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

Re: [BUG]5.9.4 PRESIZE in EQMODs broken?

Expand Messages
  • Byngl
    Shouldn t there be two different PRE s here? One for the size of equipment, and one for the size of a character? And since it looks like PRESIZE was never
    Message 1 of 7 , Apr 5, 2006
    • 0 Attachment
      Shouldn't there be two different PRE's here? One for the size of
      equipment, and one for the size of a character? And since it looks
      like PRESIZE was never coded for equipment, something like
      PREEQUIPSIZE might do.

      Byngl

      --- In pcgen@yahoogroups.com, boomer70 <boomer70@...> wrote:
      >
      >
      >
      > --- Eddy Anthony <eddyba@...> wrote:
      >
      > > boomer70 scribed:
      > >
      > > > I am not really sure how you would want this to
      > > work.
      > > > Without fundamentally changing the way the item
      > > > customizer works there are only two solutions,
      > > always
      > > > pass the prereq or never pass the prereq. Never
      > > > passing puts you right back where you started
      > > (minus
      > > > the error msgs). Always passing would always show
      > > the
      > > > EQMOD. I am not sure what would happen if you
      > > then
      > > > equipped the item to a character with this EQMOD.
      > > It
      > > > may "work" in that if the prereq failed against
      > > the
      > > > character its mods wouldn't be applied but I am
      > > not
      > > > sure about that.
      > >
      > > Not sure I follow, a PRESIZE tag in an EQMOD should
      > > be evaluated against the
      > > SIZE of the equipment it is being applied to. If the
      > > equipment has no SIZE
      > > tag it is assumed to be medium, or at least I assume
      > > that is what it is
      > > assuming see as how that is the size shown in the
      > > equipment info pane in
      > > such cases.
      >
      > OK thats more than a little confusing. However if
      > that is what it is supposed to do it is easy to fix.
      > I didn't see that in the documentation, did I miss it
      > or do we need a doc tracker for it?
      >
      > -Aaron
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.