[Pcgen-trackers] [ pcgen-Feature Requests-1715178 ] NUMCHOICES for Temp Mods

[SourceForge.net <no...@so...>]

Feature Requests item #1715178, was opened at 2007-05-08 14:39
Message generated for change (Comment added) made by papa_drb
You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=384722&aid=1715178&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: Unscheduled
>Status: Deleted
Resolution: None
Priority: 2
Private: No
Submitted By: LegacyKing (amaitland)
Assigned to: Nobody/Anonymous (nobody)
Summary: NUMCHOICES for Temp Mods

Initial Comment:
one on
NUMCHOICES for Temp Mods

If it wasn't then this
>  > should perhaps throw a warning that the NUMCHOICES is silently
>  > consumed in this case. Also this may become  a future FREQ.

> If you want this fully fixed and NUMCHOICES supported, I need to
> >  understand the entire behavior that PCGen should have under the
> >  condititions where NUMCHOICES is set to something other than one.  I
> >  do not believe it is well defined right now, and I'm concerned that
> >  the use of NUMCHOICES in the CHOOSE to define the number of times a
> >  Temp Mod can be applied is a problem.
> >
> >  Currently, the temporary selector either saves the previous value or
> >  allows a new value to be chosen.  If CHOOSE NUMCHOICES is set to 2,
> >  then the first one gets a chooser, the second one gets a chooser, and
> >  the third one... gets what?  The first choice or the second choice?
> >  Or can it not even be selected a third time?
> >
> >  Also, if NUMCHOICES on the choose actually controls the temporary
> >  modifier and how many times the Temp Modifier can be applied, then how
> >  do you code up a temp mod that CAN be applied multiple times but
> >  applies the same bonus each time (which was selected with the first
> >  application)?
> >

Once the number of choices have been taken, the item shouldn't be
selectable anymore, unless a selection is removed first.

But if that functionality never was there, we should not introduce it
now by way of a bug fix. Some homebrewers may have copied the line for
their own campaigns and might be called by surprise if the behaviour
suddenly changes. I think that part is best handled as a new Freq.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

>Comment By: David R. Bender (papa_drb)
Date: 2011-07-13 14:39

Message:
http://jira.pcgen.org/browse/CODE-878

----------------------------------------------------------------------

You can respond by visiting: 
https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=384722&aid=1715178&group_id=25576