PDA

View Full Version : Request - Non-Ally Results extension



deer_buster
January 25th, 2019, 05:37
This extension looks at the ''Chat: Show GM rolls' and 'Chat: Show roll totals' settings in the 5e ruleset. If the Show GM Rolls is Off and the Show row totals is set to Off, the clients will no longer see the total value of attack rolls against them. If either of those is set to On, the clients will see the roll total included in the results. Also made a small change to the output to show the attack description and the attacker's name.

If I can get a small non-breaking change from the Developers on the ruleset, I can shorten the description to just the weapon used.


Show GM Rolls (off) and Show roll totals (off):
[ATTACK (M)] Scimitar [by Goblin 3] -> [at TestPC][MISS]
Show GM Rolls (on) or Show roll totals (on):
[ATTACK (M)] Scimitar [by Goblin 3][10] -> [at TestPC][MISS]




NOTE:
This extension has been replaced by my new extension Expanded Options. It provides a much nicer (IMHO) output than what this one does. I'll leave this one here for archival purposes, but it will be unsupported going forward.


https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?47946-5E-ExpandedOptions-v1-0&p=426369#post426369

Zacchaeus
January 25th, 2019, 10:09
Sounds like the solution is to switch on hide DM rolls if you are concerned about the players working out what the NPC’s AC is. With that option off you’ll get text output pretty much exactly what you want.

Trenloe
January 25th, 2019, 15:51
GM's telling players "Goblin attacks with a scimitar and rolls a 17, does that hit?" has been part of RPGs since day one! ;)

In your example of the shield spell, you could argue that knowing the attack was going to be only a close hit and thus use the reaction and burn the spell slot - I'm guessing your players would get pretty annoyed if they had to burn spell slots for no reason!

If you have problems with players metagaming then I'd recommend you address the problem with them, rather than trying to force the system to hide some data from them.

But, hey, it's your game. Run it how you wish. Maybe learn some LUA so you can make FG display exactly what you want! :) Have a look in the ruleset you're using (you don't mention which one) - in 3.5E and 5E the scripts\manager_action_attack.lua file controls the attack action, with the applyAttack function putting the chat message together.

deer_buster
January 25th, 2019, 22:37
GM's telling players "Goblin attacks with a scimitar and rolls a 17, does that hit?" has been part of RPGs since day one! ;)True, but that's one of the great things about FG...you don't have to rely on manual mechanics.


In your example of the shield spell, you could argue that knowing the attack was going to be only a close hit and thus use the reaction and burn the spell slot - I'm guessing your players would get pretty annoyed if they had to burn spell slots for no reason!There is no reason they should know that it was a hit with a roll more than 5 above their AC. It is a reaction to being HIT or a Magic Missile is cast at them. At the table their reaction is based on the hit only and they don't know the number.


Have a look in the ruleset you're using (you don't mention which one) - in 3.5E and 5E the scripts\manager_action_attack.lua file controls the attack action, with the applyAttack function putting the chat message together.Thanks for the info...it is helpful...I did state that it was 5e in my post. ;)

Trenloe
January 25th, 2019, 22:47
I did state that it was 5e in my post. ;)
So you did. My apologies.

damned
January 25th, 2019, 22:47
You know when you watch the movies and there is that big fight scene and there are lots of smaller hits - the hero dodges but the villain just barely catches her. Thats how I imagine the close hits to be. And both the hero and the villain know it was a close thing. And then you have the hit where the villain clocks the hero good. She walks right into that blow. Maybe it knocks her right to the ground and then she takes a few more for good measure or maybe she can shake it off = either way she knows she got owned by that hit. Thats how I imagine that hit where you rolled real high.

deer_buster
January 25th, 2019, 22:55
So, in this case, I would need to create a layered ruleset (importing 5E) and override the applyAttack function?

damned
January 25th, 2019, 22:59
So, in this case, I would need to create a layered ruleset (importing 5E) and override the applyAttack function?

You would only create an extension.
You would need the file you are editing and an extension.xml file as your minimum.

deer_buster
January 26th, 2019, 07:21
Was able to complete a first pass at this. Utilizes the Show GM Rolls and Show roll totals option settings to determine whether to show the roll total or not. Made a small change to the output as well. Now it shows [ATTACK (M)] Scimitar [by Goblin 3] -> [at TestPC][MISS] with Show GM Rolls (off) and Show roll totals (off). With Show roll totals (on), shows [ATTACK (M)] Scimitar [by Goblin 3][10] -> [at TestPC][MISS].


