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

Re: [pcgen] [Frank] [Chuck] Re: Output - XML

Expand Messages
  • Keith Ratliff
    OK I reviewed it and I m up for it. See, I wasn t too sure about being up for it until I saw that I d get in good with Phylacteries United. I mean, who
    Message 1 of 23 , Sep 8, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      OK I reviewed it and I'm up for it.

      See, I wasn't too sure about being up for it until I saw that I'd get in
      good with Phylacteries United. I mean, who wouldn't want to disembody their
      soul and store it in a jar?

      --- Why am I seeing so many hands held up?

      --- Imps.

      Now question... As I understand it, PCGen and E-Tools are at their base
      level done by the same folks yes? Is there an issue with creating the XML in
      the same format as the E-Tools XML? Ideally, if this could be done, it would
      allow all the E-Tools sheets that currently exist to be used with PCGen as
      well.

      --Keith

      On 9/8/06, karianna03 <martijnverburg@...> wrote:
      >
      > Ah, well that's the easy part :-), first of all I highlight this to
      > the Content Silverback (Frank) and his Output Sheet 2nd (Chuck) and
      > they'll tell you exactly how to proceed. In the mean time you might
      > want to investigate:
      >
      >
      > http://www.legolas.org/pcgen/pytw/#Welcome
      >
      > Check out "Teams", "The Team", "Content" and "OS" sections. Should
      > give you an idea of what you'd be getting into.
      >
      > Since you're keen to work on your own sheet, we'd happily have you
      > working on that but we'd also hope that you could fix the occasional
      > bug / implement the occasinoal feature in Output sheet land :-)
      >
      > You of course get full medical (the doctors are monkeys however), free
      > bananas, an adoring community (yeah OK I might be starting to stretch
      > it here) and a brand new room in the "Soul Jar" (Tm).
      >
      >
      > Karianna
      > Chair Monkey
      >
      > --- In pcgen@yahoogroups.com <pcgen%40yahoogroups.com>, "Keith Ratliff"
      > <dracorat@...> wrote:
      > >
      > > Lol. What does joining the team entail?
      > >
      > > On 9/8/06, karianna03 <martijnverburg@...> wrote:
      > > >
      > > > Well those of you who have known me on the boards over the years
      > have
      > > > probably noticed that I'm a little over zealous in getting in new
      > > > volunteers, but it really is a great team to work in, honest!
      > > >
      > > > Karianna
      > > > <carefully hiding the 'whip of volunteer persuasion'>
      > > >
      > > >
      > > > --- In pcgen@yahoogroups.com <pcgen%40yahoogroups.com><pcgen%40yahoogroup
      > s.com>, Darin McBride
      >
      > > > <dmcbride@> wrote:
      > > > >
      > > > > On Friday 08 September 2006 03:52, karianna03 wrote:
      > > > > > Keith,
      > > > > >
      > > > > > Would you like to join our team? We'd love to have another Output
      > > > > > Sheet monkey on board. Naturally if you became a team member we'd
      > > > > > have to accept your new sheet ;p
      > > > >
      > > > > "Sneaky" doesn't even begin to cover this. "Subtle" doesn't even
      > > > try to cover
      > > > > it. ;-)
      > > > >
      > > > > (The more OS's we can choose from, the better! :->)
      > > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >
      > >
      > >
      > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > >
      >
      >
      >


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Andrew Wilson
      ... Not accurate I m afraid. CMP are the current maintainers of ETools. They also produce PCGen data sets. They are a commercial organisation set up by some
      Message 2 of 23 , Sep 8, 2006
      • 0 Attachment
        On Fri, Sep 08, 2006 at 09:18:59AM -0700, Keith Ratliff wrote:
        > Now question... As I understand it, PCGen and E-Tools are at their base
        > level done by the same folks yes? Is there an issue with creating the XML in
        > the same format as the E-Tools XML? Ideally, if this could be done, it would
        > allow all the E-Tools sheets that currently exist to be used with PCGen as
        > well.

