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

Feats uploaded

Expand Messages
  • Drew Bernat
    I ve uploaded my first go at the feats listing. Weapon Finesse isn t working yet (still choose one instead of for all ), and someone is welcome to tell me
    Message 1 of 20 , Jul 22, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      I've uploaded my first go at the feats listing. Weapon Finesse isn't
      working yet (still "choose one" instead of "for all"), and someone is
      welcome to tell me I'm a doofus for not figuring that one out.

      Also, tower shield now has a separate proficiency. I didn't see a "shield
      proficiency" to modify (the shield feat appears to do nothing).

      Comments very welcome.

      Finally, I copied the old SRD in that we never use the DESC tag (well,
      "see text"). Is there any reason for that? I wouldn't mind putting in
      short pulled-from-SRD descriptions.

      Drew

      --
      Drew Bernat __ ____
      abernat@... | | |
      http://www.zathras.net | |
    • Thomas Jannes
      ... If this can reassure you about your potential doofus-being, I asked about using a weapon type for weapon finesse and got as answer that BONUS:WEAPONPROF=
      Message 2 of 20 , Jul 22, 2003
      • 0 Attachment
        > I've uploaded my first go at the feats listing. Weapon Finesse isn't
        > working yet (still "choose one" instead of "for all"), and someone is
        > welcome to tell me I'm a doofus for not figuring that one out.

        > Also, tower shield now has a separate proficiency. I didn't see a "shield
        > proficiency" to modify (the shield feat appears to do nothing).

        > Comments very welcome.

        > Finally, I copied the old SRD in that we never use the DESC tag (well,
        > "see text"). Is there any reason for that? I wouldn't mind putting in
        > short pulled-from-SRD descriptions.

        > Drew

        If this can reassure you about your potential doofus-being, I asked
        about using a weapon type for weapon finesse and got as answer that

        "BONUS:WEAPONPROF= does not allow a TYPE to be used on the weapon
        proficiency place. You have to list each weapon proficiency.

        BONUS:WEAPONPROF=Longbow OK
        BONUS:WEAPONPROF=TYPE.BOW NOK

        Felipe
        - OSCM Gibbon"

        So, that would be a new FREQ for 3.5 I guess ?

        Thomas/Chipoulou
        Mad OS Test Monkey
      • Felipe F. Diniz
        ... isn t ... someone is ... a shield ... (well, ... putting in ... Yes, new FREQ, already working on it. Tir already tossed it to me before getting into his
        Message 3 of 20 , Jul 22, 2003
        • 0 Attachment
          --- In pcgen@yahoogroups.com, Thomas Jannes <tjannes@v...> wrote:
          > > I've uploaded my first go at the feats listing. Weapon Finesse
          isn't
          > > working yet (still "choose one" instead of "for all"), and
          someone is
          > > welcome to tell me I'm a doofus for not figuring that one out.
          >
          > > Also, tower shield now has a separate proficiency. I didn't see
          a "shield
          > > proficiency" to modify (the shield feat appears to do nothing).
          >
          > > Comments very welcome.
          >
          > > Finally, I copied the old SRD in that we never use the DESC tag
          (well,
          > > "see text"). Is there any reason for that? I wouldn't mind
          putting in
          > > short pulled-from-SRD descriptions.
          >
          > > Drew
          >
          > If this can reassure you about your potential doofus-being, I asked
          > about using a weapon type for weapon finesse and got as answer that
          >
          > "BONUS:WEAPONPROF= does not allow a TYPE to be used on the weapon
          > proficiency place. You have to list each weapon proficiency.
          >
          > BONUS:WEAPONPROF=Longbow OK
          > BONUS:WEAPONPROF=TYPE.BOW NOK
          >
          > Felipe
          > - OSCM Gibbon"
          >
          > So, that would be a new FREQ for 3.5 I guess ?
          >
          > Thomas/Chipoulou
          > Mad OS Test Monkey


          Yes, new FREQ, already working on it. Tir already tossed it to me
          before getting into his bus to Indy... I don't know if there is
          actually a FREQ ticket for it, though.