If anyone wants it, hit me up on FG Discord (Laendra#9660)

tstory30
January 26th, 2019, 14:20
For those of you wondering about what this does:

26118

On a normal attack (non-crit):

26119

LordEntrails
January 26th, 2019, 16:18
Was able to complete a first pass at this. Utilizes the Show GM Rolls and Show roll totals option settings to determine whether to show the roll total or not. Made a small change to the output as well. Now it shows [ATTACK (M)] Scimitar [by Goblin 3] -> [at TestPC][MISS] with Show GM Rolls (off) and Show roll totals (off). With Show roll totals (on), shows [ATTACK (M)] Scimitar [by Goblin 3][10] -> [at TestPC][MISS].


If anyone wants it, hit me up on FG Discord (Laendra#9660)
Or you could edit the first post and attach it there and add any instructions etc you wish to provide. Then one of the Mods could link this in the appropriate extension list.

deer_buster
January 26th, 2019, 16:34
I would if I wasn't stupid and could figure out how to attach to my post...I can't see the attach button, and drag-drop doesn't seem to want to take it.

EDIT: Apparently I wasn't using the Full Site option of the forums...duh

deer_buster
January 26th, 2019, 16:46
Or you could edit the first post and attach it there and add any instructions etc you wish to provide. Then one of the Mods could link this in the appropriate extension list.

Done

deer_buster
January 26th, 2019, 19:27
You know when you watch the movies and there is that big fight scene and there are lots of smaller hits - the hero dodges but the villain just barely catches her. Thats how I imagine the close hits to be. And both the hero and the villain know it was a close thing. And then you have the hit where the villain clocks the hero good. She walks right into that blow. Maybe it knocks her right to the ground and then she takes a few more for good measure or maybe she can shake it off = either way she knows she got owned by that hit. Thats how I imagine that hit where you rolled real high.

That's kind of the point of damage and the GM's narration of what happened, isn't it? If the hit just barely grazed you, you probably only took 1-2 damage. If you dodged the attack, the attack missed and "you just managed to duck under his savage swing", if you throw up a Shield spell, but it hits anyway "You instinctively throw up your Shield spell as you notice the incoming attack, but the arrow was too perfectly timed and found an opening while he shield was going up". If you took 34 points of damage, yeah, you got owned by that hit! :)

LordEntrails
January 26th, 2019, 23:14
I would if I wasn't stupid and could figure out how to attach to my post...I can't see the attach button, and drag-drop doesn't seem to want to take it.

EDIT: Apparently I wasn't using the Full Site option of the forums...duh
Glad you found it! Much nicer looking forums now isn't it?

damned
January 26th, 2019, 23:20
That's kind of the point of damage and the GM's narration of what happened, isn't it? If the hit just barely grazed you, you probably only took 1-2 damage. If you dodged the attack, the attack missed and "you just managed to duck under his savage swing", if you throw up a Shield spell, but it hits anyway "You instinctively throw up your Shield spell as you notice the incoming attack, but the arrow was too perfectly timed and found an opening while he shield was going up". If you took 34 points of damage, yeah, you got owned by that hit! :)

That is an interpretation.
But thats not the way D&D mechanics work excepting a natural 20 and critical damage.
You might have only just nicked your opponent - rolled a 14+2+1 to hit their AC of 17 - and then you roll a 9+2 on damage - perhaps you nicked a major artery or severed a tendon.
You might roll 19+2+1 to hit their AC of 17 and then you only rolled a 2+2 damage - you easily beat your opponents defences but at the very last moment they pulled up and your thrusting blow slides into his meaty thigh and he snarls at you viciously and fights on even harder.
But we each interpret things and run things our own way and your way is just as valid as anything I might choose to do.

LordEntrails
January 26th, 2019, 23:23
... and run things our own way and your way is just as valid as anything I might choose to do.
Are you saying *there is no bad wrong fun!* :)?

damned
January 26th, 2019, 23:28
Are you saying *there is no bad wrong fun!* :)?

Im saying agree with me or suffer my wrath you little insect!



ahem... sorry yes I meant keep having fun...

deer_buster
January 27th, 2019, 03:04
Glad you found it! Much nicer looking forums now isn't it?
Honestly it looks the way it did before it weirdly switched to the vBulletin layout the other day...I thought you guys had upgraded or something...glad I finally noticed the full site link.

LordEntrails
January 27th, 2019, 03:51
Honestly it looks the way it did before it weirdly switched to the vBulletin layout the other day...I thought you guys had upgraded or something...glad I finally noticed the full site link.
I find it does that to me sometimes after I do a site search and follow one of the links there. There's a cookie you can clear, but it's faster to just click the Full Site link.

deer_buster
January 27th, 2019, 04:06
I find it does that to me sometimes after I do a site search and follow one of the links there. There's a cookie you can clear, but it's faster to just click the Full Site link.

Yeah, I am sure that is how it happened for me too.

How would one go about getting a minor change request approved for the 5E ruleset? Adding "rRoll.sLabel = rAction.label;" to the getRoll function of the manager_action_attack.lua script would give me the ability to clear the clutter from the weapon name portion of the result in this extension. This is the most simple, and non-breaking way I can think of to provide that functionality. I'll still have to override some handlers, but the base functions are a little harder, I think.

