The Seven-Sided Die

The odds & ends of roleplaying

Entries tagged “PDF”

Staple binding PDFs tutorial

written by d7, on Apr 21, 2012 11:43:00 AM.

Five half-letter booklets fanned out on a table below a long-arm stapler, a bone folder, and a pair of yellow binder clips.

A player asked me how I made the Adventurer Conqueror King System mini-booklets that we’ve been using. I ended up writing a long email and figured I’d share it here.

I can’t stand playing from PDFs on a laptop (and I don’t have an iPad), so being able to bind my own printouts has made lots of PDFs in my collection infinitely more useful for actual play.

There’s four tools that make staple binding work: a duplex printer, a long-arm or saddle-stitch stapler, a paper cutter, and a bone folder aka paper knife. Most of the trouble is in cost for the stapler and paper cutter, and even finding a bone folder. For larger books a pair of small binder clips is very useful to keep the sheets lined up for stapling (my stapler doesn’t have the v-shaped alignment bump of a real saddle-stitch stapler), but for booklets of just a few sheets I don’t bother.

I’ve been using the latest version of Acrobat Reader to print in booklet form. (Versions earlier than 10.1.3 had problems with doing the two-sided printing right when the booklet option was selected.) It automatically handles the imposition and two-sided printing so the sheets nest right. There are some PDFs that were never intended for print and printing all pages will do things like put the page numbers on the inside or something like that. Often just leaving out the covers does the trick. Printing parts of a PDF like I did with ACKS takes more experimenting to get it to look nice, though you might notice I messed up one of the booklets and the page numbers are in the fold. There are certainly worse things. Experiment with the preview until it looks right. One thing to note is that the “automatically rotate pages” checkbox is off by default in Acrobat Reader, which only matters if the PDF has landscape pages mixed in with the portrait pages. I didn’t notice that, so the Mortality tables in my GM booklets are printed upright and tiny instead of sideways and full-page.

The long-arm stapler came from, appropriately enough, Staples. The paper cutter too, and it took some talking to them to find one that would do more than two sheets at a time well. The packaging mostly lies and you can pretty much halve the claimed sheet capacity to find out what a cutter will handle without pulling and making a curved cut. As it is, just under a couple hundred still only gets you one that can do four well, six kinda, eight claimed on the box. The ones that nicely cut stacks at a time are exorbitant. The rotary type are only really good for one sheet at a time and are way less satisfying than the guillotine type.

The bone folder is a piece of magic. It’s just a flattish stick made out of a certain kind of plastic (or actual bone if you get a fancy one) that you can press super-crisp folds with without the kind of friction that drags the fold into a curve or burnishes the paper. Michael’s appears to carry one as part of a Cricut tools kit. Otherwise they’re hard to find. Deserres might have them but I can’t find them in their online store. Might be worth talking to them if you’re passing by. I got mine from a local bindery: Rasmussen Bindery. They have an online store but they’re the quaint kind of place that will call you on the phone to discuss your online order before putting it together for shipping.

You can do without the bone folder. Not having it will make thicker booklets fit together less well and be fatter, but it’s doable. Having one does make the folding less time consuming and annoying though, which makes a difference in how fast you can make one book and how long it takes before you’re tired of all this folding crap.

So just print the booklet sheets (collated if you’re doing multiple copies of a PDF), fold the pages but don’t nest them yet, and use the paper cutter to trim the edges. I just eyeball the margins to make sure I’m not cutting any text and there’s enough margin to be visually pleasing. Making the outside cuts about the same distance from the text block as the fold margin (or slightly thinner if there’s a large inside margin) seems to give good results. I ususally do two folded sheets at a time (so four paper-thicknesses) because my cutter cuts that cleanly without pulling and it’s fast enough for the size of PDFs I’ve been doing. I do one edge for all the pages before moving to the second and third edge so that I don’t have to keep resetting the backstop on the cutter.

The only problem with cutting a few sheets at a time is that in the end you’ll get a V-shaped outer edge to the book that’s more pronounced the more sheets it has. It’s not really avoidable. (Real books sometimes have a saw-tooth edge for the same reason. The only way to avoid it is to use a book clamp and actually plane the edge of the text block until it’s even, but that’s serious binding geekery.)

Once you’ve got them all folded and trimmed, nest them together and unfold them. Try to pinch the folds flat rather than holding one side or the other so that they stays lined up and don’t drift. For thicker books like the ACKS booklets, I use a pair of binder clips after unfolding to keep the folds lined up for stapling. My stapler has a sliding stop to make consistent staple distances easy, but setting it is still a matter of eyeballing where the staple will go through. I haven’t perfected this yet, but the closer to right through the fold the staples go, the easier the pages turn in both halves of the book. For a half-letter sized book, a pair of staples 1/4 from the top and bottom of the fold works.

