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

[Blacky]

Formally posted here, I'll ask and expand here because I think the Fantasy Grounds community is more apt to answer than SmiteWorks (who are busy with other things).

Given the very very steep learning curve of Fantasy Grounds, and the tremendous delta in features between most community ruleset and top of the line rulesets (like the D&D ones), and the fact that FG was greenlighted on Steam and will gain a broader audience, and finally since that we have now in production the 3.x branch with the 3.0.0 version which handle ruleset layering/cascading;

I think it's time for a real, expanded, precise, tutorial on how to make a ruleset if one doesn't know a thing, based on the Core ruleset and with the layering/cascading functionality.

I'm talking about something other than booting people unto the forums for answers (which mostly it doesn't have), and something with some mind behind it to do it the “right” way. Not fast and loose, not some glue and paint to make it work, but something that describe everything in details the right way.

I would think:

• Text (and images) based, no podcast or screencast. Because it's easier to maintain, edit, correct, and easier to use for non-English speakers. COuld even be community translated by and for other non-English speaking communities.
• Very detailed, step by step, with a lot of real world examples. Like chapter 1 plan your thing, chapter 2 how to handle characteristic and skills, chapter 3 how to handle tests and dices, chapter 4 how to automate things, and so on.
• Simple, talk-to-me-like-I'm-10-years-old. Nothing implicit, no previous knowledge required apart from a basic end-user knowledge of Fantasy Grounds and very very basic end-user knowledge of the Core ruleset. No XML, LUA, ruleset, previous knowledge required.
• Community made, easy to write and maintain, probably some kind of wiki.
• Verified and endorsed by SmiteWorks. Moon_wizard knows what works and what doesn't, how he made the new D&D, Pathfinder and other Core+ ruleset. To reassure the readers this is not some bake and cake, glue and paint thing that will become irrelevant soon but it's the “right” way some kind of verification and endorsement is, I believe, necessary.

I believe the first steps are the hardest. Once one knows how to do small things, one can look up more complex things, start reading advanced LUA books and tutorials, and so on. I think real world examples, in much details, with explanations, would be a huge help for a lot of people.

[damned]

i doubt very much that you could write your own ruleset - even as an extension - without reasonable programming skill. if you dont have LUA you need the ability to learn and understand it at least.

[Dracones]

A help would be some simple tutorials with a sort of "where to start" type thing. To compare, I've been using VTT's for a couple years(even FG off and on) and I found it a lot easier to start digging into Maptool than FG when it came to adding my own stuff. For example with Maptool when you start digging in it all starts with "here's how to make a simple macro", which then makes you learn more complex things and then even more complex things and so on. All of that steamrolled into me eventually writing my own Hero Lab to Maptool complex as hell desktop application(https://hg.tarsis.org/hl2mt), but it all started with a very simple start that got me more interested in digging down into more stuff.

Fantasy Grounds felt/feels like it has a much steeper barrier for that start up, because you have to dig down into megs worth of XML and LUA files.

[Blacky]

Dracones is quite right. This is why I think with 3.0 and Core+, and Steam, now is the right time to do some work in that area. Damned, I don't think extensive LUA knowledge is necessary. And said tutorial can certainly link to LUA ressources or official website for LUA specifics parts, as long as everything from the FG side is explained. Explaining what a while loop is would be out the scope, pointing what loop in what file handle for example PC sheet skill test absolutely is in my opinion.

[malvok]

I think some sort of tutorial would be great. If you are using an established ruleset then Fantasy Grounds is awesome. If you have to make your own ruleset then not so much. Aside from having to learn XML and Lua, there is a great deal of fumbling around in the dark, searching through files trying to find out where something you need to edit is located. I find myself at times wondering if it would just be simpler to learn to customize another VTT than to invest the time in learning XML, LUA, and Fantasy Grounds.

Don't get me wrong, I dig Fantasy Grounds but the investment needed to get a new working ruleset is not trivial.

[Qai]

While a tutorial would be nice, the scope of it would, unfortunately, have to focus on advanced programming such as pointing people to the right files and functions to accomplish what they need to do. There is no way of getting to the nitty-gritty step-by-step details without becoming overly pedantic.

Learning to mod FG is very different than learning XML and LUA. When learning XML and LUA, you can always start simple with lots of explanations to learn those programming languages. On the other hand, modding FG from the outset uses full-blown XML and LUA intertwined at an advanced level. Even if you start simple, the complexity explodes exponentially, especially when what you want to accomplish ultimately spans several files. It is the complexity of the FG framework that needs to be understood in order to create a ruleset, which is knowledge on top of knowing XML and LUA.

The only viable way I can suggest for anyone wanting to learn how to mod is to look at base.xml from CoreRPG and then look at base.xml from a ruleset build on top of CoreRPG. base.xml essentially tells FG what the key files are needed in order to implement the ruleset and which files supplement/override those of CoreRPG. Then simply go line-by-line in base.xml, look at each file it is loading, then go line-by-line in that file, and so on. If you don't understand XML and LUA, then, without hurting anyone's feelings, you aren't ready to mod FG. You might be able to pull something off, but it will take you a long time and will be frustrating as you struggle to learn XML and LUA alongside the FG framework.

[malvok]

"Then simply go line-by-line in base.xml, look at each file it is loading, then go line-by-line in that file, and so on."

That's exactly what a tutorial could cover. I don't think anyone needs or wants an XML or Lua tutorial, there are many places on the Net to find those. But one that could save people time when searching for particular areas in a ruleset could come in handy.

Honestly, if i had known how much extra work, graphics and code, etc. it would take to make a ruleset for my games, I would have probably chosen a different VTT.

[Bidmaron]

Making a worthwhile ruleset cannot, IMO, be done in any other VTT. As has been frequently observed, fg is the only tool that even comes close to really handling a ruleset. As with any other endeavor, making a ruleset requires progrMming. It is an illusion to think that some software will let you wAve some kind of virtual wand and create a ruleset.

The reason fg seems hard is because a lot of the toolset code is built into fg. This is code you'd have to write yourself if fg didn't already provide it. Learning how to use this library, which is quite extensive, takes time. A tutorial could help explain what is where and maybe show you how to use some of the packages. As for knowing lua and XML, I think it's possible to teach it to yourself as you go (I did) but you need to, I think, understand basic programming concepts to have any prayer to do anything worthwhile.

[malvok]

I won't discuss alternate VTTs as this is a FG forum, but you're wrong about FG being the only VTT capable of handling different games.

And I don't see why people are against the idea of a tutorial. How is a tutorial a bad thing?

Also, the insinuation that anyone who thinks a tutorial is a good idea is somehow a simpleton incapable of designing a ruleset is pretty lame.

[Bidmaron]

I'm not against a tutorial. I'm certain other VTTs can handle rulesets. I simply said (IMO again, just like I said up there) that other VTTs couldn't do the rulesets justice. The fact that fg can is a result of its flexibility and commensurate sophistication (and, unfortunately, complexity). I think a tutorial is a great idea. Problem is someone has to do it. The people qualified barely have time to make the feAtures were all clamoring for.