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

Re: [pcgen] Why not make the "PRD"?

Expand Messages
  • Eric C Smith
    Hi Folks! Hmmm, what I m seeing here are two sets to maintain. One large and extensive PRD plus all the individual PF RPG books. It will take extra effort to
    Message 1 of 20 , Aug 22, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Hi Folks!

      Hmmm, what I'm seeing here are two sets to maintain. One large and extensive PRD plus all the individual PF RPG books. It will take extra effort to ensure that both "sets" remain up-to-date.

      Maredudd

      On Aug 22, 2013, at 7:12 PM, Andrew wrote:

      > Yes, see the clarification above, this would another set. We'd still have the separate books. It's
      > just a better way to handle the ever growing issue of duplicates, and required thing from x book.
      >
      > The difference between "Load all Pathfinder main supplements" and "PRD" is the books would all be
      > meshed together.
      >
      > To address the PRD lack the deities et all, as part of the process, we can include each book OGL
      > license, and still include it. Since we already have the permission. Then the user gets the best of
      > both. - Call it the "PRD Plus!" set if it makes more sense.
      >
      > On 8/22/2013 3:58 PM, Doug Limmer wrote:
      > > I think making a PRD data set is a good idea.
      > >
      > > However, there are reasons beyond "people don't always embrace change"
      > > to keep the separate books as well. One reason is potential memory
      > > issues, as others have mentioned. Another is if someone doesn't want to
      > > use a particular book. [For example, some people really don't like the
      > > Gunslinger, Ninja, and Samurai from Ultimate Combat.] I'm sure there
      > > are others.
      > >
      > > DS/DL
      > >
      > > On 8/22/2013 5:57 PM, Andrew wrote:
      > >>
      > >> Hi Folks,
      > >>
      > >> With the increasing workload of making sets work together, and the
      > >> increased "onus" to further
      > >> support in each additional book (not to mention the back support). I
      > >> would like to put forth a
      > >> radical idea which is well within precedent. The Paizo Pathfinder
      > >> system has an OFFICIAL website,
      > >> maintained and run by the publisher and includes *ALL* their OGL
      > >> materials in plain view. We already
      > >> have an open permission to included everything Pathfinder from them.
      > >>
      > >> So, we make a PRD set. Everything lumped in, no duplicate issues cause
      > >> you are always loading
      > >> everything available. You only update items if something comes along
      > >> and changes the wording.
      > >>
      > >> A Basic Loader for the entire PRD is nice, and then support requests
      > >> will drop. Fixing issues
      > >> becomes simple since everything is condensed into one location. It
      > >> won't be Books x, y and z any
      > >> more, but just the PRD.
      > >>
      > >> (We can still leave the separate books, cause I know people don't
      > >> always embrace change) But I think
      > >> this would be a positive step forward in supporting the community.
      > >> Adding in additional materials
      > >> would still go through the NFD process, and require chimp oversight.
      > >> But ANYONE can submit items to
      > >> be included in this manner.
      > >>
      > >> Thoughts?
      > >>
      > >> --
      > >> Andrew Maitland (LegacyKing)
      > >> Admin Silverback - PCGen Board of Directors
      > >> Data 2nd, Docs Tamarin, OS Lemur
      > >> Unique Title "Quick-Silverback Tracker Monkey"
      > >> Unique Title "The Torturer of PCGen"
      > >>
      > >>
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > ------------------------------------
      > >
      > > 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
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      >
    • Rob
      This is a valid point... Here s my rebuttal to it. :D 1. The individual books are still going to be exactly that, individual books per what Andrew said.. So
      Message 2 of 20 , Aug 22, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        This is a valid point... Here's my rebuttal to it. :D

        1. The individual books are still going to be exactly that, individual books
        per what Andrew said.. So the SOURCExxx info doesn't change in any way...
        it'll list book/page as always...

        2. The PRD+, for things not on the PRD website, leave the source info
        alone... for what is on the website, change the source info to point right
        to it. Or list both (listing both might be a PITA, but that might actually
        be a better way to handle it)

        W. Robert Reed III
        Mynex



        -----Original Message-----
        From: pcgen@yahoogroups.com [mailto:pcgen@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
        Stefan Radermacher
        Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 6:14 PM
        To: pcgen@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: Re: [pcgen] Why not make the "PRD"?

