DICE PACKS BUNDLE
Page 3 of 3 First 123
  1. #21
    Trenloe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    Posts
    33,362
    Yes, an option to override default encounter ID settings would work to override encounters created as non-ID'd. You seem to want to keep guessing how things work and how changes would actually be implemented without fully appreciating the architecture and what can and can’t be done and how layered rulesets operate.

    I stand by all I’ve stated in this thread as to what would need to be changed in CoreRPG and what needs to be logged as a feature request. I kinda know what I’m talking about as I have a little bit of knowledge about these rulesets, PFRPG2 in particular (I’m the ruleset developer).

    As I’ve said multiple times - log your requests for feature changes in the FG wishlist. It doesn’t matter whether you view the current implementation as incomplete or not - you need to log your request for a change. I’m guessing you haven’t actually done that?
    Private Messages: My inbox is forever filling up with PMs. Please don't send me PMs unless they are actually private/personal messages. General FG questions should be asked in the forums - don't be afraid, the FG community don't bite and you're giving everyone the chance to respond and learn!

  2. #22
    Trenloe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    Posts
    33,362
    You know what, I've wasted far too much of my time on this thread. I wanted to not just dismiss @yarnevk's opinions and lack of understanding of how FG works, and spend my time educating and explaining the background to this issue and options available. But they either aren't reading what I'm saying, don't understand it or don't believe what I'm saying - I'm guessing from some of the arguments probably the latter.

    I've spent about 2 hours of my time responding in depth to this thread. I now feel that time was wasted. I could have spent that much more constructively developing PFRPG2 features and converting the Bestiary DLC. Heaven only knows how many encounters @yarnevk could have changed to ID'd in the time they've spent in this thread - probably enough to last a lifetime.

    In the end, it comes down to this - the developer has made a decision to tag the encounters in their PFRPG2 FG conversions as not ID'd. That's their decision and I'm fine with it. If a different developer decides to have encounters as ID'd, or the current FG developer changes their mind and starts producing encounters that are now ID'd, then I'm fine with that too. It's not a big deal. There are two places where this can be changed with the click of a button - one click! Changing this in the PFRPG2 DLC material is not what a majority wants - far from it, there is one person complaining about this, and more than one supporting it!

    @yarnevk - you are the sole voice wanting this changed. It's not a game breaker and it's not stopping you running your games how you want to run them - one button click does that for you. Assuming you're still not happy with this, the process for requesting a change has been outlined to you many times in this trhead. Whether you don't believe us or not when we tell you the changes you want need to be done in the CoreRPG ruleset - that's up to the SmiteWorks developers to decide where they'd make that change, if they make it at all.

    To be perfectly frank, continuously questioning what I'm saying is getting very tiresome (and beginning to border on disrespect to be honest), so I'm going to leave this thread how.
    Private Messages: My inbox is forever filling up with PMs. Please don't send me PMs unless they are actually private/personal messages. General FG questions should be asked in the forums - don't be afraid, the FG community don't bite and you're giving everyone the chance to respond and learn!

  3. #23
    Again you are being dismissive resorting to the click argument.

    That sort of response is unprofessional considering you are engaged in a customer service position as a developer when you are contracted to develop the ruleset.

    It is understood that it is not the ruleset that enforces the change, but rather the adventure module developer decided to do it that way. And of course the only reason to do it is as someone already said about 5e - that the number of clicks for the DM/GM is super annoying to change it to be the other way.

    Had this been posted to the 5e forum saying can we please change the module defaults to hide the names, because it is super annoying it defaults to showing it to the players? Would your response also have been just as dismissive that it is only a few clicks to change it?

    By that argument there was no reason to change the behavior between 5e and pf2e modules - because it is just a few clicks either way. Obviously it was changed because someone thought the extra clicks was annoying. So stop dismissing requests for change over how many clicks you think are not annoying.

  4. #24

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Virginia Beach
    Posts
    3,096
    New content should be made with identification hidden. The feature hasn’t been around long. Old content might not support it. For newer content, if something was released with identification not (edited to add NOT) hidden and someone complained, I believe most content developers would fix it without any complaint.
    You are becoming a royal pita if you haven’t figured that out. Were it up to me (and it isn’t) you’d be voted off the island. That almost never happens but it has happened once.
    Last edited by Bidmaron; August 15th, 2019 at 00:19.