        Not accurate I'm afraid. CMP are the current maintainers of ETools.
        They also produce PCGen data sets. They are a commercial organisation
        set up by some people who were very important in settig up the PCGen
        project, but these days they spend most of their time concentrating on
        the CMP end of things. Most of the code work on PCGen is done by
        volunteers (at least one of whom is connected to CMP, but mostly not).

        I suspect that the ETools optput format is copyright to Wotc. If anyone
        ahd permission to have PCGen produce the same output it would be CMP. I
        doubt that they have the time to tackly a project of that scale.

        To be honest I don't think this will ever happen.

        andrew
        --
        Gemini: (May 21 - June 21)
        The entire Southern region of the U.S. will fall in love with
        you overnight when you accidentally win three consecutive
        stock-car races.
      • karianna03
        Hi all, ... -I suspect that the ETools optput format is copyright to Wotc. If -anyone had permission to have PCGen produce the same output it would -be CMP.
        Message 3 of 23 , Sep 8, 2006
        • 0 Attachment
          Hi all,

          >> Now question... As I understand it, PCGen and E-Tools are at their
          >> base level done by the same folks yes? Is there an issue with
          >> creating the XML in the same format as the E-Tools XML? Ideally, if
          >> this could be done, it would allow all the E-Tools sheets that
          >> currently exist to be used with PCGen as well.
          >
          > Not accurate I'm afraid. CMP are the current maintainers of ETools.
          > They also produce PCGen data sets. They are a commercial
          > organisation set up by some people who were very important in
          > setting up the PCGen project, but these days they spend most of
          > their time concentrating on the CMP end of things. Most of the code
          > work on PCGen is done by volunteers (at least one of whom is
          > connected to CMP, but mostly not).

          -I suspect that the ETools optput format is copyright to Wotc. If
          -anyone had permission to have PCGen produce the same output it would
          -be CMP. I doubt that they have the time to tackle a project of that
          -scale.

          -To be honest I don't think this will ever happen.

          I'm not too sure on this, in theory we'd need to gain permssion from
          CMP and WoTC (I think), we could get the Pauls to check, it maybe
          relatively easy to get permission

          K
        • Paul W. King
          ... I m fairly certain this is true, but I ll ask. Paul W. King PR SB, BoD
          Message 4 of 23 , Sep 8, 2006
          • 0 Attachment
            > -I suspect that the ETools optput format is copyright to Wotc.

            I'm fairly certain this is true, but I'll ask.

            Paul W. King
            PR SB, BoD
          • Paul W. King
            ... When you say format, are you talking just sheet layout, or the desire to use the same variables as well? Paul W. King PR SB, BoD
            Message 5 of 23 , Sep 8, 2006
            • 0 Attachment
              > Is there an issue with creating the XML in the same format as the
              > E-Tools XML? Ideally, if this could be done, it would allow all the
              > E-Tools sheets that currently exist to be used with PCGen as well.

              When you say format, are you talking just sheet layout, or the desire
              to use the same variables as well?

              Paul W. King
              PR SB, BoD
            • Keith Ratliff
              The XML format itself. My sheet has its own layout. Indeed I coded it 100% from scratch in notepad. That s just my style. But when I coded it, I used output
              Message 6 of 23 , Sep 8, 2006
              • 0 Attachment
                The XML format itself.

                My sheet has its own layout. Indeed I coded it 100% from scratch in notepad.
                That's just my style.

                But when I coded it, I used output XML files from E-Tools to map out the
                sections of it. For example:

                Evaluating a Will Save:
                <xsl:value-of
                select="sum(saving-throws/saving-throw[name='Will']/modifiers/modifier[@name='feature'
                or @name='user']/@value)" />

