Would a PDF plugin be possible?

[Kurgan]

I love the idea of having virtual books within the FG environment, but the "ruleset creation" process is very tedious, and doesn't allow for having all the content of the books (no artwork, for example).

Taking into consideration the popularity of OEF books (official, purchased PDFs), it seems that creating a way to "open" these electronic books within FG would be the most logical thing to do. Imagine having your books sitting there on the virtual table, and with a click you can raise one up and open it for reading! God, that would be so cool.

So, how could it be done? And would the devs for FG be willing to do it? Heck, is it possible for someone else to write it as a plugin, even if the powers-that-be weren't interested? Can you imagine how popular FG would become if this were done? You can't say this wouldn't shoot sales through the roof, that's for sure. They'd make a mint.

A secondary, duct-tape sort of idea would be to export the pages of a PDF, then import the JPGs into FG the same as you would maps. Then all we'd need is some sort of "album" to store them in, so to speak, that would allow for browsing. Not as cool or simple as opening a PDF within FG, but it'd do the job.

Please, please, please, someone tell me this can be done.

[kalmarjan]

IANAL:

I would believe that this would open up a whole slew of copyright concerns. The way FG stands right now, having these items in your ruleset transfers them to the players in your campaign.

The good news is that there are several things in the wings (Wink Wink) pending the release of FGII.

The bad news, I cannot see this happening (The plug in that is.)

Sorry to rain on your parade, but as it stands now, it looks like that is the way things are, and the decision is out of our hands.

Cheers,

Sandeman

[Kurgan]

I would believe that this would open up a whole slew of copyright concerns. The way FG stands right now, having these items in your ruleset transfers them to the players in your campaign.

No, you've missed the point completely. I'm not talking about rulesets, at all. I'm talking about being able to load a PDF into FG for viewing during a game. No different than someone bringing their books to a game, and setting them on the table for all to use during the session. That person logs-off, the books leave with him. This would only be a problem if someone intentionally created an additional feature that allowed a user to save a copy of something they're viewing. So, don't create that extra feature. Not exactly rocket science here. :)

And if all else fails, fine, just give us the ability to do it for ourselves. If I load books into the game, only I can see them on the table. Same goes for others, should they load whichever books they happen to own into their systems. That'd work, too. I find the need to do it this way overly paranoid and silly, but if someone thought it a real concern, there ya go, that'd work just fine and avoid the potential for abuse.

[tdwyer11b]

Funny, cause that's exactly how the new modules function works in FG2. Modules being books in your library.

[Yenooc]

As the title of this post says: Aauuuugghhhhh!

All this talk of what's going to be available when FGII is released is like salt in a wound! :cry:

When oh when will this torture end!?

;)

[Kurgan]

Funny, cause that's exactly how the new modules function works in FG2. Modules being books in your library.

Well, that's a fantastic idea, so long as we can use the materials we already have, and not have to do a ton of work for each and every book we'd like to put on the table. PDF stores are popular, and that's what people are buying/using. It only makes sense to include that medium. I'm not saying anyone should do away with creating "rulesets," just that, as a user, I'd like the option to be able to pop-in a book I own without having to convert it, OCR it, check it for errors, retype stuff, and/or whatever else is entailed in going that route. I can buy PDFs at lots of webstores. I can't buy pre-made rulesets anywhere, and to be honest, I wouldn't really want to if I could have the PDFs (since they're actual replications of the books, with artwork and charts, etc). If FG adds this feature, they'll have a convert for life outta me, and I imagine a lot of others gamers, too.

[LordTomar]

No, you've missed the point completely. I'm not talking about rulesets, at all. I'm talking about being able to load a PDF into FG for viewing during a game. No different than someone bringing their books to a game, and setting them on the table for all to use during the session. That person logs-off, the books leave with him.

The problem here is then the players would have to DL the PDF each time the game starts (some of those PDFs are pretty large), or at the least as soon as the DM loads the book. This would be a huge waste of time.

Personally It does not matter to me if they add this feature, I hate reading books off screen. I much prefer to have the real thing in my hands when i need to read it. So it is doubtful on if I would ever read the PDFs if the DM loaded them for me.

[kalmarjan]

Well, that's a fantastic idea, so long as we can use the materials we already have, and not have to do a ton of work for each and every book we'd like to put on the table. PDF stores are popular, and that's what people are buying/using. It only makes sense to include that medium. I'm not saying anyone should do away with creating "rulesets," just that, as a user, I'd like the option to be able to pop-in a book I own without having to convert it, OCR it, check it for errors, retype stuff, and/or whatever else is entailed in going that route. I can buy PDFs at lots of webstores. I can't buy pre-made rulesets anywhere, and to be honest, I wouldn't really want to if I could have the PDFs (since they're actual replications of the books, with artwork and charts, etc). If FG adds this feature, they'll have a convert for life outta me, and I imagine a lot of others gamers, too.

Digital Adventures has an example of a product that does just what you are asking:
Check out this link:
https://digitaladventures.net/fg_accessories.htm

We have:

Iron Heroes
Arcana Evolved
Arcana Spell Treasury

And more!