  5. #25
    Trenloe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    Posts
    33,362
    Quote Originally Posted by yarnevk View Post
    Again you are being dismissive resorting to the click argument.
    I think you're being very hypocritical saying this. You have dismissed everything the people in this thread have been trying to tell you - people who have much more knowledge and experience of the underlying Fantasy Grounds architecture and code.

    Quote Originally Posted by yarnevk View Post
    By that argument there was no reason to change the behavior between 5e and pf2e modules - because it is just a few clicks either way. Obviously it was changed because someone thought the extra clicks was annoying. So stop dismissing requests for change over how many clicks you think are not annoying.
    This again shows that you're not grasping what we're trying to tell you. The ability to identify creature names has only been added to the FG rulesets (those based on CoreRPG) recently. Before then, there was no option to do this at all. Setting up encounters as unidentified is a *new* thing, and it's great that the PF1 and PF2 products take advantage of this. Hopefully other FG DLC developers will consider doing the same for future products and take advantage of the new encounter ID functionality.

    Quote Originally Posted by yarnevk View Post
    Had this been posted to the 5e forum saying can we please change the module defaults to hide the names, because it is super annoying it defaults to showing it to the players? Would your response also have been just as dismissive that it is only a few clicks to change it?
    What you fail to grasp is that you're the only one asking for this. One person! As I have said multiple times, there are 5 people in this thread who want encounters set as unidentified. Already your request is in the minority (5-1 against). Additionally, there are at least 26 PF1 and PF2 products that do this - that's probably over 1000 product sales and no one has mentioned this as an issue before - not even mentioned it, let alone argued the toss to the level you have. You are by far and away the very small vocal minority on this issue.

    Ultimately, this is the reason why I will not be implementing your request. I've said this before, but you either aren't reading or you don't believe me (I'm guessing a bit of both based off your incessant arguing and demands):

    1. You are in the vast minority here. No one else is asking for it, and a bunch of people have said they like the PF2 products the way they are. This simple fact should be enough for most people, but oh no! not for you, you are completely dismissing this very important point.
    2. If you think other people would like it, why don't you add it to the wishlist so others can vote on it? Do you do this - oh no! You don't want to do that - why? Is it because you think that he who shouts loudest gets what he wants? Not on these forums you don't. You see, we're not like most forums on the internet - here we support and help those who are polite and reasonable, and respect and appreciate other people's opinions. I have tried to respect yours - by spending an inordinate amount of time trying to explain how things work and why I'm not going to advocate changing the way the PF2 encounters have been setup in the official DLC. But all you do is dismiss everything I, and others, have been trying to tell you.
    3. Here we get back to the "one click" argument, in tandem with the above two points. If this was such a hassle for the GM to change, one way or the other, and the desire to have encounters default to ID's or non-ID'd was an equal split among the community (which it isn't - see point #1 above) then I'm sure that things would be looked at in a different way. But, it's not. There is a simple way to change the deployed functionality (one-click) - which you keep dismissing.


    I think you're the type of person who loves an argument, never sees things any way except your own, and always has to have the last word. So I'm not going to bang my head against a wall trying to educate you and argue with you, because it's simply a waste of time. You should realise that being the one person incessantly arguing when you're in the vast minority is not going to get you anywhere, all it's going to do is annoy a bunch of people and any goodwill you may have had is going to evaporate.

    I'm going to leave this thread open for a while, so you can have the last word - I hope that makes you at least a little bit happy. Then I'll close the thread as we're going nowhere and you're the only person even mentioning this, let alone making such a ridiculous song-and-dance about it...
    Last edited by Trenloe; August 15th, 2019 at 17:10.
    Private Messages: My inbox is forever filling up with PMs. Please don't send me PMs unless they are actually private/personal messages. General FG questions should be asked in the forums - don't be afraid, the FG community don't bite and you're giving everyone the chance to respond and learn!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
FG Spreadshirt Swag

Log in

Log in