Yeah that was a mistake bud thanks for the feedback.
Printable View
Yeah that was a mistake bud thanks for the feedback.
Terrific... glad to see OSE getting support. FWIW I'm a software tester/QA automation "engineer" in my day job. So, apologies if my reports and responses get overly detailed. It's force of habit at this point. Or I'm just a verbose SOB. :p
Oh yeah I am not going anywhere. I continue to make improvements to the ruleset as time permits. I still want to add a turn tracker that integrates with the CT and a few more quality of Life items.
Howdy! Thanks for the updates.
I updated 02/04/2022.
Only OSE AF Player's Tome and OSE AF Referee's Tome loaded.
Items, Groups, seems to have one too many groups ("Old School Essentials Advanced Fantasy Player's Tome"). This group only has "wine" in it. Items appear to be in "Old School Essentials Advanced Players Tome".
When building a new character, AC remains at "0" (zero) instead of "9", which is great for Magic Users. When a character is given (unequipped) armor and it appears in the Inventory, AC correctly changes to "9". When the Armor is equipped, the AC does change to the correct number.
Just a few notes.
So when you make a character as soon as you add any item to the inventory it updates the AC. Ill investigate the behavior and next update address it. I added a backpack and the AC values updated. It probably has to do with the window not initializing when you first pop open the character sheet but not a major deal since most adventurers carry at least one item :)
Wine was created as uncategorized and was exported in its own category. Next time the Tome is updated we will fix it. thanks!
OK figured it out. The gnomes I enslaved to bring you this ruleset set the initial AC value. They are sleeping until something is added (any item) to the inventory. Now when you create a character they awaken and set your AC to its default value (which should be 12 (9 -3) until your dex is set.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Axe
Another couple of errors from running my game last night. If needed I can try to find steps to reproduce.
[2/7/2022 9:10:40 PM] [ERROR] Script execution error: [string "scripts/manager_action_attack.lua"]:128: attempt to compare nil with number
[2/7/2022 9:22:25 PM] [ERROR] Script execution error: [string "round"]:52: attempt to compare number with nil
[2/7/2022 9:25:42 PM] [ERROR] Script execution error: [string "round"]:52: attempt to compare number with nil
I am going to need some help with the first one. What level and thaco was PC and what monster did they attack? Was it targeted? Any other details would be helpful. I cannot reproduce the error.
The last two are turn tracker related me thinks.
Second one is fixed. Something is going on with default values reverting in FG. When it pulled the value if no value is there it sets it to 0. Should have coded it like this to begin with.
Although I couldn't not reproduce it. I did see a potential bug where if the ac was somehow greater than 12 it could throw a nil value. So I fixed that. Since the error was one time and went away I am going toc all it solved.
Here are a couple wishes for the NPC records:
- Configurable option to roll HP by HD for each NPC in an encounter. The key here is making the stats less predictable and "samey".
- A way to indicate attack patterns for an NPC without having to switch to the notes tab or—quite frequently—go beyond the NPC record to read the Referee Tome. This is definitely the bigger issue because the information simply isn't easy to get at with the provided NPC records.
I apologize in advance, but I'm donning my QA pocket protector now to go into probably entirely too much detail in support of my findings and recommendations.
Attack Patterns and Number of Attacks as Represented by the NPC Record
Gavin's statblock conventions makes it really simple to see what's going on. So much so that when I was helping edit/reorganize the content for another VTT's OGL OSE implementation I ended up just including the entire statblock in notes in addition to setting up the mechanical attack patterns. Sometimes a single line of text is just easier to read:
- Black Dragon: Att [2 × claw (1d4 + 1), 1 × bite (2d10)] or breath
- Chimera: Att 2 × claw (1d3), goat: 1 × gore (2d4), lion: 1 × bite (2d4), dragon: 1 × bite (3d4) or 1 × breath (3d6)
- Manticore: Att [2 × claw (1d4), 1 × bite (2d4)] or 6 × tail spike (1d6)
Let's look at the Manticore. The weapons list from the NPC out of the Referee Tome looks like this:
There's no indication of how these attacks are organized from the Main tab, and unfortunately the Notes tab has no useful information on attack patterns, either:
Weapon ATK DMG 2 x claw 0 1d4 1 x bite 0 2d4 6 x tail spike 0 1d6
So now I go to the Reference Manual and search "manticore" and I get a hit called "M and N". Crap... all the monsters for M–N are in a single page without any ability to "find in page"... scroll down... thankfully it happens to be the second record, and now I can see that it's got:Quote:
Monstrosities with the face of a man, the body of a lion, bat-like wings, and a tail bristling with spikes. Love eating humans.
Dwell in wild, mountainous regions.
Tail spikes:
180’ range. 24 in total; 2 regrow each day.
Track and ambush:
Follow humans and attack with tail spikes when they stop to rest.
Okay... so now I know that it's either 2 x claw and 1 x bite OR it's 6x tail spikes. Let's attack with the tail... click a bunch of times... I think I clicked 6 times...Quote:
Att [2 × claw (1d4), 1 × bite (2d4)] or 6 × tail spike (1d6)
"Is that 6?" Counting... "Nope... only 5." Clicking again.Quote:
6 x tail spike[NPC] [THACO 13] Attack
Attacker Hits an AC of [8]
6 x tail spike[NPC] [THACO 13] Attack
Attacker Hits an AC of [4]
6 x tail spike[NPC] [THACO 13] Attack
Attacker Hits an AC of [-6]
6 x tail spike[NPC] [THACO 13] Attack
Attacker Hits an AC of [-6]
6 x tail spike[NPC] [THACO 13] Attack
Attacker Hits an AC of [-4]
Alternatively, I could have this for weapons:Quote:
6 x tail spike[NPC] [THACO 13] Attack
Attacker Hits an AC of [1]
Weapon ATK DMG (Att 1) Claw #1 0 1d4 (Att 1) Claw #2 0 1d4 (Att 1) Bite 0 2d4 (Att 2) Tail spike #1 0 1d6 (Att 2) Tail spike #2 0 1d6 (Att 2) Tail spike #3 0 1d6 (Att 2) Tail spike #4 0 1d6 (Att 2) Tail spike #5 0 1d6 (Att 2) Tail spike #6 0 1d6
And this would give me the following in the chat log:
The gains here:Quote:
(Att 2) Tail spike #1 [NPC] [THACO 13] Attack
Attacker Hits an AC of [8]
(Att 2) Tail spike #2 [NPC] [THACO 13] Attack
Attacker Hits an AC of [4]
(Att 2) Tail spike #3 [NPC] [THACO 13] Attack
Attacker Hits an AC of [-6]
(Att 2) Tail spike #4 [NPC] [THACO 13] Attack
Attacker Hits an AC of [-6]
(Att 2) Tail spike #5 [NPC] [THACO 13] Attack
Attacker Hits an AC of [-4]
(Att 2) Tail spike #6 [NPC] [THACO 13] Attack
Attacker Hits an AC of [1]
- Nomenclature matches the mechanics; i.e. the chat log will show the weapon and the number of attack rather than repeatedly showing "2 x claw" or "6 x tail spike". This makes it easier to sanity check results.
- Attack patterns are apparent at a glance.
The obvious drawbacks here:
- More attacks in a confined space—it might look really congested and be hard to see what's available.
- Scrolling to click each of the tail spike instances rather than spamming a button.
- Attack routines are defined via non-enforced convention.
- Monsters are already "done" for the Ref tome... nobody wants to go and edit them all.
Information is the Bigger Issue
The difficulty of discovering the information is a bigger issue than the mechanical representation. If I could quickly see Gavin's statblock I wouldn't really care too much about the rest. But the info simply isn't available in the NPC record and getting to it from the Reference Manual isn't fast, involving 5 clicks and some skimming. In the case of the Manticore, it's actually faster to search Gavin's SRD website. However, that won't help with Advanced monsters, and the Advanced monsters are the ones people will be less familiar with, anyway, since they're not just Moldvay monsters with the possibility of a slightly different name.
All of the following monsters have more than one attack listed within the OSE AF Monsters book. Some of these simply have multiple attacks and no alternate attack pattern. Others do have one or more alternate attack patterns. It simply isn't possible to tell what the monsters' attack patterns are by looking at most of these NPC records. Again, note that these are only Advanced monsters.
