# How Is There Still PCGen?



## mattcolville (Jul 30, 2002)

In anticipation of E-Tools coming out, I was checking out PCGen and astonished by the claims it makes. According to their site, they have data in there from the splatbooks (not open) and Star Wars (not open, and licensed by someone else.) And they encourage donations!

Am I missing something, how are these guys getting away with this? Is it just that no-one at Wizards cares or is it that the app doesn't do what it says it does?

Seems a pretty popular program, I'd be surprised if it managed to 'fly under the radar.'


----------



## Crothian (Jul 30, 2002)

I don't use it, but my DM swears by this.  He has all the characters in there along with countless NPCs.  

And I have no idea what the answer is to your question.  I never thought of it like that.


----------



## Gizzard (Jul 30, 2002)

Dont they claim to have permission for the various data they cover?  I believe its discussed somewhere on their web-page.  

As for why its not going to compete with e-Tools, its written in Java, which makes it a hassle for many users (and slow for all users.)  Its still pretty good at what it does though if you can put up with the performance issues and the arcane user-interface.  

But thats neither here nor there from a legal standpoint, which is the real meat of your question.


----------



## Darklance (Jul 30, 2002)

I think its more of a..."Your operation has such a small user base that we really just don't care. If you don't charge for it we won't sue you."


----------



## Ranger REG (Jul 30, 2002)

I wouldn't be surprised if Wizards' Legal Department is collecting evidence as we speak.

Of course, the folks at PCGen could politicize the situation and convince the PCGen users about a corporation stomping on the little guys. Something like that usually win the public's sympathy.

Lately, they have been blatant about plugging their wares by "informing" those waiting for _e-Tools_ to consider PCGen as a better alternative ... right on Wizards' _e-Tools_ message boards. Of course, the scheme works due to a a lot of impatient, disgruntled gamers waiting for _Master Tools/e-Tools._


----------



## Nightfall (Jul 30, 2002)

Well all I really care about is finding a nice RPG Character Generator that uses Scarred Lands stuff.


----------



## mattcolville (Jul 30, 2002)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> *Well all I really care about is finding a nice RPG Character Generator that uses Scarred Lands stuff. *




Well, ok. My question wasn't "why do you use it" it was "how do they get away with it?"


----------



## mattcolville (Jul 30, 2002)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> *I wouldn't be surprised if Wizards' Legal Department is collecting evidence as we speak. *




I'm not sure Wizards has a legal dept. anymore. I think it might all be at HASBRO which means they might be able to get away with charging for it, since they'd be unlikely to ever be noticed by a HASBRO person.


----------



## Grazzt (Jul 30, 2002)

mattcolville said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Well, ok. My question wasn't "why do you use it" it was "how do they get away with it?" *




I would imagine WotC just hasn't gotten around to "killing" them yet if they are using non-SRD material (splat books, SW, etc.)


----------



## Nightfall (Jul 30, 2002)

True and anyway Matt I'm not defending them. Just stating my sincere wish to HAVE something like that.


----------



## Geoff Watson (Jul 30, 2002)

It's probably not worth the bad publicity (Big Bad Evil Corporation squashes small volunteer group), and effort (Hard to stomp out stuff on the internet as a new site will pop up quickly) so they won't bother. Yet.

Geoff.


----------



## Gez (Jul 30, 2002)

How do they get away with that ? Simple.

Don't believe that the campaign files with PC-Gen allows you to "know" the non-open books for free. I mean, you can learn things like there's a feat called Treetopper in the FRCS. Great. That don't explain you what the treetopper feat does. You do know its prerequisites; but that's all you have in the way of the game mechanic. If you absolutely want to use the treetopper feat in game, you'll have to invent your own game effect or buy the FRCS.


I could say the same thing for a prestige class from Song & Silence (OK, so the Temple Raider of Olidammara must worship Olidammara...) or a class from Star Wars (so, there are three Force classes: Jedi Guardian, Jedi Consular, and Force Adept...).

You'll have the BAB and save progressions, the skill list, skill points, and bonus feat. You'll have the name of the special abilities, but you won't have any description for them. How much good is it to know you have Supreme Cleave if you don't know how Supreme Cleave works ?

You know, I've seen MORE closed rule materials on Wizards' very own message boards than on PC Gen. 

They can't control all the stuff typed-in by contributors, so sometimes you can find a prestige class for which all class features are explained lenghtly in the strings normally dedicated for the name of the feature (that is, instead of writing "Big Hullahoop +3", you'll find "Big Hullahoop +3: gives you a +3 profane bonus on all rebuke undead check made while performing a hullahoop move-equivalent action"). Such things are rare and usually get fixed as soon as noticed.


----------



## Duncan Haldane (Jul 30, 2002)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> *I wouldn't be surprised if Wizards' Legal Department is collecting evidence as we speak.
> QUOTE]
> 
> I seem to recall that sometime last year the pcgen guys said they'd had email discussions with Ryan Dancey (while he was still at WotC), and had come to some decisions about whether it was competative to e-tools.
> ...


----------



## Duncan Haldane (Jul 30, 2002)

Gizzard said:
			
		

> *As for why its not going to compete with e-Tools, its written in Java, which makes it a hassle for many users (and slow for all users.)  Its still pretty good at what it does though if you can put up with the performance issues and the arcane user-interface.
> *




While java may be slower than native code in most cases, there are now some aspects of Java that claim to be faster than native code.

Also, e-tools is only available on one platform.  Java, and therefore PCGen, is available on many, many more.

Anyone who uses Unix, Linux, or Mac can use PCGen much more easily than they can use e-tools (yes, I know there are simulators...)

Duncan (who is not a Java Junkie, but can see the benefits).


----------



## RodneyThompson (Jul 30, 2002)

Well, since PCGen is a poorly programmed piece of crap that is full of memory leaks and contains massive overlap with no real thought put into the GUI, I'm not surprised WotC doesn't  give a damn about them.

Look, I've used PCGen. Aside from that fact that it requires the SUN Java crap to work, is slow, and does bad things to my computer, nothing is more frustrating than to be making, say, a Star Wars character and coming across a "Priest Domains" tab. 

I'm also still a little chapped that they had lots of stuff from my website in there that I didn't give them permission to use. But whatever. Use it if you like, but I'll take the Okina-rdae  generators for Star Wars and do my D&D characters by hand.


----------



## Psychotic Dreamer (Jul 30, 2002)

Moridin.  How does it do bad stuff to your computer?  I have been using it since it came out and has never caused any problems with my machine.  Also I have never found it to be slow.  I have used the Okina-rdae generators for Star Wars stuff and find them to be memory hogs and slow, but thats just my point of view.  To each their own.

Also if you don't want them to have stuff from your website, contact them and let them know.  9 times out of 10 they will remove it if asked.


----------



## Neowolf (Jul 30, 2002)

Moridin said:
			
		

> *Well, since PCGen is a poorly programmed piece of crap that is full of memory leaks and contains massive overlap with no real thought put into the GUI, I'm not surprised WotC doesn't  give a damn about them.*




I take it you (and the others who have claimed PCGen is slow and has a bad interface) haven't bothered to actually try the new versions.  Over the past few months, they've optimized memory/CPU usage, added tons of new functionality (like PDF export)  and cleaned up the UI a LOT.  Seriously, give it a try again before you talk about how bad it is.  There's a reason software developers release new versions of their programs: development and perfection takes time.


----------



## Gez (Jul 30, 2002)

Moridin said:
			
		

> *Well, since PCGen is a poorly programmed piece of crap that is full of memory leaks*





I'm going a bit off-topic, but as all memory management is out of the programmer's hand in Java, if you have memory leaks, that's because of the JVM you use, not because of PCGen itself.

You've got more memory leaks if you run Words or Excel than if you run a JVM, from my personal experience.


----------



## EricNoah (Jul 30, 2002)

Robin .... to the Software Forum Cave!

*slides down pole behind bookshelf*


----------



## Randolpho (Jul 30, 2002)

Gez is right. 

I don't mind PCGen being written in Java; at least I can take it to any platform I want, when I want it! 

If only they didn't use that $#&!#(*!#$ Swing GUI!!!!! I really hate that.


----------



## Uller (Jul 30, 2002)

Well...if WotC/Hasbro believes it infringes on intellectual material, I think they _must_ close PCGen.  Why?  Because if you choose to not to protect intellectual material, it is my understanding that you can't later choose to do so.  If they allow PCGen to "steal" material, then later try to prevent someone else from usinging it, they won't be able to.   I'm no copy right lawyer, though...

Anyway...I'm guessing that they aren't actually stealing material.  They either have permission or the fact that they don't give any real information allows them to get by.   For instance, I just created a Star Wars character with PCGen...I never bought the book.   But there is no way my group and I could actually USE the character without having access to the book.  The GM has the book and when I showed up to the game, I had to learn what all the skills and feats I picked actually meant...


----------



## RodneyThompson (Jul 30, 2002)

Regarding using my stuff, they did finally have the courtesy to ask if they could use it, but not until I bitched about it. Now, since they asked, of course I gave them permission. I mean, just because I don't use it doesn't mean that I don't think other people should be able to.

As for the programming stuff, I guess I'm just spoiled on something that runs well. I mean, heck, I'm a Computer Scientist and a SysAdmin, so I think I'm plenty qualified enough to grip. And yes, I know Java is the biggest problem with the speed and memory issues, not their coding...but that doesn't mean the program doesn't still run like ass. 

I'm not telling other people not to use it, it just had one too many strikes against it in my book.


