Re: [BUG] Amulet of Natural Armor
- --- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Eddy Anthony <eddyba@m...> wrote:
> Actually there is a bug with this implementation. If you apply Magicthey are
> Vestment to already magic Armor the effects should not stack since
> both Enhancements to Armor, you would get the spells enhancement or theWell, that just means that there are multiple bugs to fix. It doesn't
> original plus value of the Armor, whatever is better. However PCGen just
> adds them up.
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 besince
> displayed correctly on the OS and it was not thought to be a problem
> the enhancement EQMODs could be set to be mutually exclusive. Idon't think
> temp bonuses from spells were considered because when thisconfiguration 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 typesit would
> be possible to separate them, the OS could have a box for nonmagical AC for
> when you enter an anti-magic zone. It would conceivably be possibleto 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 haveand 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' whichscore or its
> can be removed, it is a quality of the creature like an ability
> 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).
- ben_craig256 scribed:
> <improbable solution>Improbable indeed, since what we have now covers almost everything it's not
> 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>
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 :-)
~ Eddy Anthony (MoSaT)
~ PCGen Content Silverback