Thread: New NPC-sheet
-
August 22nd, 2005, 09:24 #1
New NPC-sheet
All this started as a discussion in the tavern where msd requested a NPC-sheet with fields for spells.
kalmarjan made new graphics for the NPC-sheet and I agreed to make the code, however as I explained in the tavern I have no idea whatsoever how the d20-system work so I can't tell what field should be present, on what page they belong, whether it should be a string or a number or whatever, and what the logical order should be.
In the meantime I've coded the graphical definition based on kalmarjan's images. I had to alter the images somewhat to make room for the name-field, windowopencontrol and identityactivation, I hope you don't mind kalmarjan.
The other pages will be 'working' (in the sense that it will be possible to click the tab to bring that page to the front within an hour of work, tops. They will still be empty sheets though.
I guess the 'Hook' page would make most sense with another formattedtext-field much in the same way as the description on the first page - yes?
Suggestions, ideas and above all - where to next?
-
August 22nd, 2005, 10:30 #2
The other tabs are now clickable. I'd post the ruleset, but there's not really much to look at at the moment.
-
August 22nd, 2005, 17:30 #3
Interesting, if you are in need of any graphics, let me know, I am fairly adept with Fireworks and can usualyl make whatever is needed.
Isn't that a different background than the normal sheet? Just curious, I am at work and I cannot check at the moment.• snikle •
. .lapsus calumni. .
-
August 22nd, 2005, 17:47 #4
Yep, it is a different background. I wanted something like a rough paper background to differentiate what is done through the normal FG. So we have a unique ID for user/fan work!
My appologies for my lateness, as soon as I get home from work, I will post what it is that I was requiring, and then I will definately look into cleaning up the actual graphics.
Looks great so far. I wish I had half the skill you have at coding.
Just a note too, once we are finished with the NPC, if you don't mind, the monsters are to follow next. If you got no time, let me know how you did it, then I can code it. As it is, it will require some big changes into the actual coding of the monsters in the XML files, which I can do and am confortable doing. (It is just data entry after all )
Thank you so much for your time, and again, an awesome job!
Cheers,Ultimate Licence holder
I've had FG for so LONG I DON'T KNOW HOW TO USE IT!
But I'm learning!
-
August 22nd, 2005, 17:48 #5
Yep- the hook page is where you would put things such as favourite sayings, stuff like that.
Ultimate Licence holder
I've had FG for so LONG I DON'T KNOW HOW TO USE IT!
But I'm learning!
-
August 22nd, 2005, 18:09 #6
The question that I want to ask is though, I don't really want everything to be seperated.... is there a possibility that we can incorparate this into the other sets as well, for the SRD, or is a reality that everything will have to be recoded??
I would like to see this as a standard for the community if possible, just for the sake of enrty... and my own campaigns, and others.
What do you all think?
Again, great job!
P.P.S. for the person who did the fantastic NPC.exe programming, when we get the code for this finalized, is there a way to modify the exec program to give us the XML in this fashion???
Cheers,Ultimate Licence holder
I've had FG for so LONG I DON'T KNOW HOW TO USE IT!
But I'm learning!
-
August 22nd, 2005, 20:23 #7Originally Posted by kalmarjan
Originally Posted by kalmarjan
Originally Posted by kalmarjan
Originally Posted by kalmarjan
-
August 22nd, 2005, 20:32 #8Originally Posted by kalmarjan
One thing that must not happen though, is to remove existing fields, because if someone tries to use this on existing data, with an NPC that contains fields that aren't defined in the code, it will crash the program. Do you think this is a risk? If it is I might have a workaround, so it might not be a problem. Just let me know.
-
August 22nd, 2005, 20:40 #9
Could be a risk, yes, I think the best way to workaround this is to keep the fields that FG has now the same, No? Then the others can be slipped in nicely. The part I think we have to worry about is the actual XML info, which if we manage to keep the code the same for that at least, there should be no problem. Then it is just a matter of where that information is displayed.
I could be off base here, I will know better when I get home and plow into the XML, and write out what is needed to make this happen.
Thanks again!Ultimate Licence holder
I've had FG for so LONG I DON'T KNOW HOW TO USE IT!
But I'm learning!
-
August 22nd, 2005, 20:50 #10Originally Posted by kalmarjan
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks