Re: Add language to 3.5

Andrew Maitland

Several of the issues I've had "bug" reports over was just this exact thing. Someone loads every single Pathfinder source available, and then complain when the "rules" are wrong.

Barak is absolutely correct. PCGen is not responsible for the hundreds of published supplements that come out, change existing rules, use the same names multiple times but intend different objects from specific sources without naming them. There is a reason why KITS have a "FREE" tag, because even the publishers made mistakes in creating monsters that we had to be able to override the rules to replicate their examples. Or the fact that in order to support the more "popular" versions, I had to intentionally re-key so those duplicates would show up (Cause the community wanted to have a choice).

Anyways, I am not sure how PCGen has poor version control, or what exactly you intend to propose to fix it, since as far as I can see the files are coded to what the books say. However, the only way things improve is not criticism or dissent, but proposing viable solutions. Criticism and Dissent might not be "bad" but they are "negative" and volunteers doing a project with no compensation except the occasional "thanks" don't feel inspired to work on something when all they have is negative feedback.

As I mentioned earlier, most of us joined to add something to PCGen or to fix a problem. If you cannot code in Java, or have the time to tackle some LST or edit html, then at least offer a solution (x is y, but should be a).

As a side note, someone wanted to know how to add the languages to a race:




And you place that on the race. You can also drop that onto a template and grant the template to the race. Handy for the races that have slightly different languages based upon a campaign setting.



On 11/17/2019 6:50 AM, Barak wrote:
??I disagree with your conclusion.?? What those "issues" are from is the game system itself, not a lack of version control.

?? Haven't you noticed that the core system is "The Rules" and EVERY supplement is the breaking/changing of said rules??? There are additions as well, but the vast majority of supplemental books make changes to the existing rules (the changes running the gamut from expansion to direct contradiction) or even negate them entirely.?? The programmers cannot help that a user is expecting the rule from source A but has just loaded every supplement under the sun and caused the rule from source A to be over-ruled (pardon the pun) by the changed one from Source H.????

?? As I recall at one time there was a discussion of warning people of such things when they loaded data, but the conclusion was there were so many, even just loading a few sources that it just wouldn't be useful (I believe that "running out of memory" was another concern if someone loaded all the files and we tried to report every change to a core rule that would make).????

?? There are duplicates in the data (for the most part) because there are duplicates in the sources.?? All of the issues you are pointing out are in the sourcebooks as well, it's just not as noticeable because a human can wave aside anything that might be considered a conflict and move on.?? A computer program not so much.????


On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 2:27 PM Steven High <stevenfordhigh@...> wrote:
??There are whole swaths of file data that are duplicated, or rendered null, or in conflict with one another, &c, but all of which comprise a continuing source of error and confusion. That is poor version control.

Join to automatically receive all group messages.