Community call for a 3.0 Core expanded how to make a ruleset tutorial

[Blacky]

I personally think a series of short video tutorial would be easier and faster to produce than written text guides as well as being easier for users to perhaps follow

I do think text & images are easier:

1. The author don't have to handle HD screencast, keeping full control of the pacing, the windows, playing with bitrate and such, and so on.
2. One doesn't have to re-do the video (sometime the full video) to update its content.
3. It's easier to understand for non fluent English speakers.
4. It's more precise when talking about code that pronouncing it in a microphone.
5. It's easier to work on it with multiple authors, insert comments, updates, corrections, whatever.
6. It's easier to localize if such translation happens.
7. It's more accessible, for people who have a visual or hearing impairment.
8. It's easier to follow, the tutored doesn't have to speed check some way to slow passage or stop&rewind incessantly on more complex steps.

However, any serious guide rubber stamped by SmiteWorks is better than none

[dulux-oz]

I concur with Blacky - to do a Video Tutorial well you need a well written script to start with, otherwise the video jumps around to much, etc, etc, etc.

And if you've got a well written script in the first place, then you've effectively got a written text, etc.

Cheers

[martel]

i like this :-) Zeus and Blacky and dulux-oz :-)

one video could add 1 comment with each langage for explain example via https://captiontube.appspot.com/
the people translate and send mail to owner video, to add this caption text into video original. with out copy video :-)
click on CC button into video youtube to display the langage text caption.

it is a very good idea.

one video and x translate caption text langage. :-) it is easy to follow the video on other langage audio :s

I do think text & images are easier:

1. The author don't have to handle HD screencast, keeping full control of the pacing, the windows, playing with bitrate and such, and so on.
2. One doesn't have to re-do the video (sometime the full video) to update its content.
3. It's easier to understand for non fluent English speakers.
4. It's more precise when talking about code that pronouncing it in a microphone.
5. It's easier to work on it with multiple authors, insert comments, updates, corrections, whatever.
6. It's easier to localize if such translation happens.
7. It's more accessible, for people who have a visual or hearing impairment.
8. It's easier to follow, the tutored doesn't have to speed check some way to slow passage or stop&rewind incessantly on more complex steps.

However, any serious guide rubber stamped by SmiteWorks is better than none

[Bidmaron]

Users can try to put something together. dulux-oz has a great set of videos, and he put a great deal of time into them. FG3 came along, and now he's redoing them all because he really can't just patch them.

There is a ruleset creation guide already. It is horribly outdated. I just think that I'd rather have JPG, Trenloe, Zues, and those few who (as someone put it) "really know what they're doing" working on getting us the automation improvements that we really want and need (just look at the wish list) than creating tutorials or even sanctioning tutorials that any of us users come up with.

There are rulesets already for the more common games, and more are coming along. There are a whole lot more rulesets that were created and either no longer functional or barely functional because creating a ruleset is not a one-time endeavor. It requires maintenance and support.

Even if we were to produce a tutorial, it would be out of date in less than six months because MoonWizard would have moved on by then.

I'm not trying to insult anyone. It's just not possible or realistic. People have successfully made rulesets without these tutorials, and rulesets are in creation now. In deconstructing or reverse engineering, you gain the skills you are going to need in order to produce a ruleset. The journey is necessary to reach the destination. No video (IMO) is ever going to measure up with the sheer awe you will feel if you are ever in the Vatican (no, I'm not Catholic, but that experience almost made me wish I were).

You can't do a tutorial without showing how to walk your way through all the files, and you cannot do that without settling on a tool for that job. While Notepad++ seems to be the most popular among those who do (or try) some of this, the minute you settle on that, someone will be bitching because you didn't tell them how to do it in whatever program it is that they prefer. This is just one of the many issues you'll struggle with in such a set of tutorials.

