Minimal Acknowledgement of Other NPC

[Domi]

Domi, what do you mean by this? Do you mean that you think I should remove the component from Crossmod? I'd just like to say that the reason its in Crossmod is not because 'these are the people who have given permission' its so that automated code can check (at the end of someones mod install list) what is installed and what is not. The reason I ask for people's permission before adding NPCs to the list is there are important flags which I do not know their intention about (i.e. can their romanc be killed, should it kill others?) In the past I have contacted the author for this information and in all but one case they have replied in some form. The one case is the original Nalia Romance, so I guessed the intention of the author when it comes to these flags. If he ever wants this changed, I'll change it. The point is, its not a permission issue but a convenience thing, because modders I would imagine don't want to code romance killing scripts for every new NPC that arrives on the scene.

 

No, I said this not in relation to the Crossmod. I think that authomatic shut downs are necessary component.

 

What I meant were textual conflicts. What I would very much want to see is the consensus that one modded character can acknowledge the presence or rivalry by another modded character IF the dialogue files are not added to as something acceptable in the eyes of the community.

 

I agree with you on compatibility. Any dialogue file involving things I would gladly submit to your capable and qualified hands. On another hand a PID that only checks for DV of a character but does not utilize the third party's D-file - I think it is more convenient for everyone if it is resolved within the mod itself.

 

Same goes for complex romance reactive scripts.

 

The simple RA going to 3 if Kivan's RA went to 2 is great in the CM. My twisted P#KivanLove adventures is probably better left where they belong - in my twisted BAF.

[BigRob]

This is what happens when you don't look at all the threads before you start replying.

 

For me personally, I figure that talking about (not to or with) a Mod NPC is in the same boat as killing romances if one mod NPC gets to a committed or silmilar stage first. It doesn't change anything the author's written, nor does it add any extra words into the NPC's mouth. So I would deem it as perfectly acceptable to do without the author's permission. Maybe not everyone will share that attitude, but that's mine.

 

(So yes, if anyone wants to make such comments for their own NPC about Aklon, go right ahead)

[jcompton]

I have said on many, many occasions that I consider Kelsey fair game for all purposes public and private. I can only say it as many more times as you need.

 

If I'm reading this correctly (which I assume I am) you are saying other people can use Kelsey in their mods? If thats the case, thats fine. This has been done before (e.g. Weimer with Solaufein for the Kivan-Sola material) and if thats the case then I won't ask for your blessing on every piece of material.

 

No, you need to read what I was saying about complicating the situation.

 

You've already given players and modders the expectation that everything in that mod is "mutual permission." That being the case, I don't feel that Kelsey material would belong there. That's what I mean about you complicating the situation despite good intentions.

 

The point is, much as in the romance case, crossmod's existance is not about permission or lack of, its about convenience of install.

 

Content mods tend to be defined more by their content than by their technical merits.

 

If people really feel that there is a problem with 'oh I don't have their permission'

 

Nobody's ever going to get every single mod content creator, past, present, and future, to agree to the exact same standards. Ultimately it's up to the mod publisher to enforce their own standards and deal with the results.

[Kulyok]

I read the topic with interest, but was rather surprised when nobody made this suggestion (well, Domi did in another topic, but her suggestion was less specific):

 

It might be a good idea if a modder mentions their attitude about the matter in their mod's Readme. Either "leave me and my mod alone", or "it is essential that you contact me first", or "I would prefer if you contacted me first" or "only if we are working together" or "do whatever you like".

 

I respect jcompton's approach to the problem, but until I asked the question in this topic: http://forums.spellholdstudios.net/index.php?showtopic=16925 , I knew nothing of his opinion on the matter. Nor, perhaps, did other modders who did not browse the forums extensively.

 

So, if there was an appropriate line in Kelsey's Readme, I think it would help somewhat. (Though I myself would probably still send a PM, if only for informational purposes, but never mind.)

 

I agree with the statement:

 

Nobody's ever going to get every single mod content creator, past, present, and future, to agree to the exact same standards. Ultimately it's up to the mod publisher to enforce their own standards and deal with the results.

 

However, I think stating the modder's wishes in their mod's Readme would not worsen the situation, at the very least.