        Am 22.08.13 23:57, schrieb Andrew:
        > The Paizo Pathfinder system has an OFFICIAL website, maintained and
        > run by the publisher and includes *ALL* their OGL materials in plain
        > view. We already have an open permission to included everything
        > Pathfinder from them.

        You idea certainly has merit. However. the statement you give here is not
        exactly correct. Paizo's PRD site only lists the OGL content from their
        Pathfinder RPG product line, i.e. the hardcover rulebooks. Stuff included in
        Pathfinder Player Companion line or Pathfinder Campagn Setting line or other
        Golarion-specifict books is not included there. Neither are the Gods, even
        though they are integrated into domains and subdomains in the Core Rulebook
        and other books. Just something to consider in this regard.
      • Andrew
        *Looks at the tracker list* . *then looks at the commit list*
        Message 3 of 20 , Aug 22, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          *Looks at the tracker list* >.> *then looks at the commit list* <.<

          Yeah... Still not opposed to it. Plus, I've got this monkey who's like a QA uber monkey who will be
          reviewing all the materials, which should make this less error prone sets. Thus lessen any efforts
          except errata updates. \o/

          (In skype that's a disco dancing man - dance little man, dance!)

          Cheers,


          On 8/22/2013 5:19 PM, Eric C Smith wrote:
          > Hi Folks!
          >
          > Hmmm, what I'm seeing here are two sets to maintain. One large and extensive PRD plus all the individual PF RPG books. It will take extra effort to ensure that both "sets" remain up-to-date.
          >
          > Maredudd
          >
          > On Aug 22, 2013, at 7:12 PM, Andrew wrote:
          >
          >> Yes, see the clarification above, this would another set. We'd still have the separate books. It's
          >> just a better way to handle the ever growing issue of duplicates, and required thing from x book.
          >>
          >> The difference between "Load all Pathfinder main supplements" and "PRD" is the books would all be
          >> meshed together.
          >>
          >> To address the PRD lack the deities et all, as part of the process, we can include each book OGL
          >> license, and still include it. Since we already have the permission. Then the user gets the best of
          >> both. - Call it the "PRD Plus!" set if it makes more sense.
          >>
          >> On 8/22/2013 3:58 PM, Doug Limmer wrote:
          >>> I think making a PRD data set is a good idea.
          >>>
          >>> However, there are reasons beyond "people don't always embrace change"
          >>> to keep the separate books as well. One reason is potential memory
          >>> issues, as others have mentioned. Another is if someone doesn't want to
          >>> use a particular book. [For example, some people really don't like the
          >>> Gunslinger, Ninja, and Samurai from Ultimate Combat.] I'm sure there
          >>> are others.
          >>>
          >>> DS/DL
          >>>
          >>> On 8/22/2013 5:57 PM, Andrew wrote:
          >>>>
          >>>> Hi Folks,
          >>>>
          >>>> With the increasing workload of making sets work together, and the
          >>>> increased "onus" to further
          >>>> support in each additional book (not to mention the back support). I
          >>>> would like to put forth a
          >>>> radical idea which is well within precedent. The Paizo Pathfinder
          >>>> system has an OFFICIAL website,
          >>>> maintained and run by the publisher and includes *ALL* their OGL
          >>>> materials in plain view. We already
          >>>> have an open permission to included everything Pathfinder from them.
          >>>>
          >>>> So, we make a PRD set. Everything lumped in, no duplicate issues cause
          >>>> you are always loading
          >>>> everything available. You only update items if something comes along
          >>>> and changes the wording.
          >>>>
          >>>> A Basic Loader for the entire PRD is nice, and then support requests
          >>>> will drop. Fixing issues
          >>>> becomes simple since everything is condensed into one location. It
          >>>> won't be Books x, y and z any
          >>>> more, but just the PRD.
          >>>>
          >>>> (We can still leave the separate books, cause I know people don't
          >>>> always embrace change) But I think
          >>>> this would be a positive step forward in supporting the community.
          >>>> Adding in additional materials
          >>>> would still go through the NFD process, and require chimp oversight.
          >>>> But ANYONE can submit items to
          >>>> be included in this manner.
          >>>>
          >>>> Thoughts?
          >>>>
          >>>> --
          >>>> Andrew Maitland (LegacyKing)
          >>>> Admin Silverback - PCGen Board of Directors
          >>>> Data 2nd, Docs Tamarin, OS Lemur
          >>>> Unique Title "Quick-Silverback Tracker Monkey"
          >>>> Unique Title "The Torturer of PCGen"
          >>>>
          >>>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>> ------------------------------------
          >>>
          >>> 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
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>>
          >>
          >
          >
          >
          > ------------------------------------
          >
          > 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
          >
          >
          >
          >
        • Andrew
          I m going to say no. Here s the reason, 1) the individual books are still in existence and can be selected as you desire today. I don t plan on removing these
          Message 4 of 20 , Aug 22, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            I'm going to say no. Here's the reason,

