Full pak or bits and bobs?

[celestian]

So, I've decided to try my hand and tweaking FG to fit my table. To that end I've cracked open moreCore and began tinkering with the record_npc.xml and the character version of that.... but before I get to far I want to make sure I'm going about this right.

I've seen it recommended to use the moreCore as a basis and extend it for your needs. I've also seen (looking at the ruleset documentation) that cracking open the one you want to use as a basis and move on from there, manually updating the changes made to the original .pak you started with.

My real question is this. If I want to have my own ruleset (different character sheets, npc sheets and possibly add a "Items" like feature for "Spells" database) do I want to get the most current moreCore and move on from there... or is there a way to just "include moreCore" and then only use my changed files.

There is an overwhelming amount of information out there on this stuff (and I thought MapTools Frameworks were complex) so I'm hoping I can just get a good idea where to start, simply, so I can pickup the complexities as I move deeper.

[damned]

Hey celestian and welcome.

MoreCore was intended to offer more than the CoreRPG platform in a very generic way.
Most modern rulesets also extend CoreRPG but in very specific ways - eg for their specific game system and version.

If you want to take a shortcut and not build a fully automated ruleset then Id encourage you to build an extension on top of MoreCore. If you really want to build a full ruleset build it as layered on CoreRPG.

This could be confusing - bear with me.

5e is a ruleset that is layered on CoreRPG.
So are 4e, 3.5e, Call of Cthulhu, Savage Worlds, MoreCore and others.
Pathfinder is layered on 3.5e layered on CoreRPG.

A layered Ruleset and an Extension are very similar - generally a Ruleset does a lot more but the premise is the same.

City of Mist is a powered by the apocalypse game. Imiri and I created an extension for MoreCore to add/change those things needed for that particular system. My aim was to keep it as close to MoreCore as possible codewise. I tried to stick to theme/flavour as much as possible. So this is the City of Mist extension on top of the MoreCore ruleset on top of CoreRPG.

So... maybe if you share what system you are wanting to build for and how much automation you want and how much work you are prepared to do... and we can try and guide you better... :)

DCC is a recentish ruleset. leozelig started with 3.5e (layered on CoreRPG) and reused code, rebuilt code, replaced code to get it working for DCC.

Whenever you build upon another layer you need to be aware that changes to that layer(s) can effect your layer.

Pros and Cons to every method...

City of Mist extension: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?35056-MoreCore-Themes&p=302754&viewfull=1#post302754
City of Mist refernce materials: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?35156-MoreCore-City-Of-Mist-Starter-Set (published with permission)

[celestian]

Hey celestian and welcome.

MoreCore was intended to offer more than the CoreRPG platform in a very generic way.
Most modern rulesets also extend CoreRPG but in very specific ways - eg for their specific game system and version.

If you want to take a shortcut and not build a fully automated ruleset then Id encourage you to build an extension on top of MoreCore. If you really want to build a full ruleset build it as layered on CoreRPG.

So... maybe if you share what system you are wanting to build for and how much automation you want and how much work you are prepared to do... and we can try and guide you better... :)


I am looking to build a more robust AD&D 2e ruleset. Of the ones I've looked at the "2e" one has a workable sheet but I would like to change several things about it and add more automation. Specifically coming to mind is spell slots, memorization/etc. I would also like it to manage the initiative system a bit more fluidly (AD&D rolls it every round). Automated hitpoints based on hit dice for npcs, automated save values based on hit dice for npcs...etc. Expiring effects based on time. Experience reward system tho I might could just use a "coin" field named EXP and call it a day ;)

But, to start I want to have a simple complete sheet for characters and npcs and then add the automation bits as I pickup the methods. I am hoping to get something similar to this for a character sheet sorted out (at least in data/fields).

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B53Z1k8zPr4cSVY3M0RVd0xvWVE/view?usp=sharing

It will not be 100% like it but should include everything I'll need in some fashion even if it's just a string field.

[damned]

Its going to be a big job.

Another member vodokar built (its still being updated) an AD&D1e ruleset just recently.
It is layered on Castles&Crusades which is layered on CoreRPG.
Castles&Crusades is a commercial ruleset (but excellent value at $10) and includes a full bestiary and players handbook which is very similar to D&D - but of course has differences.

If I were doing this project Id either do the same or Id start from scratch.
Starting from scratch Id use 3.5e as a guide to understand how to design the character sheet (your first goal) and then continue from there.

[celestian]

If I were doing this project Id either do the same or Id start from scratch.
Starting from scratch Id use 3.5e as a guide to understand how to design the character sheet (your first goal) and then continue from there.

I think I'll take that advice. My concern with hanging off another's code is they change something that might break something in my ruleset. I'll start with a clean base of the Core and then pick apart the others to build a sheet for npc/pc and go from there. I've actually got a lot of the spells/critters/items in xml for another program I wrote a while back that I might be able to fiddle around with and import so I don't have to do all the data entry.

[celestian]

I've a few follow up questions, hopefully easy to answer.

First thing I noticed when fiddling with all of the rulesets I noticed on the health on the combat sheets/various areas it seems most just list MAX health and the Wounds. Is there a reason it doesn't list MAX and Current health instead? Is there some technical reason or just the style used?

Second query, when you recommended a ruleset to base a custom one from you suggest perhaps Core or the 3.5 version, is there a reason you didn't also include the 5e one? I've been poking about in it and it seems closer to the earlier D&D system than the 3e version.

