Merging Modules to Mitigate the Muddled Mess

[JackOfAllGames]

Hello all! I'm fairly new to Fantasy Grounds and I've begun purchasing and creating D&D 5E modules. Not wanting to drop a ton of money (or data entry time for that matter) all at once, I've been buying some classes, monster groups, and other modules a piece at a time (rather than in the $50 groups). I can already see the module window getting quite messy though. I'd like to keep it clean and usable.

With this in mind, I'm wondering how to merge modules together - turn those purchased monster books into one...or the class books into one. I'm hoping there's some simple way to do this and I haven't just made a horrible mistake, purchasing them as I have. Even if the solution isn't simple, I'm not one to shy away from a challenge. I'm familiar with a few SQL databases, many storage formats, and have some programming experience. If a bit of tinkering is required, I don't mind.

So anyway, does anyone know how I could go about condensing the module data? I'd appreciate it. Thanks!

[JohnD]

The modules are all protected so I doubt you will be able to combine as you want.

[Zacchaeus]

The modules are all protected so I doubt you will be able to combine as you want.

Indeed, this is correct. There is a merge facility which would allow you to create your own module and then add stuff to it. However the 5e modules are protected in such a way that you can't alter them so merging would not be possible.

[damned]

For every other ruleset to date you would be able to do what you are planning - but to protect the Wizards IP these files are encrypted and it wont work...

[JackOfAllGames]

Ah, I see. Thanks for the information! That's disappointing to hear, but at least I'm not too invested yet. I guess I do understand the need to protect the data (it's probably required to get the WotC license) - it's just going to be a bit troublesome now. For now, I'll continue experimenting with module creation. That may end up being my preferred solution...at least, for player content. Who knows? Maybe I'll try my own hand at automating some of the module creation. It could be fun. (PAR5E is great, but I have some ideas I'd like to explore...and I don't like having Java installed.)

With such restrictions in place, it would be nice if the library view could be modified to show more information at once...and perhaps module reference info could be merged internally before shown to the user. I haven't figured out what exactly that would look like yet...but such topics are probably best posted in a different FG forum. =)

Thanks again guys! I appreciate it.

[Nylanfs]

If you talk nicely to Doug you might be able to swap out the modules once you have purchased (or pay the difference).

[JackOfAllGames]

If you talk nicely to Doug you might be able to swap out the modules once you have purchased (or pay the difference).

Thanks for the suggestion. If I end up purchasing a full module set at this point, it certainly wouldn't hurt to ask. For the moment, I think I'll look into how much work it would be to do all of the data entry myself.

I'm not crazy about the time investment, but on the flip-side, I'm also not a huge fan of "DRMed" content getting in the way. I'd like the flexibility to add *or subtract* available content from a session...and I'm planning to add a fair amount of content myself. I'm getting the feeling that I'll probably be happiest if I make my own modules...so I'm going to at least TRY that now.

To be clear, I don't fault the fine FG folks or anything. I love their software and the fact that I CAN make my own modules. I just need to figure out what'll work best. Hey, if I can avoid buying the licensed content, perhaps the savings can be put toward something like a FG ultimate license instead. =)

[someoneinatree]

Just on this - I know it is very much dependent on the terms of the licencing with WotC, but an "upgrade" option for people who've purchased the Customization pack + around $45 worth of Class packs to swap these for the Complete Core Class Pack would be ideal. Even if this was a manual edit of the person's account.