Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

AUTO:FEAT|Shield Proficiency vs AUTO:SHIELDPROF?

Expand Messages
  • Ainvar G
    What is the preferred tag to grant a character class proficiency in all simple and martial weapons, shields, etc? (Yeah, this is more inclusive than the
    Message 1 of 3 , Apr 1 4:50 AM
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      What is the preferred tag to grant a character class proficiency in all simple and martial weapons, shields, etc? (Yeah, this is more inclusive than the subject indicates.)

      I see AUTO:FEAT|Simple Weapon Proficiency in the Pathfinder Core datasets, but the docs show AUTO:WEAPONPROF|TYPE.Simple, which on the surface appears to be equivalent.

      Similar with the Armor and Shield proficiencies. I see that I can grant proficiency to a specific type of weapon or shield, but that's not what I need at the moment.

      Thanks!
    • Tir Gwaith
      ... The Simple Weapon Proficiency feat (and now the Armor and Shield prof feats as well) has the AUTO:WEAPONPROF tag in it. ... AUTO:FEAT is the data standard
      Message 2 of 3 , Apr 1 7:39 AM
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 6:50 AM, Ainvar G <ainvarg@...> wrote:
        > What is the preferred tag to grant a character class proficiency in all simple and martial weapons, shields, etc? (Yeah, this is more inclusive than the subject indicates.)
        >
        > I see AUTO:FEAT|Simple Weapon Proficiency in the Pathfinder Core datasets, but the docs show AUTO:WEAPONPROF|TYPE.Simple, which on the surface appears to be equivalent.
        >

        The Simple Weapon Proficiency feat (and now the Armor and Shield prof
        feats as well) has the AUTO:WEAPONPROF tag in it.

        > Similar with the Armor and Shield proficiencies. I see that I can grant proficiency to a specific type of weapon or shield, but that's not what I need at the moment.
        >
        > Thanks!

        AUTO:FEAT is the data standard for official release files.

        1) Presents it on the character sheet (We show weapon proficiencies,
        but not armor or shield - not even sure if there is a token for that).

        2) AUTO:FEAT / ABILITY can be .CLEARed, where AUTO:xxxPROF can not.

        3) For classes that get ALL Marital weapons (Fighter, etc), we have
        "All Martial Weapon Proficiencies" that grants them all, and allows an
        easy PRExxx for checking if a character has them all.

        Currently, since AUTO:WEAPONPROF etc. can not be .CLEARed, we are
        using holder objects for EVERY proficiency in release sets. Class
        calls "ABILITY:Special Ability|AUTOMATIC|XX Class Proficiencies",
        which has the AUTO:WEAPONPROF (typically that is the one that is
        different) that doesn't fit a neat generic call. That way a user can
        .CLEAR the ABILITY tag, and make any changes for their homebrew set.
        Long term hasn't been discussed other than we eventually want a .CLEAR
        for AUTO:xxxPROF tags (Waiting to let the code cleanup happen - could
        mean a new tag and deprecation, or just an upgrade to the tag, but we
        haven't spec'd it out yet that I remember.)

        For your own files, use whatever is easiest for you. :)

        --
        Tir Gwaith
        PCGen LST Chimp
      • Ainvar G
        Thanks for the detailed answer, Tir. Since I m hoping this becomes a candidate for inclusion in the official datasets, I ll save time later and do it
        Message 3 of 3 , Apr 2 8:58 AM
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          Thanks for the detailed answer, Tir. Since I'm hoping this becomes a candidate for inclusion in the official datasets, I'll save time later and do it "official" up front.

          AinvarG




          ________________________________
          From: Tir Gwaith <Tir.Gwaith@...>
          To: PCGenListFileHelp@yahoogroups.com
          Sent: Thu, April 1, 2010 9:39:48 AM
          Subject: Re: [PCGenListFileHelp] AUTO:FEAT|Shield Proficiency vs AUTO:SHIELDPROF?


          On Thu, Apr 1, 2010 at 6:50 AM, Ainvar G <ainvarg@yahoo. com> wrote:
          > What is the preferred tag to grant a character class proficiency in all simple and martial weapons, shields, etc? (Yeah, this is more inclusive than the subject indicates.)
          >
          > I see AUTO:FEAT|Simple Weapon Proficiency in the Pathfinder Core datasets, but the docs show AUTO:WEAPONPROF| TYPE.Simple, which on the surface appears to be equivalent.
          >

          The Simple Weapon Proficiency feat (and now the Armor and Shield prof
          feats as well) has the AUTO:WEAPONPROF tag in it.

          > Similar with the Armor and Shield proficiencies. I see that I can grant proficiency to a specific type of weapon or shield, but that's not what I need at the moment.
          >
          > Thanks!

          AUTO:FEAT is the data standard for official release files.

          1) Presents it on the character sheet (We show weapon proficiencies,
          but not armor or shield - not even sure if there is a token for that).

          2) AUTO:FEAT / ABILITY can be .CLEARed, where AUTO:xxxPROF can not.

          3) For classes that get ALL Marital weapons (Fighter, etc), we have
          "All Martial Weapon Proficiencies" that grants them all, and allows an
          easy PRExxx for checking if a character has them all.

          Currently, since AUTO:WEAPONPROF etc. can not be .CLEARed, we are
          using holder objects for EVERY proficiency in release sets. Class
          calls "ABILITY:Special Ability|AUTOMATIC| XX Class Proficiencies" ,
          which has the AUTO:WEAPONPROF (typically that is the one that is
          different) that doesn't fit a neat generic call. That way a user can
          .CLEAR the ABILITY tag, and make any changes for their homebrew set.
          Long term hasn't been discussed other than we eventually want a .CLEAR
          for AUTO:xxxPROF tags (Waiting to let the code cleanup happen - could
          mean a new tag and deprecation, or just an upgrade to the tag, but we
          haven't spec'd it out yet that I remember.)

          For your own files, use whatever is easiest for you. :)

          --
          Tir Gwaith
          PCGen LST Chimp






          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.