----------



## Henry (Jul 30, 2002)

Moridin:

First of all, I have great respect for you, and the hard work you put into your site. This post is not to slam you; rather, it is to clear up some of the misconceptions about PCGEN.

First of all, for matcolville and others who raised this, the program is, and always will be, FREE. No charging money for it has been the decision of the creator from the beginning. Not that this would ameliorate any claims of copyright ingringement, but there is no charge for the program, even now that they have reached a "development" release. (version 3.0.0, for those who wonder.) This just means that version 3.0 will be available as a stable release. The beta's will continue.

Second, the LST Files (The files containing data from different supplements and releases) is ENTIRELY fan created. The programmers have nothing to do with the maintenance and creation of these files, and the ".lst monkeys" are the ones who decide which projects to tackle. If there has ever been a contention with certain included content, the policy has always been to remove it if asked - even as you said, in your case.

Third, the program is under constant improvement. The program sees one release every week to two weeks, to give you an idea of just how  much development is being done.

Fourth, all volunteers working on it are just that - volunteers. THey are not paid for thier efforts. If anyone suggests a feature or a product .LST , they are invited to jump in and assist, if they wish. Otherwise, it goes into the long list of features and improvements to add, and work goes on.

Fifth, the PCGen development team have publically stated on their web site that they are NOT OGL-compliant, nor have they claimed to be. This actually served to head off a number of legal issue regarding coding.

Sixth, if any publisher, WotC or otherwise, wishes a LST file of their product removed, then they will do so. As an aside a long laundry list of official d20 publishers have welcomed PCGen inclusion with open arms. I recall a rumor that one d20 publisher actually provides LST files of their expansions soon after release!

Seventh and final point, Anyone who misses out on the development of PCGen is missing a fantastic thing - a software app that can generate fuly detailed characters for almost any d20 setting. I use it for most of my games that we play, and am very satisfied with the product, occasional bug or not. In fact, one of our group members recently came up with a d20 star trek variant game. I already have 80% of his rules input into PCGen - did it in about 3 hours time, too.


----------



## machine (Jul 30, 2002)

If I remember correctly, PCGen doesn't have information on classes, feats, spells, etc. that are not in the SRD.

This issue, for me, is why I don't like it.  The java-base and the clunky interface doesn't kill it for me, the lack of info does.


----------



## kingpaul (Jul 30, 2002)

machine said:
			
		

> *If I remember correctly, PCGen doesn't have information on classes, feats, spells, etc. that are not in the SRD.
> 
> This issue, for me, is why I don't like it.  The java-base and the clunky interface doesn't kill it for me, the lack of info does. *



The reason for that, IIRC, is to not try and take away a company's revenue stream.  If PCGen, a free product, contained all of the info you would like from products you'd have to pay for otherwise, why would you pay?  Further, and IANAL, if this *were* the case, I'd be fairly certain all of the companies would be suing the creators for lost profit.


----------



## LightPhoenix (Jul 30, 2002)

machine said:
			
		

> *If I remember correctly, PCGen doesn't have information on classes, feats, spells, etc. that are not in the SRD.
> 
> This issue, for me, is why I don't like it.  The java-base and the clunky interface doesn't kill it for me, the lack of info does. *




If you want info, buy the book.  The program isn't a substitute for the PHB, DMG, et alia, it's a supplement.


----------



## Leopold (Jul 30, 2002)

Howdy from the PCGen team here!



			
				Henry said:
			
		

> *.
> 
> First of all, for matcolville and others who raised this, the program is, and always will be, FREE. No charging money for it has been the decision of the creator from the beginning. Not that this would ameliorate any claims of copyright ingringement, but there is no charge for the program, even now that they have reached a "development" release. (version 3.0.0, for those who wonder.) This just means that version 3.0 will be available as a stable release. The beta's will continue.*



*

Yes it will always and evermore be free. The 'donation' is simply for the founder and creator Bryan McRoberts to take some time off from coding and take his wife out for dinner, movies, etc. for a change instead of coding. Keeping the woman happy is key to keeping the code flowing!

As for copyright information: all information in PCGen MUST and I mean MUST have permission in a written text file, email, etc. to state that we have permission to code in. We reiceved permission from Ryan many moons ago as well as several publishers such as THG Hal from Mystic Eye Games, JTyranny from Tyranny games, and Matt Sprague from Mongoose for example, even Morrus has given us written permission for Nat20!

No code goes into production if the publisher says 'no' PERIOD.




			Second, the LST Files (The files containing data from different supplements and releases) is ENTIRELY fan created. The programmers have nothing to do with the maintenance and creation of these files, and the ".lst monkeys" are the ones who decide which projects to tackle. If there has ever been a contention with certain included content, the policy has always been to remove it if asked - even as you said, in your case.
		
Click to expand...



not true. LST monkeys work on the data files, code monkeys work on the code side. There is a select group which contacts the publisher and delegates material down to the people who can work on each area of the data files. We have broke it down into teams: some work on races, some on equipment, some on classes, etc. This way all the work gets done faster and more efficently as each of us is specialized in one area.




			Third, the program is under constant improvement. The program sees one release every week to two weeks, to give you an idea of just how  much development is being done.
		
Click to expand...



every week a new version. It has changed heavily since the first of the year with more options, more goodies, more tools, cleaner interface.  This week a STABLE release will be out for full production mode.




			Fourth, all volunteers working on it are just that - volunteers. THey are not paid for thier efforts. If anyone suggests a feature or a product .LST , they are invited to jump in and assist, if they wish. Otherwise, it goes into the long list of features and improvements to add, and work goes on.
		
Click to expand...



absolutely correct! Core books if broken get fixed first as well as cleanup of files, Bugs next, and then FREQS (feature requests).  None of us are paid, noone gets a check and 99% of us have fulltime jobs and families as well. It's a labor of love as the big boss puts it.




			Fifth, the PCGen development team have publically stated on their web site that they are NOT OGL-compliant, nor have they claimed to be. This actually served to head off a number of legal issue regarding coding.
		
Click to expand...



It's LPGL i believe is the version of licensing we are using. 




			Sixth, if any publisher, WotC or otherwise, wishes a LST file of their product removed, then they will do so. As an aside a long laundry list of official d20 publishers have welcomed PCGen inclusion with open arms. I recall a rumor that one d20 publisher actually provides LST files of their expansions soon after release!
		
Click to expand...



this is true. ANY company who wishes us not to use their material all they have to do is ask and we will remove their material and explain that the publisher requested it. We value and protect every companies Intellectual property and if for some reason it interferes with said publisher and they wish it gone we will comply. So far we present the material to the publisher to have them look it over and they see that nothing that has conflicited with their IP that they can't live with. 

The rumor is true, just waiting for the book to come out so we can say who it is!




			Seventh and final point, Anyone who misses out on the development of PCGen is missing a fantastic thing - a software app that can generate fuly detailed characters for almost any d20 setting. I use it for most of my games that we play, and am very satisfied with the product, occasional bug or not. In fact, one of our group members recently came up with a d20 star trek variant game. I already have 80% of his rules input into PCGen - did it in about 3 hours time, too. 

Click to expand...


*
It truly is a flexible, mutliplatformed application, that can save hours of writing and typing by just using a simple well tuned GUI. We have fleshed it out, written up thurough docs to walk the user through creating a PC and the .lst files. We are planning on supporting future works for publishers and showing that we are a valuable tool not only for the gamers but for the companies we support as well.

Feel free to contact myself, or anyone of the people on the PCGen team here at our yahoogroup if we can aid or assist anyone further be it player or DM, writer or Publisher:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pcgen/



Leopold
Doc Silverback


----------



## Ranger REG (Jul 30, 2002)

Gez said:
			
		

> *
> You know, I've seen MORE closed rule materials on Wizards' very own message boards than on PC Gen.*



We believe if falls under Fair Use; a discussion of the rules is considered a review or educational purpose. Of course we try not to quote from the copyrighted work verbatim, unless to show citation.


----------



## Draconis Imperium (Jul 30, 2002)

i have been a user of PcGen since its beginning and even helped on a few .lst files. For any who would like to gripe about clunky features
  I suggest you use your Master tools! oh wait... sorry.
  Why don't you use your e-tools for your new supplement. oh wait...sorry. 
You see by a lot of hard work of a lot a volunteers you have a program though not perfect, to use, to help and improve your d20 and D&D gaming. It it adds all new modules and supplements as soon as permission is granted.

I get so tired of hearing people complain about it. If you don't like it don't use it. Just stop whining about it.


----------



## trancejeremy (Jul 30, 2002)

WOTC not only knows about it, but apparently PC Gen is being endorsed by Gen Con.

Personally, I don't get it, either. It should be completely illegal.  I mean, technically, any character generator for a RPG that isn't authorized is illegal, since it's a work that is derivative of their copyright.  Most companies don't care, or give permission, but some do (like Palladium, for instance).

And it sucks for those of us who write programs that try to follow the OGL.


----------



## CRGreathouse (Jul 30, 2002)

trancejeremy said:
			
		

> *WOTC not only knows about it, but apparently PC Gen is being endorsed by Gen Con.*




Sure, PC Gen is GenCon-endorsed, but GenCon isn't run by WotC.



			
				trancejeremy said:
			
		

> *Personally, I don't get it, either. It should be completely illegal.  I mean, technically, any character generator for a RPG that isn't authorized is illegal, since it's a work that is derivative of their copyright.  Most companies don't care, or give permission, but some do (like Palladium, for instance).*




This is true, but there are many ways of getting it authorized - special permission and the OGL come to mind.



			
				trancejeremy said:
			
		

> *And it sucks for those of us who write programs that try to follow the OGL. *




Why?  It doesn't seem that hard.  Either draw from an external, human-readable database or provide source code.