[Guest -jastey-]

-giving a general idea that s/he is there

-mentioning him/her by name

-discussing him/her with the PC.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I don't see why you need a permission of the mod NPC author for that. Or the other way round: I don't agree that a mod NPC author could forbid my NPC to talk about their NPC.

 

Putting words into another's NPC is a complete different thing. But that was not the question here.

 

-jastey

[Princeps]

[...]

It might be a good idea if a modder mentions their attitude about the matter in their mod's Readme. Either "leave me and my mod alone", or "it is essential that you contact me first", or "I would prefer if you contacted me first" or "only if we are working together" or "do whatever you like".

[...]

However, I think stating the modder's wishes in their mod's Readme would not worsen the situation, at the very least.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Maybe it would be possible for the major modding sites to agree on a document to be included in the readmes of all NPC mods, where the author(s) states his/her wishes on the degree in which the mod is made 'public domain'?

 

Can a new mod, for example:

 

-mention my npc

-comment on my npc's character or actions

-interject to my npc's banters

-add to my npc's dialogues

-change my npc's dialogues

-change the portrait/kit/appearance/custom items...

-etcetera, etcetera

 

For each option the author could say YES, WITH THE PERMISSION OF THE AUTHOR or NO.

[Borsook]

Does this all mean that most of community here believe that when mod author states "nothing connected to my mod may appear in other mods" his/her will should be respected? Just a question, I won't try to convince you otherwise, but it's very sad to live in an age obsessed by rights to IPs...

[jester]

Why do I get the feeling that this disclaimer in the readme is not making things a lot easier.

 

I might have to reread the thread, I guess.

[Domi]

Maybe it would be possible for the major modding sites to agree on a document to be included in the readmes of all NPC mods, where the author(s) states his/her wishes on the degree in which the mod is made 'public domain'?

 

And that again returns us to the realm of the individual authors' wishes. While what I think we need is the blanket community agreement, which sets the acceptable level of 'no permit required' interaction for all. What you are proposing, is effectually not having such a level.

[Grim Squeaker]

Well, here is my Suggestion #1:

 

No permission is required for:

- Any basic scripting checks e.g. romance kill scripts.

- Interjections into the other mod's material assuming you are not writing a 'counter interjection' for that NPC afterwards i.e. the other person's NPC responding to your interjection (As this would break the rule in the next paragraph).

- Dialogues about the other person's NPC, within reason i.e. it should be your NPCs opinion of that mod not an opportunity to flame that mod*

 

Permission is required for any situation which would involve writing new dialogues or similar for someone else's mod i.e. no putting words in their mouths.

 

* It's not a requirement but it would be considered polite to inform the mod's author in this situation as they may wish to read what you are saying before you release it.

 

Any changes that people would like to those rules? I've tried to keep them reasonably simple. Obviously these shouldn't be too specific and people shouldn't be looking for loopholes. This entire matter is more about what is polite than 'laying down the law and punishing the guilty'.

[Kulyok]

I cannot agree with this.

 

I see your point, but for me, it's just not working. How can you, say, respect the modder's wish not to modify their work, but not respect their wish not to have interactions with their work? It just doesn't make sense to me.

 

I see three points of view here:

 

1) Game can be modded. Mods mod the game. Mods can be modded. If mod author minds, it's their problem.

 

2) It is ethical and polite to contact the author, if you want to use anything of theirs.

 

3) Well, I do not mind, actually, but...

 

The third being the most interesting one, of course, namely by the fact that it does not exist.

 

What I am speaking about is there's no middle ground. You can tell yourself a hundred times that there is and should be an accepted borderline, but there is none. It's either 1) or 2).

 

Again, I would rather see a modder stating their wish in their Readme's, so I and others could(not would!) follow them if they so wished.

 

This blanket community agreement you propose is just a variant of 1). Nothing else.

[Domi]

I think that this is very much along the lines of my own thinking. I can't summon any reason why I could object to such a treatment of my characters. I agree that it should not be about punishing the guilty.

 

I however think that in the spirit of cooperation and sharing it might be a good idea to let go of the assumption that it is impolite to not notify an author when working within the confines of the Charter. I assume that when I release a mod that other people will see the character and make up their opinion on him; so, theoretically are NPCs.