            1) the individual books are still in existence and can be selected as you desire today. I don't plan
            on removing these books.
            2) We're back to making sure each new option is supported properly. This translates to more work for
            me. I don't mind dual supporting the book and the 'PRD+' set, but I'm not going to delve into
            supporting surgical incisions within the PRD+. I already have enough trouble getting people to give
            me detailed bug reports with the book the issue is in. Imagine the confusion this will create when
            they say they loaded x, y and z books, but didn't realize those were the "index" PRD options? I'll
            waste my time tracking down an issue in the wrong area, and the fix won't happen in a timely manner.
            3) Finally, why bother mashing everything together if you're gonna have someone come along behind to
            de-mash it? The PRD isn't set up like the M/R/SRD with file segregations and known cut off points.
            We'd basically be back to making multiple books. Which we already have. The alternative of course is
            to just make a master "PRD" pcc file, do what the PFS pcc already does, pick and choose files and
            such, make a few custom ones, and then that'd be that. But now we run the risk of breaking things
            any time one of those books is altered. It's a toss up on which is actually better if you weigh
            those two options. PFS style pcc linking would be easier I suppose.

            Cheers,



            On 8/22/2013 3:32 PM, Billy Brown wrote:
            > Perhaps one per set with books simply being lists of indexes, and in that
            > way you could still include or exclude specific sources
            > On Aug 22, 2013 5:57 PM, "Andrew" <drew0500@...> wrote:
            >
            >> **
            >>
            >>
            >> Hi Folks,
            >>
            >> With the increasing workload of making sets work together, and the
            >> increased "onus" to further
            >> support in each additional book (not to mention the back support). I would
            >> like to put forth a
            >> radical idea which is well within precedent. The Paizo Pathfinder system
            >> has an OFFICIAL website,
            >> maintained and run by the publisher and includes *ALL* their OGL materials
            >> in plain view. We already
            >> have an open permission to included everything Pathfinder from them.
            >>
            >> So, we make a PRD set. Everything lumped in, no duplicate issues cause you
            >> are always loading
            >> everything available. You only update items if something comes along and
            >> changes the wording.
            >>
            >> A Basic Loader for the entire PRD is nice, and then support requests will
            >> drop. Fixing issues
            >> becomes simple since everything is condensed into one location. It won't
            >> be Books x, y and z any
            >> more, but just the PRD.
            >>
            >> (We can still leave the separate books, cause I know people don't always
            >> embrace change) But I think
            >> this would be a positive step forward in supporting the community. Adding
            >> in additional materials
            >> would still go through the NFD process, and require chimp oversight. But
            >> ANYONE can submit items to
            >> be included in this manner.
            >>
            >> Thoughts?
            >>
            >> --
            >> Andrew Maitland (LegacyKing)
            >> Admin Silverback - PCGen Board of Directors
            >> Data 2nd, Docs Tamarin, OS Lemur
            >> Unique Title "Quick-Silverback Tracker Monkey"
            >> Unique Title "The Torturer of PCGen"
            >>
            >>
            >
            >
            > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            >
            >
            >
            > ------------------------------------
            >
            > 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
            >
            >
            >
            >
          • Andrew
            UE (Alpha) and Bestiary 3 (Alpha) it s not in the Release, they aren t ready for prime time, ergo it doesn t get to count as any errors those produce will skew
            Message 5 of 20 , Aug 23, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              UE (Alpha) and Bestiary 3 (Alpha) it's not in the Release, they aren't ready for prime time, ergo it
              doesn't get to count as any errors those produce will skew any real analysis and statistics. ;)