----------



## Jeremy (Jul 30, 2002)

I'd just like to jump in here and say how truly wonderful PC Gen is.

I use it at home and at work and it has gotten much faster, much more stable, and remains very comprehensive.

I still have to reference my books to find out what feats do, class abilities do, spells do, etc, but if I've already got it in my head, I can whip up a PC or an army of NPC's in little under 10 minutes complete with a spell list from Book of Eldritch Magic I & II, Relics & Rituals, Tome & Blood, and Magic of Faerun along with magical items from all of the above, Masters of the Wild, and the Psionics Handbook with If Thoughts Could Kill complete with prices and the adjustments made to the character sheet.

Heck, I'd use the app just for the ability to put characters into html format for e-mailing or web posting.  How many good examples of filled out character sheets have you seen on the web lately?

I just finished putting together an ogre/goblin/hogoblin fighting squad with the phalanx fighting feat from Lords of Darkness, Team Fighting from the Fantasy Community Council's latest revision Netbook of Feats, and Spear and Shield fighting from the same.  Then I exported it to a party format html and on one page got all the combat info I need for them all.  Now all I have to do is throw the chits on the table and go.

The fact that I could throw deepwood sniper levels on the hobgoblin archers inside the shield wall is just gravy.

I've fleshed out an entire order of Knights Hospitaler including knights apostate, chaplain, errant, and a few brigadiers and lance corporals.  Ask my DM how handy that came in when 17 of them came over a rise as mounted cavalry to aid us in taking a fortified encampment.  Instead of making up numbers they were all right there with sources and everything.

Extremely useful software, and if my 45 lb backpack says anything about it, it says that it isn't costing WotC or anyone else a dime.  It's just helping me use my books more efficiently.

Go PC GEN!


----------



## Ranger REG (Jul 31, 2002)

Look, if you want to keep PCGen safe from possible violation of copyright and trademark, remove anything that is copyrighted and/or trademarked, such as _Star Wars._

Do not use anything without their permission.

I'd rather you develop a basic electronic aids where I can input and/or alter information. If I want to input _Star Wars_ then I'll do it manually for personal use.

Oh, and one more thing: stop advertising on the Wizards' _e-Tools_ board stating PCGen is better than what _e-Tools_ is coming out. It's annoying. It's also spamming.


----------



## Grraf (Jul 31, 2002)

I realize that people love to bag things for fun and that this wasn't started as much of a serious discussion as a chance to complain.

Having said that:
1. I use PcGen constantly in a weekly game. It saves hours.
I don't think I could run a game every week without it.

2. The interface doesn't always work perfectly, but its still a hell of a lot of faster than computing by hand all the skills and feats of a half-gynosphinx, rogue, assasin, loremaster. 

3. Its run by a bunch of doggedly obessive fanboys (its really a complement). A month ago when I started using it there was a limited amount of Scarred Lands stuff (OK there was a lot of spells but not all of the supplimentary material). The interface was a bit tricky to figure out.
Now its basically all in there. They're constantly improving the program. Even the jump between 262 and 273(271?) was huge. The new e-tools program (now that its been gutted by WotC and hasbro with no mapping, limited material, etc etc) will never have the functions the pcgen already has.

4. You can pick which supplements you feel like using. make your own stuff, post questions and get responces same day. Its nicely customizable and totally free.

IT'S NOT ILLEGAL (if you've been following the e-tools thing its pretty clear. They'll be doing the same thing. Fan created not for profit libraries are pretty clearly fair use)
You need the books to use it anyway (trust me). So unlike e-tools it encourages purchasing of products. 

JAVA is good
I guess I understand the "insta-click" mentality. I have to admit that I run pcGen on a computer fomr a few years ago and it doesn't exactly zip around.  Using it is still about 5-10 times faster than doing things out by hand (and the chance of computational error or forgetting about that stat increase a character got because I bumped them up a level is nil).

You may not like pcGen, but its a gaming revolution in action. Warts and all.


----------



## smetzger (Jul 31, 2002)

Jeremy said:
			
		

> *Team Fighting *




Cool, someone is using my Team Fighting Feat.

A Couple of things about PCGen.
1) Its slow on startup, not because of Java but because (I Believe) they load all the material into memory.  Some things are quite speedy.  For instance, if you change an attribute the program will very quickly adjust the feats that you now qualify for.

2) I know for a fact that they do not contact all the copyright holders before putting stuff into the program.  They have not contacted me for my feats in the NBoF.  

3) They have gotten permission from WOTC to use splatbook material.

4) They don't use the d20 logo or the OGC so they are not in violation with those licenses.  

*:> Scott


----------



## kingpaul (Jul 31, 2002)

smetzger said:
			
		

> *2) I know for a fact that they do not contact all the copyright holders before putting stuff into the program.  They have not contacted me for my feats in the NBoF.*



Well, they did post, a while back, on the main FaNCC Yahoo! Group that they wanted to use the stuff...and no one objected.


			
				smetzger said:
			
		

> *3) They have gotten permission from WOTC to use splatbook material.*



They did?!?  Wow!


----------



## Ranger REG (Jul 31, 2002)

Grraf said:
			
		

> *
> 4. You can pick which supplements you feel like using. make your own stuff, post questions and get responces same day. Its nicely customizable and totally free.
> 
> IT'S NOT ILLEGAL (if you've been following the e-tools thing its pretty clear. They'll be doing the same thing. Fan created not for profit libraries are pretty clearly fair use)
> You need the books to use it anyway (trust me). So unlike e-tools it encourages purchasing of products.*



Well, everyone wants the customization feature, but that is for personal use. The makers of PCGen shouldn't include data from _Star Wars_ into the program and then distribute it without Wizards' permission. That is something the user must do. After all, you don't see the Document file of _D&D Player's Handbook_ included with MSWord, do you?

If you want, get the other _d20_ publisher's permission to input data from their work, but leave others out like Wizards' copyrighted material unless they did give you the green light (preferably memorialized in writing).

I'm not ragging down on PCGen and its developers. I'm just trying to keep you guys safe. If you want, consult with a lawyer.


----------



## Leopold (Jul 31, 2002)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> *Look, if you want to keep PCGen safe from possible violation of copyright and trademark, remove anything that is copyrighted and/or trademarked, such as Star Wars.
> 
> *



*

in the production release there is no star wars, FR, or Greyhawk for this reason.




			I'd rather you develop a basic electronic aids where I can input and/or alter information. If I want to input Star Wars then I'll do it manually for personal use.
		
Click to expand...



gravy for you but what about the hundreds else that want it for free use?




			Oh, and one more thing: stop advertising on the Wizards' e-Tools board stating PCGen is better than what e-Tools is coming out. It's annoying. It's also spamming.
		
Click to expand...


*

i can assure you that any member I catch doing this will be told to stop. It is not needed, not recommended, and does not help things. It's like going to an NAACP meeting wearing white sheets with eye holes cut out. It does not fly and all it does is cause trouble. We respect WOTC for everything they do and the products they put out. We enjoy having people post how they like the application and what they can do with it. But please do not post something along the lines of "PCGen roX0r and E-tools=suX0r!" That doesn't bode well with WOTC nor the people trying to keep it free and open as much as possible.


----------



## Ranger REG (Jul 31, 2002)

Leopold said:
			
		

> *
> gravy for you but what about the hundreds else that want it for free use?*



They should be glad to have this program of yours to input new _d20_ data on their own. But the program should not include data from copyrighted material of which you did not secure the publisher's permission.

Like I said, if you have Wizards' permission to use _Star Wars_ information and include it in the freeware PCGen as a bonus to distribute, then that is great. I won't bother you. But if you don't, then by law you are in violation.

You can try and secure other third-party _d20_ publisher's permission, such AEG's _Spycraft_ and use that as a selling point. After all, you did advertise that this is a generic _d20_ electronic aid, am I correct?


----------



## Leopold (Jul 31, 2002)

smetzger said:
			
		

> *
> that you now qualify for.
> 
> 2) I know for a fact that they do not contact all the copyright holders before putting stuff into the program.  They have not contacted me for my feats in the NBoF.
> ...





i'll answer this one as I did this. I contacted the main guy sigfried for the Netbook of Feats and got his approval. I had him contact the other members of the council and they gave the ok.  I did this for all the NetBooks: Classes, Races, Treasures, etc.

Am i violating any of the authors copyrighted work? No. The beauty of the netbooks is that i don't have to contact every author just the main council members and they pass on their approval.

 So far every author that did a feat for the Netbook has their name appear in the SOURCE tag for reference. Therefore, every time someone uses the feats they know who the author is and where it comes from. We do this with every SOURCE we use and it's the tag that is standard for EVERY single line of code that goes in there. We make sure the right people get the right credit for the work and that nothing is missed.

 Also since it's OGC, technically I don't even have to do this but we do it for protocol and in good faith gesture. If you have a problem with us using your feats I would suggest you contact Sigfried and the members of the NBoF council and then contact us and we will remove it from our application.


----------



## Leopold (Jul 31, 2002)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> *
> They should be glad to have this program of yours to input new d20 data on their own. But the program should not include data from copyrighted material of which you did not secure the publisher's permission.*



*


i cannot agree with you more on this statement




			Like I said, if you have Wizards' permission to use Star Wars information and include it in the freeware PCGen as a bonus to distribute, then that is great. I won't bother you. But if you don't, then by law you are in violation.
		