          Felipe
          - OSCM Gibbon
        • Felipe F. Diniz
          ... asked ... that ... Hey, Thomas, looks like i found a way to do this without this FREQ. BONUS:TOHIT|TYPE=Finesseable|(DEX-STR) Can someone test this,
          Message 4 of 20 , Jul 22, 2003
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In pcgen@yahoogroups.com, "Felipe F. Diniz" <fdiniz@i...> wrote:
            > --- In pcgen@yahoogroups.com, Thomas Jannes <tjannes@v...> wrote:
            > > > I've uploaded my first go at the feats listing. Weapon Finesse
            > isn't
            > > > working yet (still "choose one" instead of "for all"), and
            > someone is
            > > > welcome to tell me I'm a doofus for not figuring that one out.
            > >
            > > > Also, tower shield now has a separate proficiency. I didn't see
            > a "shield
            > > > proficiency" to modify (the shield feat appears to do nothing).
            > >
            > > > Comments very welcome.
            > >
            > > > Finally, I copied the old SRD in that we never use the DESC tag
            > (well,
            > > > "see text"). Is there any reason for that? I wouldn't mind
            > putting in
            > > > short pulled-from-SRD descriptions.
            > >
            > > > Drew
            > >
            > > If this can reassure you about your potential doofus-being, I
            asked
            > > about using a weapon type for weapon finesse and got as answer
            that
            > >
            > > "BONUS:WEAPONPROF= does not allow a TYPE to be used on the weapon
            > > proficiency place. You have to list each weapon proficiency.
            > >
            > > BONUS:WEAPONPROF=Longbow OK
            > > BONUS:WEAPONPROF=TYPE.BOW NOK
            > >
            > > Felipe
            > > - OSCM Gibbon"
            > >
            > > So, that would be a new FREQ for 3.5 I guess ?
            > >
            > > Thomas/Chipoulou
            > > Mad OS Test Monkey
            >
            >
            > Yes, new FREQ, already working on it. Tir already tossed it to me
            > before getting into his bus to Indy... I don't know if there is
            > actually a FREQ ticket for it, though.
            >
            >
            > Felipe
            > - OSCM Gibbon

            Hey, Thomas, looks like i found a way to do this without this FREQ.

            BONUS:TOHIT|TYPE=Finesseable|(DEX-STR)

            Can someone test this, please?

            Felipe
            - OSCM Gibbon
          • dlm1065
            ... If I have a DEX 10 & STR 18 this would be a -4 to hit I think you need to add something a condition something like this perhaps??
            Message 5 of 20 , Jul 22, 2003
            • 0 Attachment
              > Hey, Thomas, looks like i found a way to do this without this FREQ.
              >
              > BONUS:TOHIT|TYPE=Finesseable|(DEX-STR)
              >
              > Can someone test this, please?
              >
              > Felipe
              > - OSCM Gibbon

              If I have a DEX 10 & STR 18 this would be a -4 to hit

              I think you need to add something a condition something like this
              perhaps??

              BONUS:TOHIT|TYPE=Finesseable|(DEX-STR)|PREVARGT:DEX,STR

              dlm1065@...
              -Lst Gorilla
            • dlm1065
              people take a look at this example I thing you ll like it http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PCGenListFileHelp/message/3317
              Message 6 of 20 , Jul 22, 2003
              • 0 Attachment
                people take a look at this example I thing you'll like it

                http://groups.yahoo.com/group/PCGenListFileHelp/message/3317
              • Thomas Jannes
                ... Well, that s what I tested first of all if I remember correctly... Thomas/Chipoulou Mad OS Test Monkey
                Message 7 of 20 , Jul 22, 2003
                • 0 Attachment
                  > --- In pcgen@yahoogroups.com, "Felipe F. Diniz" <fdiniz@i...> wrote:
                  >> --- In pcgen@yahoogroups.com, Thomas Jannes <tjannes@v...> wrote:
                  >> > > I've uploaded my first go at the feats listing. Weapon Finesse
                  >> isn't
                  >> > > working yet (still "choose one" instead of "for all"), and
                  >> someone is
                  >> > > welcome to tell me I'm a doofus for not figuring that one out.
                  >> >
                  >> > > Also, tower shield now has a separate proficiency. I didn't see
                  >> a "shield
                  >> > > proficiency" to modify (the shield feat appears to do nothing).
                  >> >
                  >> > > Comments very welcome.
                  >> >
                  >> > > Finally, I copied the old SRD in that we never use the DESC tag
                  >> (well,
                  >> > > "see text"). Is there any reason for that? I wouldn't mind
                  >> putting in
                  >> > > short pulled-from-SRD descriptions.
                  >> >
                  >> > > Drew
                  >> >
                  >> > If this can reassure you about your potential doofus-being, I
                  > asked
                  >> > about using a weapon type for weapon finesse and got as answer
                  > that
                  >> >
                  >> > "BONUS:WEAPONPROF= does not allow a TYPE to be used on the weapon
                  >> > proficiency place. You have to list each weapon proficiency.
                  >> >
                  >> > BONUS:WEAPONPROF=Longbow OK
                  >> > BONUS:WEAPONPROF=TYPE.BOW NOK
                  >> >
                  >> > Felipe
                  >> > - OSCM Gibbon"
                  >> >
                  >> > So, that would be a new FREQ for 3.5 I guess ?
                  >> >
                  >> > Thomas/Chipoulou
                  >> > Mad OS Test Monkey
                  >>
                  >>
                  >> Yes, new FREQ, already working on it. Tir already tossed it to me
                  >> before getting into his bus to Indy... I don't know if there is
                  >> actually a FREQ ticket for it, though.
                  >>
                  >>
                  >> Felipe
                  >> - OSCM Gibbon