Then you’ve got a nice self-cover book. They’re not super-durable, but once you’ve got the setup to make them it’s just a bit of time, paper, and toner to replace them, and the time it takes is little enough that I’m more worried about toner costs. I printed, folded, cut, and stapled the entire GM section of ACKS in less time than it took everyone to make characters in the first session.

This is a great way to make books out of PDFs, especially ones that don’t exist in print at all. It’s not a replacement for a real print version, but it’s a great DIY project to take a book you would like to use at the table out of the computer and into your hands.

I’m looking forward to my hardcover of ACKS coming in the mail (I got the shipping notice email last week!) but in the meantime being able to bind copies myself has been invaluable – we wouldn’t have been able to play without them.

My own hex paper

written by d7, on Mar 30, 2012 12:22:00 PM.

I needed some hex paper for the game I’m setting up. Autarch even has some 6-mile hex paper that’s custom-designed for their particular campaign-creation guidelines. I, however, am Very Particular as my wife well knows, and using four different types of hex paper that uses 24 minor hexes to one major hex on one sheet and then 4 minor hexes to 1 major hex on another and then uses rectangles and hexes together on yet another sheet is just silly. [1]

(Actually, Autarch’s hex sheets are very nice sheets and I’d recommend trying them for anyone who likes hexes.)

I wanted one sheet for any scale I could think of. I liked the logic laid out in In Praise of the 6 Mile Hex, and I’ve got some skill with the drawing functions of ConTeXt, so I made some hex paper with 12 minor hexes to 1 major. With these sheets I can scale up or down in 12ths, giving me 6-mile hexes for my core scale, ½-mile hexes for detailed maps, and 72-mile hexes for large regional maps. I doubt I’ll bother with a continental scale for this campaign, but 864-mile hexes should handle that fine if I do.

Screenshot of the hex paper I made

Download it here:

[1]

Translation for those who can’t hear my tone of voice: tongue firmly in cheek there.

Dresden Files RPG and the OGL

written by d7, on Feb 11, 2012 3:27:00 PM.

After an exchange on Twitter with Fred Hicks of Evil Hat, the publishers of the Dresden Files RPG, about my misgivings about DFRPG’s OGL notice, I’m somewhat reassured and have a clearer idea of what the future might look like for the Dungeoneer’s Handbook as a product.

As I understand it now, the intent of the “everything new in DFRPG is Product Identity” is filtered through the OGL’s definition of Product Identity (PI). For the simple reason that the Dresden Files universe is a property that doesn’t belong to Evil Hat, they are making sure that the RPG translation of the novels don’t “leak” any of Jim Butcher’s copyrighted work into the world for others to use. The language used is unfortunately ambiguous, but the whole point of the Open Game License is to eliminate doubt about the intent of a publisher using the OGL so I’m happy enough with that clarification of Evil Hat’s intentions.

What this means for the Dungeoneer’s Handbook

This means two interlinked things for the Dungeoneer’s Handbook. Wait, three. [1] Three things for the future of the DHB.

First, it means that it’s going to be way simpler for me if I just make this a personal project never intended for release. (Turns out that there’s another reason this would be the simplest route for me, but that’s nothing to do with DFRPG—see below.) However, pretending that I’m eventually going to show this to people who don’t have me there as the DM to explain away the rough spots means I’m taking a more rigorous approach to the writing and design. So, in practice, regardless of whether I eventually aim for a public release, this first point doesn’t change that pretending that I will in my own head improves the project.

Second, and this is interlinked with the third point, it means that I can’t refer to Stunts and Powers that appear in DFRPG. This is mostly not a problem, since I don’t need most of them to make a derivative work in a completely different setting. I can’t use a Power like “Knight of the Cross”, but I don’t want to anyway. Dresdenverse bits like “Knight of the Cross” are exactly the sort of “special ability” that Product Identity was designed to protect, and the sort of thing that Evil Hat doesn’t want to accidentally just hand away on Jim Butcher’s behalf. Since I’m not using the Dresdenverse at all, this sort of thing doesn’t pose a problem.

While I don’t want to Dresdenverse concepts embodied by stunts and powers, there are generic stunts and powers that aren’t unique to the Dresdenverse that I’d like to use. Things like Toughness, the supernatural ability for a creature to ignore a certain amount of stress unless you find its weakness, is a concept that predates DFRPG and appears in most fantasy RPGs. Werewolves who can’t be hurt except by overwhelming damage (say, being hit by a truck), but are deathly susceptible to injuries dealt by silver, is exactly the sort of thing that Toughness and its higher-powered variants are perfect for representing. These are the sorts of things that I look at as useful Fate innovations that would be great to re-use.

