Random Surfers/Hackers

[Stuart]

I closed my game early tonight (and just as a drow prisoner was about to unleash a "handgrenade" ... sigh) in order to safeguard a custom ruleset drawn from material via Digital Adventures and FUM and stuff some good friends and I have put together.

The work involved is considerable and I would hope that my players appreciate the detail and size of the ruleset ... some could care less I know :(

Please, do not randomly surf for alias' via peoples posts and various boards. It is annoying. In one instance (pm'd) I'm sure this was just idle curiosity and I hope that the person involved contacts me and we can sort out a game slot (looks like MERP only I'm afraid). However, there have been at least three other instances of people trying to log on who, by their "handles" on FUM and FG are definately NOT "newbies" and in two instances have been not-so-gently upbraided for talking about "free rulesets", "piracy" and the like.

It is most definately NOT cool to randomly connect to people's games.

[Valarian]

Is this a common problem? Is there any way to prevent occurrences?

[Griogre]

I would say it is not a common problem, but people being people there are always a few disruptive ones or someone who wants something for nothing. The easy solution is to password your game, but problems are so uncommon that almost no one does.

[richvalle]

I've not had anyone do it in a year and a half of using FG in a weekly game.

rv

[Sigurd]

I honestly think that some of it is simply people frustrated at not finding a game to play.

Evening comes and you have some time but no organized game...

Doesn't mean its not rude, of course.


Sigurd

[Wavestone]

As a player in one of the mentioned games, I agree with Stuart.. he and friends have put a lot of work into a great ruleset.. That is not free for anyone just connecting!

I agree with Stuart's decision to shut the game down rather than letting these pirates get the ruleset. Sad to hear that it is known people posting on the boards and at FUM. The newbie can be excused - the others should know better! You dont just randomly join someones game like that!

But I must say that yesterday was the first instance of "piracy" I've seen in the two years I've played FG. And I really hope that it isnt anything catching on.

[Fade]

It has to be considered very rude. Its like barging in on someones tabletop room.

If there is a password protecting facility then I guess that would cure this, or at least discourage people from attempting to gate crash. Albeit the passwords would have to passed around like love notes in the classroom via PM's.

The connecting to theive a custom ruleset is terrible. And I guess the password protected mechanism would prevent against this too.

I'm a bit wooley on whats get passed over to clients, but am I right in thinking that if a client connects to a server and 'shares' the ruleset and tokens and maps etc. Then the client machine now has those items. And if that client then DM's a game, perhaps not using the custom ruleset, but say the tokens used in the other game get shared with a whole other party of players, does this mean that the more games you play, the more game assets you pick up and subsequently pass around other players, almost virally? If this is the case, then not only the ruleset creators and the token makers are being done a disservice by the game. And they rely on the morals and honesty of the players involved to protect their custom content. Perhaps this is an issue being looked at in FG2? I don't know.

Basically it seems the only way to combat this "gate crashing" for sure, is to lock out the uninvited players with a password.

[joshuha]

As mentioned above, if this does become more common there are two ways to prevent it. You can secure your game with a password or if you are posting the IP/alias on a forum, lock the forum only to members of your campaign.

Lets hope this doesn't become the norm, especially with all the anticipated cool stuff in 2.0 that will require lots of work. Otherwise soem people looking to protect their work are going to start being really strict whenever they start a game.

[richvalle]

The ability for a client to download a full copy of a rule set was brought up VERY early in FG II's life time. Possibly before FGII was even started. This issue was realized right when rulesets started to be sold.

I'm pretty sure something is going to be in place but not 100% sure how it works. FGII does have a new... library type function where you can share, deny or force different modules/books onto clients.

rv

[joshuha]

I'm a bit wooley on whats get passed over to clients, but am I right in thinking that if a client connects to a server and 'shares' the ruleset and tokens and maps etc. Then the client machine now has those items. And if that client then DM's a game, perhaps not using the custom ruleset, but say the tokens used in the other game get shared with a whole other party of players, does this mean that the more games you play, the more game assets you pick up and subsequently pass around other players, almost virally? If this is the case, then not only the ruleset creators and the token makers are being done a disservice by the game. And they rely on the morals and honesty of the players involved to protect their custom content. Perhaps this is an issue being looked at in FG2? I don't know.