                  > Hey, Thomas, looks like i found a way to do this without this FREQ.

                  > BONUS:TOHIT|TYPE=Finesseable|(DEX-STR)

                  > Can someone test this, please?

                  > Felipe
                  > - OSCM Gibbon

                  Well, that's what I tested first of all if I remember correctly...

                  Thomas/Chipoulou
                  Mad OS Test Monkey
                • Felipe F. Diniz
                  ... FREQ. ... Well, i tested it here, and it worked, so could you test again? As noted by a fellow monkey, it really needs to be this:
                  Message 8 of 20 , Jul 22, 2003
                  • 0 Attachment
                    > > Hey, Thomas, looks like i found a way to do this without this
                    FREQ.
                    >
                    > > BONUS:TOHIT|TYPE=Finesseable|(DEX-STR)
                    >
                    > > Can someone test this, please?
                    >
                    > > Felipe
                    > > - OSCM Gibbon
                    >
                    > Well, that's what I tested first of all if I remember correctly...
                    >
                    > Thomas/Chipoulou
                    > Mad OS Test Monkey

                    Well, i tested it here, and it worked, so could you test again? As
                    noted by a fellow monkey, it really needs to be this:

                    BONUS:TOHIT|TYPE=Finesseable|(DEXMAXSTR)-STR

                    Felipe
                    - OSCM Gibbon
                  • Thomas Jannes
                    ... Well, you re right ! This works :-) Thomas/Chipoulou Mad OS Test Monkey
                    Message 9 of 20 , Jul 22, 2003
                    • 0 Attachment
                      >> > Hey, Thomas, looks like i found a way to do this without this
                      > FREQ.
                      >>
                      >> > BONUS:TOHIT|TYPE=Finesseable|(DEX-STR)
                      >>
                      >> > Can someone test this, please?
                      >>
                      >> > Felipe
                      >> > - OSCM Gibbon
                      >>
                      >> Well, that's what I tested first of all if I remember correctly...
                      >>
                      >> Thomas/Chipoulou
                      >> Mad OS Test Monkey

                      > Well, i tested it here, and it worked, so could you test again? As
                      > noted by a fellow monkey, it really needs to be this:

                      > BONUS:TOHIT|TYPE=Finesseable|(DEXMAXSTR)-STR

                      > Felipe
                      > - OSCM Gibbon

                      Well, you're right ! This works :-)


                      Thomas/Chipoulou
                      Mad OS Test Monkey
                    • Drew Bernat
                      ... Updated on Yahoo (I hope I got it right...) Drew -- Drew Bernat __ ____ abernat@zathras.net
                      Message 10 of 20 , Jul 22, 2003
                      • 0 Attachment
                        > Well, you're right ! This works :-)

                        Updated on Yahoo (I hope I got it right...)

                        Drew

                        --
                        Drew Bernat __ ____
                        abernat@... | | |
                        http://www.zathras.net | |
                      • Andy Knight
                        From: Drew Bernat [mailto:abernat@zathras.net] Finally, I copied the old SRD in that we never use the DESC tag (well, see text ). Is there any reason for
                        Message 11 of 20 , Jul 22, 2003
                        • 0 Attachment
                          From: Drew Bernat [mailto:abernat@...]

                          Finally, I copied the old SRD in that we never use the DESC
                          tag (well, "see text"). Is there any reason for that? I
                          wouldn't mind putting in short pulled-from-SRD descriptions.

                          -----------------
                          Drew,
                          The See Text is there because the 3.0 SRD didn't include the
                          one-liner descriptions of the feat. 3.5 SRD does not have
                          the descriptions either, so you'll have to keep it as See
                          Text.