The makers of FG (Smite Works) at present do not have add ons for FG, as they require licensing from the game companies. I am not sure where any company stands from the viewpoint of WOTC products, as the sole company that had the licence to do official product (CMP) did not have their licence renewed.

Unfortunately, it is really a wait and see affair. FGII promises to be a great upgrade to the base product as it stands now, and to release a lot of product would waste developer time, as they would have to turn around and convert it to a new format.

I hope that answers some of your questions. (Unfortunately though, it may not be the answer you were looking for. :) )

Sandeman

[kalmarjan]

The problem here is then the players would have to DL the PDF each time the game starts (some of those PDFs are pretty large), or at the least as soon as the DM loads the book. This would be a huge waste of time.

Personally It does not matter to me if they add this feature, I hate reading books off screen. I much prefer to have the real thing in my hands when i need to read it. So it is doubtful on if I would ever read the PDFs if the DM loaded them for me.

Hmm. Looking at this, in FGII, the DM has more control over what gets transfered to the players. If a plug in were to occur, it could be set to read only for the DM only.

One question I have to ask everyone though, why bother with a plug in? Is there not the ability to read the book with Adobe Reader?

Sandeman

[LordTomar]

Hmm. Looking at this, in FGII, the DM has more control over what gets transfered to the players. If a plug in were to occur, it could be set to read only for the DM only.

One question I have to ask everyone though, why bother with a plug in? Is there not the ability to read the book with Adobe Reader?

Sandeman

Yeah it would be easier to read with an outside program if it was just for the DM's refrence, but I think his request was also for the ability to share the PDFs with his players also during a session.

[Kurgan]

The problem here is then the players would have to DL the PDF each time the game starts (some of those PDFs are pretty large), or at the least as soon as the DM loads the book. This would be a huge waste of time.

There are two way to look at this. One, if the books were visible to all players, then they wouldn't have to "open" (ie. temp download) them at all unless they chose to do so. Besides, most players will probably want to buy their own PDFs, anyway, to load locally, or will have the physical books already on-hand. Broadband users wouldn't have any real problem, and dial-up users (read: virtually extinct) will take other approaches.

Two, if the books were only visible to the person that loaded them, this would be a completely moot concern.

Also, consider that thumbnails could be used (just like any PDF reader has), and only the thumbnails need to be loaded until they choose a specific page they need to pull-up.



Digital Adventures has an example of a product that does just what you are asking

I don't see anything regarding PDFs inside of FG, but if you're referring to rulesets, that's OK. I personally loathe d20, but I'm glad to see something's available.



One question I have to ask everyone though, why bother with a plug in? Is there not the ability to read the book with Adobe Reader?

Sure, but the idea here is to A Enhance the FG experience by having the books "on the table" inside of the environment, and B avoid having to load a secondary program that'd eat-up more resources, and require one to minimize or shrink FG. For me, it's all about making the virtual aspect more real and functional. Remember, rulesets were a component from the get-go, so obviously I'm not the only one to desire this, I'm merely suggesting that another format be included for [almost] the same function, so that we can avoid having to create rulesets and can actually use a new PDF when we buy it, "out of the box."



Yeah it would be easier to read with an outside program if it was just for the DM's refrence, but I think his request was also for the ability to share the PDFs with his players also during a session.

It's not my primary concern, but yes, I would be very happy to see it have full functionality in that way. I'd grumble a bit, but ultimately would settle for the crippled version that only allowed the books to be visible to those that loaded them on their local systems, though.

We've got a virtual tabletop, we've got virtual dice. I'm simply rootin' for the obvious: virtual game books. :) Since OEF books are now popular, wide-spread, and easily available, it just seems a natural thing to do, even if someone felt the need to also incorporate some extra security feature so it couldn't be abused (which I still find redundant, but wouldn't complain about).

[kalmarjan]

See, we are getting into something that has been discussed before. The Devs here are very concerned about FG being a vehicle for copyright infringement. The chances of a PDF plug in that would allow the transfer of PDFs to the players (Read: not the owners) are slim to non-existent.

Just from the posts previous, I can see that people have to OCR the PDF, then rip it into a ruleset for FG. This tells me that they are violating the copyright on these PDFs, as they are distributed without OCR for a reason. (And the chances of that are slim to none. Most PDFs available for legal download are conveniently OCR'd and bookmarked ;) )

My stance on this is such: If a person really needs the information from these books inside of FG, they really have 2 choices:

1) Wait for a company to get a hold of a license, and then wait for the conversion of said material

or

2) Convert the product themselves.

It may sound harsh, but the matter is a sore one for certain people on this board. Some people, myself included, actually get paid for our hard work converting licensed product for use in FG. If the release of a plug in erased that, then I would be looking for something else to do with my time.

It would be okay if it was not for people abusing the PDF itself. Sending the PDF to your friends via the internet is not okay. (Read: illegal) It does not make it any better through FG.

Cheers,

Sandeman

[Kurgan]

Sorry, but I completely disagree with you. Using PDFs is no different than using rulesets, merely easier, so they're already doing it. The notion that they'd be afraid to streamline the process, --an existing feature--, to make it simpler for people to use, because someone might get the wrong idea... well, that's just silly.