                The source document has an XML Snippet:
                <saving-throws>
                <saving-throw>
                <name>Fortitude</name>
                <abbr>Fort</abbr>
                <ability>Con</ability>
                <modifiers>
                <modifier name="base" value="9"/>
                <modifier name="ability" value="2"/>
                <modifier name="magic" value="0"/>
                <modifier name="feat" value="0"/>
                <modifier name="race" value="0"/>
                <modifier name="familar" value="0"/>
                <modifier name="feature" value="0"/>
                <modifier name="user" value="0"/>
                <modifier name="misc" value="0"/>
                </modifiers>
                </saving-throw>
                <saving-throw>
                <name>Reflex</name>
                <abbr>Ref</abbr>
                <ability>Dex</ability>
                <modifiers>
                <modifier name="base" value="5"/>
                <modifier name="ability" value="0"/>
                <modifier name="magic" value="0"/>
                <modifier name="feat" value="0"/>
                <modifier name="race" value="0"/>
                <modifier name="familar" value="0"/>
                <modifier name="feature" value="0"/>
                <modifier name="user" value="0"/>
                <modifier name="misc" value="0"/>
                </modifiers>
                </saving-throw>
                <saving-throw>
                <name>Will</name>
                <abbr>Will</abbr>
                <ability>Wis</ability>
                <modifiers>
                <modifier name="base" value="9"/>
                <modifier name="ability" value="6"/>
                <modifier name="magic" value="0"/>
                <modifier name="feat" value="0"/>
                <modifier name="race" value="0"/>
                <modifier name="familar" value="0"/>
                <modifier name="feature" value="0"/>
                <modifier name="user" value="0"/>
                <modifier name="misc" value="0"/>
                </modifiers>
                </saving-throw>
                </saving-throws>

                I would like to be able to recreate all of the base XML Document as an
                output style from PCGen. Just the XML. No other code, no other features.

                All other features of my sheet are 100% mine, implemented fully 100% by me,
                on my own time, with my own style, constructs, methods, etc. I was very
                careful not to even look at other sheets because I wanted my sheet to have a
                fresh look and feel, not a recreation of the same ol' same ol'. (Although
                how the sheet looks to the end user does have some basis in sticking with
                sheet layout standards)

                The question here is in structure of the XML. While XML itself isn't
                copyrighted by anyone, save conventions are (c) the W3C organization, the
                actual DSD (Document Style Definition) may be (c) E-Tools. I checked the
                license agreement for E-Tools already and it doesn't list the XML in any
                part, but it would be better to check with them I think than to just assume.

                --Keith


                On 9/8/06, Paul W. King <paulking.rhochi@...> wrote:
                >
                > > Is there an issue with creating the XML in the same format as the
                > > E-Tools XML? Ideally, if this could be done, it would allow all the
                > > E-Tools sheets that currently exist to be used with PCGen as well.
                >
                > When you say format, are you talking just sheet layout, or the desire
                > to use the same variables as well?
                >
                > Paul W. King
                > PR SB, BoD
                >
                >
                >


                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • Edwin Holley
                ... I would suggest taking a look at the PCGen output sheet stuff, and making even brand spanking unique er character sheets :-). And ... putting
                Message 7 of 23 , Sep 8, 2006
                • 0 Attachment
                  <SNIP>
                  > The question here is in structure of the XML. While XML itself isn't
                  > copyrighted by anyone, save conventions are (c) the W3C organization, the
                  > actual DSD (Document Style Definition) may be (c) E-Tools. I checked the
                  > license agreement for E-Tools already and it doesn't list the XML in any
                  > part, but it would be better to check with them I think than to just assume.
                  >
                  > --Keith
                  >
                  >
                  > On 9/8/06, Paul W. King <paulking.rhochi@...> wrote:
                  >
                  >> > Is there an issue with creating the XML in the same format as the
                  >>
                  >>> E-Tools XML? Ideally, if this could be done, it would allow all the
                  >>> E-Tools sheets that currently exist to be used with PCGen as well.
                  >>>
                  >> When you say format, are you talking just sheet layout, or the desire
                  >> to use the same variables as well?
                  >>
                  >> Paul W. King
                  >> PR SB, BoD
                  >>
                  I would suggest taking a look at the PCGen output sheet stuff, and
                  making even "brand spanking unique" er character sheets :-). And ...
                  putting them in the files section on the group. Who dosn't love new
                  character sheets, especially unique ones (even better if they have
                  pretty graphics, to impress the non-PCGen enabled (poor folks)).
                • Keith Ratliff
                  Well, at issue here is that I have my own version of a character sheet. Here is how version 1 looked and I am working now on version 2 with even more features:
                  Message 8 of 23 , Sep 8, 2006
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Well, at issue here is that I have my own version of a character sheet.

