Re^4: CRPGs, Perl, Gtk2, and my vision

Ok, I should rewind a bit. The first thing I want to accomplish is to be able to mimic the old gold box games. Now, it's like I didn't know AD&D has advanced a lot since then, but after looking at the Open Gaming information (the many RTF files), there's so much more than I really feel is necessary for an old-school computer RPG.

I'm talking about a simpler time...

_____________________________________________________
Jeff japhy Pinyan, P.L., P.M., P.O.D, X.S.: Perl, regex, and perl hacker
How can we ever be the sold short or the cheated, we who for every service have long ago been overpaid? ~~ Meister Eckhart

Comment on Re^4: CRPGs, Perl, Gtk2, and my vision

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: CRPGs, Perl, Gtk2, and my vision by Tanktalus (Canon) on Feb 08, 2005 at 18:15 UTC
I understand ... although having jumped from AD&D 1st edition to 3rd, I can say that the 3rd edition rules are much more coherent, and thus more easily programmable. Fewer exceptions, more natural progressions, less arbitrariness. All that and lots more flexibility, too. No one says you need to support everything - I would just encourage you to use OGC as your basis - which will allow you to continue advancing your support for OGC and allow some really modern games, too. What I mean is that you can support a subset of OGC to start with, and add support for more stuff as time goes on.	[reply]
Re^5: CRPGs, Perl, Gtk2, and my vision by dragonchild (Archbishop) on Feb 08, 2005 at 18:37 UTC
If you need help with the licensing, I know several people in Wizards of the Coast, having played Magic for over 10 years. Being right, does not endow the right to be rude; politeness costs nothing. Being unknowing, is not the same as being stupid. Expressing a contrary opinion, whether to the individual or the group, is more often a sign of deeper thought than of cantankerous belligerence. Do not mistake your goals as the only goals; your opinion as the only opinion; your confidence as correctness. Saying you know better is not the same as explaining you know better.	[reply]