Click to expand...



i believe we do, but for safety sake we removed all reference to star wars till clarification has been made for the full release version. The beta version still has the star wars, fr, greyhawk material there but the full release does not till clarification has been made. We wish to do everythin in our power to keep the folks at WOTC happy and to allow us to use their material under the rules that they allow us to. Violating this 'gentlemens agreement' harms not only us but the industry in general.




			You can try and secure other third-party d20 publisher's permission, such AEG's Spycraft and use that as a selling point. After all, you did advertise that this is a generic d20 electronic aid, am I correct?
		
Click to expand...


*
who said anything about selling? Where did this come from? We will never ever ever have a price tag on this work. It's in violation of the licensing we use and against all that this application is built upon.


We did get AEG's spycraft permission from Patrick Kapera the main guy in charge of spycraft. With his help and work we managed to get that code in place and working. He made a nice announcement about it on his website and look forward to doing it again with him in the future. 

And yes we say that PCGen is a generic D20 electronic aid for not only the gamer but for the publishers as well.


----------



## Ranger REG (Jul 31, 2002)

I apologize for using the wrong term. When I mean by "using it as a selling point," I mean to say "use it to as a best advertising pitch for your freeware to the public, especially toward _d20_ gamers."

However, you could market it. I mean you really have something going on here, and I give credit where credit is due. But if you prefer to keep the program as freeware, then you may have to consider the option of open-sourcing your program so other programmers can improve upon it. Of course, you may already have been considering it, so my statement is a moot point.


----------



## LightPhoenix (Jul 31, 2002)

If WotC hasn't done anything about it by now, I highly doubt they will in the future.


----------



## Leopold (Aug 1, 2002)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> *I apologize for using the wrong term. When I mean by "using it as a selling point," I mean to say "use it to as a best advertising pitch for your freeware to the public, especially toward d20 gamers."
> 
> However, you could market it. I mean you really have something going on here, and I give credit where credit is due. But if you prefer to keep the program as freeware, then you may have to consider the option of open-sourcing your program so other programmers can improve upon it. Of course, you may already have been considering it, so my statement is a moot point. *





but it is freeware and it is opensource silly!  . anyone can come along and take the pcgen information and say ohhhh make it into software to code how to program a toaster or anything. Anyone can take the data in the .lst files and use it for whatever purposes they want. Will it do them any good? probably not. It's all kept as bland and blasee as possible to make sure that the IP is protected for the publishers. 

If someone wants access to the code and wants to alter it or change it, like any other application on sourceforge or built  on the GPL platform, all they have to do is give the PCGen team credit on it and they can alter it to their hearts content. Heck WOTC could've taken pcgen, slapped a pretty gui on it and sold it as E-Tools for all we care. That is the price and beauty of Open Licencisng like Linux has.


----------



## Ranger REG (Aug 1, 2002)

Like I said, consider my statement moot.


----------



## Mynex (Aug 1, 2002)

*Let me step in here please*

Several points to make, so I'll try to be brief.

1) This thread started near to being a flame against PCGen.  That is unnecessary and uncalled for.

2) The Wizards boards have a wonderful tendancy to be EXTREMELY rude to anything non wizards, Ranger, you can attest to this, we've exchanged posts there before.

3) PCGen is Free, will stay free, will NEVER be charged for.  We use the Lesser General Public License (v2.1) on Source Forge.  This is EXACTLY whay it will stay free.  Open Source Software is just that, Open Source.

4) As noted previously, Gen Con is NOT owned by Wizards anymore, it is owned by Peter Adkinson, and yes, we have reached a limited licensing agreement to use the phrase 'PCGenCon World Tour 2002' on our shirts.  (The GenCon name is a trademark of GenCon LLC).

5) We have had exactly _ONE_ publisher tell us flat out no.  We have had 2 publishers give is a nod, but not 'official permission'.  The rest have given us official permission (and if I am mistaken, I would beg them to contact me so we can correct any issues they may have).  We have had numerous publishers come to us (mostly the last few months) and ask US to add their stuff in, some before it even hits the shelves/internet.

6) We have contacted ALL the publishers we have, even a few we do not yet.  Some later than others and for that I do apologize.  The reason for that lateness is due to protocols being recently (last few months) being instituted to make sure we do things correctly and politely with the publishers.

7) We are not bound by the D20/OGL licensing issues, but we are bound by the 'Gentlemens Agreement' andour integrity and word that we will do _EVERYTHING_ we can to protect a publishers PI.  We have numerous publishers that have granted us the PI rights to use the names and 1 line 'flavor' text of feats.  NO WHERE else do we use PI, if it slips in (as was more often in the past, but VERY rare now), we correct it as soon as we notice it.  Which is generally before any publisher would have to contact us about it, and to date, no publisher HAS contacted us about PI being used.

8) We include mechanics only (expecting the noted cases above in point 7).  This means exactly what others have pointed out, you MUST HAVE access to the source in question to know what a given feat/skill/spell/class/etc does for game play.  PCGen is a character generator, nothing more, nothing less.  It's note a replacement for the books, it's a supplement to them.

Those are the general statements, now let me hit the specific points others raised.

1) Star Wars, Wheel of Time, Call of Cthulhu, Forgotten Realms, etc... Specific game worlds/settings... something to think about here.  
I just used those copyrighted names in a public forum, hence those names are being distributed in an electronic format across the internet.  Am I or Morrus going to get sued?  No, why?  They're names.  They tell you nothing about them.  The same holds true for PCGen, yes you can make a character with PCGen for those worlds, but you know nothing about the actual underlying world itself.  Mechanics, not flavor is what PCGen is all about.  

2) Pcgen is not 'Stealing' anything from anybody. Period.

3) PCGen is NOT in direct competition with E-Tools, regardless of what anybody says.  Our goal is NOT to sink E-Tools, or cause it to lose sales.  As noted elsewhere in this thread, it is an all volunteer, fan based, passion for the game.  And we make no money.  We do it because we love the game and the software.

4) Wizards has said in the past that any software character creation tool must have the mechanics in a 'Human Readable Format'.  Yes?  PCGen does.  They're called list files.  And all they are, are text files given the extension .lst instead of .txt or .doc or .whatever.  And that is ALL they've said about software so far.

5) Java and the GUI.  If you haven't used PCGen in the last month, then you have NO room to complain about the UI, it's drastically different and a hell of a lot faster than ever, and it's getting faster every release.  Divorce Java from PCGen, if you don't understand the differences, then you have NO right or reason to slam PCGen due to speed, memory leaks, or your system crashing.  I do Tech support for a living, and most problems are user created by NOT READING THE DOCUMENTATION.

6) Since that was just mentioned, Documentation.  A pet peeve of mine.  Flat out, the existing docs suck.  That is fixed now.  For the production release (Still and always free) and from now on, the documentation is completely up to date, explains EVERYTHING in simple clear, concise directions on how to use PCGen, the tags used in the list files explained a LOT clearer, etc... everything about them is better.  How do I know this?  I just finished revamping them, with input from Leopold (Most of the walkthrough section) and a few of the code monkeys.  Currently it is made for IE/Netscape web interface, but will soon (prob after GenCon) come in PDF and plain txt versions as well.

There's more I want to address, but I'm not going to type anymore at the moment... a few final things to think about though...

Why are people so anti-PCGen?
So much discussion over PCGen, what about Twin rose and Tablesmith and the like, where's the 'hot debate' over them,  some of them charge.
If Wizards was THAT worried about PCGen smashing E-Tools into the ground, why didn't they squash it several years ago, BEFORE PCGen even got rolling?  Hell M/E-Tools has been in development longer than PCGen has been around!
I was on Beta for M/E-tools, I made no bones about my work on PCGen, It was known when I was selected, it was known while I was in the beta, and every one of my messages had my sig line in there of 'PCGen Doc & lst file Silverback'  You think THAT was glossed over?  Hell no.

And finally, please, PLEASE, let's refrain the slanderous attacks on PCGen.  If people want to debate the pro/cons, I'm more than happy to, hell I like to, it makes PCGen a better product!

I mean, really?  What would you rather do, Have a civilized discussion or name call?  If the former, by all means, let's do so, if the latter, I think Morrus might take exception to that.


----------



## Mynex (Aug 1, 2002)

Moridin said:
			
		

> *Regarding using my stuff, they did finally have the courtesy to ask if they could use it, but not until I bitched about it. Now, since they asked, of course I gave them permission. I mean, just because I don't use it doesn't mean that I don't think other people should be able to.
> 
> As for the programming stuff, I guess I'm just spoiled on something that runs well. I mean, heck, I'm a Computer Scientist and a SysAdmin, so I think I'm plenty qualified enough to grip. And yes, I know Java is the biggest problem with the speed and memory issues, not their coding...but that doesn't mean the program doesn't still run like ass.
> 
> I'm not telling other people not to use it, it just had one too many strikes against it in my book. *




1) Who did you complain to?  I don't recall you contacting anyone about it.  Doesn't mean you didn't, but I've been involved with PCGen since before any of that was added.

2) Really, a computer scientist AND a SysAdmin.  Hrmm... Do you code Java as well?  If so, then by all means come join our volunteer group of Code Monkeys.  If you don't then you DON'T have room to talk about the coding work that is done on PCGen.  

3) Well nothing that can be done about that.  you've made up your mind that PCGen is 'Crap' and 'Runs like ass', so no doubt you'll never try it again, and no doubt you'll never see the vast improvements that have been made.


