[Extension] - 5E - AGGRO: Smart Targeting System for NPCs

So... new update incoming. New features include:

3 New Effects

• INDEPENDENT: NPCs with INDEPENDENT effect will skip threat calculation an auto targeting. Use it for manual targeting.
• NOTHREAT: NPCs with this effect will be ignored as valid targets.
• CRUEL: The NPC with this effect will bypass NPC Cruelty: Off (NPC will continue to see dying actors as valid targets until they're dead). Good to evil bosses or final battles.

A New targeting mode: Target Advisor

• Instead of Auto selecting targets, Target advisor will just advise the GM on who are the biggest threats of the battlefield, leaving the final target choice to GM/Player.

New Option: NPC Engagement

NPCs normally don't engage in combat. But this option can change that behavior. These are the new options:

• Off: Neutral NPCs never engage combat, even if attacked.
• Auto Defense: Neutral NPCs will join the opposing faction of any actor that attack them first. If after switching factions a former neutral is attacked by a member of the faction they've just joined, the NPCs will turn hostile to all, instead.
• Hostile to All: If a neutral NPC is attacked by anyone, it will turn hostile to all actors on combat tracker that were not neutral before.
• Random Choice: Randomly chooses between auto defense or hostile to all.

Bug Fixes and minor changes:

• Fixed effective and max range calculations for melee actors.
• Renamed menu options.

Known Issues:

• Foes will never see a former neutral turned foe as a valid target. The only way to trigger the "betrayal" behavior for neutrals that are now foes is to manually target it with another foe.

I've tried my best to test all possible scenarios, but as the number of features grow, it's becoming very difficult to test, so if you would like to test future releases in advance, let me know!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fingersome

I always check for updates before I run FGU so it *should* be using whatever the latest version you’ve pushed is… right?

---

Maybe not. I've switched AGGRO from Data to Vault on Forge, in earlier versions. if you happen to have a older version in .ext format in you extensions folder, FG will grant priority for the .ext over the vault file. Remove any old aggro files from your extension folder and give it a new try.

check the extension announcement message when you launch the game, if it says Aggro 1.2.1 you're good. If it says something like "Aggro - [Prioritized Source: File; Other Sources: Vault]" it's because FG is loading the old version instead.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alanrockid

Maybe not. I've switched AGGRO from Data to Vault on Forge, in earlier versions. if you happen to have a older version in .ext format in you extensions folder, FG will grant priority for the .ext over the vault file. Remove any old aggro files from your extension folder and give it a new try.

check the extension announcement message when you launch the game, if it says Aggro 1.2.1 you're good. If it says something like "Aggro - [Prioritized Source: File; Other Sources: Vault]" it's because FG is loading the old version instead.

---

Attachment 63142

Welp, it's still giving that error, and it's definitely the latest version :confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fingersome

Attachment 63142

Welp, it's still giving that error, and it's definitely the latest version :confused:

---

Can you share a screenshot of the NPC sheet that is triggering this error? I need to see the text for the ranged attack and the npc speed and reach.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alanrockid

Can you share a screenshot of the NPC sheet that is triggering this error? I need to see the text for the ranged attack and the npc speed and reach.

---

Aha! Found the issue; the creature's ranged attack was missing the "ft." part of the range increment on its ranged attack roll. It's now working as intended. Apologies for mucking you about!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fingersome

Aha! Found the issue; the creature's ranged attack was missing the "ft." part of the range increment on its ranged attack roll. It's now working as intended. Apologies for mucking you about!

---

Good to know! The function that checks for range in npc actors search for specific patterns: 'range x/y ft'., 'ranged x/y ft.', 'range x ft'. or 'ranged x ft', that why it wasn't working for you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arnagus

This is partially already in the verbose chat output for the GM. I am currently muting the player output and check through the calculations (pure logic option) who gets how many AGGRO points. I find myself quite often changing target due to LoS, but having a choice of 3-4 targets instead of.... many is very helpful, especiaöly if this annoying fireballing wizard in the last row is usually overlooked although in perfecr range of a crossbow...

---

Some of us process information better visually. Personally, I find it quicker to look at a map with ranked targets than to scan the chat output and match it to the tokens' positions. For example, I could glance at the map and immediately see that the token marked '1' is behind a wall and invalid, '2' is behind cover and would impose a -2 penalty on my ranging orc’s shot, while '3' is in a perfect position. Both methods work, but visual cues are much easier for me in these situations, and maybe for a few others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tooting Dog

Some of us process information better visually. Personally, I find it quicker to look at a map with ranked targets than to scan the chat output and match it to the tokens' positions. For example, I could glance at the map and immediately see that the token marked '1' is behind a wall and invalid, '2' is behind cover and would impose a -2 penalty on my ranging orc’s shot, while '3' is in a perfect position. Both methods work, but visual cues are much easier for me in these situations, and maybe for a few others.

---

That's something worth considering for sure. Right now i'm focused on implementing Spellcast/Healing aggro, but i'll add this to my todo list.

How much system performance load does this extension carry?

I use a ton of extensions (90+) and have to be selective about which ones that have a lot of overhead.

I love the concept of your work, but if it's constantly doing data comparison the performance cost may be too high (for me).

It's not apples to apples, but I had to stop using Auras for awhile because it made combat exceptionally laggy. However, that was fixed and it runs extremely well now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BushViper

How much system performance load does this extension carry?

I use a ton of extensions (90+) and have to be selective about which ones that have a lot of overhead.

I love the concept of your work, but if it's constantly doing data comparison the performance cost may be too high (for me).

It's not apples to apples, but I had to stop using Auras for awhile because it made combat exceptionally laggy. However, that was fixed and it runs extremely well now.

---

It does compare data, but not continuously. It doesn't run nonstop checks or loops in the background; instead, it performs checks once for each system message in the chat (such as criticals, damage, misses, or spells) and once at the start of an actor's turn in the combat tracker. I’ve also implemented a garbage collection system to avoid memory clutter. The processing is done on local tables rather than database nodes, except when saving data.