                    Here is how version 1 looked and I am working now on version 2 with even
                    more features:

                    http://keithratliff.com/sheet/rat_v1.gif

                    Now, if I can't duplicate the ETools XML output structure (IE, they say
                    "no") then I'll use the base.xml instead and make version 2 be PCGen only.

                    But as a character sheet designer, it would be ideal to be able to include
                    as many users as possible, and that means continuing to include the ETools
                    people. The best way I see to do that is to take the time (which I am
                    willing to do) to make a basic implementation of the same XML for PCGen.

                    If we get a "yes thats OK" response, that is exactly what I intend to do.

                    Truthfully, I already started, but if the no response comes through Ill
                    abandon it and go back to the sheet directly.

                    But I know that if the answer is PCGen only, then I will have a lot of
                    disappointed "customers" of my sheet who have been loyal supporters all
                    along. And while I technically owe them nothing (since its always been free)
                    I still feel bad about excluding them going forward.

                    --Keith

                    On 9/8/06, Edwin Holley <eholley@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > <SNIP>
                    >
                    > > The question here is in structure of the XML. While XML itself isn't
                    > > copyrighted by anyone, save conventions are (c) the W3C organization,
                    > the
                    > > actual DSD (Document Style Definition) may be (c) E-Tools. I checked the
                    > > license agreement for E-Tools already and it doesn't list the XML in any
                    > > part, but it would be better to check with them I think than to just
                    > assume.
                    > >
                    > > --Keith
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > On 9/8/06, Paul W. King <paulking.rhochi@...<paulking.rhochi%40verizon.net>>
                    > wrote:
                    > >
                    > >> > Is there an issue with creating the XML in the same format as the
                    > >>
                    > >>> E-Tools XML? Ideally, if this could be done, it would allow all the
                    > >>> E-Tools sheets that currently exist to be used with PCGen as well.
                    > >>>
                    > >> When you say format, are you talking just sheet layout, or the desire
                    > >> to use the same variables as well?
                    > >>
                    > >> Paul W. King
                    > >> PR SB, BoD
                    > >>
                    > I would suggest taking a look at the PCGen output sheet stuff, and
                    > making even "brand spanking unique" er character sheets :-). And ...
                    > putting them in the files section on the group. Who dosn't love new
                    > character sheets, especially unique ones (even better if they have
                    > pretty graphics, to impress the non-PCGen enabled (poor folks)).
                    >
                    >
                    >


                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  • Chuck Pint
                    ... only. ... include ... ETools ... to do. ... been free) ... Correct me if I m wrong, but you use a XML output from eTools, and then feed that to a xslt form
                    Message 9 of 23 , Sep 8, 2006
                    • 0 Attachment
                      --- In pcgen@yahoogroups.com, "Keith Ratliff" <dracorat@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > Well, at issue here is that I have my own version of a character sheet.
                      >
                      > Here is how version 1 looked and I am working now on version 2 with even
                      > more features:
                      >
                      > http://keithratliff.com/sheet/rat_v1.gif
                      >
                      > Now, if I can't duplicate the ETools XML output structure (IE, they say
                      > "no") then I'll use the base.xml instead and make version 2 be PCGen
                      only.
                      >
                      > But as a character sheet designer, it would be ideal to be able to
                      include
                      > as many users as possible, and that means continuing to include the
                      ETools
                      > people. The best way I see to do that is to take the time (which I am
                      > willing to do) to make a basic implementation of the same XML for PCGen.
                      >
                      > If we get a "yes thats OK" response, that is exactly what I intend
                      to do.
                      >
                      > Truthfully, I already started, but if the no response comes through Ill
                      > abandon it and go back to the sheet directly.
                      >
                      > But I know that if the answer is PCGen only, then I will have a lot of
                      > disappointed "customers" of my sheet who have been loyal supporters all
                      > along. And while I technically owe them nothing (since its always
                      been free)
                      > I still feel bad about excluding them going forward.
                      >
                      > --Keith

