Two things I don't get. No AC calc for armor and no PC attacks in Combat Tracker

[RCathcart]

I've run into two issues that are apparently "by design" that I just don't understand.

First is how AC is not autocalculated when armor is assigned to a PC. Why not?

Second is why PC attacks are not listed in Combat Tracker. Why not? Yes, I know the player is supposed to do most of the combat from the player sheet (and I know the DM can too), but why not add it to Combat Tracker as an option? I mean, when you add a PC, it DOES have an "action" section... so... why not make it operable?

Every time I've run into these issues, I ask why. In particular, the armor thing is really annoying and makes no sense at all. Any chance these can be made options?

Thanks.

[Trenloe]

Assuming you're referring to the 3.5E/Pathfinder ruleset?


First is how AC is not autocalculated when armor is assigned to a PC. Why not?
This is a historical thing. A player could be carrying multiple types of armour (and shields) and there is no specific way of indicating which armour/shield is being used. It's left up to the player to enter the details based off the armour they are actually wearing.


Second is why PC attacks are not listed in Combat Tracker. Why not? Yes, I know the player is supposed to do most of the combat from the player sheet (and I know the DM can too), but why not add it to Combat Tracker as an option? I mean, when you add a PC, it DOES have an "action" section... so... why not make it operable?
There are a number of reasons for this:

Players don't interact with the combat tracker - except on a very basic level (drag/drop attacks/damage, etc. and one way of selecting targets). Players see about 5% of what the GMs sees. Simple rule - players roll all of their actions from their own character sheet, they don't even have access to the offence section that the GM sees.
This is the main reason: the format of player attacks is completely different than NPC attacks - just look at all of the options that are available to a player to setup their attacks. These don't easily translate into the simple NPC attack string that is used in the combat tracker. It would be a huge amount of work for the developers to convert the PC weapon attacks into simple attack strings for use in the combat tracker (if it could even be done 100% accurately) for what is really a requirement of only a very small minority of GMs (I'm sorry but this is the truth).

Seeing blank areas for PC attacks in the combat tracker does cause some confusion. So from the next release of FG (3.1.0) (https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?24097-Test-Release-v3-1-0&p=210596&viewfull=1#post210596) these sections will no longer be visible for PCs.

[someoneinatree]

There is one way I could see the AC calculation thing being changed to perhaps be more logical to people new to FG, without also automating it entirely which just creates issues of a different kind.

My suggestion would be to add a "Worn" checkbox column on the inventory tab, which most of the time is purely informational, but if the item is set up as Armor it could transfer the AC across when "Worn" is checked, and add Shield AC for items built with Shield subtype. Certainly checking a box on and off would make donning/doffing armor and shields a lot quicker to do than editing AC directly.

[Griogre]

That's a good idea, chezcaliente.

[Nylanfs]

Is it in the request list? :)


Edit:
Yep it is (https://fg2app.idea.informer.com/proj/?ia=54565)

[RCathcart]

A player could be carrying multiple types of armour (and shields) and there is no specific way of indicating which armour/shield is being used. It's left up to the player to enter the details based off the armour they are actually wearing.

I'm glad the armor thing is being addressed. As for the PC attacks, I can see the problem. Not entirely convinced about the exclusion of PCs for technical reasons (NPCs frequently have as many different attacks as PCs do). But this isn't an immediate problem for me. And I'm glad combat tracker is being clarified in the meantime.

[Trenloe]

I'm glad the armor thing is being addressed.
I don't know if it is being addressed for the 3.5E/PFRPG ruleset. I explained why it wasn't implemented.