              Yes, consolidating the files into one set would remove our errors with duplicates issues. Reduce
              overhead, and it would decrease memory usage, contrary to the belief otherwise. Removing .MODs, and
              duplicate items, and reusing the abilities between companions and their 'real' counterparts. It'd
              also force a standards of file naming. I don't think we need 10 race files, 8 ability files, etc.
              Sort by class, race and other for the abilities - after all, most of them are race related, class
              related or a misc item - afflictions, item powers, etc.

              I looked at the core book PDF, and it appears someone just decided to add in the scrolls and wands.
              Since the normal policy is just to place in the set what is in the book.

              Anyways, I'm gathering a lot of people are in the positive for this idea.

              On 8/22/2013 3:51 PM, Matthew Thompson wrote:
              > Honestly,
              > We're already having load problems just loading the core books anyway. If I take 6.01.05 and load the following :
              >
              > Core
              > APG
              > ARG
              > Bestiary
              > Bestiary II
              > Bestiary III (Beta)
              > UC
              > UM
              > UE (Beta)
              >
              > The program takes several minutes to load, and after making one or two characters it starts hanging on every thing it does, taking a minute or two to add a feat, to add a class level, etc. Just adding 8 class levels on a brand new character, just loaded dataset takes about 5 minutes.
              >
              > The Con below is a con if you were only going to load the Core, but, if that's all you wanted, you could just load the core and be done. If we consolidated the PRD material into one file, we could eliminate duplications between files (saving some memory).
              >
              > One other thing to consider would be to *not* load the core wands and scrolls. Those all take up memory, and the application (as I just learned this week) can create those on the fly rather easily. By not loading them seperately, that would also save memory at the cost of making it slightly more time consuming to create a character. However, we're not currently creating those scrolls/wands in expansion books (UC, UM, ARG for example) so I think that might be ok, as it would at least be consistent, rather than having the core and APG spells having wands/scrolls and the UC/UM/ARG not.
              >
              > And I don't think it would be all that hard (granted, newbie here) to create a PRD file, as it would basically be copying finalized LST entries from the expansion LST files into the PRD files.
              >
              > Matt
              >
              >
              > ________________________________
              > From: Anestis Kozakis <kenosti@...>
              > To: pcgen@yahoogroups.com
              > Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 5:18 PM
              > Subject: Re: [pcgen] Why not make the "PRD"?
              >
              >
              >
              >
              > It;s a good idea in theory, and I like it.
              >
              > Pro: You load everything.
              >
              > Con: Increased memory usage, processing and loading times.
              >
              > Anestis.
              >
              > On 23 August 2013 08:02, Andrew <drew0500@...> wrote:
              >
              >> Just to clarify:
              >>
              >> Each book added into the PRD would go through the normal 'single book
              >> creation/review' process as
              >> things stand now and when they've completed the full process from 'request
              >> to release' we'd still
              >> have the book set. But as long as the book is part of the Paizo's
              >> Pathfinder PRD, then they'd be
              >> added into the pcgen PRD data set to match.
              >>
              >> If it's not on the official Paizo PRD website, then it won't be included
              >> in the PCGen PRD.
              >>
              >> On 8/22/2013 2:57 PM, Andrew wrote:
              >>> Hi Folks,
              >>>
              >>> With the increasing workload of making sets work together, and the
              >> increased "onus" to further
              >>> support in each additional book (not to mention the back support). I
              >> would like to put forth a
              >>> radical idea which is well within precedent. The Paizo Pathfinder system
              >> has an OFFICIAL website,
              >>> maintained and run by the publisher and includes *ALL* their OGL
              >> materials in plain view. We already
              >>> have an open permission to included everything Pathfinder from them.
              >>>
              >>> So, we make a PRD set. Everything lumped in, no duplicate issues cause
              >> you are always loading
              >>> everything available. You only update items if something comes along and
              >> changes the wording.
              >>>
              >>> A Basic Loader for the entire PRD is nice, and then support requests
              >> will drop. Fixing issues
              >>> becomes simple since everything is condensed into one location. It won't
              >> be Books x, y and z any
              >>> more, but just the PRD.
              >>>
              >>> (We can still leave the separate books, cause I know people don't always
              >> embrace change) But I think
              >>> this would be a positive step forward in supporting the community.
              >> Adding in additional materials
              >>> would still go through the NFD process, and require chimp oversight. But
              >> ANYONE can submit items to
              >>> be included in this manner.
              >>>
              >>> Thoughts?
              >>>
              >>
              >>
              >> ------------------------------------
              >>
              >> 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
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >
            • Stefan Radermacher
              ... That was probably me, because I thought that would be better than to force users to use the item customizer for every scroll and wand. Stefan
              Message 6 of 20 , Aug 23, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                On 23.08.2013 11:19, Andrew wrote:
                > I looked at the core book PDF, and it appears someone just decided to add in the scrolls and wands.
                > Since the normal policy is just to place in the set what is in the book.