                          -Andy Knight

                          (For those who are new to this list, you may look at the SRD
                          and say "'nuh-uh, just use the 'Benefit:' line." This has
                          been debated here time and time again: "Benefit:" is the
                          game mechanic, not the "Description". If you open your PHB
                          3.5 to page 89, you'll see the one-liners just under each
                          feat name. For Example: "Acrobat: You have excellent body
                          awareness and coordination." You won't find that in the
                          RSRD, so it is left as closed content, which is land only
                          CMP may tread.)
                        • Drew Bernat
                          ... Gotcha. Saves me some typing, too :) Drew -- Drew Bernat __ ____ abernat@zathras.net
                          Message 12 of 20 , Jul 22, 2003
                          • 0 Attachment
                            On Tue, 22 Jul 2003, Andy Knight wrote:

                            > The See Text is there because the 3.0 SRD didn't include the
                            > one-liner descriptions of the feat. 3.5 SRD does not have
                            > the descriptions either, so you'll have to keep it as See
                            > Text.

                            Gotcha. Saves me some typing, too :)

                            Drew

                            --
                            Drew Bernat __ ____
                            abernat@... | | |
                            http://www.zathras.net | |
                          • frugal@purplewombat.co.uk
                            ... That is a shame. Especialy as the one line descriptions are in the PHB ;o( I had assumed that when I read the PHB that they were
                            Message 13 of 20 , Jul 23, 2003
                            • 0 Attachment
                              <quote who="Andy Knight">
                              > Drew,
                              > The See Text is there because the 3.0 SRD didn't include the
                              > one-liner descriptions of the feat. 3.5 SRD does not have
                              > the descriptions either, so you'll have to keep it as See
                              > Text.

                              That is a shame. Especialy as the one line descriptions are in the PHB ;o(
                              I had assumed that when I read the PHB that they were put in to make the
                              life of people like us a lot easier and would be in the RSRD. Ho hum...

                              --
                              regards,
                              Frugal
                              -OS Tamarin
                            • Brad Franks
                              As a player, user of PCGen and sometimes DM I think the Benefit text is FAR more useful than the one liner description. When looking over feats on a
                              Message 14 of 20 , Jul 23, 2003
                              • 0 Attachment
                                As a player, user of PCGen and sometimes DM I think the "Benefit" text is
                                FAR more useful than the one liner description. When looking over feats on a
                                character sheet which do you find more useful...???

                                From 3.0 PHB Weapon Focus Feat:

                                Description: "You are especially good at using this weapon"

                                OR

                                Benefit: "You add +1 to all attack rolls you make using the selected weapon"

                                The Description doesn't tell me squat about what Weapon Focus does, but the
                                Benefit tells me exactly what I need to know at a glance. Not only that but
                                the Benefit is actually *in* the SRD and RSRD and thus is legal to use
                                publicly under the OGL.

                                Brad

                                ----- Original Message -----
                                From: <frugal@...>

                                > <quote who="Andy Knight">
                                > > Drew,
                                > > The See Text is there because the 3.0 SRD didn't include the
                                > > one-liner descriptions of the feat. 3.5 SRD does not have
                                > > the descriptions either, so you'll have to keep it as See
                                > > Text.
                                >
                                > That is a shame. Especialy as the one line descriptions are in the PHB ;o(
                                > I had assumed that when I read the PHB that they were put in to make the
                                > life of people like us a lot easier and would be in the RSRD. Ho hum...
                              • Vance
                                ... Correct me if I m wrong, but I believe the reasoning behind NOT using the Benefit is that PcGen is an AID to the d20 books, not a replacement. If enough
                                Message 15 of 20 , Jul 23, 2003
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  >The Description doesn't tell me squat about what Weapon Focus does, but the
                                  >Benefit tells me exactly what I need to know at a glance. Not only that but
                                  >the Benefit is actually *in* the SRD and RSRD and thus is legal to use
                                  >publicly under the OGL.

                                  Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the reasoning behind NOT using the
                                  "Benefit" is that PcGen is an AID to the d20 books, not a replacement. If
                                  enough information is put out that would minimize the requirement for the
                                  original books, it "could" jepordize the relationship with WoTC. You can
                                  always put it in yourself in your own private copy.

                                  VR
                                • Brad Franks
                                  I truly and honestly agree that PCGen and the SRD should be an aid *only* to the books (and that users of PCGen and the SRD should need the books to play).
                                  Message 16 of 20 , Jul 23, 2003
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    I truly and honestly agree that PCGen and the SRD should be an aid *only* to
                                    the books (and that users of PCGen and the SRD should need the books to
                                    play). From what I've read of the OGL (and I admit that my readings are
                                    minimal), *everything* in the SRD/RSRD is available for public consumption
                                    and use.

                                    --
                                    From the SRD page - http://www.wizards.com/D20/article.asp?x=srd35 - "You
                                    may consider this material Open Game Content under the Open Game License,
                                    and may use, modify, and distribute it."