Your idea of having to wait for an "official" release, or to do the conversions ourselves, just angers me to no end. The principle of it, I mean, not your saying it. I, and others, don't have to wait for official releases. We've already got them. The companies are pushing their official "electronic book" sales hard, and we're friggin' buying 'em. I'm not about to pay for the same book twice (or even a third time, since I like to get the real books, too), nor do I want to spend days on each book I need to convert.

Now, if something's available in XML format that I don't already have, yes, I might consider buying it, but even then it'd have to be a very good price, since none of these rulesets have the full contents of the PDFs or deadtree versions (no pics, no graphs, etc).


It may sound harsh, but the matter is a sore one for certain people on this board. Some people, myself included, actually get paid for our hard work converting licensed product for use in FG. If the release of a plug in erased that, then I would be looking for something else to do with my time.

I'd say it's a sore spot for the users, too. Why should we have to pay for something we've already bought? The companies were already selling "electronic" versions of their books before FG came along. I can't understand why they (FG) thought they needed to re-invent the wheel when that aspect of things was already established. You can't be surprised that people would want to be able to use their OEF books with the program. Even worse, if FG doesn't offer a product that meets user demand, how long before someone else does? I have no doubt that eventually someone else will simply build their own 3D virtual tabletop, and include such features. But I'm old fashioned on this sort of thing, and would prefer to see the "original" product do it, so I can support it.

[kepli]

It's not that the FG people wouldn't want to include the rulebooks, they just can't. The copyrights that exist on the rulebook (yes, the digital ones too) just won't allow it. FG is a business and if they want to stay that way, they have to abide by these rules or be sued their assess of (believe me, It happens). If you like to add the rulebooks to FG, go ahead, but you would be doing something illegal ...

Paying for something you already have ... Yeah, that may sound unfair, but remember that it takes a lot of effort to convert these rulebooks into FG. That time costs money, so you have to pay for that ... pure economics. Compare it to translating the rule into another language ;)

Just my 2 cents ;)

[kalmarjan]

Sorry, but I completely disagree with you. Using PDFs is no different than using rulesets, merely easier, so they're already doing it. The notion that they'd be afraid to streamline the process, --an existing feature--, to make it simpler for people to use, because someone might get the wrong idea... well, that's just silly.

It is not that I disagree with the idea. It is the copyright infringement that I disagree with. In the posts on this thread, it has been explicitly stated that a plug in like this would be used to "share" said PDFs with the players.

Look at it this way: I am sure that a plug in that allows you to view your PDFs locally would not be an issue. You have already paid for it, like you said. Now you want to transfer said PDFs to your friends? They haven't paid for it, have they?

You may argue that you bought the book, and when you game face to face, you can share the book with your friends. That is fine. But you are asking for this ability in an online format, which is a completely different thing.


Your idea of having to wait for an "official" release, or to do the conversions ourselves, just angers me to no end. The principle of it, I mean, not your saying it. I, and others, don't have to wait for official releases. We've already got them. The companies are pushing their official "electronic book" sales hard, and we're friggin' buying 'em. I'm not about to pay for the same book twice (or even a third time, since I like to get the real books, too), nor do I want to spend days on each book I need to convert.

It is not actually my idea. This is just the way things are. Again, playing a game with FG is a different format than the intended use of the PDFs that are released. When you buy a PDF, you are entering into an agreement with the provider that you will not distribute said PDF. It is basically the same thing as promising that you will not photocopy the PHB for distribution to your friends.

As for official addons to FG? I say that it is a great thing. Instead of all of your friends buying the PDF to play, or procuring said PDFs illegally by the DM sending it to the players VIA email, the format is converted to a usable state in FG. Now, you can have all the information from those PDFs that ARE licenced to share with your players for the low cost of 5-10$. Can you do that by purchasing PDFs? If you have 5 friends playing the game, all living in different continents - legally you would have to purchase that PDF 5 times. That's 25$.

I would say that the addons to FG are a pretty good deal. Morally and legally.



Now, if something's available in XML format that I don't already have, yes, I might consider buying it, but even then it'd have to be a very good price, since none of these rulesets have the full contents of the PDFs or deadtree versions (no pics, no graphs, etc).

If you are asking for something in XML format, chances are all you get is the information. How is that going to help you anyway? You would have to take the time to convert it via XSLT to render it into the XHTML format for FG anyways.


I'd say it's a sore spot for the users, too. Why should we have to pay for something we've already bought? The companies were already selling "electronic" versions of their books before FG came along. I can't understand why they (FG) thought they needed to re-invent the wheel when that aspect of things was already established. You can't be surprised that people would want to be able to use their OEF books with the program. Even worse, if FG doesn't offer a product that meets user demand, how long before someone else does? I have no doubt that eventually someone else will simply build their own 3D virtual tabletop, and include such features. But I'm old fashioned on this sort of thing, and would prefer to see the "original" product do it, so I can support it.

You touch on something there. The creators of FG never intended for the program to be a proprietary vehicle for one game company. FG comes with a version of the SRD upon installation. FG is meant to be a system light version of a table top.

I am not surprised that people would want to use their OEF books with the game. I am surprised at the shock people get when they sit back and declare that it is not fair that they cannot distribute their books to their players.

