You roll the Deed die. it auto adds this to the attack roll and damage.
You roll the Deed die. it auto adds this to the attack roll and damage.
Credit to bayne7400 for the TWF bug report!
The deed die must be rolled before the attack. The roll result is stored in the Weapon Meta window (click magnifying glass in Weapons header) until a new deed is rolled. The reason is that you only perform one deed per round, and the result is added to all attacks and damage for that round. The ruleset cannot track time to determine when a new deed roll is needed, so the deed roll is not automated. It’s tricky when first learning the ruleset, but a necessary step.
Working on a log for the DCC legacy rules...
Attachment 45050Attachment 45051
Thanks for the deed info. Am I doing something wrong? Have the latest updated FGU, still when I roll attack for my level 1 halfling two handed it rolls a d14 and d12 respectively. I have two weapon fighting dot checked and using two handaxes. Have one designated primary and other offhand. Showing two-weapon fighting in features along with other halfling abilities.
It’s a bug. I uploaded the fix which should be available next Tue. You can get it sooner on the Test channel.Quote:
Originally Posted by omega1143
Attachment 45198
New error. The error occurs when adding a weapon to the character sheet.
Hotfix submitted. Thanks, bayne7400!Quote:
Originally Posted by bayne7400
One persistent issue: When you delete a weapon from the inventory, it’s adding that weapon to the weapon list a second time instead of removing the existing entry. You can delete the items from the weapon list manually until I can figure out the problem.
I'm getting an error on NPC/mobs rolling a crit; rolling a fumble with or without a target on the combat tracker works as expected, rolling a crit without a target works as expected; rolling a crit with a target gives me an error: "Script execution error: [string "scripts/manager action critical.lua"]:76: attempt to perform arithmetic on a string value.
No extensions in use.
Thanks, Tab... I’ll check it out.
Edit: Hotfix submitted. I figured out the issue with a second weapon entry adding to the weapon list when you delete it from your inventory. I will include this in the next update -- currently shooting for Tuesday, April 6.
I am currently adding actions for DCC Annual spells and canticles. I have 7 or 8 more patrons to get through, and then I will send the next update. This is probably low-yield in terms of usage, but it's been on my list for quite some time.
I am adding infravision as a vision preset for the new map features that are currently on the Test channel. The Senses field on the char sheet will auto-populate when you drop an occupation or class with the Infravision feature, and NPCs with the infravision special property will gain the appropriate effect when dropped to the combat tracker. Note that characters who already have this feature on their char sheet will need to update the Senses field manually.
Creating spell actions for the DCC Annual content is taking longer than anticipated, so I am going to put that on hold for now. I have 7 more patrons (27 spells) to cover, and you can expect to have those before too long. That means the next update will hit the Test channel by the middle of this week.
Goodman games has a few "VTT packs" with color maps and tokens. Are there plans to update the modules (like Sailors on the Starless Sea) to the nicer maps and tokens?
Hi Myrdin,Quote:
Originally Posted by Myrdin Potter
That’s a good question — I’m not aware of any plans to do that. Since the VTT packs are sold as separate products, I’m guessing they will remain that way, but I don’t have any official knowledge of that.
https://goodman-games.com/store/prod...ap-token-pack/
In the case of the FG version of this module, even the B&W players maps still have all the keys still there. They were not even photoshopped to get rid of that (I do that when I convert old modules for use on VTT). I previewed a competing VTT version of this module this weekend and they used the VTT pack.
Other publishers sell VTT asset versions separately, but usually those assets were used in whatever official VTT version that was published. I did not look to see who converted the module originally, but since this is one of the marque funnels, it might be good to have the best maps and tokens in it.
I can buy the maps and add in LOS myself (and maybe even lighting), but hopefully someone can ask Goodman Games and the VTT versions here can be enhanced.
Myrdin you should go with on Goodman games discord and ask them there. Surely this would require their permission. Your right the goodman sailors VTT map is very cool. Can you say what VTT this was on?
It was on foundry. The automation and background features of Fantasy Grounds are still better (there is no auto check for hits and damage, for example). I am not aware if this was just the ruleset conversion and the Judge was using the VTT art pack to run the module but that will not be for sale.
However, the maps are significantly nicer for VTT play than the older B&W ones. Foundry has similar lighting effects as the test version of FG and there are parts of the color maps where this really came across well.
Compared to Roll20, Foundry looked quite good. Other than keeping the pressure on Smiteworks to keep innovating, I did not see anything other than the player interface being the browser that would make me want to switch. And that is not that compelling.
Was the foundry module sold directly on Goodman's store or is this a fan created unofficial module? If it is one they created I bet we could make this happen! Some of the stuff on foundry is being shared from person to person and is not really on the up and up.
Edit: This is what I found.
"Note that this system does not contain content from copyrighted DCC products, only rollable character sheets. Work is in progress to support a paid module containing copyrighted Goodman Games content ready for out-of-the-box use. In the mean time, please see the user guide for how to import content from the PDF rulebook for your personal use."
So I am wondering if what you found was legal to share.
I don't want to speak for the guy running the game. He said that he is working on the ruleset and I got the impression that more would be coming, but that is between Goodman Games and them (and he seems to be working with them).
I am not going to go onto their discord and chase them. I do that for other publishers that I work with for conversions (5e). In this case I am just a customer.
The game you played on Foundry must have used the VTT pack you can buy in the GG store. That’s not the same as purchasing a full VTT module with those art assets included. Foundry does not sell any DCC adventures yet. They are still working on the basic ruleset, and it looks like a worthy competitor so far.
I ran Shadow of the Beakmen on FG recently, and I used the VTT map and token pack from the GG store. I really don’t think that GG will throw in a $7 VTT pack with a $10 adventure module for free, but that’s just my opinion. They have no vested interest in any particular VTT, so if that changes, I would expect equal access for Roll20, FG, and Foundry.
I agree with you that a paid FG conversion should include untagged maps. DCC maps are really challenging because the art is created physically by hand and scanned in later, so the tags do not exist in a separate image layer that you can simply hide. I have always done my best to photoshop out traps, secret doors, and area labels in my conversions. (For the record, I did not convert Sailors.) I feel like untagged maps should be a requirement if you’re going to submit a conversion for the store.
I always use untagged maps myself as well for all adventures on the store. I found a photoshop expert on fiverr that is better and quicker than I could ever be.
The art pack is $4.99 for Sailor and it makes the VTT experience much better. I would say that for $9.99 I would get the printed module and the PDF, so for $9.99 for a VTT I don’t see why they would not want the best product for their customers to encourage them to buy more.
The foundry ruleset looked decent, but I still think yours has the edge and is improving every day.
The VTT packs are nice, and you have a point. The PDF only version of an adventure sells for $7 - that must be what I'm thinking of. Shadow of the Beakmen only gave me the interior map, not the village, but that one map saved me a lot of work! I'm thankful that Goodman Games is giving some attention to virtual tabletops, and hopefully they will expand their VTT offerings in the future.
Foundry looks nice, and they are very active on the Goodman Games Discord server, which seems to generate a lot of interest. But it runs more like Roll20, and I'm not sure it will ever be as feature-rich as Fantasy Grounds. Still, for some reason folks love those browser-based VTTs.
I submitted the next update for the DCC ruleset:
[Fixed] Deleting a weapon from your inventory adds a second entry to the weapon list instead of deleting the original.
[Updated] Senses field auto-populates on char sheet for occupations or classes with Infravision feature.
[Updated] NPCs with infravision special property gain corresponding vision effect when dropped to combat tracker.
[Added] Results table to Divine Aid class feature.
[Added] Fleeting luck (FLUK) field to char sheet, with option to show or hide this field; default is off.
[Added] Auto-roll disapproval, with option to enable or disable this feature; default is on.
[Added] Log tab to char sheet and adventure record for DCC Legacy rules.
If all goes well on the test channel, these will go live on Tue, Apr 6...
Hey Leo, I noticed a typo on the Color Spray spell results table. It looks like the "12-13" result has the result from Choking Cloud instead of Color Spray. Choking Cloud is correct.
Thanks, Tab. My computer is down for a couple days, but I will fix that this weekend.
I have a couple big DCC-related projects I want to work on, but I don’t have any major feature updates planned at the moment. I will keep working on spell misfire and corruption tables and potentially automating those.
I have set up a YouTube channel and plan to start a weekly series of tutorials. I made an intro video, but it needs work. I hope to get into a routine with these because the ruleset desperately needs a user guide, and I think short videos are the best medium for that.
I will continue fixing bugs as always, and I appreciate the constant feedback and bug reports from the awesome community here.
I submitted a fix for the color spray casting table (see post #623), which should hit the Test channel tomorrow.
I started combing through the Mutant Crawl Classics rulebook because I want to make the DCC ruleset more compatible with MCC.
I haven't played nearly as much MCC as DCC, but as far as I can tell, many differences are just name changes (spells = wetware programs, Common language = Nu-Speak, gold pieces = creds). Some aspects of MCC work with the existing ruleset, like occupations and skills. Class drops currently do not account for the Rover attack bonus or the Mutant initiative bonus, but some minor ruleset changes should fix that. Wetware programs and mutations should mostly work with the existing spell record, but I might want to create a separate data library for mutations so they aren't all lumped together in one list.
Parts of MCC do not allow for automation to the same degree as DCC - for example, players making an artifact check would need to account for the Complexity Modifier using the modifier box. I don't see a way around that. Artifacts are a pretty broad category, but most of them could be added to the char sheet (manually) as powers, with units of power counted as uses - think magic wands and charges in 5E.
If anyone else has any insights, feel free to share.