----------



## Mynex (Aug 1, 2002)

trancejeremy said:
			
		

> *WOTC not only knows about it, but apparently PC Gen is being endorsed by Gen Con.
> 
> Personally, I don't get it, either. It should be completely illegal.  I mean, technically, any character generator for a RPG that isn't authorized is illegal, since it's a work that is derivative of their copyright.  Most companies don't care, or give permission, but some do (like Palladium, for instance).
> 
> And it sucks for those of us who write programs that try to follow the OGL. *




Uhrm.. Please explain to me how PCGen 'sucks for those of you (us original) who write programs that try to follow the OGL'??

I'm not seeing how PCGen prevents or interferes with you writing your own software.

OH, you mean it sucks for those that are writing software and charging for it.  Got it now.


----------



## Mynex (Aug 1, 2002)

Ranger REG said:
			
		

> *Look, if you want to keep PCGen safe from possible violation of copyright and trademark, remove anything that is copyrighted and/or trademarked, such as Star Wars.
> 
> Do not use anything without their permission.
> 
> ...




Ranger,

   You know why the supporters of PCGen started doing that? (and no, I don't condone it, it irritates to many people).

Simple - The Dealy of M/E-tools, the stripped down functionality, and the _biggest_ reason of all... Slamming of PCGen on the wizards boards... which basically boils down to lack of courtesy.  

And no it's not spamming.  Spamming would be if all 2000+ members of our yahoo group came over to the Wizards boards and all posted the same message.

It's annoying, kinda like the Anti-PCGen messages on Wizards and here (Which fortunately are not that many, Thank you Morrus and Co!).

It's also Rude, which is why I don't agree with doing it.  I do _try_ to stay away from rude replies, and usually I manage to, but sometimes I get sarcastic as hell. 

Ranger, just to be clear, I'm not 'flaming you' or 'being rude', I actually like you from the posts at Wizards and here I've seen.  Just trying to address your points is all.


----------



## Mynex (Aug 1, 2002)

smetzger said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Cool, someone is using my Team Fighting Feat.
> 
> ...




Leopold answered 2-4, so that leaves 1. 

Yes, PCGen makes a ton of stuff at startup for quick reference after the initial get go.  This has been worked on and improved, and is continuing to do so.

There are still some speed issues, and we actually have a couple of code monkeys that LIKE optimizing code (Shudder all you other code monkeys, I understand that they are freaks because of that. )... There's only so far that they can go in the optimizing however... Java is the issue here... and 1.3.1 is not a friendly sort... and we still compile the code in that to keep support for the mac people...

Some of us are using JDK1.4 to compile and test things, and it's a LOT faster... apparantly SUN did a ton of optimizations of their own in the fundamental level of Java... so as soon as Apple gets up to date using 1.4, then we'll begin compiling with that.. that will show marked improvment, trust me!


----------



## Twin Rose (Aug 1, 2002)

*Re: Let me step in here please*



			
				Mynex said:
			
		

> *
> So much discussion over PCGen, what about Twin rose and Tablesmith and the like, where's the 'hot debate' over them,  some of them charge.
> *




The hot debate comes in several forms.  Usually users from other boards coming onto our support forums and trying to slam us.

I entered into a pair licenses, referred to as the D20 Stl and the OGL.  These licenses list what is acceptable, and what is unacceptable, for products of any flavor - and include limits on what is not acceptable.  They list the rules for inclusion of copyright, and when there is potential breach, the matter is discussed with people at wizards of the coast or within the Open Gaming Foundation to remedy the breach.  If it is still not remedied by this 'polite' manner, than it becomes an official warning for 30 days - after which, logos and rights will be terminated.

The FAQs you refer to in regards to "Human readable format" apply to the Open Gaming License.  Open Content does not mean you can use it however you want - you have to follow the rules.

"Hot debates" about Campaign Suite are discussed, worked, and remedied if there is a problem or potential problem.

The license any OGL and/or D20 programmer or publisher enters into insures that they are - in fact - legal until found in violation.  Not entering into such a license, such as saying, "If anyone has a problem with us, we'll stop, but otherwise we'll keep going" means it's shady ground and someone can accuse you of being illegal, someone else can accuse you of being legal, and noone is really right.

Being bound by the license means that there is no threat of anyone losing their intellectual property rights.  In intellectual property law, you are bound to actively defend your rights.  By not doing so for one person, they can - in fact - lose their rights.  The license gives them gaurauntee that they can pull the license at any time, and they can very actively defend it.

Last, but not least, the "hot debate" about Twin Rose and DM's Familiar and others has gone under heavy review at Wizard's of the Coast and I've been very active with them in trying to establish the legal bounds of using their mechanics, phrases, and other content in a software product.

I think that the comparison here was largely unfair, as you have not entered into any sort of Agreement with Wizards of the Coast, and we maintain our own forums where such debates occur.  Whether or not we receive payment for our work, and our professions, is also not in issue.  The OGL and D20STL make no such distinction, and WOTC is not a company to say, "You can't make money off of our licenses!"  Rather, saying, "You can use our stuff, but use it the way -we- dictate."


----------



## smetzger (Aug 1, 2002)

*Re: Let me step in here please*



			
				Mynex said:
			
		

> * 6) We have contacted ALL the publishers we have, even a few we do not yet.  Some later than others and for that I do apologize.  The reason for that lateness is due to protocols being recently (last few months) being instituted to make sure we do things correctly and politely with the publishers.
> *




You may have contacted all the publishers.  However, not all the publishers are copyright holders.  For example, take the Netbook of Feats.  You may have contacted the NetBook council, however, they do not have the legal right to give you permission to use the material without the use of the OGC license or the d20 license.  I realize that getting permission from all the copyright holders would be difficult, but it is something which you have not done.  

That being said, I don't mind that you are using my material.



			
				Mynex said:
			
		

> * 4) Wizards has said in the past that any software character creation tool must have the mechanics in a 'Human Readable Format'. Yes? PCGen does. They're called list files. And all they are, are text files given the extension .lst instead of .txt or .doc or .whatever. And that is ALL they've said about software so far.*




Technically this is not true.  The OGL FAQ says that you need to allow people to extract any OGC material that you include.  It suggests that one way to do this is to include the data in human readable format that your program can process.  And besides since PCGen does not use the OGL or d20 license it does not have to comply with this.


----------



## merton_monk (Aug 1, 2002)

*PCGen's Philosophy*

Put simply, we are not OGL or d20 compliant, so the requirements for those licenses are completely irrelevant.  We have been taking steps toward that direction which is why we contact all the publishers for the permission - particularly PI permission for names of items - which is completely unnecessary if we don't ever become OGL or d20 compliant. However, gaining permission from a company/group/individual is the professionally polite thing to do and is a good way to start a dialog even if we don't ever become OGL and/or D20 compliant.

We are under copyright/trademark laws.  Under Fair Use we can include mechanics (the "crunchy bits"), we cannot include "flavor text" verbatim as that would violate copyright.  We satisfy TradeMarks by giving proper attribution - everywhere in PCGen it is very easy to determine from what book/group/URL/individual an item came from.  We do this for a number of reasons:
1. to satisfy trademark requirements
2. to help out d20 publishers who put out wonderful material - we want people to know who created that class/feat/spell that they like and where they can go to purchase it and find other products by that same author!
3. we want to make it easy for our users to remember which of their books they need to look up the details about it in.  All DMs will want to know the details about something (more than PCGen provides) and having a reference in hand is a typical requirement.

The way this balances for us is that PCGen is useful as a character generator and mainenance application because it handles all the math.  It gives you all the options you have, let's you know what you qualify for and what you don't qualify for.  In this way it really lowers the learning curve on using new d20 material (especially for those compeltely new to d20/3e!).  It also works as free marketing for all the d20 publishers who don't have to worry that our product will make theirs unnecessary.  I have received numerous email from people and seen posts on our yahoo message board that many groups will only allow players to use books which PCGen supports in their character generation.  This means that publishers who let us include their material in our application are generating more sales than they would have this includes a number of people who have bought Wotc books because they're in PCGen!).  No one has *not* purchased a book because it was not necessary due to the information included in PCGen.  That means we're not costing any publisher a dime.

I have contacted Wotc several times seeking their permission to specifically include their books in PCGen.  Again - technically it isn't an absolute necessity, but for many reasons it's the right thing to do.  I have never tried to "fly under the radar".  I have exchanged email with Ryan Dancey, and with other Wotc employess after his departure.  None of them have indicated that Wotc has a problem of any kind with PCGen.  I'd like to gain their official permission, but they're obviously very reticent to do that.  It isn't necessary to have their official permission, but I'd be very happy to enter into negotiations with them in order to obtain it.

I don't expect PCGen to affect E-Tools sales at all.  Our purposes have some overlap, but our audiences are very different.  Our audience is completely on-line, and due to our cross-platform nature we have a large userbase among non-Windows users.  E-Tools will be distributed nation-wide in Wotc retail stores for Windows-only and will have instant name recognition among those who are not on-line.  E-Tools is focused on the core rulebooks, will run on Windows (so it *should* run somewhat faster than PCGen which is java based) and will do what a lot of gamers need.  At around $30 it's not like it's going to break anyone's budget.  We're free (no budget necessary!) and we support somewhere around 60 sources at last count.  Not everyone needs that versatility.  The learning curve for using PCGen is probably higher than E-Tools, though we're slowly lowering that - Mynex's great work on the documentation should go a long way to rectify that!  The GUI has taken big steps forward and we're constantly working on optimizing the speed as much as we can - moving to Java 1.4 in the next month or so should help tremendously.  The comparisons between PCGen/E-Tools and all the other character generators are inevitable - in the case of retail generators the users will vote with their checkbook.  I haven't figured out how people vote for us, except that lots keep helping to enter the data files and we have publishers ask about getting their stuff entered.  Without that kind of vote of support, we wouldn't have gotten to where we are today!

