Including text in module?

[Blacky]

Your best bet would be to do the story entries within FG, export the module to produce a normal db.xml module and then edit the XML in this to make it a <library> module (refer to the structure in the 3.5e basic rules module) and rename to common.xml so that the players can download it.

If I rename the content file common.xml, does the module content behave the way Data Module management hints to? Meaning a GM can forbid the module to players, allow it, or force it?

[Griogre]

The answer is maybe. The module would work like a common module, yes, but the rest would depend on the ruleset. If the ruleset allows players to load the data shared then yes it would work that way. However, if the ruleset does not normally allow players to access the data then setting the module to common won't magically allow them to access the data.

[Moon Wizard]

Actually, this has changed in v3.x.

Any module can be shared. By default, modules containing db.xml files are disallowed and not visible by players. Otherwise, module access is undefined, and the modules are visible and able to be requested by players. The access can be changed by the GM.

Regards,
JPG

[Griogre]

Yes, but if a ruleset for example doesn't allow the GM to share NPC's, wouldn't that mean the players could still not actually *see* or access the NPCs? If a ruleset doesn't give a client permission to open a window class it still can't be opened by the client, correct?

[Moon Wizard]

It depends. As long as the link to the NPC is visible (via Library or Campaign List), the player should be able to access it. You are correct in the case where the ruleset doesn't give the players the NPC campaign list button, and the NPCs are stored there.

Regards,
JPG