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

Re: [BUG] Amulet of Natural Armor

Expand Messages
  • ben_craig256
    ... they are ... Well, that just means that there are multiple bugs to fix. It doesn t mean that introducing an implementation only bonus would be the best
    Message 1 of 32 , Aug 2, 2005
      --- In pcgen@yahoogroups.com, Eddy Anthony <eddyba@m...> wrote:
      > Actually there is a bug with this implementation. If you apply Magic
      > Vestment to already magic Armor the effects should not stack since
      they are
      > both Enhancements to Armor, you would get the spells enhancement or the
      > original plus value of the Armor, whatever is better. However PCGen just
      > adds them up.

      Well, that just means that there are multiple bugs to fix. It doesn't
      mean that introducing an implementation only bonus would be the best
      approach. As an aside, does PCGen support giving bonuses to bonuses?

      > I'd guess this was done this way so that the total AC value would be
      > displayed correctly on the OS and it was not thought to be a problem
      since
      > the enhancement EQMODs could be set to be mutually exclusive. I
      don't think
      > temp bonuses from spells were considered because when this
      configuration was
      > developed they didn't exist.

      Correct me if I'm wrong (because I probably am in this case), but
      won't making Amulets of Natural Armor give a NaturalArmorEnhancement
      bonus break the OS? An extra field in the output will have to be
      added, or the sheet will have to be modified to add the natural armor
      bonus and the enhancement bonus.

      > What's more because all the magic bonuses would have distinct types
      it would
      > be possible to separate them, the OS could have a box for non
      magical AC for
      > when you enter an anti-magic zone. It would conceivably be possible
      to have
      > a way to turn all the magic off and have the OS display that.

      Using that approach, you'd have to make exceptions for things like +5
      Holy Swords and the like, since most of that is magical, but there's
      still a Masterwork bonus underneath that still works in an anti-magic
      zone. Perhaps TYPE=Enhancement.Magic?

      > That would involve overhauling like 80% of all the creatures we have
      and so
      > I don't see that happening for that reason alone.

      Actually, you'd have to overhaul every one of them, even the ones with
      a natural armor bonus of 0. Otherwise they couldn't receive barkskin
      at all. It -should- be a fairly easy change to make though, just a
      lot of that easy change. Definitely something I would be willing to
      do though, once a solution is decided on :).

      > Natural Armor is not a 'thing' which
      > can be removed, it is a quality of the creature like an ability
      score or its
      > size. I don't see a problem with the way it is currently handled.

      You can't remove, claws, bites, slams, or gores either, but they are
      still handled that way. Magic Fang requires it (and also happens to
      follow the whole "I give enhancement bonuses to stuff" pattern).
    • Eddy Anthony
      ... Improbable indeed, since what we have now covers almost everything it s not likely to change anytime soon. However if you would like to keep poking at it
      Message 32 of 32 , Aug 3, 2005
        ben_craig256 scribed:

        > <improbable solution>
        > Perhaps we could continue with the multiple bonus type thread and give
        > physical armor TYPE=Armor.Item and Magic Vestment a
        > TYPE=Armor.Item.Enhancement. To keep other armor bonuses from
        > inadvertantly stacking, we may be able to do something like
        > Armor.Magic. Then we can take the highest valued Armor "branch" and
        > use that for the armor bonus.
        > </improbable solution>

        Improbable indeed, since what we have now covers almost everything it's not
        likely to change anytime soon. However if you would like to keep poking at
        it (which is what I've been doing) Tir is continuing this thread at
        pcgen_experimental where we do most of the data development. Feel free to
        join us :-)

        <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/pcgen_experimental/>
        --
        ~ Eddy Anthony (MoSaT)
        ~ PCGen Content Silverback
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.