Though they’d be great to re-use, the PI declaration in DFRPG does capture the names and descriptions of “special abilities” since those do fall under the definition of Product Identity in the OGL. So, I can’t use the name of Toughness in a derivative like the DHB. I can’t even refer to it in my own writeup for werewolves in the DHB, saying “look it up in your copy of DFRPG:YS,” because the name itself is claimed as PI. This sort of thing is probably not what Evil Hat intended to cover with the blanket PI claim in DFRPG’s OGL, but it would have been prohibitive to separate out such things as Open Game Content without getting into grey territory regarding Dresdenverse copyright. A blanket PI claim is the safe, responsible way to handle this kind of thing, even if it’s inconvenient for me. In order to model werewolves and the like in the DHB, then, I have to write my own version of Toughness with a different name, or some other stunt/power that fills the same generic narrative concept of “unnaturally hard to hurt except with weakness X.” This brings me to the related impact on the DHB:

Third, I have to make the Dungeoneer’s Handbook a stand-alone product (should I hypothetically publish it). It would have been far easier for me to just say, “The DHB requires the use of The Dresden Files: Your Story from Evil Hat LLC” and not bother writing up my own special abilities that are already adequately provided by DFRPG. This would have been nice for me as it would save work, and actually I would have felt a bit happier saying “go buy DFRPG! You can’t use this without it!” On the other hand, I realise that would have been more annoying for the hypothetical players who would end up flipping back and forth between the DHB and DFRPG books in order to make their character creation choices.

In some ways this is a blessing in disguise, though. It means that the (hypothetical) release edition of the Dungeoneer’s Handbook will be a complete game unto itself, with no dependencies on third-party “core” books, and that’s a better experience for the end reader and user. (I’m still going to say “Go buy DFRPG!” in a hypothetical DHB release though, because really yes yes read DFRPG.)

Skills: the silver lining

Fortunately, one thing the definition of Product Identity in the OGL doesn’t cover is skills, so I should be able to use DFRPG’s skill list as my base, including the existing skill trappings. I wasn’t looking forward to abandoning/rewriting all that, since they’re even more integral to the mechanics than even the “generic” non-Dresdenverse Stunts and Powers are.

Of course that’s not all

As I implied above, there’s more in the way of such a hypothetical release. As it turns out, the DFRPG OGL isn’t the stickiest bit of copyright that I’m running into as I write. If you recall, I’m aiming to use this as a handbook for a home Forgotten Realms campaign. As I write, I find that I’m embedding a lot of setting concepts from the Realms that there’s no way could ever see the light of day without being infringing. I’m putting them in anyway because I want this stuff available for my players, but if I eventually turn the handbook into a releasable form it will mean a lot of text will have to be rewritten or outright stripped out.

For example, I have a template called Touched by Mystra. Right there in the name, I can’t put that out in a product. However, something like that is necessary to reflect character options related to the way magic has changed in my Realms after the Avatar Crisis, and since it’s directly tied to Mystra (and fiction matters in Fate) it’s necessary to have that baked right into the template. For a home game that’ll be fine, and in the meantime I’m just not worrying about it. It does mean that I’ll be looking in two directions should I endeavour to sanitise the manuscript for publication: toward DFRPG to identify and remove/rewrite any Product Identity that we relied on for our home campaign, and toward the Forgotten Realms to remove (utterly) any references to Wizards’ copyrighted game setting. [2]

[1]

Nobody ever expects the Spanish Inquisition!

[2]

This is one of those ironic bits about living in a digital age. If I’m just blogging about it, I can publish bits and pieces of my home game’s rules that refer to Forgotten Realms copyrighted stuff, because most game companies (Wizards included) consider that to be OK online fan behaviour. However, if I do the very same thing in a PDF for download, it suddenly becomes “publishing” in a sense that the same companies see as a problem. There’s a difference of apparent intent, certainly—publishing a comprehensive PDF carries with it an implication of profiting from Realms details, even if the PDF is free, in a way that publishing piecemeal on a blog doesn’t. As “digital” becomes the norm, though, these sorts of distinctions are going to get even fuzzier. …Huh. That implies that there may be a future clash between hobbyists and game publishers coming, which is kind of unnerving. We’ve been there before, and it was ugly. It could be uglier yet when the difference between hobby publishing and pro publishing collapses.