Just look at the mini-debate going on here regarding format (I think Blacky has the only workable idea). Think about it: FG is so complex that you could sit through the entire tutorial library (dulux-oz had over 3 hours of videos on just PLAYING the game, and he's still got hours left to go), and then when you got ready to do something you'd do something like this: "okay, I remember the tutorial told me the chat box management was in Chat_Manager.lua, but which routine was it again where I could circumvent the xml node ownership by passing message from the client back to the host again? Gee, I think that was in video fifteen, but that thing was 30 minutes long."

It's just not realistic. The Bible has been around for many hundreds of years, and there are still people trying to explain it.

JPG has done a fabulous job, and I for one don't want him to slow down any more than is necessary to maintain the documents on the routines he has graciously provided. Whatever Smiteworks makes for their software I am certain is not enough. I thank them for what they do, but I support them in focusing on what is important, and I think they've done a masterful job in balancing engine evolution, ruleset generation and support, responding to us demanding bastards on the boards, and documenting their wonderful handiwork.

[ImaTarget]

Hi all, I found this thread and must say I do not understand the reluctance to even start a Turorial. I think Dr.Zeus had the right idea. The average user does not need a totally in depth line by line tutorial. Give me one to explain how to change the graphics to make a Themepack and one on how to customize the character sheet. If this indeed so complicated that you need 12+ month programming knowledge to do then FG is simply not sustainable long term. There are many more games around these days then the big few, and modifying the rules to fit your needs is a must have. I have spent three days now just TRYING to understand how a character sheet is layed out without too much success. This is simply not a good way of doing stuff. Yes, there is reference available but if you scare users away with this complexity all you will do is loose more users as tools like Roll20 get more powerful. FG is frustrating as hell for me because I am more the creative kind and less the programmer. And I can´t be creative with FG right now because doing something that should be simple as a character sheets asks me too look into LUA scripts. That is just silly. You may disagree with me, but I am kind of angry I did indeed spend 80 USD on FG just to realize I wont be able to use it to run my games as I want to in the next few month because creating the ruleset extension for it with just a TINY bit of automation is so far out of my scope it is not even funny anymore. I can do some JS, was fairly good in HTML but the undocumented nature of the Rulests makes it near impossible for me to suss out what us what. And I rarely have time to prep my games, much less so to dive deep into the technological side. With my current skill level I can only use Core as is and that feels like a) a waste and b) like I should have stuck with Roll20. :-( And I do not want to go back to R20, I like FG. I am really frustrated right now as you can tell because wherever I look, I just can´t understand how a ruleset works and there are no tutorials at all. I do no need a step by step for everything. Like someone else suggested, start small. This is how you create a Theme extension. Here is how to create a character sheet without LUA. Next tutorial: Here is how to add some automation to your sheet. Roll Against DC. Roll against skill. etc. It seems a lot of people want to open up the whole can of worms to everyone and that is what is intimidating and driving people away from, not to, FG.

Alternatively FG needs a code repository or plugins or SOMETHING that makes creating a working character sheet easier. I think that ongoing crowdfunding thing is also a great idea, it should just be part of native FG and not a separate purchase. Well this went on longer then I wanted to and I hope I did not come off as too negative, I just pull my hair out on this and don´t make any headway. People in this forum are really helpful, I love that and thank them for it, it just slows everything down because I get stuck every few minutes it feels like and can´t move forward until someone steps up friendly and points me in the right direction.

[Moon Wizard]

I apologize for your frustration. It's always a challenge keeping a fresh product moving forward, while documenting everything people should know. Plus, we are 2 guys working part time after working our day jobs. We rely heavily on our community to help us continue to move forward, and we have been very fortunate to have a great community full of people willing to help.

I would say that the easiest way to approach this situation is to back off the character sheet generation, and start with something smaller. Character sheets are typically one of the most complicated piece of any ruleset, because people expect them to do so much.

My suggestion would be to open up one of the theme extensions that comes with Fantasy Grounds to do some theme work first. Graphics replacement is a much easier task, and will give you a better feel.

A couple things that might help to get you started:

Files
* Whenever you open an extension, FG will open the extension.xml file for that extension and begin processing it. Nothing else will get loaded, unless it is specified in the extension.xml file.
* In a similar manner, when loading a ruleset, FG will open the base.xml file for that extension and begin processing it. Again, nothing else gets loaded unless the base.xml file specifies.