Thanks! Mostly I've just been comparing the rulesets and checking out the code behind them. Quite a complex thing.

[damned]

AFAIK all the rulesets have Max HP/Health and Wounds. Id keep it the same way unless the character sheet of your system specifies it the other way.

5e has way more bells and whistles and has about 50% more code. There are definitely some things from 5e I wanted to do in MoreCore (like the collapsing powers/actions etc) that I couldnt nut out. If you want to use 5e as your model go for it. It has the newest features etc.

[Trenloe]

To expand on what damned has said - you really have two broad options: take a current ruleset and change that ruleset, essentially freezing your base FG functionality at that point; or write an extension/layered ruleset that runs on top of existing rulesets. The advantage of the former is that it probably means less upkeep in the long run as the code is frozen, but you miss out on all the new functionality that keeps getting added to FG - in one year there would be a few things people would like to see, in two years the ruleset might start to look a bit long in the teeth; but it takes much more maintenance to keep a custom ruleset up to date each time a new underlying ruleset update is made.

[celestian]

To expand on what damned has said - you really have two broad options: take a current ruleset and change that ruleset, essentially freezing your base FG functionality at that point; or write an extension/layered ruleset that runs on top of existing rulesets. The advantage of the former is that it probably means less upkeep in the long run as the code is frozen, but you miss out on all the new functionality that keeps getting added to FG - in one year there would be a few things people would like to see, in two years the ruleset might start to look a bit long in the teeth; but it takes much more maintenance to keep a custom ruleset up to date each time a new underlying ruleset update is made.

I will do some experimenting with the layering (looks like the 5e one did this with the Core ruleset) and see how it works.

[Trenloe]

And you can layer on top of layers. For example the PFRPG ruleset is layered on top of the 3.5E ruleset, which is layered on top of the CoreRPG ruleset. So, if you like the 5E ruleset as a good starting point you could layer on top of that. This is similar to what vodokar has done for his AD&D ruleset - he's layered on top of Castles & Crusades which is layered on top of CoreRPG.

[celestian]

And you can layer on top of layers. For example the PFRPG ruleset is layered on top of the 3.5E ruleset, which is layered on top of the CoreRPG ruleset. So, if you like the 5E ruleset as a good starting point you could layer on top of that. This is similar to what vodokar has done for his AD&D ruleset - he's layered on top of Castles & Crusades which is layered on top of CoreRPG.

Is there a good place to read up on the basics of "layering"/importruleset ? Couldn't seem to find any notes on it

[Trenloe]

It's similar to an extension - i.e. it replaces/merges with the lower layer rulesets. Here's some info on extensions: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/modguide/extensions.xcp

Open base.xml in the PFRPG ruleset - the <importruleset> tag tells it which ruleset it runs on top of.

The <importinfo> tag tells it what other modules it can load: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/refdoc/importinfo.xcp

[Zhern]

That is what I'm planning to do with the S&W derivatives (LotFP, Crypts & Things, etc) - layer them on top of the S&W ruleset.

[celestian]

So what makes layering a good idea and what makes it a bad idea? For example, there are a lot of things I like about the sheet in 5e (the spell section, the class/exp section) but I want to change the ability score section to have AD&D values, such as Strength has bonus to hit, damage, bend bars and open doors. I also like the pre-configured mod buttons (+2/+4, -2/-4) but I wanted to remove the Advantage/disadvantage and add in +1-+4 and -1 thru -4 for the preconfigured mods. I'll have to change the spell structure a bit to include some items from AD&D and the same for NPCs.

My guess on how layering works is that the topmost code will over-ride the lower. So if I replace record_char_main.xml with a modified version it will use that over the layered previous one...

Sorry for all the questions, just trying to get a grasp of what is the best path before I get to deep and can't change directions ;)

[Trenloe]

So what makes layering a good idea and what makes it a bad idea?
What I mention in post #8 is very relevant.

The main thing is to see if there is a ruleset that gives you a lot of what you want to star off with, if so then layer on top of that (or modify it directly - see below) - no point in reinventing the wheel.



My guess on how layering works is that the topmost code will over-ride the lower. So if I replace record_char_main.xml with a modified version it will use that over the layered previous one...
Correct.


Sorry for all the questions, just trying to get a grasp of what is the best path before I get to deep and can't change directions ;)
Well, you're going to have to layer on top of something - either CoreRPG or a d20 based ruleset, even if you modify 5E (for example) you're still layered on top of CoreRPG. For a d20 based ruleset I really wouldn't recommend taking CoreRPG as your base, but you could if you really wanted to - but you'd still be developing in a year (unless you have lots and lots of free time).

As mentioned in post #8 - your main decision will be: do I "modify" my chosen d20 based ruleset directly or do I layer on top of that chosen d20 ruleset.

I'd say give it a go - choose something in the 5E ruleset and change it directly in the ruleset itself, then take a bit of time to work out how a layered extension would make that change. It's a little more work initially (just to understand it and setup the layered ruleset), but then it's really not much more work to do a layered ruleset - copying the base files/s over to the layered ruleset, putting code in to load them and then modifying them to make the changes needed.

[Zhern]

I can say, from the work I've done on the Swords & Wizardry ruleset so far, that building on 3.5E has definitely helped as I've been going along. It has saved me a lot of work so far.