I think that should about cover all the issues. 

Bryan McRoberts
Benevolent Dictator and Chief Code Monkey of PCGen


----------



## drothgery (Aug 1, 2002)

I am not a lawyer, but it seems to me that despite (and possibly because of) everything the PCGen people have said, it's on incredibly shaky legal ground, and if Hasbro and WotC thought it was worth the effort, the project would probably get shut down. You're working off of some highly flawed legal assumptions.

1) The notion that game mechanics can't be copyrighted has never been tested in court, as far as I know. If someone published the d20 SRD without including the OGL and d20 STL, I think it would be hard to find a judge and/or jury that said they didn't violate WotC's copyrights.

2) PCGen's status as an open source/freeware product does not protect it any way from lawsuits or exempt it from copyright laws. It may limit the damages you could be sued for, but that's about it.

3) It's not at all clear that including game mechanics descriptions in a text file for use in a generator program is fair use, even if posting the exact same text here would be. In any case, recent legislation (most notably the Digital Millenium Copyright Act) has severely limited 'fair use' rights.


----------



## kingpaul (Aug 1, 2002)

drothgery said:
			
		

> *1) The notion that game mechanics can't be copyrighted has never been tested in court, as far as I know. If someone published the d20 SRD without including the OGL and d20 STL, I think it would be hard to find a judge and/or jury that said they didn't violate WotC's copyrights.*



Actually, IIRC, you don't need to include the d20 STL with a work.  You need to abide by it if you slap the d20 logo on the work, however.  This pretty much means a minimum 5% OGC, no character generation rules, and no rules on what to do with experience.

However, you do need to include, and abide by, the OGL if you use OGC.


----------



## Nine Hands (Aug 2, 2002)

mattcolville said:
			
		

> *In anticipation of E-Tools coming out, I was checking out PCGen and astonished by the claims it makes. According to their site, they have data in there from the splatbooks (not open) and Star Wars (not open, and licensed by someone else.) And they encourage donations!
> 
> Am I missing something, how are these guys getting away with this? Is it just that no-one at Wizards cares or is it that the app doesn't do what it says it does?
> 
> Seems a pretty popular program, I'd be surprised if it managed to 'fly under the radar.' *




So Matt when are you going to give permission for PCGen to include your works...hmm?


----------



## Fractalwave (Aug 2, 2002)

*Re: PCGen's Philosophy*

I've read threads in these forums for some time now and this one is the one that actually got me to register and post...go figure. This post is not a flame, it's an explanation of sorts and hopefully points to some useful websites for those who want to look up a few things. And...IANAL. I just do business. 

Herein lies the problem that is easiest to see...



			
				merton_monk said:
			
		

> *Put simply, we are not OGL or d20 compliant, so the requirements for those licenses are completely irrelevant.
> 
> Bryan McRoberts
> Benevolent Dictator and Chief Code Monkey of PCGen *



I think you should probably reread the OGL. There's only been one version of the OGL to my knowledge and this is the link. http://www.wizards.com/d20/files/OGLv1.0a.rtf 

The OGL is distributed with all OGC and OGC is licensed under the OGL, therefore if OGC is used the OGL applies. PCGen contains OGC, does it not? Section 3 of the OGL says 







> 3.Offer and Acceptance: By Using the Open Game Content You indicate Your acceptance of the terms of this License.



 This is the short explanation. Unless PCGen entered into a separate license with each and every copyright owner of the OGC they include, be it in an alpha, beta or 'stable' production version, they are subject to the OGL.

I also think that several people are confusing PI and IP. PI, product identity, is defined by the OGL in section 1 (e): 







> "Product Identity" means product and product line names, logos and identifying marks including trade dress; artifacts; creatures characters; stories, storylines, plots, thematic elements, dialogue, incidents, language, artwork, symbols, designs, depictions, likenesses, formats, poses, concepts, themes and graphic, photographic and other visual or audio representations; names and descriptions of characters, spells, enchantments, personalities, teams, personas, likenesses and special abilities; places, locations, environments, creatures, equipment, magical or supernatural abilities or effects, logos, symbols, or graphic designs; and any other trademark or registered trademark clearly identified as Product identity by the owner of the Product Identity, and which specifically excludes the Open Game Content



IP is intellectual property and is covered by copyright, patent and trademark laws to name a few. Intellectual property is everything that is the product of human innovation and creativity. If you create something new, then you own the intellectual property. For example, you write a story then you copyright it because you as the creator of the intellectual property own those rights.

Everything, open or not is IP. Not everything is PI. Clear as mud yet?



			
				merton_monk said:
			
		

> *Under Fair Use we can include mechanics (the "crunchy bits"), we cannot include "flavor text" verbatim as that would violate copyright.
> 
> Bryan McRoberts
> Benevolent Dictator and Chief Code Monkey of PCGen *



Consult a lawyer on this one too. From http://whatiscopyright.org/


> Fair use or fair practice is utilization of a portion of a copyrighted work "as is" for purposes of parody, news reporting, research and education about such copyrighted work without the permission of the author. Use of copyrighted works, or portions thereof, for any other purpose is not deemed fair use, so be careful! That includes copying text or scanning pictures from postcards, magazines, books or any other work.



To my knowledge, PCGen isn't using the information or data for the acceptable fair use purposes listed above. Find someone to look up cases for you in case that site is out of date but it was last updated on May 4, 2002.

From section 1 (c) of the OGL:







> "Distribute" means to reproduce, license, rent, lease, sell, broadcast, publicly display, transmit or otherwise distribute



PCGen definitely distributes OGC. Distribution of a product has absolutely nothing to do with whether there's a price attached to it.

Also, a good lawyer could easily argue violation of the d20stl simply from PCGen's repeated use of the term "d20" in marketing materials. Note that marketing includes websites.

I suggest that anyone who wants to learn more should subscribe to the mailing lists at the open gaming foundation website. http://www.opengamingfoundation.org There are threads in there that discuss whether things are considered derivative as well as whether it's possible for the OGL to be compatible with any other open source license without violating the OGL. I would think these would be very informative.

I've not even touched on copyrights and trademarks. Just do a google search on copyright and trademark. You'll find lots of information.

Fractalwave
aka Dee Peterson


----------



## smetzger (Aug 2, 2002)

*Re: Re: PCGen's Philosophy*



			
				Fractalwave said:
			
		

> *I think you should probably reread the OGL. There's only been one version of the OGL to my knowledge and this is the link. http://www.wizards.com/d20/files/OGLv1.0a.rtf
> 
> The OGL is distributed with all OGC and OGC is licensed under the OGL, therefore if OGC is used the OGL applies. PCGen contains OGC, does it not? Section 3 of the OGL says  This is the short explanation. Unless PCGen entered into a separate license with each and every copyright owner of the OGC they include, be it in an alpha, beta or 'stable' production version, they are subject to the OGL.
> *




Your other statements about fair use and stuff may be correct.  However, this one is wrong.  Just because you use information that is OGC/OGL does not mean that you must abide by the license.  If you do not use the OGL license then the rules for use come under the copyright rules.  It is possible to use material that is OGC/OGL without the actual license and obey copyright rules.  For instance if you own the copyright you can publish however you want to publish.  You can also give permission to others to use your material.  If you own the rights to the material you can do what you want with it.

In short I think that PCGen is on shaky legal ground.  Since they are not using the OGL or the d20 license a copyright holder could at any time seek legal action against them.  But most D&D websites (including this one) and Jamis' Generators are on the same shaky ground.  For example, hardly anyone publishes free modules under d20 or the OGL.  Morrus is very defensive about the OGC content yet he does have a whole lot of sidetreks available for download that have no licensing information in them.  Although, Jamis gives credit and notes who the different copyright holders are for his NPC generator, he does not in fact use the OGL or d20 license.

So, there are lots of online sources that do not comply with OGL or d20.  I myself am writing D&D software that I am pretty sure will not use the OGL or d20 license.


----------



## D'karr (Aug 2, 2002)

*And the question is*

Who gives a crap?

If WOTC wants to pull the plug, who gives a crap?

People complaining and whining about it being OGL or d20 compliant need to get a life.

All these legal experts, quoting this law or that law, just chaff my ass.  Get a frigging life.

The guys doing the PCGen files are doing a great service.  If WOTC decides they don't want the files distributed then let WOTC take action.  The PCGen files have already said that they will pull it if WOTC wants them to.

As far as I've seen, nobody here works for WOTC and is just whining because somebody might or might not be doing something quasi-legal.

If you have such hard felt opinions about it don't support it.  In an online forum nobody gives a crap about your opinion anyway.  The same way that nobody gives a crap about my opinion.

Flame if you want because I don't give a crap.


----------



## Draconis Imperium (Aug 2, 2002)

*Re: And the question is*



			
				D'karr said:
			
		

> *Who gives a crap?
> 
> If WOTC wants to pull the plug, who gives a crap?
> 
> ...





Halleluah! and AMEN!


----------



## Lily Inverse (Aug 2, 2002)

Actually people, there is one thing to keep in mind.  WotC made an extremely risky move by writing the OGL in the first place, as it is based on the legally untested GNU licenses for open-source software.  There's no guarantee that the OGL can hold up in court as-is.  There is a chance, however slight, that the first time this license comes under legal attack the entire system of trusting the other guy to not break you will collapse.