XML Tags
* Every tag in those files boils down eventually to a tag in the ruleset reference. If an XML tag has a name not shown, try searching for <template name="tagname"> to see if it is a control template. Otherwise, if it's not in the reference, it's only data for scripts.
https://www.fantasygrounds.com/refdoc/
* While the Anatomy of a Ruleset guide is VERY old and written when FG2 was relatively new, it covers several core topics which are still valid today.
https://www.fantasygrounds.com/filel..._a_Ruleset.pdf

Scripts
* Scripts defined by themselves in the ruleset files are global scripts, and the onInit function within each will be called on ruleset load.
* All other scripts are tied to objects (windowclass, windowcontrol), and are only called when instantiated. Each object type supports a number of "events" automatically called (such as onInit).
* Other objects that aren't specifically defined in the ruleset (tokeninstance, databasenode) can support "handlers" for registering and capturing events ob those objects.

Hope some of that helps. If still stuck, try picking one section of a sheet you are working on, and post up what you are trying to do and where you are stuck. I try to log onto the forums as often as I can, and I'll keep a look out.

Regards,
JPG

[ImaTarget]

Hi MW,

Thank you for your tips. I understand what you are saying but sadly a graphical extension wont allow me to play my game. A simple tabletop that has no automation where I can only throw dice I could have gotten cheaper. That is not or anything, just a fact.

I do understand this is a niche product. Your fans are really awesome in helping, but that can go only so far. I remember when I learned HTML, it was much easier as I could open a handbook, look up the tag and had all possible variations and information there i need. Can´t do that with XML. A library of that would go a long way to help out understanding whats what.
I also did read "Anatomy of a ruleset" and that is what motivated me to start at all, as it seemed easy enough to follow/ do. However It seems to me at least that the new CoreRPG seems more complicated then that. But indeed, that is the kind of tutorial that actually helps. This is what is there, this is what I do, this is what the result is. Great stuff, sadly cut short.

Can you please elaborate on "* Every tag in those files boils down eventually to a tag in the ruleset reference. If an XML tag has a name not shown, try searching for <template name="tagname"> to see if it is a control template. Otherwise, if it's not in the reference, it's only data for scripts."

For example I search for <label_frametop> in all files and find:

Search "<template name="label_frametop">" (1 hit in 1 file)
  E:\Fantasy_Grounds_Data\rulesets\CoreRPGHACK\common\template_common.xml (1 hit)
	Line 54: 	<template name="label_frametop">

That still does not tell me what this tag does, only that it is defined in a file. And I cant find label_frametop in refdoc. And what is a "control template" ? I do not want to get too specific here, I ask the questions in my workshop thread. I just want to illustrate what problems new clients face that want to "just" play their homebrew and use the features that FG promises.

[Moon Wizard]

This may help:
https://www.fantasygrounds.com/modguide/templates.xcp

Whenever a "label_frametop" is defined, it is merged with the contents of the label_frametop template. Let me walk through an example from campaign\record_char_notes.xml.

<label_frametop>
	<anchored to="languageframe" />
	<static textres="char_label_languages" />
</label_frametop>

Then the "label_frametop" template defined in common/template_common.xml is used to merge, and it becomes

<label>
	<anchored to="languageframe" position="insidetop" offset="0,10" />
	<center />
	<static textres="char_label_languages" />
</label>

Then the "label" template defined in common/template_common.xml is used to merge, and it becomes

<stringcontrol>
	<anchored to="languageframe" position="insidetop" offset="0,10" height="20" />
	<font>sheetlabel</font>
	<nodrag />
	<readonly />
	<center />
	<static textres="char_label_languages" />
</stringcontrol>

Finally, the stringcontrol tag is a basic FG object, which supports the anchored, font, nodrag, readonly, center and static tags.
https://www.fantasygrounds.com/refdoc/stringcontrol.xcp
https://www.fantasygrounds.com/refdoc/windowcontrol.xcp

Regards,
JPG

[Moon Wizard]

While I would love to have a drag and drop lego-like system to build character sheets and custom game system support, I haven't seen anyone even come close. It's a very complex problem, both from a data design and UI design point of view. Both Fantasy Grounds and Hero Lab come closest to decent multiple game system support and programmability, and both have development and UI challenges to show for it.

