Printable View
If you use the effect "Charged" from the ruleset, according to the Reference (https://fantasygroundsunity.atlassia...ence+-+Effects), modifiers applied are: +2 to hit, AC reduced by 1, Dexterity and Shield ignored in armor calculations.
For AD&D1, I'm using two custom effects:
orQuote:
Charge (w/oDEX): ATK: +2; AC: -1
And players warn me if they have DEX bonus or notQuote:
Charge (wDEX); ATK: +2; Nodex
Hi,
thanks for that
Only thing is I don't think the "charged" effect is just reducing AC by 1
In my examples
A) changed from AC4 to AC1 (inc dwarf v ogre)
B) changed from AC4 to AC2 (inc dwarf v ogre)
C) changed from AC8 to AC7 (inc gnome v ogre)
D) changed from AC2 to AC6
E) changed from AC3 to AC6
F) changed from AC3 to AC8
I'm not sure what is happening but it ain't (just) AC -1 :confused:
Sorry, pretty new to FGU, so dumb question but do I just enter those string values into the advanced effects part of the character sheet? Custom effects doesn't seem to be giving me any real ability to create anything other than a new line of [effect all 1 RND vision], nothing I can actually write script into. I'm probably missing something obvious!
OK, I entered them in the CT effect line and they worked fine, no errors. So many thanks for that but not as easy as a draggable effect button even if I have them in the hot buttons :)
Ran some further test, I'll repeat the whole lot for easy reference
Ogres attacking against charging opponents:
A) Against Agatha: Dw RGR3, AC 4 (Splint, DEX 0) – returned AC 1. This is the correct result.
[+4 for ogre v dwarf, -1 for charging = AC 1].
B) Against Akbar: Dw CLR3, AC 4 (Mail, shield, DEX 0) – returned AC 2. This is incorrect by +1.
[+4 for ogre v dwarf, -1 for charging = AC 1]
C) Against Jeremiah: Hu FTR3, AC 2 (Mail, shield +1, DEX -1) – returned AC 6. This is incorrect by +3.
[-1 for loss of DEX = AC 3]
D) Against Mellix: Gn MU3, AC 8 (No armour, DEX -2) – returned AC 7. This is incorrect by +1.
[+4 for ogre v gnome, -2 for loss of DEX = AC 6].
E) Against Sebastian: Hu RGR1, AC 3 (Mail, shield, DEX -1) – returned AC 6. This is incorrect by +2.
[-1 for loss of DEX = AC 4]
F) Against Wilf: Hu THF2, AC 3 (brigandine, DEX -4) – returned AC 8. This is incorrect by +1.
[-4 for loss of DEX = AC 7].
Equipping shield on Agatha and Wilf
G) Against Agatha: Dw RGR3, AC 3 (Splint, shield, DEX 0) – returned AC 2. Incorrect by +2
[AC 3 +4 for ogre v dwarf, -1 for charging = AC 0].
H) Against Akbar: Dw CLR3, AC 4 (Mail, shield, DEX 0) – returned AC 2. This is incorrect by +1.
[+4 for ogre v dwarf, -1 for charging = AC 1]
I) Against Jeremiah: Hu FTR3, AC 2 (Mail, shield +1, DEX -1) – returned AC 6. This is incorrect by +3.
[-1 for loss of DEX = AC 3]
J) Against Mellix: Gn MU3, AC 8 (No armour, DEX -2) – returned AC 7. This is incorrect by +1.
[+4 for ogre v gnome, -2 for loss of DEX = AC 6].
K) Against Sebastian: Hu RGR1, AC 3 (Mail, shield, DEX -1) – returned AC 6. This is incorrect by +2.
[-1 for loss of DEX = AC 4]
L) Against Wilf: Hu THF2, AC 2 (brigandine, shield, DEX -4) – returned AC 8. This is incorrect by +2.
[-4 for loss of DEX = AC 6].
Using an orc to eliminate the ogre +4 bonus vs Agatha, Akbar, and Mellix
M) Against Agatha: Dw RGR3, AC 3 (Splint, shield, DEX 0) – returned AC 6. Incorrect by +2
[-1 for charging = AC 4].
N) Against Akbar: Dw CLR3, AC 4 (Mail, shield, DEX 0) – returned AC 6. This is incorrect by +1.
[-1 for charging = AC 5]
O) Against Jeremiah: Hu FTR3, AC 2 (Mail, shield +1, DEX -1) – returned AC 6. This is incorrect by +3.