                      Correct me if I'm wrong, but you use a XML output from eTools, and
                      then feed that to a xslt form to get the Output Sheet? If that's the
                      case, you should only have to rewrite base.xml on the PCGen side in
                      order to feed that into your xslt form. While it would be tedious, it
                      should be entirely possible to do (note that base.xml is a fairly big
                      file). Also, if that's all you do, then I don't see why you would need
                      anyone's permission. Note that under LGPL license PCGen is written
                      under, if you want to distribute your Output Sheet, you simply have to
                      offer it back to the project.

                      If I missed something, or have the wrong assumtions, I'm sure someone
                      will let me know...

                      Chuck
                      OS Chimp
                    • frank_kliewe
                      ... in ... their ... [snip] ... Hi Keith, I ve sent you a PM about joining the team. Please check your inbox. :) Cheerio, Frank Kliewe PCGen Content Silverback
                      Message 10 of 23 , Sep 8, 2006
                      • 0 Attachment
                        --- In pcgen@yahoogroups.com, "Keith Ratliff" <dracorat@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > OK I reviewed it and I'm up for it.
                        >
                        > See, I wasn't too sure about being up for it until I saw that I'd get
                        in
                        > good with Phylacteries United. I mean, who wouldn't want to disembody
                        their
                        > soul and store it in a jar?
                        >
                        > --- Why am I seeing so many hands held up?
                        >
                        > --- Imps.
                        >
                        [snip]
                        >
                        > --Keith
                        >

                        Hi Keith,

                        I've sent you a PM about joining the team. Please check your inbox. :)

                        Cheerio,

                        Frank Kliewe
                        PCGen Content Silverback

                        --
                        I don't think you understand. I didn't come to rescue Rambo from you. I
                        came here to rescue you from him.
                        (Col. Trautman in "First Blood", 1982)
                      • Keith Ratliff
                        ... permission. That pretty much is all I am asking for. The only reason I might need permission is that I am copying a structure created by a company. Thus,
                        Message 11 of 23 , Sep 8, 2006
                        • 0 Attachment
                          > Also, if that's all you do, then I don't see why you would need anyone's
                          permission.

                          That pretty much is all I am asking for. The only reason I might need
                          permission is that I am copying a structure created by a company. Thus, it
                          might end up having been caught under some copyright clause somewhere. But I
                          do see it as minor since the structure isn't anything special or anything
                          with intellectual works in it.

                          I do have an email for a CMP person from when I used to be active on their
                          forums. I don't usually contact people directly but this might be cause to
                          do so.

                          Regardless, thanks for all the input folks. =) I gots me a sheet to
                          programme!

                          --Keith

                          On 9/8/06, Chuck Pint <pcgen2006@...> wrote:
                          >
                          > --- In pcgen@yahoogroups.com <pcgen%40yahoogroups.com>, "Keith Ratliff"
                          > <dracorat@...> wrote:
                          > >
                          > > Well, at issue here is that I have my own version of a character sheet.
                          > >
                          > > Here is how version 1 looked and I am working now on version 2 with even
                          > > more features:
                          > >
                          > > http://keithratliff.com/sheet/rat_v1.gif
                          > >
                          > > Now, if I can't duplicate the ETools XML output structure (IE, they say
                          > > "no") then I'll use the base.xml instead and make version 2 be PCGen
                          > only.
                          > >
                          > > But as a character sheet designer, it would be ideal to be able to
                          > include
                          > > as many users as possible, and that means continuing to include the
                          > ETools
                          > > people. The best way I see to do that is to take the time (which I am
                          > > willing to do) to make a basic implementation of the same XML for PCGen.
                          > >
                          > > If we get a "yes thats OK" response, that is exactly what I intend
                          > to do.
                          > >
                          > > Truthfully, I already started, but if the no response comes through Ill
                          > > abandon it and go back to the sheet directly.
                          > >
                          > > But I know that if the answer is PCGen only, then I will have a lot of
                          > > disappointed "customers" of my sheet who have been loyal supporters all
                          > > along. And while I technically owe them nothing (since its always
                          > been free)
                          > > I still feel bad about excluding them going forward.
                          > >
                          > > --Keith
                          >
                          > Correct me if I'm wrong, but you use a XML output from eTools, and
                          > then feed that to a xslt form to get the Output Sheet? If that's the
                          > case, you should only have to rewrite base.xml on the PCGen side in
                          > order to feed that into your xslt form. While it would be tedious, it
                          > should be entirely possible to do (note that base.xml is a fairly big
                          > file). Also, if that's all you do, then I don't see why you would need
                          > anyone's permission. Note that under LGPL license PCGen is written
                          > under, if you want to distribute your Output Sheet, you simply have to
                          > offer it back to the project.
                          >
                          > If I missed something, or have the wrong assumtions, I'm sure someone
                          > will let me know...
                          >
                          > Chuck
                          > OS Chimp
                          >
                          >
                          >