But that means that OGL is based entirely on trust.  Unfortunately, the fact is is that OGL DOES self-replicate.  The implication is that if you use OGC the OGL is attached to it.  Thus, PCGen could actually constitute a huge threat to the D20 system as it exists today.  But whether that risk is taken is entirely dependent on WotC.  My opinion is they don't DARE try to shut the operation down, for fear that the empire they're building will come crashing down about their ears.

I'm no lawyer, though.


----------



## Twin Rose (Aug 2, 2002)

Lily Inverse said:
			
		

> *Actually people, there is one thing to keep in mind.  WotC made an extremely risky move by writing the OGL in the first place, as it is based on the legally untested GNU licenses for open-source software.  There's no guarantee that the OGL can hold up in court as-is.  There is a chance, however slight, that the first time this license comes under legal attack the entire system of trusting the other guy to not break you will collapse.
> *




You are correct.  Misuse can in fact lead to everyone losing the benefits of the d20 and open game licenses.  This would be very grave for a lot of people, people I believe do a lot to contribute to gaming as a whole.



> *But that means that OGL is based entirely on trust.  Unfortunately, the fact is is that OGL DOES self-replicate.  The implication is that if you use OGC the OGL is attached to it.  Thus, PCGen could actually constitute a huge threat to the D20 system as it exists today.  But whether that risk is taken is entirely dependent on WotC.  My opinion is they don't DARE try to shut the operation down, for fear that the empire they're building will come crashing down about their ears. *




If they don't, they forfeit their ownership of their copyrights.  According to the law, you MUST defend your copyright if you are aware of it.  If the GPL made a claim to the information contained in PCGen, that they own it now since it's derivitive, noone would be allowed to sell anything containing that material, iirc.


----------



## Ranger REG (Aug 2, 2002)

*Re: And the question is*



			
				D'karr said:
			
		

> *
> Who gives a crap?*



We do. We "whiners" give a crap because we want PCGen to succeed for a very long time. That's why we want the developers to cover their bases.

Now if you guys don't want us to care for PCGen, then please say so.


----------



## merton_monk (Aug 2, 2002)

*Copyrights*

Here is a website that I continually check back on whenever I need to refresh myself on copyrights.

http://www.templetons.com/brad/copymyths.html

You do not need to vigorously defend copyrights - you need to vigorously defend trademarks.  We defend trademarks in PCGen by clearly indicating the owner of the trademarks and copyrights.

I appreciate, and I think everyone should, the discussion about legalities.  As dry as it is and as (occasionally) emotional it is, it is necessary as a way to (as Ranger put it) make sure out bases are covered.

Few things about how all these licenses affect software are very clear - it's murky at best.  That combined with the fact that a company can still win a meritless or very weak suit based upon the ability to afford lawyers puts another dimension on this whole issue.  Still, we are trying to be conscientious and legal - not only to protect ourselves, but to make sure we don't accidentally contribute to the detriment of any works we reference. We enjoy a lot of support from publishers because of this, and I have every intention of maintaining those good relations - which would be impossible to do if any of them viewed us as a threat to their work in any kind of way.

Bryan McRoberts


----------



## Lily Inverse (Aug 3, 2002)

> If the GPL made a claim to the information contained in PCGen, that they own it now since it's derivitive, noone would be allowed to sell anything containing that material, iirc.[/quiote]
> 
> Actually, this list isn't anywhere near as big as you might think.  No PI is contained within PCGen at all, it's all in the .lst files, which, IIRC, aren't covered by the GPL because they are, in essence, just separate data files.
> 
> Also, the key point about OGL that I made is that, while you can sell everything, you are supposed to make any product that contains OGC completely OGL compliant.  If you don't, you are in violation of the license and completely open to legal prosecution under it unless you make some other arrangement, _and possibly not even then_.  I would need to re-check the wording, but I believe that it's such that, once you've applied the OGL to a specific product, you can't use any _other_ license with those contents anymore.  I may be wrong in that such only applies to other printed media, though.


----------



## Christian (Aug 3, 2002)

Well, WRT to the core D&D rules-the authors of the .lst files could say that they're using the copyrighted material in the PH (all of the PH is copyrighted, including the portions that were later released as OGC) with the permission of the copyright holder.

Ponder that until your brain hurts. Or not.


----------



## EricLeaf (Aug 4, 2002)

*Re: Let me step in here please*



			
				Mynex said:
			
		

> Those are the general statements, now let me hit the specific points others raised.
> 1) Star Wars, Wheel of Time, Call of Cthulhu, Forgotten Realms, etc... Specific game worlds/settings... something to think about here.
> I just used those copyrighted names in a public forum, hence those names are being distributed in an electronic format across




If I follow your argument, you are saying that because you have not been sued for posting those names, therefore it is ok to use them. That is false.



> 2) Pcgen is not 'Stealing' anything from anybody. Period.




To be honest I have no problems with the movement and have greatly benefitted personally from open source in general and many of the larger products such as Linux and gcc, bread and butter.

However, two key ideas are not divorced from a subject "merely" because you aren't getting cash for the work. That is value trade, *and* stealing. My own interpretation of our copyright laws don't imply bank account increase only to mean improper use of others IP, in other words violation.


Also, with service or trade marks its even more dangerous for you. In addition, while you seem to be saying something different from another on the team, its not the owners job to notify *you* to not violate their copyright. And even having that view will be viewed harshly in court I wold wager. In other words, thats a foolish stand to make, unless you have legal permission your only option would be to cease and desist when you recieved such notice since, "oh they didn't tell me" won't take you very far.





> 3) PCGen is NOT in direct competition with E-Tools, regardless of what anybody says.  Our goal is NOT to sink E-Tools, or cause it to lose sales.  As noted elsewhere in this thread, it is an all




Lack of malice or foresight doesn't remove you from responsibility.




> 4) Wizards has said in the past that any software character creation tool must have the mechanics in a 'Human Readable Format'.




I think you are mixing ideas in your head, OGL is pretty clear, and not portable with GPL or LGPL. D20 license would benefit you in terms of branding, but also places on you greater limits. Your standpoint is that you don't follow either license so you are not limited by them, but in reality by not following either license you are merely violating copyright. Wether devoted wotc writer's children are going unfed is a totally different question, but thats only a morality concern, legally it doesn't matter.




> 5) Java and the GUI.  If you haven't used PCGen in the last month, then you have NO room to complain about the UI, it's drastically different and a hell of a lot faster than ever, and it's getting faster every release.  Divorce Java from PCGen, if you don't understand the differences,




Thats not entirely valid, the pcgen team *choose* to use Java. So regrettably they are connected. Until someone with sense ports it to C or C++. 





> Why are people so anti-PCGen?
> So much discussion over PCGen, what about Twin rose and Tablesmith and the like, where's the 'hot debate' over them,  some of them charge.




I can think of a few reasons, the main one being that the people that are Pro-pcgen, much like the classic Mac or Linux zealot, are abrasive to many people. Not so much because of the actual ideals, but because of the simple minded and polar values that they represent.

I'm sure you can find better thought out and more exhaustive discussion on the whole free software realm, but just becuase its free does not mean its better for me and everyone else. Many people have a natural distrust of "free", which is sensible in my mind. Also, and this is a lesson I learned when I did run Linux which was years ago at this point (I'm old sk00l) its not free in the thing I value most in life, my time. I can buy a fullly loaded Dell with Xp and be up and running in the time it takes me to plug it in, it has a price tag, but that more than makes up for the time cost it would take to install Linux. And while I know its easier nowadays, it took me weeks with no reference to get it running on a notebook in 94'. I was a student then so my time was worthless for the most part so it was a fair trade. Now however, I wouldn't think of installing Linux unless maybe I was setting up a server machine.

I'm sure you understand that, and eTools will be the same way. For the vast majority of people it will be the better choice. That should be obvious, and your statements make it seem like you understand that. Now, you have people that sell pcgen in a way to act like that doesn't exist, and that is what I am talking about here. That is annoying because its a polar view that doesn't look at all the issues involved, so of course will bother people. Bother them so much they reply on these or other boards to debunk that belief. And since it is an argument or battle, they have to respond with the same level of intensity to compete.


In more general terms deToqueville wrote on this while describing America's two party system sometime last century. Its either very basic logic or "natural balance" if you stand on the far edge, someone will stand on the opposite edge to balance you out.




> I was on Beta for M/E-tools, I made no bones about my work on PCGen, It was known when I was selected, it was known while I was in the beta, and every one of my messages had my sig line in there of 'PCGen Doc & lst file Silverback'  You think THAT was glossed over?




It may have been overlooked initially. I know for a fact it wasn't just glossed over, and you came out with a different political agenda when it came out so to ease peoples concerns. I've since read posts by you on other forums that now leads me to believe that was only lip service.




> And finally, please, PLEASE, let's refrain the slanderous attacks on PCGen.  If people want to debate the pro/cons, I'm more than happy to, hell I like to, it makes PCGen a better product!




I believe this post to be largely devoid of slanderous attacks and name calling. I think that will make this post seem odd and out of place so am compelled to say pCgEN s0xx0rs, et00ls roxxors!


----------



## Mynex (Aug 5, 2002)

*Re: Re: Let me step in here please*



> It may have been overlooked initially. I know for a fact it wasn't just glossed over, and you came out with a different political agenda when it came out so to ease peoples concerns. I've since read posts by you on other forums that now leads me to believe that was only lip service.




