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

Re: Feature Ideas

Expand Messages
  • zebuleon@peoplepc.com
    oh, shows what I know huh? :) Thanks Mario ... that ... a
    Message 1 of 19 , Feb 28, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      oh, shows what I know huh? :)

      Thanks
      Mario
      --- In pcgen@y..., mocha@m... wrote:
      > I said DESCRIPTION tag, not DESCRIPTOR. :) I can see how you'd be
      > confused.
      > DESCRIPTION is a tag I want to make work for all objects. the
      > DESCRIPTOR tag is intended to be kind of an alternate-school
      > capability for spells. If you don't want to use it this way, and
      > since (I think, anyway, I'd have to check to be sure) you can output
      > the DESCRIPTOR tag for spells, you haven't wasted your time.
      > So, yes, the DESCRIPTOR tag is working (at least I haven't heard
      that
      > it isn't...)
      >
      > -Bryan
      >
      > --- In pcgen@y..., zebuleon@p... wrote:
      > > --- In pcgen@y..., mocha@m... wrote:
      > > > I think what has been suggested is using the effect-type tag
      > unless
      > > > (or until...) I add in a hook where you can put descriptions in
      a
      > > > file of your choosing and grab the descriptions from there and
      > dump
      > > > it out with a DESCRIPTION tag.
      > > >
      > > > -Bryan
      > > >
      > > I don't understand, I thought the DESCRIPTOR tag was working, was
      > it a
      > > waste for me to go through and add all those tags to the spells if
      > > your not going to use them? I'm not mad or anything but you should
      > > have told me to put them in the effect_type spot instead.
      > >
      > > For the R&R spells should I move the descriptor information to the
      > > effect_type spot or leave it with the Descriptor tag?
      > >
      > > Mario
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.