This is pretty cool! I have very fond memories of playing the original Gamma World but haven't checked out MCC yet. Seems like a perfect fit. I really wish someone would take up the abandoned Basic Fantasy ruleset for FGU, too!Quote:
Originally Posted by leozelig
Thank you for all of your hard work!!
-TK
1) Question/Suggestion on auto-Disapproval; can you make a editable field for the table this rolls on so we can use custom deity disapproval tables?
2) When I roll the "Attack all" button on the main tab of the Partysheet, I get the following error [string "scripts/manager_action_attack.lua"]:134: bad argument #1 to 'match' (string expected, got nil).
Yes, custom disapproval tables are the next logical step. I know the DCC Annual Vol. 1 uses those. I was going to add a field similar to crits and fumbles where you can specify the table name.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tabarkus
Thanks for the bug report. I will take a look at it later today.
Fixed party sheet attack bug.
Working on some MCC features...
I am trying to decide whether Artifact Check would work better as a skill or a power. It has a class and level bonus progression that argues for making it a skill, and it has a results table associated with the check result that argues for making it a power. The downside of making it a skill is that you would need to look up the table result, and the downside of making it a power is that you would need to manually enter your artifact bonus. Right now, I'm leaning towards making it a power since you will be using the results table much more than you will be entering a new level bonus. I can create a single bonus field on the Actions tab to make the manual entry easier.
I think I will eventually create a unique mutation record based off the power record. It will have a Type field but no Corruption, Misfire, or Manifestation fields. When added to the char sheet it can create a power group named "Mutations." These will also live in their own data library (ie, unique sidebar button).
NPC records will need an AI Recognition field. We won't need Alignment, but I will leave this field in there since it auto-hides when blank.
I think it will be useful to create specific item records for artifacts -- artifact_weapon, artifact_armor, artifact_equipment, and artifact_vehicle. That way, when they are dropped to your inventory, I can either create a weapon entry or a power depending on what fields the item has. This is how items work for DCC, but it would add additional categories to handle drops more specifically.
That's all for now. As always, feel free to share any thoughts about making the DCC ruleset work better for MCC.
Leo, Might be easier to write an extension for MCC and not tinker with the ruleset.
That was another big question for me. My concern with the extension is that I will need to update both with duplicate changes, and I’m worried I will miss something or double my work by creating an extension. My plan is to run MCC from within the DCC ruleset the same way Pathfinder is (or was originally, not sure now) an option in the 3.5E ruleset.Quote:
Originally Posted by bayne7400
Yeah I guess it depends on what all you have to change. Like that Lankhmar extension. When they redid the sidebar it threw me for a loop but I was able to eventually figure it out. Had it just been some fields on the character sheet it would hardly need to be maintained:).
After running it by a few people who are smarter than me, I realized that MCC needs it's own ruleset, which would include the core rules module. I can make the character data match up with the DCC ruleset in case you want to run a crossover game. If MCC is an extension or option within the DCC ruleset, someone who only wanted to play MCC would need to buy the DCC ruleset and the MCC core rules module. Creating a standalone ruleset for MCC means you only need to buy one product in that scenario.
So MCC will be a standalone ruleset that includes the core rules. You should be able to import DCC characters, but that might be a later stage feature. Here's a preview of what's to come...
Attachment 45789
Hey Leo, I noticed in my game tonight that Halflings crit hitting on a roll of 16 is not functioning. When I changed the meta data on the weapon itself and unchecked the Two-weapon fighting box the crit still would not happen even when I set the Crit On number to 2. Would you please look into this.
Yes, I thought I had that fixed. Is it the primary or offhand attack that is not working? There is some debate about whether a halfling’s offhand attack can crit. Other classes cannot. Since the rule is unclear for a halfling, I do not automatically count the offhand nat 16 as a crit so judge’s can rule how they want. Let me know when you get a chance...
Neither primary nor off-hand were critting for me. I've always interpreted the rule as written: "Unlike other characters, when fighting with two weapons, a halfling scores a crit and automatic hit on any roll of a natural 16" Emphasis mine. That clearly implies either weapon attack to me, especially when the base two-weapon fighting rules specifically limit it to the primary hand. But each to their own interpretation.
Some people focus on the “automatic hit” aspect of that statement. With Agility 16-17, non-halflings need to roll a 16 on the d16 AND hit the target, whereas halflings automatically hit with a 16 regardless of target AC. The halfling class description says that with an Agility above 16, normal two-weapon fighting rules apply - ie, a PC with Agi 18 rolls a d20 and crits on a nat 20 regardless of target AC. In all cases, only the primary hand crits. It’s the phrase “any roll of a natural 16” that creates confusion. Are they referring to primary/off hand or the attack hitting the target’s AC?
I don’t have a strong feeling personally, but when it comes to automation, I have tried to code the more restrictive interpretation. The manual crit roll is easy enough.
Anyway... I submitted a fix for the halfling class not applying a minimum Agility score of 16. :)
cool, thanks man; yeah I can see the other interpretation; and coding to the conservative interpretation makes sense.