The same argument is made over the internet about music, movies etc. Bottom line is, it is morally wrong, in some places it is even illegal. A lot of people already do it, because it is too hard to track down every last person who does. (It is as if everyone in the shopping mall was shoplifting at the same time. LOL)

Smiteworks has already stated that FG is not to be used as a vehicle for copyright infringement. They are taking great pains to ensure that this does not happen in the future. For example, FGII now holds the ability to enable "modules" for rulesets. This means that not all the information is transfered to the players when they log in.

This in turn will make the gaming companies happy, as they can be assured that there is no infringement. That in turn will get more gaming companies on board to release licenses for their games in this format.

Now, I think the PDF viewer plug in is a great idea. As long as it is for local products only, that would be a great thing. Imagine though; you are the game company who is looking at perhaps licensing your product for use in FG. Then you discover that there is a plug in that will allow the illegal distribution of your product.

Would you proceed?

Copyright infringement hurts us all. While some may stand back and yell, "It's not fair!!!" Other sit here and grimace because we know that we are taking another step back when it comes to this issue.

Cheers,

Sandeman

[Kurgan]

It's not that the FG people wouldn't want to include the rulebooks, they just can't. The copyrights that exist on the rulebook (yes, the digital ones too) just won't allow it. FG is a business and if they want to stay that way, they have to abide by these rules or be sued their assess of (believe me, It happens). If you like to add the rulebooks to FG, go ahead, but you would be doing something illegal ...

According to that theory, anyone that makes a ruleset is breaking the law. This entire discussion is entirely about file format, nothing else. No one has suggested any changes to what's already in-place and working, only another format that would do the exact same thing, but not require additional work to "convert." (And, in my opinion, would also look nicer.)


Paying for something you already have ... Yeah, that may sound unfair, but remember that it takes a lot of effort to convert these rulebooks into FG. That time costs money, so you have to pay for that ... pure economics.

It doesn't sound unfair, it is unfair, and all that effort wouldn't be necessary at all if we could simply load a danged PDF into the thing. (And the fact that it takes "a lot of effort" to convert stuff into rulesets just illustrates both my point, and the need for the alternative.)

Marketing non-ethics 101: Create something that's hard for the end-user to do (despite a simple alternative already existing), but that you know they'll urgently desire to, then set up a secondary "industry" to do the work for them for a fee.

Honestly, the very idea just slays me. "Ok, kiddies, you can take your documents and spend ages converting them to another format, and that's just hunky dorey, or you can pay for us for the few we've done for ya, but don't you go near those nasty-bad PDFs, even though the game companies are shoving them down your throats and you've bought a bunch of 'em. Remember, God kills a puppy every time you use a PDF!"


It is not that I disagree with the idea. It is the copyright infringement that I disagree with. In the posts on this thread, it has been explicitly stated that a plug in like this would be used to "share" said PDFs with the players.

We're getting way off-track to the point of misdirection. I'm talking about using PDFs exactly the same as the current, functional format. File format is the issue, and if one format is OK and another isn't, it's definitely time to start questioning motives. A ruleset allows the material to be shared, too. There's an entire sub-forum for helping people build their own rulesets, and I'm gonna take a wild leap of faith here and guess that they're not doing it just so they can shelve 'em or play solo. And hey, that's fine. I don't believe that's copyright infringement at all, but obvious, expected Fair Use. Same goes for PDFs. It's merely another, easier format. People go to games and they have their books on the table, and other players can use them during the game, but the books go home with their owner after the session. I've never suggested in any way, shape, or form that "PDF Rulesets" be something that remains on the player's system after a session (if originating from the game server, of course). I've also said that I, and I'm sure others, would even be happy if the books were only loaded and seen locally. I'd much prefer being able to have the "books on the table" for the players to browse during the game, but it's not critical.

Bottom line, I don't want to see any changes. I only desire to see the available formats for creating rulesets expanded to include the PDF format, since that's the format the game companies are selling their OEF books in.

Oh, and beer. I want lots of beer in it, too. ;)

[LordTomar]

It doesn't sound unfair, it is unfair, and all that effort wouldn't be necessary at all if we could simply load a danged PDF into the thing. (And the fact that it takes "a lot of effort" to convert stuff into rulesets just illustrates both my point, and the need for the alternative.)

Marketing non-ethics 101: Create something that's hard for the end-user to do (despite a simple alternative already existing), but that you know they'll urgently desire to, then set up a secondary "industry" to do the work for them for a fee.

Honestly, the very idea just slays me. "Ok, kiddies, you can take your documents and spend ages converting them to another format, and that's just hunky dorey, or you can pay for us for the few we've done for ya, but don't you go near those nasty-bad PDFs, even though the game companies are shoving them down your throats and you've bought a bunch of 'em. Remember, God kills a puppy every time you use a PDF!"


The thing is your making it sound like it is required to have all of this information on screen to be able to play a game. This is not true. Sometimes it is nice to have the information right there, but it is never needed.

I have always believed that the rulesets for FG are over engineered. You do not need every single rule/chart/word from the origional document in a ruleset for FG. All that is needed (and this is debatable) is a char sheet.