[-1 for loss of DEX = AC 3]
P) Against Mellix: Gn MU3, AC 8 (No armour, DEX -2) – returned AC 11. This is incorrect by +1.
[-2 for loss of DEX = AC 10].
Q) Against Sebastian: Hu RGR1, AC 3 (Mail, shield, DEX -1) – returned AC 6. This is incorrect by +2.
[-1 for loss of DEX = AC 4]
R) Against Wilf: Hu THF2, AC 2 (brigandine, shield, DEX -4) – returned AC 8. This is incorrect by +2.
[-4 for loss of DEX = AC 6].
Note that adding a shield to the armour of Agatha (A, G, M) and Sebastian (E, K, Q) changed their results. Removing the ogre complication made no change to the margin of error.
Given that shields were generating a problem a week back, that Doomsword resolved, I can't help but think that the issue lies with them. It's almost like an extra -1 is being applied across the board with another -1 for having a shield (-2 for the magic shield).
this seems to be supported by the fact that equipping/unequipping a shield after having applied/removed "charged" isn't changing the target AC. If I reload the entire CT, equipping/unequipping changes the AC as normal - adding "charged" stops that from happening, it seems to freeze the shield factor at what it was initially.
As always, thanks for the testing and details. I agree with your assessment of how charging should work and how it's normally played. I can certainly remove the "charged" effect after the 1st attack, which would be the correct way to handle it. But people would need to be aware that this is the case and that making any sort of attack roll after adding the "charged" effect would remove it. I guess I could always make it an option, too, where you can remove the effect after the 1st attack or leave the modifiers in play until a new round has begun.
I also agree that the term "charged" is not the best way to express it and I did have it changed to "charging" when I first worked on this. I guess that never made it over when I stopped just modding the ruleset and turned this into an extension.
Regarding the math details and how they're not working out, I'll run through similar scenarios and see what's up. I'm going to start with all of this in the OSRIC ruleset since 2E probably works the way people expect it to, or, at least, people already have workarounds in place or have come to expect whatever it does as the way that things should be handled. Once changes have been made in OSRIC, I will check 2E to see if everything is doing as it should, though.
Gimme a bit and I'll get back to you.
Thanks again.
No problem, no great rush. Thanks to Vackipleur I have a work around that suits my version of the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by Doomsword
I just think if there's a system effect it ought to work, and ought to work BTB :)
Yeah, I saw that you have a workaround, which is good, but I agree that this should work BTB and provide less confusion and an easier way to get the needed results (as well as fix any issues).
How do we report an error? I have narrowed it down to this extension. I'm getting a stack overflow when loading a campaign with this extension loaded.
like this:
[5/4/2024 6:30:05 PM] [ERROR] Handler error: [string "2E:scripts/windowmanager.lua"]:87: C stack overflow
[5/4/2024 6:30:05 PM] [ERROR] Handler error: [string "CoreRPG:scripts/manager_soundset.lua"]:125: C stack overflow
[5/4/2024 6:30:05 PM] [ERROR] Handler error: [string "2E:scripts/manager_token_adnd.lua"]:756: C stack overflow
But lots of them, to the point where the app locks up and I can't even dump log files anymore.
Disable the extension, and the 2e Ruleset loads without issue. This started 4 May, 2024. Was working great prior to this.
I can try to send additional information if requested.
Thanks.
Thanks for the report. I'll try to reproduce and I'll get back with you.Quote:
Originally Posted by georgelaiacona111
I'm not seeing it on my end. I've 2E v2024.04.10, CoreRPG v2024-04-16, and the extension v1.81.
Do you have other extensions loaded, and can you try it with any other extensions unloaded?
I am loading no other extensions or features.Quote:
Originally Posted by Doomsword
[5/4/2024 6:28:28 PM] FGU: v4.5.7 ULTIMATE (2024-05-02)
[5/4/2024 6:28:28 PM] OS: Windows 10 (10.0.19045) 64bit
[5/4/2024 6:31:55 PM] RULESET: 2E v2024.04.10 For Fantasy Grounds
--by Celestian 2017-2024
[5/4/2024 6:31:55 PM] RULESET: Core RPG ruleset (2024-04-16) for Fantasy Grounds
Copyright 2024 Smiteworks USA, LLC
[5/4/2024 6:31:55 PM] EXTENSION: AD&D Options and House Rules v1.81 (2024.04.05)\rby Doomsword\r For use with the 2E or OSRIC rulesets
Updated via the auto updater May 4 in the AM.
Thanks!