 

Imagine if Anomen was a modded character, and his author was insisting that all other characters would give only loving and adoring feedback about him...

[Grim Squeaker]

I cannot agree with this.

 

I see your point, but for me, it's just not working. How can you, say, respect the modder's wish not to modify their work, but not respect their wish not to have interactions with their work? It just doesn't make sense to me.

 

I see three points of view here:

 

1) Game can be modded. Mods mod the game. Mods can be modded. If mod author minds, it's their problem.

 

2) It is ethical and polite to contact the author, if you want to use anything of theirs.

 

3) Well, I do not mind, actually, but...

 

The third being the most interesting one, of course, namely by the fact that it does not exist.

 

What I am speaking about is there's no middle ground. You can tell yourself a hundred times that there is and should be an accepted borderline, but there is none. It's either 1) or 2).

 

Again, I would rather see a modder stating their wish in their Readme's, so I and others could(not would!) follow them if they so wished.

 

This blanket community agreement you propose is just a variant of 1). Nothing else.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

The point is with my suggestion that you are not modifying their work. All the things I stated as allowable without permission are passive. In the first you are checking their variables, but not modifying them. In the second you are interjecting but not changing anything they say nor adding to it. In the last one you are once again commenting on the existance of something or someone but not putting words in their mouth.

 

The point that this line is drawing is that you are not changing their material at all, not adding, not taking away. If it is there wish that you, to follow your example, do not add interjections then any decent modder would respect that. I'm not saying a modder doesn't have the right to say 'would you please not do that with my mod'. Most importantly of all it all comes down ton decency. Modders that I speak to and would want to collaberate with are decent people as I hope I am myself. I'm not going to go against their wishes and I hope no-one would deliberately go against mine. This suggestion is just to provide some ease when it comes to collaberation so that we don't have to make everything some kind of legally binding contract.

[Kulyok]

I however think that in the spirit of cooperation and sharing it might be a good idea to let go of the assumption that it is impolite to not notify an author when working within the confines of the Charter. I assume that when I release a mod that other people will see the character and make up their opinion on him; so, theoretically are NPCs.

 

Amen to that. You have my heartfelt agreement, though I am not the community, fortunately or unfortunately.

 

 

The point that this line is drawing is that you are not changing their material at all, not adding, not taking away. If it is there wish that you, to follow your example, do not add interjections then any decent modder would respect that. I'm not saying a modder doesn't have the right to say 'would you please not do that with my mod'. Most importantly of all it all comes down ton decency. Modders that I speak to and would want to collaberate with are decent people as I hope I am myself. I'm not going to go against their wishes and I hope no-one would deliberately go against mine. This suggestion is just to provide some ease when it comes to collaberation so that we don't have to make everything some kind of legally binding contract.

 

I understand the convenience, of course, but it still rings false to me. Even if you have the long list of names before the end of the day, will it work in the end? New people will come, and all will begin anew.

 

 

Besides, there are not so many NPCs now. Look at the modlist. Half of them are One-Days, another half is Betas, and from the last ones six have been developed by Sillara's creative team, and contacting them is easy. Jason made his opinion clear. I do not think sending 10 PM's is that difficult, and it's not the sort of thing one has to do every month, anyway. My opinion only, of course.

[Grim Squeaker]

I however think that in the spirit of cooperation and sharing it might be a good idea to let go of the assumption that it is impolite to not notify an author when working within the confines of the Charter. I assume that when I release a mod that other people will see the character and make up their opinion on him; so, theoretically are NPCs.

 

Imagine if Anomen was a modded character, and his author was insisting that all other characters would give only loving and adoring feedback about him... 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Once again, I'm trusting that modders are decent people. The only time I said it would be polite to contact them was when you were having dialogues about the NPC in question. I would assume it an enormous amount of cases that the modder would write back saying 'thats fine. I look forward to seeing what you've come up with' or words to that effect. I'd hope that very rarely (if ever) people would say 'okay, I want to read it first and I may have some serious suggestions for changes', but if that was the case, its good to respect their wishes. I'm just trying to avoid the situation of an author getting a nasty shock when a mod comes out and someone else tells them 'dude, did you read what they said about your mod', as that could get ugly.