Re: [pcgen] move on, nothing to see here
- bblackmoor wrote:
>Steve Gilroy <sgilroy2@w...> wrote:Well, there is still the issue that 95% of the D20 material out there is
>There is a phrase which comes to mind here: "the best darned buggy
>whip in the automobile industry".
>Look, PCGen *3.0* is completely adequate for D&D 3.0. That's what I
>was using myself until quite recently. If people like my quite-recent
>self don't want to upgrade, they make their choice and they get what
>For the *present*, I think it's a tremendous waste to divert limited
>development resources to an obsolete system. They aren't *my*
>resources, so obviously I don't get to choose, but I do protest the
>misguided objections from some quarters that it's the right and proper
>thing to do... for all that my protest may matter, which isn't much on
>the best of days. :)
>That being said, the people who actually volunteer their time to *do*
>the work will volunteer it where they like, which is as it should be.
>Enough grumbling. If you have a complaint about the LST files you paid
>for, you should take it up with the people you gave your money.
made for 3.0, *not* 3.5 - and many people want us to add support for
those books - granted, some are using those D20 books in 3.5 campaigns
(like me) but 3.0 needs to keep working for those books to be correctly
- It basically depends on how they were written by the publisher.
I would imagine any new sources publishers produce will be geared towards
3.5 and that's how they'll be coded for PCGen.
Older stuff was obviously created for 3.0 rules and so will be coded that
I would presume if OGL publishers put out conversion documents, we'd have a
set for each ruleset. :p
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jay - Firesbane [mailto:firesbane2@...]
> Thank you for chiming in.
> I have a related question regarding outside sources. Are the
> bulk of them
> written to work with 3.0 or 3.5, or does it not matter.
> > Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2004 20:25:53 -0500
> > From: "Barak" <barak@...>
> >Subject: RE: Re: move on, nothing to see here
> >The upshot is that *both* are going to be supported to the
> best of our
> >ability. We will *not* forsake one for the other.
> >~ PCGen BoD
> >~ OS Silverback