Ruleset updates for older rulesets - for community developers (commission work)

[ddavison]

Since acquiring a number of older rulesets from Digital Adventures in our acquisition, it has become apparent that these are starting to fall far behind our newer rulesets in functionality. If you are interesting in porting over functionality from BRP or 4E into an older product, here is your chance to do so and have it shared with the community while receiving a commission.

Commission Structure:

• Decided on a case-by-case basis after receiving a list of planned updates. This can range up to 15% like our standard updates.
• Commissions will be limited to a 6-month window so that we don't end up in the same situation 6-months or a year later. You will be expected to do minor updates within this period in order to extend your commission period. If you disappear or fail to keep it up to current, a new developer may be tapped for future maintenance.
• Commissions would be for new sales of the ruleset. We don't expect to charge existing customers for these upgrades. This might be decided on a case-by-case basis if it would make the difference of having an upgrade or not.

Requirements:

• The new version should be compatible with the existing modules and libraries published for the ruleset.
• New functionality should contain a mix of additions that allow double-clicking, preferences, the box, image toolbars, chat box re-styling to show speak bubbles, additional drag and drop support, additional combat tracker functionality, CT Menus, etc.
• You must send a full list of updates (or planned updates) and include a change log text file which can be included with the new version and posted to the forums.
• The new version should come in the form of a .PAK file
• The ruleset *may* contain graphical updates to frames, backgrounds, etc. but these are subject to review and approval
• You may split this with another developer for a pre-agreed split of the commission
• Any graphics additions must use public domain graphics, original content or graphics pulled from the original product being supported.
• You can use any code logic or xml snippets from any of our commercial rulesets freely. Any third-party ruleset code ported over must be accompanied by a copy of an email or document granting SmiteWorks unrestricted use and access (but not ownership) to the code.

[VenomousFiligree]

The fact that you are giving commission for the ruleset implies that you will be charging for the updated ruleset?

[ddavison]

Thanks for bringing this up. We were not planning to charge existing customers for the update. The commission would be for new sales after release of the update. We can review this on a case-by-case basis though if we have trouble getting developers to come on board.

* I edited the original post to reflect this answer.

[VenomousFiligree]

Would some of these not be better off being extensions, rather than full rulesets, ie the D20 based ones?

[drahkar]

Does this apply the cross the board or is it limited to rulesets that are pending requests? For example if there is a ruleset that everyone likes as it is, so no changes haven been made to it over 7 months, would the time limit apply? Would we have to add features for the sake of adding features just to renew?

[ddavison]

Sorry for the delay, I was out of town for a few days.

The motivation would be to keep it up to date, not to force unnecessary updates on developers just to retain a commission. We still need to work out the exact language we will use in the contract and it is probably going to have to be written subjectively to allow us to take action where necessary. Since a developer will continually receive residual commissions for sales of the ruleset, we expect this will provide enough incentive for most to keep them current as-is.


MurghBpurn, extensions would probably work for most of the D20 spin-offs. I played around with a D20 Modern extension to port over the skin and extra customizations from it -- but it ended up touching so much of the core ruleset that you really started to lose the benefit of the extension. With some redesign of the core ruleset, this could be a much better approach though. The challenge is to do it in a backward compatible way.

[Magnatude]

I would like the help in getting a 3.5 extension made for Iron Heroes and will ing to help out with my minimalist scripting abilities. I currently run an Iron Heroes campaign and can provide a lot of GM input on what needs to be changed... though I'm still using the buggy/faltering original version, I would be extrememly happy (as well as my players) to have a rulest that functioned properly.

[ddavison]

Having Iron Heroes, Arcana Evolved and D20 Modern as extensions/skins to the 3.5E ruleset would definitely be the preferred way forward. We would then be able to list it in with the rest of the D20/OGL, 3.5E and Pathfinder compatible products.

Have you played around at all with extensions for FG?

[Magnatude]

I have played a bit with BRP, at least with the notes included with that ruleset on extensions. I have yet to delve into the 3.5, but will soon, I devote a lot of my time on my Iron Heroes campaign for my players (creating custom maps and developing the campaign world, they are a good devoted group that show up consistently... and they make me feel appreciated for the work I put into the game). With that aside I've put some effort into looking up some information on the wikis and links on modding the files, some days I wish i had more hours in the day to delve into more. I have some time off work at the end of November, so I'm going to hit the xml hard during that time. I know I'm going to have to, the quirks in the Iron Heroes ruleset show more with each patch.

[Dracones]

I wonder if there aren't other ways to do funding for the rulesets. Maybe kickstarter campaigns to get new rulesets off the ground in the first place.

Or maybe monthly subscriptions for players/GM who are willing to "subscribe" to rulesets and help fund their updates/get their issues resolved/vote on added features.

I know there are a lot of people that don't want to pay for updates and that's fine. But I personally don't mind kicking some funds towards devs who are putting in hours scratching our itches. Put enough of us together and it could really help pay to keep certain tools and rule sets up to date.