Ankheg, Banshee, Bulette, Catoblepas, Deep One, Demonic Knight, Multichromatic Dragon (different attack pattern than other dragons), Dragonne, Drider, Efreeti, Eye of Terror, Eye of the Deep, Giant Electric Eel, Giant Mutant Frog, Ghast, Ghost, Gibbering Mouther, Iron Golem, Gorilla, Gullygug, Black and Sea Hags, Hulker, Jackalwere, Krell, Flame Lizard, Monitor Lizard, Malfyr, Mantid, Merrow, Mind Lasher, Nightmare, Otyugh, Phoenix, Pseudo-Dragon, Rakshasa, Roper, Sahuagin, Satyr, Scorpionoid, Sea Serpent, Giant Slug, Snake Person, Spawn of the Worm, Sphinx, Tarrasque, Titan, Giant Wasp, Winter Wolf, Xorn.
I would argue that having quick access to the stat block is essential unless the entire attack pattern is captured either mechanically or through descriptive convention within the NPC record. As it is I'm going to have to take the time to specially prep each monster I'm going to use for a session to reduce cognitive friction during game time, and that does somewhat diminish the value of having stock NPC records already built for me.
The following is a summary of my own personal values/priorities, but hopefully it's useful information.
- Ideal would be having the entire statblock in the notes tab AND the attack pattern documented either mechanically or through descriptive convention. No clicks required if there are no questions. (Optional single click to get to Notes to check details.)
- Second best would be to leave the attacks alone and add the statblock to Notes. (Mandatory single click to get to Notes and learn the attack details.)
- Third best would be including a link in the Notes tab to the specific monster entry in the Referee Tome. This would require reorganizing the Referee Tome so that each monster has it's own record. (One click to get to Notes, and a 2nd click to get to the monster entry.)
- Fourth best would be including the link to the record which includes the monster entry without it actually being split into it's own record. (Click the link then scroll and skim. 2 clicks and a scrolling scan for the monster.)
- Fifth best would be record per monster and having to search the Referee Tome for the monster. (1. Click on Modules; 2. Click on Referee Tome; 3. Click on Reference Manual; 4. Click into the search field; 5. Scan for the relevant match and click it.)
- Sixth best is what we have now: All the steps of the "fifth best" option plus the added step of scrolling through the record to find the specific monster details I'm looking for. (5 clicks plus scanning for the right info twice.)
Don't be fooled by the volume of my feedback. The OSE ruleset is a big part of what drew me back to FG after having gradually cut my ties to several different VTTs in favor of Google Sheets character sheets and using a VTT merely for dice rolling and handouts. I'm looking forward to what OSE2 can do for me and my groups.
I am sorry I don't understand the bug. Give me the cliff notes version.
If your asking for a recode of how npcs work that's not something I am prepared to do.
I thought my npc parser places the stat block in the notes tab, I double check.
Remember this is free ruleset. Jolly and I did it for free and haven't accepted money for our work on it nor has anyone offered ha.
The problem is lack of information within the NPC record to indicate the attack patterns. IF the statblock was included in the record there wouldn't be a problem. So I guess my issue really should go to the paid product thread—the Referee Tome NPC records don't provide enough information to distinguish between multiple attacks and alternate attack patterns, and sometimes there are both—some monsters have multiple attacks AND an alternate attack pattern.
Attachment 51416
The monsters in the ref tome have all the information from the book What are you saying is missing?
Let me take another stab at this, without all the supporting detail.
The core problem I want to address is insufficient representation of the monster attacks. Monsters can have 1 or more attack patterns, and each attack pattern can have 1 or more separate attacks. In the OSE books Gavin solves this problem by separating multiple attacks with commas and separating attack patterns with brackets and/or the word "or".
- A) In the software, the NPC record, the limitation is that the concept of multiple attack patterns is simply not represented. There is no way, mechanically, to represent multiple attack patterns in a way that makes them visible to the end user.
- B) In the paid OSE Advanced Fantasy Referee's Tome the NPC records could have, but do not, provide this information. In most cases there is no information provided in the NPC record to distinguish between multiple attack patterns and multiple attacks.
The problem could be mitigated by addressing A or B, or a combination of them. My overly long post was running down the "user story" sort of problem at work here as well as possible solutions. If it would help I can try to detail the issues I see with the Referee's Tome over in the correct thread for it, but I don't want to waste anyone's time. If it would be easier to chat via discord, we can move there to discuss what I'm trying to get at.