I would still say that FG is designed to be able to be programmed to play any game system, but specialized rules will always require specialized coding. Unfortunately, no other platform that I know of will do any better, unless it is specifically built with support for that game system and outside of user customization.

That said, every person who has developed rulesets on Fantasy Grounds spent quite a while figuring things out by working on extensions or modules first, trying out small changes in an existing ruleset, then working up to bigger changes and a full-fledged ruleset. I went through the same process myself years ago, before I joined the company. And I've added a ton of new features (both for users and developers) since then.

I'm not trying to defend anything, just trying to say that it is complex and requires smaller steps.

Hopefully, some of the questions I have answered will help lead you forward. The offer to look at your code still stands. You can post your PAK file, or send to [email protected], with your questions and issues; and I will do my best to help.

Regards,
JPG

[dulux-oz]

Let me add something to this discussion - you may find it helpful or you may not.

I've actually been playing around with the idea of doing a Tutorial Video on creating "stuff" for FG - it won't be out for a while because I've got other things to do first, but this type of thing - "This seems so simple why can't it be simple" is something I hear professionally every day - its called "End User Computing".

EUC is a great idea on paper, but in reality it never, never lives up to is promises. Why? Because creating something for a computer is a complex task that takes a lot of time, knowledge and experience to do properly - ie you need to know how to code, either as a talented armature or as a professional - and even then you need people with other skills to do other parts of a given project. For eg, I can't do graphics if my life depended on it - thank God that Zeus (no pun intended) is very good at graphics and has been able to help me out whenever I've had to ask (once again, thankyou Zeus).

The art of being a good coder (or, more accurately, a good coding team - professionally) is to make a hugely complex and complicated "thing" seem simple to the End User - and herein lies the nub of the problem; because Moon and Doug and the community coders (Zeus, Doswelk, Trenloe, etc, and even my not-so-humble self) are good or even very good at what they do (& here I'm referring to the others, not myself) they've succeed in making the complex seem simple, and thus people who do not understand just how complex things are are always asking "Why can't we do this?" or "Why is this so hard?"

Well, it is hard - just like walking on two legs is hard - think about it; just what is it you need to do to (1) balance on two legs in the first place, then (2) continually lose and regain you balance in a controlled fashion so as to move forward (or backward) under complete control.

OK, enough of the "you need to be an expert" speech - here's the skills, etc, you are going to need to have to effectively create a Ruleset (or even an Extension) in FG.

1. A thorough, in-depth knowledge of your chosen RPG and it's game mechanics.
2. A good working knowledge of basic programing concepts.
3. A good working knowledge of basic logic.
4. A good working knowledge of XML.
5. A good working knowledge of LUA.
6. A "talented armature" level of skill in reverse engineering ie the ability to read a piece of code and work out what its supposed to do.
7. A good working knowledge of debugging techniques.
8. A good working knowledge of your chosen graphics application (eg Paint.net) - or someone you can beg too to do the graphics for you (Hi Zeus ).
9. A good working knowledge of your chosen text editer (eg Notepad++).
10. A lot of time.
11. Patience

In short, you need to be a coder - I'm sorry, but that's what is required.

Now, you can learn all of the above - there are some very good, free online Tutorials on each of those topics (just search Google) but its going to take some time - like leaning to walk before you lean to run, or leaning to drive before becoming a stunt or F1 driver. The nice thing about FG is that the community is always, ALWAYS willing to help - whether you are a complete coding newbie right through to an ICT Professional with multiply Post-Graduate Degrees and over 25 years in the industry who still needs to "bounce" ideas off of others.

So, get your feet wet and learn to swim, but don't expect to win an Iron Man race your first week out

Just my $0.02 worth

Cheers