                That was probably me, because I thought that would be better than to
                force users to use the item customizer for every scroll and wand.

                Stefan
              • Jason D
                I think it s a fantastic idea. :) ... [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                Message 7 of 20 , Aug 23, 2013
                • 0 Attachment
                  I think it's a fantastic idea. :)





                  >________________________________
                  > From: Andrew <drew0500@...>
                  >To: pcgen@yahoogroups.com
                  >Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 4:08 PM
                  >Subject: Re: [pcgen] Why not make the "PRD"?
                  >
                  >
                  >

                  >Yes, that would be correct. It'd be like loading the "All Pathfinder Main Supplements" we have
                  >today. The big difference is we wouldn't have the dupes issues we have today.
                  >
                  >On 8/22/2013 3:13 PM, Stefan Radermacher wrote:
                  >> Am 22.08.13 23:57, schrieb Andrew:
                  >>> The Paizo Pathfinder system has an OFFICIAL website, maintained and
                  >>> run by the publisher and includes *ALL* their OGL materials in plain
                  >>> view. We already have an open permission to included everything
                  >>> Pathfinder from them.
                  >>
                  >> You idea certainly has merit. However. the statement you give here is
                  >> not exactly correct. Paizo's PRD site only lists the OGL content from
                  >> their Pathfinder RPG product line, i.e. the hardcover rulebooks. Stuff
                  >> included
                  >> in Pathfinder Player Companion line or Pathfinder Campagn Setting line
                  >> or other Golarion-specifict books is not included there. Neither are the
                  >> Gods, even though they are integrated into domains and subdomains in the
                  >> Core Rulebook and other books. Just something to consider in this regard.
                  >>
                  >>
                  >> ------------------------------------
                  >>
                  >> 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
                  >>
                  >>
                  >>
                  >>
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >

                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Jon Catron
                  Dunno if this is still an open topic of discussion, but I think it s a good idea. :) ________________________________ From: Andrew To:
                  Message 8 of 20 , Aug 24, 2013
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Dunno if this is still an open topic of discussion, but I think it's a good idea. :)



                    ________________________________
                    From: Andrew <drew0500@...>
                    To: pcgen@yahoogroups.com
                    Sent: Friday, August 23, 2013 5:19 AM
                    Subject: Re: [pcgen] Why not make the "PRD"?



                     
                    UE (Alpha) and Bestiary 3 (Alpha) it's not in the Release, they aren't ready for prime time, ergo it
                    doesn't get to count as any errors those produce will skew any real analysis and statistics. ;)

                    Yes, consolidating the files into one set would remove our errors with duplicates issues. Reduce
                    overhead, and it would decrease memory usage, contrary to the belief otherwise. Removing .MODs, and
                    duplicate items, and reusing the abilities between companions and their 'real' counterparts. It'd
                    also force a standards of file naming. I don't think we need 10 race files, 8 ability files, etc.
                    Sort by class, race and other for the abilities - after all, most of them are race related, class
                    related or a misc item - afflictions, item powers, etc.

                    I looked at the core book PDF, and it appears someone just decided to add in the scrolls and wands.
                    Since the normal policy is just to place in the set what is in the book.