In 2.0 I beleive you can set the information in modules to be shared with players but it is all done in memory. I don't believe the information is ever saved locally to the players machine. The ruleset itself and I think tokens/images are but all of the "data" you put in modules is safe I think. I need to test this a bit more to give a final answer though.

[richvalle]

You know Stuart... it could be that people are hearing about how great your game is and want to join in.

You're becoming famous!!

:)

rv

[Stuart]

You're becoming famous!!

Sadly no, infamous, possibly.

Just to clarify and not scaremonger - the instances I mention have happened recently; in two years of using FG I can count on the fingers of one hand the number of "unexpected guests" who have logged on.

I blame myself for throwing around the alias I have via FUM and my own boards ... pretty dumb really:o

The good news is that one of last nights visitors has (I think) signed up for the MERP game I want to start next week !:)

[Engar]

Interesting. I never even realized rulesets were "exchanged" when logging into a game. Is that true? If so, how can intellectual property for FG possibly be protected?

[joshuha]

In the current version not very well. The only safeguard you really have is the majority of the people connecting to you are using client versions and would not be able to use the ruleset in a GM mode.

2.0 is changing this a bit and hopefully even more safeguards will be there in the future, like encrypted rulesets or something.

[richvalle]

This does bring up something I've been wondering about.

Right now I have bought the D20 SRD from Digital Adventures. My players did not but recived it when they connected to me and we've been playing for 1 and a half years like this.

Now that 2.0 is coming out what happens? Do they have to buy the SRD version? Or, can I use it on my system but they don't have access to it? If so, how is rule sets going to work as mine will be built with the d20 srd but they won't really be getting that rule set.

rv

[sloejack]

Now that 2.0 is coming out what happens? Do they have to buy the SRD version? Or, can I use it on my system but they don't have access to it? If so, how is rule sets going to work as mine will be built with the d20 srd but they won't really be getting that rule set.
That depends on how DA handles upgrading the SRD. If they publish it as a ruleset again, it will behave the same way. If instead they modify it to be d20 modules that add on to the default d20 ruleset that comes with FG2, then each player would need to purchase the product to have access to it.

Now to put that into perspective of potential developers of content like this, I have no problem with each player needing to purchase it to have access to the material, its inexpensive and certainly worth it if you use it. On the flip side, kind developers could probably construct a player-only module that the purchaser could be given license to distribute to players and it's contents would be a subset of the total package focused on what a player needs to participate in a game that uses those rules

[Ged]

From an rather old post concerning Fantasy Grounds II:


Rulesets will be cached so that they are not playable without a GM who has the ruleset. Therefore they do not spread anymore by just connecting to a host.

Modules will be by default only for the GM and the fact that reference information can be included in modules does not change that. "By default" implies there are other possibilities too: in fact the modules of v2 may include host data, shared data and client data. Host data is only for the GM, the GM can allow the players to receive shared data, and client data is contained in modules clients have and the players may request for the GM to allow enabling them (the GM can naturally access his/her own client data).

The shared data are also cached and do not become available for the players outside the game session.

[kalmarjan]

From an rather old post concerning Fantasy Grounds II:

Ged,

This is fine when you are speaking of "data" (I believe that you mean text in this case), but when you are speaking about IP, you are also speaking about the graphics component to the rulesets.

While it takes a while to input in all the data from a ruleset, basically you are just looking at XHTML snippets. It is a completely different story when you are speaking of Tokens/Ruleset graphics.

I currently see that there is the framework inside FGII to combat the transfer of data, but I am seeing nothing preventing the transfer of graphics to the client side.

Am I incorrect in this? I worry, because potential RPG companies may not view the free transfer of thier IP in a good light.

As for people hopping up on the game in prgress, I agree it is a major faux pas. There is a button for kicking an offending connector if you right click the portrait when they log in, but unfortunately this happens AFTER said transaction has been completed.

Stu, the best bet is to create a section to your boards with the IP information, and mask it so only members of certain groups can obtain that IP information. Email me if you ar eunsure how to go about this.

Sandeman