When you buy a PDF, you buy it under the assumption that you can use it on a computer to be able to get the information you want/need that is inside the file. You do not buy and be guaranteed to be able to read the information in any file you want too. So you want to use the file while playing a game on FG. This is allowed, but no one ever said you would be able to plug it into FG. Would it be nice? sure. but its not the reason you paid for the product. I I can almost guarantee that the agreement when you bought it never said you could share it with someone else over a network or the internet.

Now once again would this feature be nice? Sure. But you were never told you would be able to do this when you bought either FG or the PDFs you want to use. So in other words, it IS fair.

[kalmarjan]

According to that theory, anyone that makes a ruleset is breaking the law. This entire discussion is entirely about file format, nothing else. No one has suggested any changes to what's already in-place and working, only another format that would do the exact same thing, but not require additional work to "convert." (And, in my opinion, would also look nicer.)



It doesn't sound unfair, it is unfair, and all that effort wouldn't be necessary at all if we could simply load a danged PDF into the thing. (And the fact that it takes "a lot of effort" to convert stuff into rulesets just illustrates both my point, and the need for the alternative.)

Marketing non-ethics 101: Create something that's hard for the end-user to do (despite a simple alternative already existing), but that you know they'll urgently desire to, then set up a secondary "industry" to do the work for them for a fee.

Marketing with ethics 101: Create something that applies to the above without breaking copyright conventions.


Honestly, the very idea just slays me. "Ok, kiddies, you can take your documents and spend ages converting them to another format, and that's just hunky dorey, or you can pay for us for the few we've done for ya, but don't you go near those nasty-bad PDFs, even though the game companies are shoving them down your throats and you've bought a bunch of 'em. Remember, God kills a puppy every time you use a PDF!"

THere is one thing to consider here. The company selling you the PDF is assuming that you are *not* going to convert them to another format. (That is the reason they are sold to you as a PDF. :) )If you look at your license when you buy the PDF, you will see what I am talking about.

Now, another company aquires the rights to convert that PDF into the format for FG, and that is a different story. The short answer here is about the legality of this issue. A person may think that aquiring the license to said PDF is an invitation to make tons of money. Let me correct you on that. Said companies have to pay a portion of every sale to the company they license to. (In the form of a licensing fee.)


We're getting way off-track to the point of misdirection. I'm talking about using PDFs exactly the same as the current, functional format. File format is the issue, and if one format is OK and another isn't, it's definitely time to start questioning motives. A ruleset allows the material to be shared, too. There's an entire sub-forum for helping people build their own rulesets, and I'm gonna take a wild leap of faith here and guess that they're not doing it just so they can shelve 'em or play solo. And hey, that's fine. I don't believe that's copyright infringement at all, but obvious, expected Fair Use.


We are getting off track? I do not think so. If you are speaking about using the PDF in its current format, then you are speaking about viewing the PDF on *one* computer. You are definately not speaking about the transfer of said PDFs to your friends through a vehicle like FG.

You are speaking of a known gray area with FG. It is technically constituted as fair use, to my inderstanding, if you have portions of said IP material as reference in your game. It is quite another thing to have the whole PDF available for perusal by your players, images, tables and all.

The makers of FG are trying to implement the modularity of rulesets to combat the entire transfer of information to the player's side. (Being the WHOLE ruleset.)


Same goes for PDFs. It's merely another, easier format. People go to games and they have their books on the table, and other players can use them during the game, but the books go home with their owner after the session. I've never suggested in any way, shape, or form that "PDF Rulesets" be something that remains on the player's system after a session (if originating from the game server, of course). I've also said that I, and I'm sure others, would even be happy if the books were only loaded and seen locally. I'd much prefer being able to have the "books on the table" for the players to browse during the game, but it's not critical.

There are two things already stated:

1) Playing online is different than face to face, and there is other considerations to consider. One of which is the transfer of copyrighted material.

2) The transfer of said copyright material is not allowed, even by the license of the PDF you bought.

Think of it like this: You are the person selling the PDF. You sell it in good faith to another person, who then turns around and wants to be able to "send" it to their other 6 players for perusal. Does that sound right to you? Does that sound fair?

Probably not, as you would be looking at the potential of 6 losses of sales. Why would anyone else want to purchase the PDF if all they had to do is have 1 person in their group actually own the PDF?

Can you see why it is not feasable that a gaming company would want to have a plug in like this available? If SW made something like that available, probably most gaming companies would pull their support, and we would be back to square one, with a bunch of DMs having to create their rulesets from scratch. (OCR+Cleanup+Data entry. Yum!)


Bottom line, I don't want to see any changes. I only desire to see the available formats for creating rulesets expanded to include the PDF format, since that's the format the game companies are selling their OEF books in.

Oh, and beer. I want lots of beer in it, too. ;)

Ah. Beer! I could use one right about now.

Cheers,

Sandeman

[devinnight]

Here is my understanding and opinion.
Kurgan simply wants the abilty to view a PDF in FG. For the sake of ending the discussion nothing more. To open and view a PDF inside FG without having to have another app running.
There is nothing wrong with this idea and it in no way violates any copyright laws as long as he owns the PDF. There are many applications that can view PDFs and as he pointed out many more files are being delivered this way.