                    Anyways, I'm gathering a lot of people are in the positive for this idea.

                    On 8/22/2013 3:51 PM, Matthew Thompson wrote:
                    > Honestly,
                    > We're already having load problems just loading the core books anyway. If I take 6.01.05 and load the following :
                    >
                    > Core
                    > APG
                    > ARG
                    > Bestiary
                    > Bestiary II
                    > Bestiary III (Beta)
                    > UC
                    > UM
                    > UE (Beta)
                    >
                    > The program takes several minutes to load, and after making one or two characters it starts hanging on every thing it does, taking a minute or two to add a feat, to add a class level, etc. Just adding 8 class levels on a brand new character, just loaded dataset takes about 5 minutes.
                    >
                    > The Con below is a con if you were only going to load the Core, but, if that's all you wanted, you could just load the core and be done. If we consolidated the PRD material into one file, we could eliminate duplications between files (saving some memory).
                    >
                    > One other thing to consider would be to *not* load the core wands and scrolls. Those all take up memory, and the application (as I just learned this week) can create those on the fly rather easily. By not loading them seperately, that would also save memory at the cost of making it slightly more time consuming to create a character. However, we're not currently creating those scrolls/wands in expansion books (UC, UM, ARG for example) so I think that might be ok, as it would at least be consistent, rather than having the core and APG spells having wands/scrolls and the UC/UM/ARG not.
                    >
                    > And I don't think it would be all that hard (granted, newbie here) to create a PRD file, as it would basically be copying finalized LST entries from the expansion LST files into the PRD files.
                    >
                    > Matt
                    >
                    >
                    > ________________________________
                    > From: Anestis Kozakis <kenosti@...>
                    > To: pcgen@yahoogroups.com
                    > Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2013 5:18 PM
                    > Subject: Re: [pcgen] Why not make the "PRD"?
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > It;s a good idea in theory, and I like it.
                    >
                    > Pro: You load everything.
                    >
                    > Con: Increased memory usage, processing and loading times.
                    >
                    > Anestis.
                    >
                    > On 23 August 2013 08:02, Andrew <drew0500@...> wrote:
                    >
                    >> Just to clarify:
                    >>
                    >> Each book added into the PRD would go through the normal 'single book
                    >> creation/review' process as
                    >> things stand now and when they've completed the full process from 'request
                    >> to release' we'd still
                    >> have the book set. But as long as the book is part of the Paizo's
                    >> Pathfinder PRD, then they'd be
                    >> added into the pcgen PRD data set to match.
                    >>
                    >> If it's not on the official Paizo PRD website, then it won't be included
                    >> in the PCGen PRD.
                    >>
                    >> On 8/22/2013 2:57 PM, Andrew wrote:
                    >>> Hi Folks,
                    >>>
                    >>> With the increasing workload of making sets work together, and the
                    >> increased "onus" to further
                    >>> support in each additional book (not to mention the back support). I
                    >> would like to put forth a
                    >>> radical idea which is well within precedent. The Paizo Pathfinder system
                    >> has an OFFICIAL website,
                    >>> maintained and run by the publisher and includes *ALL* their OGL
                    >> materials in plain view. We already
                    >>> have an open permission to included everything Pathfinder from them.
                    >>>
                    >>> So, we make a PRD set. Everything lumped in, no duplicate issues cause
                    >> you are always loading
                    >>> everything available. You only update items if something comes along and
                    >> changes the wording.
                    >>>
                    >>> A Basic Loader for the entire PRD is nice, and then support requests
                    >> will drop. Fixing issues
                    >>> becomes simple since everything is condensed into one location. It won't
                    >> be Books x, y and z any
                    >>> more, but just the PRD.
                    >>>
                    >>> (We can still leave the separate books, cause I know people don't always
                    >> embrace change) But I think
                    >>> this would be a positive step forward in supporting the community.
                    >> Adding in additional materials
                    >>> would still go through the NFD process, and require chimp oversight. But
                    >> ANYONE can submit items to
                    >>> be included in this manner.
                    >>>
                    >>> Thoughts?
                    >>>
                    >>
                    >>
                    >> ------------------------------------
                    >>
                    >> 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
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>
                    >>
                    >



                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.