Publishers Opinion Of PCGen

Status
Not open for further replies.
I really don't want to get into the arguments here, they've been rehashed time and time again, probably more than any single issue on the open gaming lists. I'm skeptical about software being able to comply with the licenses at all. That said, I'm perfectly willing to be convinced, but such an attempt had better be backed up with more than specious claims, preferably with commentary from WotC itself.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

d20Dwarf said:

So they say, but as a veteran spectator of the often seen software wars on the open game foundation listservers, I have my doubts. If so, one would hope that they would come forward and prove their case. I've expressed these concerns over the last few months, and nothing has been done to alleviate them. Until that happens, I cannot see them as anything but non-compliant based on the voluminous discussions that have occurred on those dedicated lists.

I haven't spectated on the lists, but have you looked at their site? They've got a d20 license FAQ that outlines their claims of compliance and seems to address some of the major issues. They also note that they have not received any requests from WOTC to alter their software, unlike PCGen.

J
 

I too feel that the d20 stl and OGl are not software friendly. That also was a reservation I had about PCGen. But I didnt list it above since apparently if WotC is working with them, WotC isnt worried about that. I'm going to have to check with Ryan, but it is my firm recollection that Ryan's position was that PCGen was not in compliance and he percieved difficulty in them achieving it in addition to the fact that he saw big problems with software implementation of the licnese in this way. Perhaps a new legal team has come to a different conclusion. But again, I will wait and see. I am not comfortable with the licenses and their interaction with software.

Clark
 
Last edited:


Orcus said:
I too feel that the d20 stl and OGl are not software friendly. That also was a reservation I had about PCGen. But I didnt list it above since apparently if WotC is working with them, WotC isnt worried about that. I'm going to have to check with Ryan, but it is my firm recollection that Ryan's position was that PCGen was not in compliance and he percieved difficulty in them achieving it in addition to the fact that he saw big problems with software implementation of the licnese in this way. Perhaps a new legal team has come to a different conclusion. But again, I will wait and see. I am not comfortable with the licenses and their interaction with software.

Clark

Clark,

Pardon the earlier post, after weeks of bashing and working our asses off, the toll hit me finally and I took your post as yet another anti-pcgen bash, for that I apologize profusely.

Onto your above post and the previous post...

The biggest hurdle to software and D20/OGL is the data sets... how they're used/maintained/layed out...

I can't speak for any other software except PCGen and E-Tools (I did beta test it)... and both handle data in roughly the same way... Human readable format (regardless of debates about M$ Access or the tags used in PCGen data/list files, they can both be read by a human being and some logical sense be made of them)

The 2nd area is in the realm of HOW the software interacts with the data sets... I'm not going to get into E-Tools about how they do, I've not played with a final release yet... but PCGen I'll (obviously) happily go on about...

The short info is this from Anthony and the WotC legal dept... The 'Interface' (i.e. software itself, code) MUST be dumb to EVERYTHING... it can only report/do what it is told by the list files...

This has been a stumbling block for a great deal of software out there in it's initial design... not faulting any coders out there, just stating most don't think in terms of OGL/D20 compliance when they write characater generators... Bryan, through foresight of sheer dumb Code Monkey luck, thought to have the information in plain text files, manipulating the code.

The code CAN be D20 compliant, but does NOT have to be OGL compliant, because the Data sets MUST be OGL compliant, but can not be D20 compliant... kinda screwy I know, but that's how it works out...

No offense to Ryan, but he's not a WotC employee or spokesman anymore... He may know what's going on inside WotC, or he may not, it is a somewhat large company... but the official word for what is D20/OGL compliant is Anthony's... he's the Brand manager for this stuff, so it's _his_ job, not anyone else's to say yea or nay...

As for an official word from WotC on whether a piece of software is D20 and/or OGL compliant, You can bet that when that software gets that nod, they'll post it to high heaven and back again, and specifically in PCGen's case, since they are going WAY OUT OF THEIR WAY to help us achieve those goals, I'll be pestering them for an 'official public' nod somewhere. :D
 

How does one "prove" that they are or are not OGL compliant?

I am referring here to CS. I really think that they belive they are D20 compliant.
 

bolen said:
How does one "prove" that they are or are not OGL compliant?

I am referring here to CS. I really think that they belive they are D20 compliant.

best bet would be to sit down with Anthony V or email him and ask. Show him your code and make sure that it is up to spec according to what mynex said on both fronts.
 

Orcus said:
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.

I don't feel so bad for calling them on my small amount of copyrighted material now.
 


Orcus said:


I didnt know they were.

Clark

Hmm... perhaps he meant if WotC decided to allow Fluid to include OGC from d20 publishers in E-Tools?

And besides, if it is OGC, then what can anyone really say about it? It would be very nice and polite if WotC contacted those publishers for permission, but technically, they really don't have to.

Unless I'm wrong about OGC use in software? Perhaps Clark could clarify that possibility.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top