he never claimed compliancy. Ditto with Mynex.

Yup, and nothing on the web page or in the download explaining things made it worse.

 

[Dextra]

stupid programmers with no time?

While this would probably be the best way, for various assorted reasons it's rather unlikely. (If nothing else we're spread over at least three continents. Which is not to say that we all don't need to increase our understanding of the licenses, we *do* need to do that.
/Jonas

I'm trying to be as objective as possible here. I'm not into witch hunts. I like the idea of software tools. They can make life so much easier for gamers, DMs, and publishers alike, and when done properly, they improve everyone's life.

Here's some of my issues with this discussion and topic.

First of all, it's getting confusing as to what the official word from PCGen is, what with all the simians and protozoans chiming in. Just so I get it right, PCGen's been working to become OGL compliant for a year now of their own volition, but seems to have only really put the push on after GenCon and discussions with WotC.

I'm disturbed about how much time of WotC's you're using up. I hope that the people dealing with you have nothing else to do with their time (like, say, develop new settings and products) than hold your hands helping you get up to speed when a simple reading of two pages of text might solve most of your problems.

But worst of all, saying that one of the reasons you're non-compliant is because you're mostly just a bunch of programmers spread across three continents seems pretty, well, lame. You discredit programmers' intelligence by saying that they are incapable of reading and understanding two pages of text. The d20 STL is about a page in length. The OGL is about a page in length. They are both available from the Wizard's site. They are both simple documents to read and understand. There are plenty of resources available here and on lists to help people understand the license. Before doing any more coding, have those code critters of yours do two pages of reading, no matter how many continents separate you. Then have them go over whatever they personally entered for compliance.

Enough with the excuses, we all have work to do. I look forward to seeing the complete and compliant product!

 

[jujutsunerd]

I'm not a publisher though... but I do work in the biz... so maybe my opinion counts for just slightly more than spit?!?!?

Well, in my case it does. I really like your art style, and hope Hero or SJG hire you more often (outside of D20, those are my main systems.)

/Jonas

 

[jujutsunerd]

Re: stupid programmers with no time?

Originally posted by Dextra

when a simple reading of two pages of text might solve most of your problems.

I suggest you take a look at the Section 15 part of a large number of D20 books (yes, even fairly recent ones.) I believe you will find a lot have gotten it wrong. Meaning, to me at least, that I'm at least not alone in not finding it all that simple.

But worst of all, saying that one of the reasons you're non-compliant is because you're mostly just a bunch of programmers spread across three continents seems pretty, well, lame.

If you think that's a lame excuse, that's fine with me. I think it's a good one. None of us are getting paid to do any of this (and most of us probably don't even *want* to get paid for it), and thus we tend do the bits that interest us. I enjoy programming, if pcgen wasn't around I'd work on some other interesting open source *programming* project. (I can't work on closed-source or for-pay projects as that could be construed as to be in competition with my employer, and I'm sure I'm not the only one in that situation.)

You discredit programmers' intelligence by saying that they are incapable of reading and understanding two pages of text.

Nope, I discredit *my* intelligence. I'm one of the programmers. (Actually, believe it or not, I've read the licenses several times, and I *think* I have a fair understanding of it. I am however not sure enough of it that I'm willing to bet anything on it. I'm perfectly happy leaving the 'figuring out what to do about licensing' to those in the project who are willing to do so.)

/Jonas

 

[Mortaneus]

I know quite a bit about copyright law, and about the OGL.

That's beside the point.

As a gamer, and as a GM, I don't give a dingo's-derrier what the OGL says. I'm trying to run a game. I want a tool that helps me make the characters in that game. E-tools can't do it, because they don't have all the non-wotc stuff. PCGen CAN do it, because they have the non-wotc stuff AND the wotc stuff. True, they've removed the files from sourceforge, but I got them before they did so. I'm using them (and modifying them) now, and will continue to do so.

If PCGen goes XML and renders the non-OGL lst files obsolete, then I won't be using that version of PCGen.

For the people on the buying end of d20 products, the central problem lies in the fact that there is no product out there that supports their needs. PCGen did, and they're getting in trouble for it. I am not, and will not use a product that restricts me in what I can and cannot use in my game. I have a huge pile of d20 books. I want to use them. If the product doesn't contain them, and lacks the ability to easily add them, then I won't be using that product.

A selfish attitude? Yep.

Do I care? Nope.

I am here to play a game, not defend someone's copyright. This doesn't mean that I xerox everything in sight. I support the companies I feel are doing a good job by buying their products. If I feel a company is NOT doing a good job, I'm not going to use their stuff, and thus there's no reason for me to try and photocopy it.

