kreynolds
First Post
Drawmack said:
LOL That was damn funny, and I suddenly wish I new how to program for a C64.
Drawmack said:
Second let me say that some of the thoughts that is rolling around in here are distrubing at best. Having had experience in doing some free programming work I would like to say that pushing people to walk through hoops when they are doing something for free is a good way to leave them disenchanted. Saying that total compatabilities has anything to do with self-respect is ludicris. Any person giving up their free time to help some people out is great person period. Saying that he has to help out nearly everyone to have any self-respect is just plain crazy. So I guess that what I’m saying is that it is rather unfair to judge a persons free work by the standards of that of a paid professional. If a person ends up asking for money out of this then I’m going to pass on it but if I wasn’t I would expect more. By the same token if they are going to offer it to me for free I’m going to accept that it is going to be using the most common standard out there. Like most reasonable people I accept that freeware is just that free. Not the work output of a paid professional. I for one am fine with the > 90% approach. Keep up the good work all.
Drawmack said:
Maybe you should surf over to w3c and do a bit of research before you make statements that make it clear to people who know what they are talking about that you do not.
xhtml is an xml implementation of html. So any browser that understands xml/xsl understands it already. Then the files are all stored on the w3c servers. So it comes out compliant more efficiently and easily the html which is why html has been depricated.
Elvinis75 said:Okay first let me say that I?m totally jazzed that you willing programmers are working hard at bringing this SRD PDF to a better standard.
Second let me say that some of the thoughts that is rolling around in here are distrubing at best. Having had experience in doing some free programming work I would like to say that pushing people to walk through hoops when they are doing something for free is a good way to leave them disenchanted. Saying that total compatabilities has anything to do with self-respect is ludicris. Any person giving up their free time to help some people out is great person period. Saying that he has to help out nearly everyone to have any self-respect is just plain crazy. So I guess that what I?m saying is that it is rather unfair to judge a persons free work by the standards of that of a paid professional. If a person ends up asking for money out of this then I?m going to pass on it but if I wasn?t I would expect more. By the same token if they are going to offer it to me for free I?m going to accept that it is going to be using the most common standard out there. Like most reasonable people I accept that freeware is just that free. Not the work output of a paid professional. I for one am fine with the > 90% approach. Keep up the good work all.
Something remeniscent of the PHB/DMG would be nice. I still have a problem with your current background, despite the color changes. Just looks way to "mechanical", high-tech. If you're going to go for the "tome" look, it needs to be more organic, less "bundle of high precision metal plates hinged together".kreynolds said:BOT (more or less), does anyone else have any ideas for a color scheme? I'm getting the feeling that a lot of folks like a combo of red and gold, and some like a little rust thrown into that. Any others? I thought of a snake-skin/black leather one the other night, but figured that might be a bit too much.
Drawmack said:
ummm, did you miss the part where I am one of the people putting together an html/javascript version?
ummm, I am a paid professional but I'm doing this for free.
ummm, I expect that anyone who is a paid professional would put their all into this as someone may see it and hire them for a job, or at least consider them, based on it.
If it is what you do for a living and you're doing some for free that doesn't mean the work should be any lower quality. I appreciate your opinions and even respect them however I think that some of the assumptions they are based on are wrong.
I get the impression that WotC needs to do another update of the SRD soon. There's entire chunks missing that couldn't possibly be considered WotC IP. The entire section on siege engines is missing for example. This one's pretty important, because the siege engine rules have changed substantially.Drawmack said:Has anyone else noticed that a good deal of the weapons listed on the table in the equipment section are missing descriptions. Below is a list of the ones I found. If they are listed elsewhere in the SRD could someone point me to them.
I think they only included descriptions of the weapons that actually had some kind of special rules. The weapons above are all "vanilla" - they just hit people and do damage.Drawmack said:Has anyone else noticed that a good deal of the weapons listed on the table in the equipment section are missing descriptions. Below is a list of the ones I found. If they are listed elsewhere in the SRD could someone point me to them.
Dagger, punching; Mace, light; Club; Mace, heavy; Morningstar; Dart; Axe, throwing; Handaxe; Kukri; Pick, light; Sap; Sword, short; Battleaxe; Longsword; Pick, heavy; Scimitar; Warhammer; Falchion; Greataxe; Greatclub and Greatsword