LordEntrails
January 27th, 2019, 05:07
Yeah, I am sure that is how it happened for me too.

How would one go about getting a minor change request approved for the 5E ruleset? Adding "rRoll.sLabel = rAction.label;" to the getRoll function of the manager_action_attack.lua script would give me the ability to clear the clutter from the weapon name portion of the result in this extension. This is the most simple, and non-breaking way I can think of to provide that functionality. I'll still have to override some handlers, but the base functions are a little harder, I think.
I'd post in the workshop forum what you are wanting to do and see if anyone has any other ideas how to accomplish it or help work through any customization then if a new function is needed, Moon might see it there and if not you can post in the wishlist.

rpranger
February 13th, 2019, 16:06
Does this extension provide a way to show to the PCs just the roll of the NPC's, before any modifiers are added or the result of the action? If not, does anyone know of a extension that does so?

Neither hiding the rolls nor allowing Players to see the result (with or without the modifiers) can cope for ability like cutting words.

LordEntrails
February 13th, 2019, 16:24
Does this extension provide a way to show to the PCs just the roll of the NPC's, before any modifiers are added or the result of the action? If not, does anyone know of a extension that does so?

Neither hiding the rolls nor allowing Players to see the result (with or without the modifiers) can cope for ability like cutting words.
Note, that an extension that does this is going to do it for all rolls for the players, not just a specific one (i.e. Cutting Words). Though maybe you could put a toggle to change it before the roll is made....

rpranger
February 13th, 2019, 16:39
Note, that an extension that does this is going to do it for all rolls for the players, not just a specific one (i.e. Cutting Words). Though maybe you could put a toggle to change it before the roll is made....

Sorry, I meant the DM roll (for an attack or ability check for instance). I know you can stop players from seeing the roll itself or the result of the action, but if the players see the roll they also see the modifier, even without knowing the result of the action. Problem is, if you see the roll + modifier, knowing the result of the action is trivial. Would be great if there were an extension that showed to the players just the bare die roll, not the total.

Zacchaeus
February 13th, 2019, 16:40
Does this extension provide a way to show to the PCs just the roll of the NPC's, before any modifiers are added or the result of the action? If not, does anyone know of a extension that does so?

Neither hiding the rolls nor allowing Players to see the result (with or without the modifiers) can cope for ability like cutting words.

Switching off DM rolls is the way to do this. Doing so emulates what would happen at the table top if the DM was rolling behind the screen. The players shouldn't know what the roll is and so run the risk of using up Cutting Words for no reason. Abilities such as Cutting Words are the kind of thing that you would use when it really matters if an NPC fails it's save or misses an attack. It isn't really meant to be a 'oh no that's a hit lit me see if I can turn it into a miss'. It's more of a 'we can't afford to have this thing succeed that saving throw; let me try and make sure it doesn't'

rpranger
February 14th, 2019, 09:49
the way the ability reads to me the Bard should know the roll, but not the total or the result.

If there are no extensions that do this, I guess the best compromise is to let them know the result but not the roll. This way they don't waste a cutting words on a 1. They wont waste it either on an almost hit (which they might if they saw the roll), but thats compensated by wasting it on a 19 (where it probably won't work).

Zacchaeus
February 14th, 2019, 11:33
And your interpretation would appear to be correct except they also get to know the modifier too (the roll isn't just the value of the dice but the total of the dice and modifiers) https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/672846879088992256

So if the player gets to know what the roll is then in most cases they're also going to know the result. If an NPC rolls a 17 for an attack against a character whose AC is 14 then they know it hits. The DM doesn't really need to make any kind of announcement. Similarly if a character forces a DC 14 save against a monster and the result is a 15 then they know what the result is. So it would seem that Cutting Words is much less of a gamble than I imagined. So, bearing all that in mind I don't think you need to be all that concerned about what information that Fantasy Grounds provides to the players. You can easily just have DM rolls on, since the players are going to be able to work out whether an attack hits or a save succeeds once they see the number. The additional wording of Hit or Succeed isn't going to make any difference.

The same thing would apply if you don't have Show DM rolls on. In order for the ability to be used the DM would have to tell the player what the roll is; which negates any reason to have DM Rolls off in the first place.

On the other hand when the characters are making attacks they aren't going to know (possibly) what the monster's AC is going to be or what it's saving throw bonus might be. The players know the roll but don't know the result unless Show results to clients is switched on.

So, taking all that into account having show results to clients switched off and show DM rolls on or off as you prefer will give the players the information they need in order to use the ability without any need for a special extension.

deer_buster
February 15th, 2019, 07:45
This extension has been replaced by my new extension Expanded Options. It provides a much nicer (IMHO) output than what this one does.

https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?47946-5E-ExpandedOptions-v1-0&p=426369#post426369