Now if FG would allow this without any ability whatsoever to share the PDF ie no one but the DM can see it, it cannot be shared, it cannot be transferred in any way, not even a single page then there is nothing at all wrong with the idea. It would in fact allow many pages to be used by the DM, charts, maps, graphics without violating any copyright. In some ways a block like this is better than scanning and sharing maps and images which are copyrighted.

I think it boils down to the transfer of material, like many people who create material I'm against it. However in this case just wanting to access the information directly in FG would be a great boon to end users.

Finally that doesnt mean that companies cant make and wouldn't sell rulesets, theres a bit more usefulness to rulesets than just the base info. Linked charts and images being a few.

-D

[Oberoten]

I think one overlooked concern here is that Adobe does not really want anyone else to make a PDF reader without paying them for THEIR intellectual property.

This is a major cost for a rather minor gain. IE, getting to read your PDF books without switching program.

[devinnight]

acrobat reader is a free program, so they make no money on sales of reader, also there are additional applications that can open PDF files, so that is not a valid reason.
-D

[Oberoten]

And even so they still own the technology behind the reader.

And at the least in the past they have charged a hefty sum to let others use it in their aplications.

[devinnight]

that may be the best point, if FG had to pay to include the feature then that cost would surely be passed on to us, and may be prohibitive.
-d

[Oberoten]

Yuppz... Increased cost for the program would probably not be very welcome, especially with those who allready have to DRAG their players into using the program.

Sorry if I was being unclear at first that this was what I was aiming at.

[Ged]

pdf as such is an open format and the developer of the format (Adobe) even provides complete documentation of the format. Without any inside information on the issue, Adobe certainly has many ways it can make profit out of the "digital paper" other than reading. There are a number of pdf readers available in addition to Adobe's, such as xpdf and kpdf, for instance.

However, pdf is not a trivial format - it is rather straight forward and well documented, yes, but even the text in a pdf is not necessarily in the order it appears on the document (as far as I understand). Displaying a pdf as such might not be a huge concern, but distilling the information so that it would be "native" to FG (extracting map and images, creating links, producing continuous text) is another issue completely.

Without going into the distribution and infringement issues (assuming, thus, that the pdf was for local use only), studying whether pdfs could be utilized in FG in a more meaningful manner than just having a reader open in the backgroud is reasonable. A carefully designed FG(2) module, however, can be a lot more valuable in gameplay as the module designer can divide content in the different categories and a module can inherently contain much game information that would be just text in a pdf.

This discussion has revealed many sides of the issue and we'll definitely consider them. To the original points:


I love the idea of having virtual books within the FG environment, but the "ruleset creation" process is very tedious, and doesn't allow for having all the content of the books (no artwork, for example).
As said in this thread, reference material in FG will not be in the ruleset but in modules (though that is of course dependent on the developer of the ruleset). Modules, on the other hand, are much less work - in fact it's a matter of using the campaign manager of FG, which will have some added features to include creating static reference data in the story book.


Taking into consideration the popularity of OEF books (official, purchased PDFs), it seems that creating a way to "open" these electronic books within FG would be the most logical thing to do. Imagine having your books sitting there on the virtual table, and with a click you can raise one up and open it for reading! God, that would be so cool.
The experience of using FG is our primary concern in design. Features as such are on the requirement side and have to be there, but how they are conveyed to you is what matters (or so we like to think). Having the contents of pdfs available in FG would certainly be great - if done in a nice manner (not just spat out into the software). The points raised in this thread, and then some, and the technical issues require, as said, consideration. Let's see what can be done.

[Kurgan]

Thanks for all the feedback.

Personally, I wouldn't think it was a problem if other gamers in a session could view the PDF books during the game, --no different than anyone at a face-to-face game with everyone's books sitting on the table--, so long as it was only something they could do at the time, and there was no way to retain the info outside of FG, or even within FG if not actually connected to the live game. Still, I'll happily conceded this issue's concerns, even if I personally find it overkill and paranoid. :) I know a lot of PDF gamers. A "PDF gamer," for purposes of clarification, is someone that keeps all their game books on their laptop (or on a disc that they take with them to games and use via laptop), instead of lugging a backback full of deadtree volumes around and getting a hernia. In these instances, a book someone else at the game might wish to read would not be "on the table" for all, per se, but would require them to have the whole laptop passed over to them temporarily. So, in the spirit of that form of expected usage, having a PDF in-game that anyone could open, despite making perfect sense to me, is indeed going "too far." Weird as hell, but like I said, I'll concede this point.

I would also like to comment that FG is a tool for use on an active, connected-to-the-web computer. In other words, the worry of FG being used as a device for illegal data transmission is effectively moot, since the persons already have that capability outside of FG by default, and FG is merely using the same resources the user has to communicate. That may sound like poorly-worded legalese, but I think it a serious point to consider when fearing abuse of this nature. P2P, Bit Torrent, DCC, eMail, direct upload/download... all of this is, and always will be, at their disposal, and FG cannot allow itself to be afraid of what home users are going to do that it cannot control. If people are going to share data, be it PDF, ruleset, or whatever, they're gonna do it, and nobody can change that (I've never seen a single email client offer a disclaimer about what the person can or can't send via email to someone else --they don't live in fear of what's out of their control, nor should they). What I do consider important is simply the platform itself, and how well it can do the job it's intended to do, which may include [i]some obvious and logical sharing of info (player handouts, character sheets, maps, notes, bits-n-pieces of story fragment as needed, and so on). If a game manufacturer ever finds that abusive and infringing, please feel free to list me on the site as a responsible party, and direct these idiots my way. I'll deeply enjoy ripping them to shreds and making them cry on behalf of the FG community.