Before I get flamed for having no ethics, and being irresponsible, let me state that there are quite a few companies out there that I gladly buy products from. If I were offered them for free, I would refuse. I WANT to give them money to keep up the good work. Among these are Malhavoc, AEG, and FFG. WotC was on the list or a while, but because of the non-OGL nature of their products, and the fact that all the major books are out, I'm much less likely to have a use for their products from here on out. I've been waiting for the ELH. I got it. I'm pretty much done with them, and all non-OGL products. They are, by their very nature, not supported well enough for my taste.

 

[Unseelie]

Incidentally, of all the apes, chimps have the biggest testicle size-to-body weight ratio and gorillas have the smallest. It's true.

LF

And here I thought that the only person in the game industry that would be likely to know that was Ron Edwards. (Ron, if you're out there, you know I'm just messing with you. )

 

[Hastursaur]

I'm not sure who posted them, or where you read them, but I'll bet they weren't Bryan or Mynex, or any other part of the inner circle of PCGen. That's the problem with an all volunteer project. You can't tell people what to do/say, and they go out and say something they think is true, but it's not, because they don't know all the facts. There are a lot of PCGen people out there saying things, but they don't always know what's going on. Bryan, above all, is the one heading up the project, and I'm sure he never claimed compliancy. Ditto with Mynex.

-cut-

(And I am NOT part of the inner circle, I only live with part of it!)

-cut-

Disclaimer
I am not an official spokesmonkey for PCGen. I am just the Artist Wench who draws the monkies. I do not code, I only incidentally dabble in list files, I am not privy to all knowledge concerning the future of PCGen. The previous has only been my evaluation of certain issues, some understanding of which I have due to my living situation. (ie. Rooming with one of the inner circle) This is all my opinion, and nothing more. Please treat it as such.

PCGen may not be a company, but they are an organization that is trying to put out a product (albeit free). They need to define who is in charge and who speaks for the organization. Other people in the organization need to stop speaking for PCGen, even with disclaimers, because it confuses the issues. It doesn't matter how well meaning the opinions are, or even if they are factually sound, it is damaging PCGen as an organization.

I would like to hear Mynex or Bryan tell us who is in the Inner Circle, who speaks for PCGen. Other people with opinions, please leave this question to them and stop confusing the issues. It is well meaning but not helpful.

I'm not trying to come down on anyone, but if I can't keep it straight, I am sure other people are having the same problem.

$.02

 

[Callypsa]

PCGen may not be a company, but they are an organization that is trying to put out a product (albeit free). They need to define who is in charge and who speaks for the organization. Other people in the organization need to stop speaking for PCGen, even with disclaimers, because it confuses the issues. It doesn't matter how well meaning the opinions are, or even if they are factually sound, it is damaging PCGen as an organization.

I would like to hear Mynex or Bryan tell us who is in the Inner Circle, who speaks for PCGen. Other people with opinions, please leave this question to them and stop confusing the issues. It is well meaning but not helpful.

I'm not trying to come down on anyone, but if I can't keep it straight, I am sure other people are having the same problem.

$.02

Ah..I understand your point, however....

This is a public forum. It is a medium for discussion and the expression of opinion. As such, anything posted would naturally be the _opinion_ of the poster, unless labeled otherwise. I fail to see how you can confuse an opinion with an official statement, especially when it is clearly labeled as either/or. The issues are already confused. I could understand confusion if I just came out and said "this is the way things are," but I didn't. I clearly stated that this is my opinion. I feel I presented it in logical manner and stated clearly my reasoning on certain subjects. I was expressing how I interpreted certain things. If this confuses you, I am sorry, but that does not mean that my stated opinion is hurting PCGen. Speaking ABOUT PCGen is different than speaking FOR it. I think people can tell the difference, especially if it is clearly labeled.

If you want official rhetoric I suggest you look up Mynex on the ENWorld boards and email him with your questions. Or, alternatively, you could hang around, because he will probably post to this thread within a day or two.

 

[Orcus]

But it does highlight a problem. The right hand doesnt seem to know what the left hand is doing. Perhaps a product of a group effort with a volunteer central organization. Hard to say. In any event, the impression would be bettered if there was a consistent voice from PCGen. At least to me as a publisher.

To me, this just reinforces the problem that the PCGen team isnt on the same page and that releasing content to the team will require constant supervision to make sure it is used properly and compliantly.

Since this is a "Publisher's Opinion of PCGen" thread, here is a possible idea: designate a person to speak on behalf of the project and to interact with publishers. It certainly wasnt clear to me. Have all the other workers or coders or whatever indicate they are not speaking on behalf of PCGen. That would make PCGen's position, and our view of their position, more clear and easier to interpret. When you have 20 people spouting off in different forums and directions, stating different versions of things and some being polite and some being hostile it is hard to know what is going on. That would solve the appearance of chaos which I have gotten from this thread and might make it easier for publishers to work with PCGen.

Clark