Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [pcgen] Re: Questions about the "Standard Campaign" 80 pt build option

Expand Messages
  • David R. Bender
    Send an email to Paul and have him check it out. I thought that this was all fan based stuff, and was covered by derivative work on the OGL. It would have been
    Message 1 of 16 , Jan 4, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Send an email to Paul and have him check it out. I thought that this was
      all fan based stuff, and was covered by derivative work on the OGL. It
      would have been the d20 llicense that might have been the problem. But
      Paul would know.

      -- david
      Papa.DRB

      My better half and me (jpg)
      <https://picasaweb.google.com/102726903532570043857/Family#slideshow/5533056948910114610>

      Love Me If You Can by Toby Keith (video)
      <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhcfFekSbHQ&ob=av3e>

      Madness takes its toll - please have exact change.
      For those who believe, no proof is necessary, for those who don't
      believe, no proof is possible. (Stuart Chase 1888-1985)
      On 1/4/2013 5:45 PM, Stefan Radermacher wrote:
      > Am 04.01.13 23:36, schrieb David R. Bender:
      >> It wasn't in the rules, but I remember something on the Wizards site (a
      >> long time ago) that mentioned those methods. They probably were not
      >> official, but just ones that folks used.
      > That reminds me: non of these point build methods for 3e and 3.5e,
      > wether from the DMG or a web site are actually covered by the OGL. We
      > may be violating the license here.
      >
      > Stefan
      >
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > Related Lists
      > PCGen's release site: http://pcgen.sourceforge.net
      > PCGen's Mailing Lists and Links: http://wiki.pcgen.org/Mailing_Lists_and_PCGen_Links
      > PCGen's alpha build: http://pcgen.sourceforge.net/07_autobuilds.php
      > PCGen's JIRA Tracker: http://jira.pcgen.org
      >
      >
      > PCGen List File Help: http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/PCGenListFileHelp/
      > (for assistance in creating new homebrew or official list files)
      >
      > PCGen Experimental: http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/pcgen_experimental/
      > (for new official data source development)
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
      >
    • Doug Limmer
      I assumed that the 80 point buy method was made up and used precisely because the other methods were not OGL. DS/DL ... [Non-text portions of this message
      Message 2 of 16 , Jan 4, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        I assumed that the "80 point buy" method was made up and used precisely
        because the other methods were not OGL.

        DS/DL

        On 1/4/2013 5:45 PM, Stefan Radermacher wrote:
        >
        > Am 04.01.13 23:36, schrieb David R. Bender:
        > > It wasn't in the rules, but I remember something on the Wizards site (a
        > > long time ago) that mentioned those methods. They probably were not
        > > official, but just ones that folks used.
        >
        > That reminds me: non of these point build methods for 3e and 3.5e,
        > wether from the DMG or a web site are actually covered by the OGL. We
        > may be violating the license here.
        >
        > Stefan
        >




        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Stefan Radermacher
        ... That would makes sense indeed. Stefan
        Message 3 of 16 , Jan 4, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          Am 05.01.13 00:15, schrieb Doug Limmer:
          > I assumed that the "80 point buy" method was made up and used precisely
          > because the other methods were not OGL.

          That would makes sense indeed.

          Stefan
        • rogerwllco
          I think those aren t OGL, they re not in the SRD as far as I know. I always assumed what was said earlier, that the standard method that PCGen used is made
          Message 4 of 16 , Jan 4, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            I think those aren't OGL, they're not in the SRD as far as I know.

            I always assumed what was said earlier, that the "standard method" that PCGen used is made up because the published methods aren't OGL.

            The CMP datasets did come with the DMG methods, but not the srd35 datasets.

            Cheers,

            Adriaan Renting/RogerWilco

            --- In pcgen@yahoogroups.com, Stefan Radermacher wrote:
            >
            > Am 04.01.13 23:24, schrieb Stefan Radermacher:
            > > Am 04.01.13 22:56, schrieb David R. Bender:
            > >> No, 80 point has been a "standard" point buy for 3.5 for a long time.
            > >
            > > Really? I remember 35 points being the default point build for 3.5.
            >
            > Actuall I just checked my 3.5 DMG (page 169), and these are the point
            > buy values listed:
            >
            > Low-powered campaign 15 points
            > Challenging campaign 22 points
            > Tougher campaign 28 points
            > High-powered campaign 32 points
            >
            > The 3.0 DMG has the same values (page 19). No 80 points anywhere. Weird.
            >
            > Stefan.
            >
          • Paul
            Yes the 80 point build was put in to be d20 compliant. Then when we dropped the d20 license the values were never added back in for 3e & 35e. Pathfinder has
            Message 5 of 16 , Jan 5, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              Yes the 80 point build was put in to be d20 compliant. Then when we dropped the d20 license the values were never added back in for 3e & 35e. Pathfinder has the values published.

              --- In pcgen@yahoogroups.com, Stefan Radermacher wrote:
              >
              > Am 05.01.13 00:15, schrieb Doug Limmer:
              > > I assumed that the "80 point buy" method was made up and used precisely
              > > because the other methods were not OGL.
              >
              > That would makes sense indeed.
              >
              > Stefan
              >
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.