                                    --
                                    From the SRD FAQ page - http://www.wizards.com/D20/article.asp?x=dt20010417h

                                    "Q: Can I use the SRD verbatim?
                                    A: Sure.

                                    Q: Could I publish the whole thing?

                                    A: Sure. If you think someone would be willing to pay for it, you're more
                                    than welcome to try."


                                    Brad

                                    ----- Original Message -----
                                    From: "Vance" <clubvance@...>
                                    >
                                    > Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the reasoning behind NOT using the
                                    > "Benefit" is that PcGen is an AID to the d20 books, not a replacement. If
                                    > enough information is put out that would minimize the requirement for the
                                    > original books, it "could" jepordize the relationship with WoTC. You can
                                    > always put it in yourself in your own private copy.
                                  • cyberfunkr
                                    ... *only* to ... consumption ... Okay.. I had this long, logical dispute about why we should allow the Benefit line from the SRD into the datasets, but since
                                    Message 17 of 20 , Jul 24, 2003
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      --- In pcgen@yahoogroups.com, "Brad Franks" <bfranks@d...> wrote:
                                      > I truly and honestly agree that PCGen and the SRD should be an aid
                                      *only* to
                                      > the books (and that users of PCGen and the SRD should need the books to
                                      > play). From what I've read of the OGL (and I admit that my readings are
                                      > minimal), *everything* in the SRD/RSRD is available for public
                                      consumption
                                      > and use.
                                      >

                                      Okay.. I had this long, logical dispute about why we should allow the
                                      Benefit line from the SRD into the datasets, but since the
                                      powers-that-be are mostly off at GenCon (Can they really call it
                                      "Gen"Con anymore now that it's not in Geneva?), and I've been here
                                      long enough to have seen all the wars, I'll just archive it.

                                      Maybe I'll send it to K after it's all over.

                                      /Cyberfunkr
                                    • traine_dan_torcan
                                      It stands for General Convention nowadays,
                                      Message 18 of 20 , Jul 24, 2003
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        It stands for "General Convention" nowadays,

                                        > (Can they really call it
                                        > "Gen"Con anymore now that it's not in Geneva?),
                                      • James Wright
                                        Okay.. I had this long, logical dispute about why we should allow the Benefit line from the SRD into the datasets, but since the powers-that-be are mostly off
                                        Message 19 of 20 , Jul 24, 2003
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Okay.. I had this long, logical dispute about why we should allow the
                                          Benefit line from the SRD into the datasets, but since the
                                          powers-that-be are mostly off at GenCon (Can they really call it
                                          "Gen"Con anymore now that it's not in Geneva?), and I've been here
                                          long enough to have seen all the wars, I'll just archive it.

                                          I am not sure about the use of the benefit line being put in, i would think
                                          that it would follow along the lines of using page numbers, which i know
                                          that (being the one who redid the MM in 3.0 ver books.) all the page number
                                          entry had to be changed to the monster name, so as to not violate the OGL,
                                          but who knows, i don't as of yet have the 3.5 books, so i am probaly just
                                          staring a fire here


                                          James wright

                                          _________________________________________________________________
                                          The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
                                          http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
                                        • Martijn Verburg (DSLWN)
                                          Hi all, We ll discuss this @ the next BoD meeting. K TM SB ... From: James Wright [mailto:wright_kavika@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, 25 July 2003 7:57 a.m. To:
                                          Message 20 of 20 , Jul 31, 2003
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            Hi all,



                                            We'll discuss this @ the next BoD meeting.



                                            K

                                            TM SB



                                            -----Original Message-----
                                            From: James Wright [mailto:wright_kavika@...]
                                            Sent: Friday, 25 July 2003 7:57 a.m.
                                            To: pcgen@yahoogroups.com
                                            Subject: Re: [pcgen] Re: Feats uploaded



                                            Okay.. I had this long, logical dispute about why we should allow the
                                            Benefit line from the SRD into the datasets, but since the
                                            powers-that-be are mostly off at GenCon (Can they really call it
                                            "Gen"Con anymore now that it's not in Geneva?), and I've been here
                                            long enough to have seen all the wars, I'll just archive it.

                                            I am not sure about the use of the benefit line being put in, i would think
                                            that it would follow along the lines of using page numbers, which i know
                                            that (being the one who redid the MM in 3.0 ver books.) all the page number
                                            entry had to be changed to the monster name, so as to not violate the OGL,
                                            but who knows, i don't as of yet have the 3.5 books, so i am probaly just
                                            staring a fire here


                                            James wright





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