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

Re: EQARMOR tag question (and one about templates)

Expand Messages
  • merton_monk
    ... penalties, ... me how ... (MAXDEX ... armour ... select it, ... should and ... EQMARMOR tag ... Hmmm... could you upload your lst file here to the Needs
    Message 1 of 2 , Aug 6, 2002
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In pcgen@y..., Gilberto Leon <edheldur@a...> wrote:
      > It's been some days since I posted my question about armor check
      penalties,
      > and about a feat to reduce said number. Ark was kind enough to tell
      me how
      > to do it... but... it doesn't work.
      >
      > > In TQFighter there is a feat called Improved Armour (damned brits)
      > > Use and the ACCHECK tag works there. As far as the other two
      (MAXDEX
      > > and SPELLFAILURE) I would only assume that it works the same..
      >
      > After my failed atempt to code it, I decided to check the Improved
      armour
      > use feat, and it doesn't work either. Actually, when I click to
      select it,
      > it just won't let me select it. The feat does not appear where it
      should and
      > the bonus it gives doesn't works. So, I guess in the end, the
      EQMARMOR tag
      > doesn't work in every file as Byngl said.

      Hmmm... could you upload your lst file here to the "Needs Help With"
      folder? That way we can check your work and our code more easily.

      >
      > FYI, I was working on the Nightsong Enforcer class from Dragon
      Magazine a
      > few issues ago.
      >
      > And now, about templates. I just grabbed the latest build from
      plambert.net
      > and began fiddling around with templates and races, and noticed
      something.
      > When I choose a template, all of the SA's that the template gives
      to the
      > base creature appear listed in the abilities tab of the character
      with a
      > "(2)", as if the character had gained the same SA in 2 different
      ways. Not
      > that it matters much ruleswise, but I'm wondering if it's supposed
      to be
      > that way or not.

      I fixed that for 3.0.0, and I thought I had made that change for what
      gets built at plambert's site as well. If you're seeing that, then
      something went wrong... thanks for mentioning it!

      >
      > Gilberto Leon
      >
      > PS.- And once again, congrats on a great tool for players and DMs
      alike.

      Our pleasure. We use it too. :)

      -Bryan
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.