Publishers Opinion Of PCGen

[kzin]

(My opinion is that the books are well worth the $10 bucks for the presentation and the joy of owning printed matter-- but then, I like books, and presumably the average PCGen user does not.)

I'm not sure why you would presume that. I don't know what the "average" opinion would be, but I personally like to have printed books. I don't much enjoy reading books (general prose nor technical material) on-line, especially when it was written for the page. Short technical documents are fine, and discussion documents like posts to these boards are fine ... but long detailed game rules? No.

And, for several reasons, I don't use PCGen material for which I do not own the corresponding publication. For one, PCGen doesn't include enough information to be fully useful without the publication (for the most part, that's a good thing, but I do wish they'd incoporate the short spell descriptions from the class spell lists (such as on PHB 159-171 ... assuming there's something comparable in the SRD, I think there is but I don't remember for sure)).

For two, I just don't think it's "right" (even if the copyright assumption is right, or even if it's OGC and PCGen becomes OGL compliant, it just doesn't feel "right" to make use of the material without buying it, if it was a work for sale and not free in the first place).

 

[Staffan]

Because the fan-site policy didnt cover software.

That depends on which fan-site policy you refer to. Right after WOTC bought TSR, they had a policy that was summarized as:
"According to the policy (above), as long as (1) you're not copying our text, (2) you're not copying our art, (3) you're not copying our logos, and (4) you're not making money off of it, you can use our properties to make your own fan material (within good taste - no porn, etc.). That's it. Make your stuff. Have fun."

Seeing as the policy in question even allowed the use of TSR's IP to make MUDs (as long as they didn't generate revenue), PCGen would be totally legal under that policy. However, soon after the release of 3e WOTC took down that policy. The only thing I've seen about fan-created material since is Ryan Dancey saying "Right now, my plan is pretty simple: If you're charging money for any aspect of D&D, you're going to be required to use the OGL and the d20 STL. If you say you're following the OGL or the d20 STL, you're going to be forced to follow them. So, if you've got a fan site that's a collection of characters, and they don't claim to be using the OGL or the d20 STL, and they're not charging money, we're going to ignore them." (from http://www.d20reviews.com/Eric/d20guide/d20intro.htm)

It's definitely easy to see how the PCGen folks could have considered themselves "safe".

 

[Henry]

...but then, I like books, and presumably the average PCGen user does not.)

No offense meant , but presumably wrong. Chalk up another PCGen user who simply wants a program that allows him to use all the material in the books he owns, in a computer program that vastly simplifies his efforts to play the game. Other programs do not do it currently (of course, neither does PCGen, currently).

 

[LcKedovan]

Ok, this Monkey is going back to work.

Reminds me of a Pixies song..... This Monkey has gone to heaven!´

-W.

 

[Knightcrawler]

My concern as a publisher is that the number of people who won't buy my products unless they are in PCGen is significantly LESS than the number of folks who won't bother to buy my products because they are in PCGen. I think that's the most realistic view.

Which is somewhat of an irrational fear in my case, I must admit, since 99% of the digestible content in my books is Open Content. (My opinion is that the books are well worth the $10 bucks for the presentation and the joy of owning printed matter-- but then, I like books, and presumably the average PCGen user does not.)

But since I have gone to the trouble of making that content open thru the OGL, I would at the very least appreciate that PCGen be OGL compliant.
Wulf

I would like you to explain this fear to us. Not trying to be snide or anything but I do consider it a bit irrational. Myself and the gaming community in my area are exposed to different publishers through PCGen and are more likely to buy products that are in PCGen.

The amount of information that is included in PCGen is negligible, basically what will appear on the character sheet. Not how they work or any of the "fluff" behind the ideas. Before I started using PCGen the only other publisher that I had bought from was SSS, their Relics & Rituals. Afterwards I would see feats, classes and spells in PCGen that I was interested in so I would then go out and buy that product. I now purchase as much if not more from other publishers as I do from WotC.