In the Referee Tome the information for the monster is provided in two places:Quote:
Originally Posted by bayne7400
- the NPC record
- the Reference Manual
The NPC records do not provide all the needed information to distinguish between multiple attacks and alternate attack patterns. Look at the White Ape, the Banshee, the Bulette, the Manticore, etc. You cannot tell from the NPC record whether the monster has multiple attacks or alternate attack patterns.
- The White Ape has 2 attack patterns: in the 1st pattern they get 2 attacks with claws, and in the 2nd pattern they get 1 attack with a thrown rock.
- The Banshee has 2 attack patterns, each with a single attack.
- The Bulette has only a single attack pattern of 3 attacks.
- The Manticore has 2 attack patterns: in the 1st pattern they get 2 claw attacks and 1 bite attack; in the 2nd pattern they get 6 tail attacks.
There is no way to determine these attack details from the NPC records alone. It is necessary to pull up the reference manual, search for the monsters, and then skim through the collection of monsters in which they appear to find the correct record. This could be a lot more convenient.
The Reference Manual entries have the full monster description, including the statblock, but they cannot be reached efficiently because monsters do not have their own, individual records which can be linked. They are grouped together, which requires navigation to the referee tome, searching to find the monster grouping, then then visual scanning to find the monster entry. Individual monster entries would be an improvement to this, making it more efficient to use. Links to individual entries could be dropped in the NPC records' Notes tab.
So you want "or" inserted? Try making a request in one single complete sentence. You can save all of us time.
Okay: "How do I distinguish between multiple attacks and alternate attack patterns for monsters like the White Ape, the Banshee, the Bulette, and the Manticore using the NPC records provided in the paid Referee's Tome?"
Pick one monster and post a screenshot off the attacks it has and then show what you think it should have, that might help.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuirgin
The NPC record as it is now in the Referee Tome:
https://i.ibb.co/ySKGQKv/20220210-Dragonne-before.png
The NPC record updated with the statblock and attack pattern annotation:
https://i.ibb.co/Rbhbs6w/20220210-Dragonne-after.png
Personally, I think that the statblock is more important than the attack pattern annotation—it will answer a wider variety of questions.
So you would like the stat block (even though it's included in the NPC sheet) and those extra attacks added?
Roar is not an attack per se, the players need to roll a save to avoid damage, so it doesn't need to be in the automation.
I think you are expecting too much.
The stat block is in the reference manual. I'll say in the future I'll make sure I include it in the parser so it places it in the notes section. As far as going back and adding it that is not something I am going to do. For adventures moving forward I'll make sure the stat block is presented somewhere in the conversion.
The statblock includes documentation of the attack patterns and multiple attacks. The attack patterns are not present in the NPC sheets, so there is information missing which is necessary for running the NPC. Your pushback is that roar isn't actually an attack so isn't needed in the automation, but the Referee needs to have the information available to know how to run it. The dragonne gets 2x claw and either 1x bite or 1x roar.
Here's another monster with two entirely different attack patterns. The manticore gets either (2x claw + 1x bite) or 6x tail spike. My expectation is that the NPC record is going to have all the information that I need, and that's not actually the case. If I'm simply missing how it's documented here, please enlighten me. But from what I can see you have to stop what you're doing, pull up the Reference Manual, search for the monster, scan through all the entries until you find the correct one, and then read a statblock looking for the Att details. Or they could just be included in the NPC record and the problem is solved to the Referee's benefit.
Manticore as in the Referee Tome:
https://i.ibb.co/kmX1J1t/20220210-Manticore-before.png
Manticore with attack patterns represented:
https://i.ibb.co/xFKPj9z/20220210-Manticore-after.png
And you don't need the full statblock given that all the other details are already present and accounted for. You could just include the attack entry. But this information is definitely missing from the product at the moment.
https://i.ibb.co/ZzY1wRB/20220210-Gullygug-after.png
Understood. I'll drop it. It's just a frustrating missed opportunity in a paid product. I'm betting making those conversions don't actually earn anyone much money for the effort, so I get the choice.Quote:
Originally Posted by bayne7400
The Roar information is in the NPC sheer.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuirgin
Don't want this buried. Sorry Bayne.Quote:
Originally Posted by bayne7400
The fact that roar is an alternative to bite is not in the NPC sheet. But Bayne has spoken and it's over.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jiminimonka
If I did the work that I'm describing is there any way to organize the effort so that it could be synced back into the official Referee Tome product and others could benefit from it?Quote:
Originally Posted by bayne7400
Yeah if they were not actually in the product I would add them but they are all in the reference manual (Which is where they belong). Its not a bad suggestion at all its just a time thing. The core RPG update on test breaks OSE pretty bad, so right now I am focused on keeping us all playing.
