Menu
▾
▴
[Pcgen-trackers] [ pcgen-Feature Requests-1471354 ] Remove/Override Nonabilities
|
From: SourceForge.net <no...@so...> - 2007-12-13 13:53:21
|
Feature Requests item #1471354, was opened at 2006-04-16 13:16 Message generated for change (Comment added) made by eddyanthony You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=384722&aid=1471354&group_id=25576 Please note that this message will contain a full copy of the comment thread, including the initial issue submission, for this request, not just the latest update. Category: Code Related (Add/Del/Improve) Group: For 5.14 >Status: Closed Resolution: Accepted Priority: 7 Private: No Submitted By: Paul W. King (kingpaul) Assigned to: James Dempsey (jdempsey) Summary: Remove/Override Nonabilities Initial Comment: Assigning to Devon for prioritization in 5.10. From http://www.codemonkeypublishing.com/index.php?name=PNphpBB2&file=viewtopic&t=13316&highlight= When Vermin are given the Celestial or Fiendish Template (such as the many creatures on the summon monster list) it is supposed to increase their Int to a minimum of 3. The way nonabilities are currently set up it doesn't work correctly because the ability (Int) is locked into non-ability mode. I request nonabilities be modified such that they are undoable/removable either manually or automatically via template of some kind. === Just created a Celestial Giant Bee in 5.9.8 using the RSRD complete, and Int didn't move as it is supposed to. Paul W. King PR SB, BoD ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >Comment By: Eddy Anthony (eddyanthony) Date: 2007-12-13 08:53 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=886893 Originator: NO Works after svn 4714, tested and added to the docs. Thanks James. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Eddy Anthony (eddyanthony) Date: 2007-12-12 13:06 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=886893 Originator: NO HI James I'm testing this for the docs and can't get it to work. I also get an error in the console: 13:02:56.837 SEVERE main PCTemplateLoader:103 Unknown tag 'DEFINE:UNLOCK.INT' ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: James Dempsey (jdempsey) Date: 2007-12-08 01:24 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=558288 Originator: NO Implemented in http://pcgen.svn.sourceforge.net/pcgen/?rev=4695&view=rev along with full test coverage. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: James Dempsey (jdempsey) Date: 2007-12-07 19:40 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=558288 Originator: NO http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/pcgen_experimental/message/7053 Vote Passed 1-0 (Eddy made the call to enact) DEFINE:UNLOCK.x x = Stat Abbreviation Proposal notes: Having reread this thread the proposal is for a DEFINE:UNLOCK tag to counter the > DEFINE:LOCK tag use for non-abilities > > I assume the full syntax is DEFINE:UNLOCK.x where x=stat abb > > If I understand Tom there is a concern about order of operations. Might this be alleviated > > if we say that the DEFINE:UNLOCK always overrides DEFINE:LOCK and leave it to the data > > monkeys to be aware of that when using it? > > I think that would solve that issue in a nice simple manner. Obviously we would have to make sure that it was noted in the doco. > > Tir also objected, though in a general way to his dislike of using DEFINE to set abilities at > > all. He has not brought a proposal forth at this time and I think we can consider it as a > > separate request. > > I don't see an issue with that. Although Tir if you do want to raise an alternate syntax the timeframe I would like to have it implemented by is the end of December. > > As it stands the proposal does not require any data changes so I see no reason not to go > > with it and leave the overhaul of the concept for a time when we can muster a good > > discussion. I assume from here it goes to a vote unless further discussion occurs? -- Cheers, James Dempsey PCGen Code SB ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Tom Parker (thpr) Date: 2007-07-26 16:57 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=1037926 Originator: NO Doesn't matter at this point. Not bad for 5.14, but 6.0 has to have the compatibility either way, due to deprecation rules. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Martijn Verburg (karianna) Date: 2007-07-23 10:07 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=252169 Originator: NO Tom, an item to resolve for 5.14 before going CDOM? - K ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: James Dempsey (jdempsey) Date: 2007-04-26 05:17 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=558288 Originator: NO There were some objections to the proposed syntax, so this still needs to be decided by the data team. I don't think we want to go to 6.0 with the syntax we have currently for locking abilities though. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Martijn Verburg (karianna) Date: 2007-04-26 04:28 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=252169 Originator: NO This will have to be done after 5.12 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: James Dempsey (jdempsey) Date: 2007-04-06 19:25 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=558288 Originator: NO Conclusions to the discussion were: 1. Enhance DEFINE:LOCK to support a new keyword NONABILITY, e.g. DEFINE:LOCK.STR|NONABILITY 2. Remove hardcoding of locked at 10 being interpreted as a non ability. 2. Create a DEFINE:UNLOCK.x tag which can unlock an ability locked to a value or to being a non ability. 3. Expand PRESTAT to check for NONABILITY. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Frank Kliewe (frank_kliewe) Date: 2007-02-22 09:27 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=1241568 Originator: NO Discussion started here: http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/pcgen_experimental/message/7053 -- Frank ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Martijn Verburg (karianna) Date: 2007-02-22 08:08 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=252169 Originator: NO Frank, can we get this looked at in Experimental? - K ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Comment By: Devon Jones (soulcatcher) Date: 2006-06-18 14:49 Message: Logged In: YES user_id=107647 This one is going to require new syntax. Presently we have a way to 'lock' an ability, but not a way to 'unlock' an ability. Furthur, 'no ability score' is defined in pcgen behind the scenes as 10, so that it does not interfere with any skills. So the Bee does not get any stat bump, as it's ability is 10, not < 3. We need to re-architect the "No ability score" system, as it presently is incapable of being modified to suit this. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- You can respond by visiting: https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=384722&aid=1471354&group_id=25576 |