I have a standing rule in my campaign. If I don't own it it can't be used as a source in PCGen. If you go on the Software forum here on EnWorld and ask this question you will get the same answer that I just gave you. And if you go to PCGen's Yahoo group and posted this question you would get the same responding answer.

And this has nothing to do with OGL/D20 or any licensing issues. Its pue and simple fact that you need the actually physical (or computer files in the case of PDF's) in your hands to make use of a source in PCGen. Also the gaming community wants to support the publishers. If its good we want to buy it so that you can put out other materials.

If your that worried check out PCGen before you have comments like that, look at the data files. Ask that question on the boards. The users of PCGen are gamers and your customers not your enemies.

Disclaimer: This has been IMHO, but check it out.

 

[LcKedovan]

No offense meant , but presumably wrong. Chalk up another PCGen user who simply wants a program that allows him to use all the material in the books he owns, in a computer program that vastly simplifies his efforts to play the game. Other programs do not do it currently (of course, neither does PCGen, currently).

Yup, here too. And as has been stated a few times in various posts, without the sourcebook loaded in PCGen (whichever that may be) it is totally useless to use PCGen in place of said sourcebook .

-Will

 

[CRGreathouse]

It's not a matter of legal loopholes and nitpicking. It's simple truth that "d20" and "D20" are not trademarked and not trademarkable

That's certainly incorrect. "d20" is trademarkable - in fact, it is a trademark already.

WotC doesn't own it - they only have "d20 System"* and "d20 Modern". A question for those faimilar with trademark law: what does this mean with regard to WotC's trademark of the d20 system [logo]? "Mark Drawing Code: (3) DESIGN PLUS WORDS, LETTERS, AND/OR NUMBERS"

* In 3 separate trademarks, with differing G&S.

 

[Hardhead]

Nice try, but no. The license is triggered by Use of OGC. The license applies to PCGen and they are in violation. Plus use of d20 logo and/or the d20 trademark or the trademarked phrase D&D and/or Dungeons and Dragons is problematic, even if there were operating solely under copyright law and outside of the license (which they arent).

No. I'm not on the PCGen team, but you can't run a liscence like that. If I write a book, and include in the front "Chapter One of this book is open content, you may quote it. But you may not quote the rest of the book, unless you pay me $1.00. Use of Open Content contitutes as agreeing to this liscence"

Now, does that mean that anyone that quotes parts of Chapter One in my book cannot quote any of the rest without paying me $1.00? Of course not, because fair use protects their quoting of my book, regarless of whether I claim that they agreed to my statement by quoting the open content.

Now, I'm not saying PCGen didn't have any other copyright problems - I'm not a copyright lawyer. But I know that using any open content does not automatically agree them to the d20/OGL lisence as long as what they *did* use was protected by copyright.


- Z a c h

P.S. I will say that PCGen kicks ass, and I'm a long-time user. I can honestly say that I've bought several products because what's in PCGen - including WotC products.

 

[Cergorach]

Because the fan-site policy didnt cover software. Software is a product. My site (including the downloads) is not. The downloads were considered document-type publications which fell under the policy. (And just in case it comes up, the PDF compilations are gone...but not because WotC asked me to remove them. They were removed pending the release of the Tome of Horrors...which is a product )

Ah... The picture is getting clearer.

But (there's always a but isn't there ;-) What exactly is the definition of software here? I see that your using ASP for your site, those webpages i see are not static html pages, they are dymanically rendered. This could, depending on your definition of software, also we seen as 'software'...

(Me want Tome of Horrors! I hope it has lots of pretty pictures...)

 

[Leopold]

If your that worried check out PCGen before you have comments like that, look at the data files. Ask that question on the boards. The users of PCGen are gamers and your customers not your enemies.

Another thing that those of us who work on the list files have been doing as of late is sending the list files to the publishers and having them look them over and load it into pcgen on their computer. If they feel that the feat is too wordy or that the name is misspelled wrong then they communicate it to us and we fix it before we release it to the public.

Similar to quality control but to give the publisher the 'warm fuzzies' to make sure the quality and material released is up to our and their standards.


simple QC makes everyone's lives allot easeir.

IMHO of course