You and I have both stated we're not lawyers, so I'm not going to continue a fruitless debate on the points we've both addressed.

You've made other points over the rabidness of PCGen users, and yes, there are many... just as many E-Tools rabid folk as well.  That's known territory, so we'll skip that as well...

This last bit, the part I quoted, is what I wanted to clarify from you.

Are you saying that my position that PCGen on/vs E-Tools has changed?  That I was paying lip service to the fact they can co-exist?

If that's the case, I strongly recommend you point to specific posts I've made where I've ever said anything different, or even remotely close to that.

I have NEVER 'dissed' M/E-Tools.  EVER.  I have slammed Hasbro/WotC/TSR for their mangling of how it was handled, I have complained on the Wizards boards about the lack of features that _I_ want, that were _PROMISED_ by the original M-Tools... but I never slammed the incarnation of E-Tools that is out, I have never said it sucks or any such other thing remotely close to it.

I _HAVE_ made comments about the the DB, but those are my quirks about Access and again, how Hasbro/WotC/TSR mangled the management of this project.

My opinions about E-Tools are my own, and I'll keep them that way for 3 reasons;

1) Until E-Tools actually hits the streets (Aug 8th I believe?) I am still bound by the NDA I signed to BE a beta tester for it.

2) Anything I say, Positive or negative, will be construed and taken as biased because of my involvement with PCGen *shrug*   That's the way people are, that's fine.

3) it is _ONLY_ an opinion.

In short, I don't like being called a liar.  And that's exactly how your comment about 'paying lip service' came across to me.

I would recommend you re-read how that statement looks and think about how it comes across though, I can't change the fact of how it looks to me as I read it, that's _my_ perception of the words.

And if I am mistaken and that was not your intent/meaning, then my apologies.


----------



## mattcolville (Aug 6, 2002)

*Re: Re: How Is There Still PCGen?*



			
				Nine Hands said:
			
		

> *
> 
> So Matt when are you going to give permission for PCGen to include your works...hmm? *




I'm a writer/designer. . .not a publisher. My permission would be meaningless, I don't hold the copyrights on anything my name's been on.

Furthermore, with a lot of the stuff I've worked on, the licensor *can't* give permission. WotC can't grant you the rights to use the term 'wookie' because they don't hold the rights to the term 'wookie.'


----------



## mattcolville (Aug 6, 2002)

Grraf said:
			
		

> *I realize that people love to bag things for fun and that this wasn't started as much of a serious discussion as a chance to complain.*




You don't realize any such thing. I started this thread and my post didn't have an ounce of complaint in it. I simply didn't understand how they could include data from IPs neither they nor WotC have permission to allow them to use.

Later, I believe I complained at how fantastically, colossaly slow PCGen is on my machine, which eats up NWN and WarIII and spits them out. How a program like PCGen can grind my computer to a halt is still something that boggles my mind and is the primary reason I'm not using it, and will be trying ETools instead. Two of the guys in my gaming group are JAVA heads, one's a computer science professor at a state college, one's a design lead for Symantec. Both said "there's no excuse for this." You can take that as a flame, or as a serious criticism from professionals who wanted to see the program work.


----------



## mattcolville (Aug 6, 2002)

Neowolf said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I take it you (and the others who have claimed PCGen is slow and has a bad interface) haven't bothered to actually try the new versions. *




Lord.

A week ago I downloaded, not only the newest version of PCGen, but the newest version of JRE. The app is slow. Slow slow slow. I click on a selection and, roughly 5 to 7 seconds later, something happens. 

I don't know why there are people who think it's not slow. I wish there was a button I could push on my computer that made it run at a normal speed.


----------



## Twin Rose (Aug 6, 2002)

mattcolville said:
			
		

> *
> How a program like PCGen can grind my computer to a halt is still something that boggles my mind and is the primary reason I'm not using it, and will be trying ETools instead. *




I wish things weren't so black and white.  If, for whatever reason, the Java and PCGen run slow on a computer doesn't mean that PCGen and E-Tools are the only options.  There are tons of programs out there, each meant to do a specific task - from character generation to Campaign Management, and some that suite them all together.  There is a rich market out there, as there should be, because competition and fair play breed quality.  "Either free generator or E-Tools" means that there may well be no competition one day, and that leads to stagnation and lack of growth.

Just a couple of copper pieces.


----------



## mattcolville (Aug 6, 2002)

Twin Rose said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I wish things weren't so black and white.  If, for whatever reason, the Java and PCGen run slow on a computer doesn't mean that PCGen and E-Tools are the only options.  There are tons of programs out there, each meant to do a specific task - from character generation to Campaign Management, and some that suite them all together.  There is a rich market out there, as there should be, because competition and fair play breed quality.  "Either free generator or E-Tools" means that there may well be no competition one day, and that leads to stagnation and lack of growth.
> 
> Just a couple of copper pieces. *




I just want something that does what I need. I thought PCGen was it and you know, maybe it is, if it weren't so slow. It seems like an example of the bazaar gone horribly wrong.


----------



## Henry (Aug 6, 2002)

mattcolville said:
			
		

> *A week ago I downloaded, not only the newest version of PCGen, but the newest version of JRE. The app is slow. Slow slow slow. I click on a selection and, roughly 5 to 7 seconds later, something happens. *




Gah!

I hate to break it to you, Matt, but that's not normal. Even my Pentium II 233 with 128MB RAM runs it faster than that. Now, given that the startup time is abysmally slow (even Leo and Mynex will tell you that), the app will still run much faster than what you described on this machine. Much, Much faster. The app actually runs at a very manageable speed on my second, main PC - and that's on an Athlon XP1600.

By no means am I "dissing" you, but I am saying that I, as a user, don't have that kind of lag on the program when it is up and running.

P.S. - those Java-heads of yours - you ought to invite 'em to come on over and work on the program some. If they've got some good solutions, I'm sure Merton Monk would love to hear from 'em.


----------



## Leopold (Aug 6, 2002)

mattcolville said:
			
		

> *
> 
> I just want something that does what I need. I thought PCGen was it and you know, maybe it is, if it weren't so slow. It seems like an example of the bazaar gone horribly wrong. *




It was a bazaar in the beginning but now with structured releases and code testing it has become a cathedral instead. Especially with the 3.0.0 stable version coming out which went through a full month of debugging and testing within only a small core group to get all the kinks out and then released to test and THEN sent for final publishing after it has been done. 

Also, all the documentation has been rewritten to provide a guide map for the new people using PCGen, a walkthrough completed, a list of all the lines of code and examples of such and how to build the files included.

Yes in the beginning it was a bazaar with a new release sometimes coming every day or every 2 hrs. Now it's down to once a week and slowly sinking back to once every few weeks. 

Control, stability, and documenation all help keep projects on track and moving smoothly to avoid the massive bazaar that can occur when things get out of hand..


----------



## Leopold (Aug 6, 2002)

Henry said:
			
		

> I hate to break it to you, Matt, but that's not normal. Even my Pentium II 233 with 128MB RAM runs it faster than that. Now, given that the startup time is abysmally slow (even Leo and Mynex will tell you that), the app will still run much faster than what you described on this machine. Much, Much faster. The app actually runs at a very manageable speed on my second, main PC - and that's on an Athlon XP1600.





I have it running on a p100 with 48mb of ram on win95. Does it run painfully slow? Your darn tootin. about 30-45 seconds to load up and run. This is a laptop that basically does all the combat stats and number I would need in a crunch if my main laptop fails. 

The box I am using now is Win2k, P3/500, 320mb of ram, with JRE 1.4 and pcgen 2.7.3. IT takes approximately 11-13 seconds to start the application, 5 seconds to load the sources ( only load the core for me) and then start the program. If you have difficultly or long load times, turn off the feature "Load Sources at Startup" under the Settings>PCGen>Sources menu.





> P.S. - those Java-heads of yours - you ought to invite 'em to come on over and work on the program some. If they've got some good solutions, I'm sure Merton Monk would love to hear from 'em.  [/B]





we did and we would love all those interested to come on over. The more the merrier.  We have about 20 developers part time to the project and maybe 5 full time. Merton or Mynex can provide more numbers as this is a guesstimate. There is about 10 people or more working on the .lst files part time with about 5 full timers pounding away. Mynex works double duty on the data files and java so I had to count him twice!


----------



## mattcolville (Aug 7, 2002)

Henry said:
			
		

> *
> 
> Gah!
> 
> ...




I've got them working on other things. 

But they've had the same experience. One's on a Sony laptop, the other has basically the same machine I've got.

Like I said, if there's a button somewhere I can press labeled "run faster" let me know, I'll press it. This is the only program I've got that does this. If you design a program (or a web page) that only runs well or looks good on machines configured like yours, you're going to get a lot of complaints.


----------



## Ds Da Man (Aug 7, 2002)

Well, although it is slow to initially load, after it starts-up, it's really not that bad. I like it, thanks PC-Gen fellows, and please keep up the work.


----------



## Aurianna (Aug 12, 2002)

*PCGen slowness*

Three primary reasons I've found that PCGen runs slowly:

1)  Loading too many source files.  If you don't need the content, don't load unnecessary data.

2)  Java exceptions.  "Non-fatal" errors from some of those .lst files will seriously slow you down, especially those sources that aren't Core, and thus haven't really been looked at in a while.

3)  Complicated characters.  I GUARANTEE that a multi-leveled, multiclassed, templated, loaded-down (equipment) character is going to take a LONG time to load/navigate.  Especially on any screen that does a "qualify"check, such as class, feats, skills, etc.


----------