Ooh, that felt good. lol

Ok, so it boils down to this (and I think I've got a pretty nifty idea to run with, so let me know what you think):

Local usage of PDFs is pretty much a universally welcome idea.

The imagined/desired form this would take is a small, virtual copy of the book(s) sitting on the "table" that the user (who has them) can click and "raise," and browse through, perhaps clicking again on a single page to enlarge for easy reading within the FG environment. This gives the illusion of having the real books sitting there on the table, just like a real, live game session. Other users that have the books could also load them locally and have the same effect, but not anyone that didn't own them. No shared data.

Images, maps, player handouts, and things of that nature can, easily, be exported using various applications (like Adobe, Foxit Editor, etc), and shared within FG as per normal, typically as JPGs or BMPs. Most game books have this exception noted in the copyright notice, as doing so is completely expected and required to actually use the book for a game.

Rulesets are unique, in that they are a legal (if licensed) way to share portions of the rules themselves with other players that do not own the books. They are not in competition with PDFs.

"Modules" in FGII could be used side-by-side with PDFs. The PDFs represent the actual rulebooks, and the modules could contain either handouts & maps, or even keep their focus on adventures, in the traditional sense of the term. Honestly, I really dig that idea. :) (And, of course, modules could also be used for full or partial rulesets, for those that prefer them in that format.)

Anyway, all of this promotes and supports both the module/ruleset method and the purchase of officially released PDFs (OEF books). Not only would it be cool as hell, but the ability to load the PDF rulebooks into the game would greatly increase the popularity of the program, benefiting FG, as well as aid in lending more support to the method of online distribution the game companies are already supporting and active in.

Hell, I like it. :)

Edit: Danged typos!

[Kurgan]

The points raised in this thread, and then some, and the technical issues require, as said, consideration. Let's see what can be done.

I...I... I love you.

;)

Time for everyone to collectively cross their fingers!

[kepli]

You have made some good points and suggestions Kurgan :)


Just don't agree with this one ;)

I would also like to comment that FG is a tool for use on an active, connected-to-the-web computer. In other words, the worry of FG being used as a device for illegal data transmission is effectively moot, since the persons already have that capability outside of FG by default, and FG is merely using the same resources the user has to communicate. That may sound like poorly-worded legalese, but I think it a serious point to consider when fearing abuse of this nature. P2P, Bit Torrent, DCC, eMail, direct upload/download... all of this is, and always will be, at their disposal, and FG cannot allow itself to be afraid of what home users are going to do that it cannot control. If people are going to share data, be it PDF, ruleset, or whatever, they're gonna do it, and nobody can change that (I've never seen a single email client offer a disclaimer about what the person can or can't send via email to someone else --they don't live in fear of what's out of their control, nor should they).
As a business SmiteWorks cannot afford to be doing anything illegal. Allowing illegal transmissions is one of those ... That there are other ways of sharing illegal material has nothing whatesoever to do with the choices SW makes in this. If they would allow this sharing, no company would make commercial material for FG anymore. Or they would sue SW when they find out sharing within FG is possible and their commercial work has been giving away because of that ... Their is no reason whatsoever why SW would take that risk.
I have seen this kind of questions asked at Dundjinni as well. As a normal user you usually don't worry too much about copyright issues (although you should imo). As a business you definitely do ;)

[Ram Tyr]

The points raised in this thread, and then some, and the technical issues require, as said, consideration. Let's see what can be done.
I want to note that I would much rather Smiteworks spends its development time on functions that are currently unavailable or sorely in need of improvement, rather than replacing a third party application.

This is just my opinion and others may disagree, but in terms of priorities, I would rank this fairly low. I am much more enthusiastic about seeing support for one player to run multiple characters, improved dice rolling, improved combat tracker, improved map functionality, etc.

Again, it is not that I think this idea is bad so much as there are other functions I would rather see before Smiteworks turns to this one. There are many outstanding requests that have merit and prioritizing them is key.

I am looking forward to the day when FG does what everyone wants, just the way they want it done! :)

Later.

[kalmarjan]

Also, stating that something is done already, makes it alright, is not a valid argument. So you have your PDF warriors? Great. I am sure that they find playing the game just as enjoyable as those who actually paid for the product.

What I do not understand is the use of this argument to fuel the complaint that FG does not have this function built in. Am I right in thinking that you are stating that since piracy is already rampant on the internet, SW should go ahead and make this plug in?

As I said before, if a person REALLY needs to have the PDF while gaming, they can follow the 2 choices outlined above.

Adobe reader does not take that many resources, unles you are running a machine that is at the bare minimum needed to run FG.

Also, the last time I checked, it really was not possible to make an OCR of a file with Adobe Reader (You need the profession version to do that,) which also suggests to me that you are using a third party application to OCR that text. While I understand that the data entry from that stand point is very difficult, it is a neccessay evil with the application you are dealing with.