                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • David M. Bebber
                          On Fri, 08 Sep 2006 17:09:20 -0500, Keith Ratliff ... I have a few questions about your sheet.... 1. The sample character is wearing
                          Message 12 of 23 , Sep 10, 2006
                          • 0 Attachment
                            On Fri, 08 Sep 2006 17:09:20 -0500, Keith Ratliff <dracorat@...>
                            wrote:

                            > Well, at issue here is that I have my own version of a character sheet.
                            >
                            > Here is how version 1 looked and I am working now on version 2 with even
                            > more features:
                            >
                            > http://keithratliff.com/sheet/rat_v1.gif
                            >
                            I have a few questions about your sheet....

                            1. The sample character is wearing Bracers of Armor +8 (Armor Bonus), and
                            a Ring of Protection (Deflection Bonus) but his Armor Bonus is a 0 in the
                            AC section... it's all lumped into the Misc. modifier box.

                            2. The sample character is a High Elf (Favored Class Wizard) Fighter 3 /
                            Cleric 6 / Wizard 5. The Wizard levels don't matter, however the 2 level
                            difference in Fighter / Cleric should give a 10% XP penalty... your sheet
                            shows a 20% XP penalty.

                            Nice sheet though... and welcome to the Jar.
                            --
                            Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
                          • Keith Ratliff
                            Thanks! And both the errors you report were errors at the time in ETools. =) But good catch. There are few other errors on that screenshot too. I had people
                            Message 13 of 23 , Sep 10, 2006
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Thanks!

                              And both the errors you report were errors at the time in ETools. =)
                              But good catch. There are few other errors on that screenshot too. I
                              had people report them in the past, but I don't recall what they are
                              off the top of my head.

                              It is after all, a sample to show off what the sheet is, not what the
                              character is. =P

                              (Although one could argue that accuracy might be compromised. But I
                              made sure that my sheet is accurate in reporting, which it is, but the
                              source application has to be accurate in outputting, which I find PC
                              Gen to be. =] )

                              On 9/10/06, David M. Bebber <bebberd@...> wrote:
                              > On Fri, 08 Sep 2006 17:09:20 -0500, Keith Ratliff <dracorat@...>
                              > wrote:
                              >
                              > > Well, at issue here is that I have my own version of a character sheet.
                              > >
                              > > Here is how version 1 looked and I am working now on version 2 with even
                              > > more features:
                              > >
                              > > http://keithratliff.com/sheet/rat_v1.gif
                              > >
                              > I have a few questions about your sheet....
                              >
                              > 1. The sample character is wearing Bracers of Armor +8 (Armor Bonus), and
                              > a Ring of Protection (Deflection Bonus) but his Armor Bonus is a 0 in the
                              > AC section... it's all lumped into the Misc. modifier box.
                              >
                              > 2. The sample character is a High Elf (Favored Class Wizard) Fighter 3 /
                              > Cleric 6 / Wizard 5. The Wizard levels don't matter, however the 2 level
                              > difference in Fighter / Cleric should give a 10% XP penalty... your sheet
                              > shows a 20% XP penalty.
                              >
                              > Nice sheet though... and welcome to the Jar.
                              > --
                              > Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
                              >
                              >
                              > PCGen's release site: http://pcgen.sourceforge.net
                              > PCGen's Wiki: http://www.legolas.org/pcgen/pytw/#Welcome
                              > PCGen's alpha build: http://pcgen.sourceforge.net/07_autobuilds.php
                              > PCGen's Online Docs: http://www.legolas.org/pcgen/docs/
                              > Yahoo! Groups Links
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                            • Keith Ratliff
                              Whoops! Follow up... PHB Page 60 - it is 20% per class, not 10 % so that part is right. As for the bracers, I totally agree their AC should have shown in the
                              Message 14 of 23 , Sep 10, 2006
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Whoops! Follow up...