Yeah, I get that. Priorities. But I'm going to be doing this work anyway to scratch my own itch. It makes it better if I can share it back. Is it possible to share it back and if so, how would that work?
Absent you having the campaign file I'm not sure. Thanks for offering though.
Tuirgin, I totally get what your saying and agree it'd be very beneficial to have that info included on the npc sheet. I do find searching the resource document cumbersome.
Also, Bayne, I get that time is scarce.
Luckily, it's only 50ish creatures.
Just chiming in. I'll likely add the info to the creatures and add them to my ever growing custom mod.
:)
Yeah, same here. The time requirements aren't trivial and I get that. I just wish there was a way we could contribute so that it wasn't everyone doing it for themselves. We could certainly work up the OGL monsters—that's everything from OSE Classic and the accompanying SRD website. But the Advanced monsters aren't under an open license, so no informal community effort is possible.Quote:
Originally Posted by Axe
Quote:
Originally Posted by Axe
If it is only 50 creatures Ill do it next update.(may be a month). Thought you guys were asking for every NPC record. Can you give me a list?
I gave you one in the very first post of this conversation. It's only the Advanced monsters, however, and it is a mix of monsters that have multiple attacks and those which have multiple attack patterns.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tuirgin
Here's a list of Classic monsters that have alternate attack patterns.
- Ape, White
- Cave Locust
- Chimera (mult & alt)
- Cyclops
- Dragons (all variants have mult & alt: bite OR breath is an alternate attack pattern despite breath being special)
- Dragon Turtle (mult & alt)
- Cloud Giant
- Fire Giant
- Frost Giant
- Stone Giant
- Gorgon
- Giant Hawk
- Normal Hawk
- Hellhound
- Devil Swine
- Wererat
- Manticore (mult & alt)
- Mastodon (mult & alt)
- Medium
- Minotaur (mult & alt)
- Mule
- Nixie
- Rhinoceros
- Sea Serpent (Lesser)
- Bull Shark
- Spitting Cobra
- Giant Squid (mult & alt)
- Stegosaurus
- Thoul (mult & alt)
- Titanothere
- Triceratops
- Vampire (alt... both alternatives are specials)
- Freshwater Termite
- Saltwater Termite
- Swamp Termite
- Sperm Whale
When the new core update hits the parser will be updated on live. It now puts the stat block at the top of the notes section so any future conversions wont be an issue. It took longer to type this post then fix the parser :)
Thanks, Bayne... I appreciate it.
Gotta get that in For Dolmenwood. Its a good point and I'm sympathetic. Wish I had thought of it back then.
TL;DR: Use of the Modifier Stack with a skill check adjusts the roll quality as expected, but in some cases the outcome reported is incorrect. It appears that the success/failure report is only evaluating the natural roll against the success target and not the modified roll.
- Modifiers applied with the Skill's Modifier field seems to be working as expected. When the field is set the dice roll quality is not changed, but the success target is updated and this is reflected in the chat log.
- Modifiers applied using The Modifier Stack occasionally produces unexpected/incorrect outcome reports. Explanation follows.
The following three rolls were made using the Modifier Stack:
https://i.ibb.co/hyVN0xQ/20220211-Sk...-Modifiers.png
- As Expected: The chat log shows the expected, unmodified "20% Success Chance"—this is straight out of my skill's success target value and has not been changed.
- As Expected: The dice quality is changed from a natural 18 to -32, from a natural 72 to a 22, and from a natural 68 to an 18.
- Unexpected/Wrong Outcome: The first two outcome reports appear to be correct. The last roll gives the wrong outcome report: 18 is less than 20, but [FAILURE] is indicated.
I've done a bunch of these rolls and consistently it appears that [SUCCESS] is only reported if the natural roll quality is ≤ the success target. From the places where I see skill modifiers described, I believe the OSE expectation is that you will modify the skill's target value and not the roll quality. However, whether the Referee wants to apply modifiers to the target value or inverse modifiers to the roll quality is a matter of taste. The math works either way, but applying the modifier to the roll is currently producing incorrect results in OSE2.
Please give me less words. Talk to me like I'm a caveman. I am pretty sure I know the issue.