Finally, I understand that a lot of material is available OCRd from the company. I also know that a lot of material out there is available illegally. So to ask for the inclusion of a plug in to fuel that illegal activity just does not sit well with me.

I really want the Devs to work on getting FG II out, sort out the bugs and work on things like the light source/fog of war stuff before I see any sort of PDF plug in (which I would not use anyway, as I have all the books that I need in front of me. :) )

Sandeman

[Kurgan]

As a business SmiteWorks cannot afford to be doing anything illegal. Allowing illegal transmissions is one of those ...

Understood, but I was merely referring to the notion that any sort of "data transfer capability" shouldn't be looked at in terms of being a potential source of abuse, no more than, for example, a company that produces and sells a popular email client would lose any sleep over what someone might be emailing with the product. Please don't read any intent into that thought beyond the basic, casual comment. :)


Also, stating that something is done already, makes it alright, is not a valid argument.

You're right, it's not. Fortunately, I never said that. :) Not sure how you got that from my comments, but sorry for any miscommunication.


So you have your PDF warriors? Great. I am sure that they find playing the game just as enjoyable as those who actually paid for the product.

What the...??? I've said nothing about "PDF warriors," whatever that means, and at no point have I spoken of, or referenced, anyone doing anything illegal. The only comment I can think of that you may be misinterpreting was the reference to PDF gamers, that prefer to use their PDF versions over carrying the actual books. Why would you immediately (if that's what's happened) assume that people that like PDFs are all thieves? PDF sales sites are numerous, and more are popping up all the time. If people weren't buying 'em, these sites wouldn't be growing, they'd be going out of business. Honestly, I really do take offense to this assumption, and that's usually something that's pretty tough to do with me. I was a PDF fan long before the craze hit. I just loved the idea of scanning all of my books, so I could have digital copies to carry around, as well as backed-up in case anything happened to my real books. I even used to photocopy stuff (back when nobody knew what a PDF was), so I could keep the book safe, and carry the copy with me to games. I also like to have the actual books at home, and buy all of those, too. Lots of people just like me out there. Can't just off-handedly assume all of us are thieves.


What I do not understand is the use of this argument to fuel the complaint that FG does not have this function built in.

It's not a complaint. This thread represents a desire to learn how to do it, as well as being a request to implement it for those of us that would find it fun and useful. Nothing more.


Am I right in thinking that you are stating that since piracy is already rampant on the internet, SW should go ahead and make this plug in?

No, not at all. Again, I never once said or implied that, nor do I think it. C'mon, admit it. You're speed-reading my posts, aren't ya? :)

The addition of this as a feature or plugin is simply something that I, and obviously some others, would find to be cool as hell, and very useful. Maybe not everyone, but then again, those that don't prefer it don't have to worry about it, since I very much doubt anyone's thinking about removing current methods. The comment about all the nasty bad people out there in the world had nothing to do with that. I was merely noting that other programs that have the potential for abuse don't always worry about what the end-user actually does, such as the email client example. Still, this aspect is completely moot now, since SW has made their feelings perfectly clear, and I agree with them for the most part (I still think the ability to read a book that was "on the table" by the players isn't a bad thing, so long as they couldn't retain a copy, but I have already conceded this point for the concern it raises, and would be perfectly happy to see it be only a "local effect").


Also, the last time I checked, it really was not possible to make an OCR of a file with Adobe Reader (You need the profession version to do that,) which also suggests to me that you are using a third party application to OCR that text. While I understand that the data entry from that stand point is very difficult, it is a neccessay evil with the application you are dealing with.

Beats me. I've never OCR'd anything in my life. I get all my stuff from Paizo, RPGnow, and DriveThruRPG. Paizo has the best prices, by far, and DriveThruRPG has the worst (they almost want the same cost as the deadtree version for most stuff!), but they do have an awesome selection. RPGnow is my favorite, though. A little high on the prices sometimes, but they give away a ton of free books, too. Lots of game companies are giving away freebies (Wizards of the Coast has an entire page of D&D books in PDF form for free download), and several companies sell CDs that contain entire libraries of classic games fairly cheap (typically about 35 bucks).


Finally, I understand that a lot of material is available OCRd from the company. I also know that a lot of material out there is available illegally. So to ask for the inclusion of a plug in to fuel that illegal activity just does not sit well with me.

Bah, humbug. (chuckle) This is the old VCR argument all over again. Don't sell phones because some people will be telemarketers. Don't sell TVs and VCRs because some people will watch bootleg movies with them. Adobe gives Acrobat Reader away for free. Does the existence of that program "fuel" illegal activity with PDFs? Look, bottom line is this. Being able to read a PDF within FG is fun and harmless, if done right, and we've already established how it can be done "right" if the time and patience exist to make it happen. The real issue is simply who wants it, and who doesn't. Those that don't care for it, and are happy with the current methods, will naturally grouse if they believe dev time on this will cut into their own desires for different enhancements. Nature of the beast, and I can accept that.

So, consider me to simply be one of those that happen to like and desire this particular [non-threatening] feature, and who will be happy to see it considered and, hopefully, implemented in time. I'm not pushing to have it shoved to the front of the list or anything, and only ask that those who don't care for it don't begrudge the rest of us [that do like it] our respectful place in the queue. :)