                                PHB Page 60 - it is 20% per class, not 10 % so that part is right.

                                As for the bracers, I totally agree their AC should have shown in the Armor box.

                                --Keith

                                On 9/10/06, Keith Ratliff <dracorat@...> wrote:
                                > Thanks!
                                >
                                > And both the errors you report were errors at the time in ETools. =)
                                > But good catch. There are few other errors on that screenshot too. I
                                > had people report them in the past, but I don't recall what they are
                                > off the top of my head.
                                >
                                > It is after all, a sample to show off what the sheet is, not what the
                                > character is. =P
                                >
                                > (Although one could argue that accuracy might be compromised. But I
                                > made sure that my sheet is accurate in reporting, which it is, but the
                                > source application has to be accurate in outputting, which I find PC
                                > Gen to be. =] )
                                >
                                > On 9/10/06, David M. Bebber <bebberd@...> wrote:
                                > > On Fri, 08 Sep 2006 17:09:20 -0500, Keith Ratliff <dracorat@...>
                                > > wrote:
                                > >
                                > > > Well, at issue here is that I have my own version of a character sheet.
                                > > >
                                > > > Here is how version 1 looked and I am working now on version 2 with even
                                > > > more features:
                                > > >
                                > > > http://keithratliff.com/sheet/rat_v1.gif
                                > > >
                                > > I have a few questions about your sheet....
                                > >
                                > > 1. The sample character is wearing Bracers of Armor +8 (Armor Bonus), and
                                > > a Ring of Protection (Deflection Bonus) but his Armor Bonus is a 0 in the
                                > > AC section... it's all lumped into the Misc. modifier box.
                                > >
                                > > 2. The sample character is a High Elf (Favored Class Wizard) Fighter 3 /
                                > > Cleric 6 / Wizard 5. The Wizard levels don't matter, however the 2 level
                                > > difference in Fighter / Cleric should give a 10% XP penalty... your sheet
                                > > shows a 20% XP penalty.
                                > >
                                > > Nice sheet though... and welcome to the Jar.
                                > > --
                                > > Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
                                > >
                                > >
                                > > PCGen's release site: http://pcgen.sourceforge.net
                                > > PCGen's Wiki: http://www.legolas.org/pcgen/pytw/#Welcome
                                > > PCGen's alpha build: http://pcgen.sourceforge.net/07_autobuilds.php
                                > > PCGen's Online Docs: http://www.legolas.org/pcgen/docs/
                                > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                >
                              • David M. Bebber
                                On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 15:10:23 -0500, Keith Ratliff ... Doh, ya caught me on that one... my group RELIGIOUSLY avoids the XP penalty, so I
                                Message 15 of 23 , Sep 10, 2006
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  On Sun, 10 Sep 2006 15:10:23 -0500, Keith Ratliff <dracorat@...>
                                  wrote:

                                  > Whoops! Follow up...
                                  >
                                  > PHB Page 60 - it is 20% per class, not 10 % so that part is right.
                                  >
                                  > As for the bracers, I totally agree their AC should have shown in the
                                  > Armor box.
                                  >
                                  > --Keith
                                  >

                                  Doh, ya caught me on that one... my group RELIGIOUSLY avoids the XP
                                  penalty, so I plead Nolo Contendre.
                                  ;)

                                  --
                                  Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
                                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.