Jack of All Things for 5e (rebranding of Kit'N'Kaboodle)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zacchaeus

When a single use item is used (only tested on a single use item) and the item is set to destroy on last use is the item supposed to be deleted from the player's inventory? It certainly deletes the number of items and removes it from the actions tab but it leaves it in the inventory. Is this intended?

---

I think there is an option.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nephranka

I think there is an option.

---

Indeed, but it makes no difference whether that is on or off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zacchaeus

Indeed, but it makes no difference whether that is on or off.

---

I see. My players like keeping the original entry in the inv so it never occurred to me the option might not be working.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zacchaeus

When a single use item is used (only tested on a single use item) and the item is set to destroy on last use is the item supposed to be deleted from the player's inventory? It certainly deletes the number of items and removes it from the actions tab but it leaves it in the inventory. Is this intended?

---

Ya, I'm sorry. I was not able to fix that last property. Honestly I forgot what was the problem now but I worked on it quite a lot. It's kind of rough trying to support an extension that someone else wrote originally cause you don't really know the thinking behind a lot of the code. And M&U was a better programmer than me.

I will try aggain at some piont but unfortunately I am stupid busy right now and am even backed up on a few requests with my own extensions so this feature might be a while before I have time to attack it again. So I would say for the forseeable future, this feature is gone.

Thanks for reporting though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Farratto

Ya, I'm sorry. I was not able to fix that last property. Honestly I forgot what was the problem now but I worked on it quite a lot. It's kind of rough trying to support an extension that someone else wrote originally cause you don't really know the thinking behind a lot of the code. And M&U was a better programmer than me.

I will try aggain at some piont but unfortunately I am stupid busy right now and am even backed up on a few requests with my own extensions so this feature might be a while before I have time to attack it again. So I would say for the forseeable future, this feature is gone.

Thanks for reporting though.

---

Oh, I just remembered a little bit of the problem. So deleting the item with the script that is triggered from a button within the action item "window" would trigger a handler to delete the "window" while the script within the window was still running. M&U had gotten around this with the old checkbox script but his work-around doesn't work with the new checkbox script. And I attempted for several hours to find a work-around and failed.

Hi guys, I was wondering if there is a way to set the item so that it recovers charges during both short and long rests, for example 1 charge during a short rest and then 1d4+1 during a long rest.

It would also be nice to have a box for the number of charges that can be set based on the PC's stats, for example proficiency bonus, lvl, and the classic 6 stats.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Henix

Hi guys, I was wondering if there is a way to set the item so that it recovers charges during both short and long rests, for example 1 charge during a short rest and then 1d4+1 during a long rest.

It would also be nice to have a box for the number of charges that can be set based on the PC's stats, for example proficiency bonus, lvl, and the classic 6 stats.

---

I do appreciate your feedback and thank you for posting.

So, I personally won't be supporting homebrew rules. There are just too many variations and I just dont have the time. If you know of an example of a RAW situation where this would come up, I will add it to the todo list.

If anyone else wanted to contribute to make these types of things happen, I'd be happy to collaberate. Part of the problem is that I didn't originally write this extension, I'm just "keeping it alive." I have added features to it but I was a LOT less busy at that time and I now have my own extensions to maintain in addition to M&U's old extensions.

I was creating an effect for a potion of healing in 5e (legacy).

Charge: 1
Recharge: Never
On Last: Destroy

Then I gave a character the potion, changed the amount to i.e. 4 and started to tick of uses.
With the option set to "Remove destroyed items from inventory" set to "Off" it ticks the used checkbox and removes one from the inventory, but as long as there is still one item left it also marks it as used. So basically it does both.
With the option set to "On" it removes one item and does not leave a marked checkbox. That's what I would expect as well. But with the option disabled, it seems a strange behavior.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Speculi

I was creating an effect for a potion of healing in 5e (legacy).

Charge: 1
Recharge: Never
On Last: Destroy

Then I gave a character the potion, changed the amount to i.e. 4 and started to tick of uses.
With the option set to "Remove destroyed items from inventory" set to "Off" it ticks the used checkbox and removes one from the inventory, but as long as there is still one item left it also marks it as used. So basically it does both.
With the option set to "On" it removes one item and does not leave a marked checkbox. That's what I would expect as well. But with the option disabled, it seems a strange behavior.

---

I probably made an error the last time I "fixed" this option. The ruleset coding for those tickboxes changed dramatically a few patches ago and I had to duct tape something together to make it function somewhat normal. It's still not working the way it used to but I'm not M&U and I don't have a lot of free time.

But, I will see if I can fix the "option off" behavior without breaking the "option on" behavior. If you were to look at the code at this point, it's covered in duct-tape and super-glue.

Hello

I reviewed the JackOfAllThings extension and tracked the two warnings down to specific merge blocks in the XML.

The warnings were coming from these files:

campaign/record_char_actions.xml
This file contains a FloatingTabs compatibility merge block targeting charsheet_actionsft.

campaign/record_power.xml
This file contains a merge block targeting power_action_resource.

The issue is that JackOfAllThings is trying to merge into UI classes that no longer match the versions currently being loaded by Fantasy Grounds. Because of that mismatch, FG reports that the asset name does not match the existing asset.

To resolve the warnings, I removed the two outdated merge blocks.

The blocks removed were:

From campaign/record_char_actions.xml:

<!-- FloatingTabs compatibility -->
<windowclass name="charsheet_actionsft" merge="join">
...
</windowclass>

From campaign/record_power.xml:

<windowclass name="power_action_resource" merge="join">
<script>
function update(_, bHideCast)
if super and super.update then super.update() end
resourcebutton.setVisible(not bHideCast);
end
</script>
</windowclass>

Result:
Removing those blocks cleared the JackOfAllThings merge warnings.

Tradeoff:
This also removes JackOfAllThings support for the FloatingTabs version of the character actions page and removes its custom update() patch for the power_action_resource row. In my testing, this was the safest way to eliminate the warnings without guessing at new merge targets.

I also created a cleaned version of the extension with those warning-causing blocks removed: