1. #1

    BRemoveOnMiss - option RMMT

    What exactly is this used for?

    Was coding saving throws and sawthis (appears elsewhere like powers/attk/spells)

    From the name, I get it is to remove the targeted creature after the (in this case) save results in no or half damage. But, what rule/option/feature is this covering. I’m sure most folks running games get this but I haven’t run any on FG so unsure if I have ever had it on. I don’t recall having to keep targeting every round.

  2. #2
    Kelrugem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Location
    Geneva, Switzerland, and Lyon, France
    Posts
    604
    Roughly, it removes the target(s) when they are not affected by a spell or attack. "Multi" means that this only happens when you have more than one target (like for AoEs) and "On" means that this happens also for single targets (except for full attacks; full attacks are never affected by an activation of this option because of multiple attacks at once)

  3. #3
    I can see the convenience of untargetting all on a multitarget because most times I would think these are for non-constant spell use (of course... that’s from my AD&D POV, these days casters can cast every round - for all I know some have as cantrips?)

    Just not sure what benefit of detargetting on miss/save is. Not a criticism of the feature, just trying to understand what it is used for before I either keep it in my ruleset or remove it (I’m trying to only keep what I will use to keep it easier to read and further build on)


    I’m at work (I was coding ruleset in train commute when posted question) so cant check in another ruleset like 2E/5E yet to test behavior yet.

    What did you mean by not affecting “full attacks” “because of multiple attacks at once” (how is that different than AoE?)

    Yeah, I’m a bit dense in this. Sorry.

    If it is hard to explain in abstract, maybe example in one of those or other free rulesets of what to cast with and without setting to see use? Same for Attk?


    Wwwwwwwait - I get this or part of it now as I asked, it’s on Save I was looking - of course, if fully save, they don’t need to be targeted not for the next attk but for the DMG portion of the two step attk then dmg combo. I guess? Of course for recast you’d want to retarget those removed and if was a pulsing thing where beed to save each turn, again would need to retarget.

    And half damage needs to be handled (and it is) so cant JUST rely on untargetting to select damage since some will need partial damage.

    OK, have a bit more idea from this now and will test it on spells when home. Still haven’t seen a big sell on it since for multisave round to round effects it would not help But maybe clearer when can read and test more.

  4. #4
    Kelrugem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Location
    Geneva, Switzerland, and Lyon, France
    Posts
    604
    Quote Originally Posted by Varsuuk View Post
    I can see the convenience of untargetting all on a multitarget because most times I would think these are for non-constant spell use (of course... that’s from my AD&D POV, these days casters can cast every round - for all I know some have as cantrips?)

    Just not sure what benefit of detargetting on miss/save is. Not a criticism of the feature, just trying to understand what it is used for before I either keep it in my ruleset or remove it (I’m trying to only keep what I will use to keep it easier to read and further build on)


    I’m at work (I was coding ruleset in train commute when posted question) so cant check in another ruleset like 2E/5E yet to test behavior yet.

    What did you mean by not affecting “full attacks” “because of multiple attacks at once” (how is that different than AoE?)

    Yeah, I’m a bit dense in this. Sorry.

    If it is hard to explain in abstract, maybe example in one of those or other free rulesets of what to cast with and without setting to see use? Same for Attk?


    Wwwwwwwait - I get this or part of it now as I asked, it’s on Save I was looking - of course, if fully save, they don’t need to be targeted not for the next attk but for the DMG portion of the two step attk then dmg combo. I guess? Of course for recast you’d want to retarget those removed and if was a pulsing thing where beed to save each turn, again would need to retarget.

    And half damage needs to be handled (and it is) so cant JUST rely on untargetting to select damage since some will need partial damage.

    OK, have a bit more idea from this now and will test it on spells when home. Still haven’t seen a big sell on it since for multisave round to round effects it would not help But maybe clearer when can read and test more.
    Indeed, the use is that all targets who resist and do not get any damage are automatically removed; in that way you can then click the damage button without worrying much about removing the invalid targets first after the save against the spell The targets for partial damage still stay your target but are then removed after damage was applied (I guess that is for when there are other separate effects of that spell which only apply to targets who failed their save, but very rare).
    Similar arguments for attack rolls and caster level checks (but miss chances as for concealment are not respected, at least in 3.5e. Therefore I added that in one of my extensions )

    The full attack has multiple rolls and so, yes, not so much difference to AoEs in that point, but all these rolls are against the same target and not against separate targets. After an attack roll the result gets compared with the target's AC but that could become problematic when the target information is already lost due to a remove by an attack roll which finished its roll a bit faster I assume that this is the reason why full attacks are not affected by this option
    EDIT: THough the target information may still be there in the code. But when there is at least one hit and miss then the attacker would need to retarget the target. Also annoying probably
    EDIT2: Thinking a bit more, I guess it is really due to the hit-miss situation of the previous edit. The target information should still be there, I guess. So my first guess is probably wrong
    Last edited by Kelrugem; September 17th, 2019 at 16:39.

  5. #5
    Makes sense. I will hopefully understand more of the mechanics as I trace it as I implement from another ruleset to mine.

    I never played 3.5, (only AD&D and 2E) so I am guessing it is some sort of flurry of strikes that are supposed to hit at same time vs the normal attack 3/2 2/1 of old systems (were not concurrent) or the 2 Attacks of 5e which are less forced apart but still not necessarily same time since you can move between them. Still those are separate single attacks in how we handle it anyhow.

  6. #6
    Kelrugem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Location
    Geneva, Switzerland, and Lyon, France
    Posts
    604
    Quote Originally Posted by Varsuuk View Post
    Makes sense. I will hopefully understand more of the mechanics as I trace it as I implement from another ruleset to mine.

    I never played 3.5, (only AD&D and 2E) so I am guessing it is some sort of flurry of strikes that are supposed to hit at same time vs the normal attack 3/2 2/1 of old systems (were not concurrent) or the 2 Attacks of 5e which are less forced apart but still not necessarily same time since you can move between them. Still those are separate single attacks in how we handle it anyhow.
    yeah, it is basically the same When you have more than one attack you direct them to separate targets or all at one target In the 3.5e character and NPC sheets one has a full attack button where all attacks are rolled simultanously When one then has a target all attacks are directed to that target. But one also has buttons for making the attacks alone and not with the other remaining attacks

    Much success

  7. #7
    Totally clear now and how it makes sense on how the option treats it. Thanks, yeah - I am really trying to keep the ruleset tight as possible I can always decide I need more versatility but part of this is building expertise and the more time I spend pruning to the Essenes the more I’ll know how the stuff works because “I did this because that’s how it was in X”

    In fact I have some ideas already based on his convo that might be cool to explore. If it leads anywhere I’ll revisit.

    In a later revision I may consider adding all-in-one attack options since I n a simple system like S&W I don’t see meta magic/power attacks etc where the dmg can be changed etc. but bridge when get there sticking to tried and true paradigm to start.

    Thanks again so much for the clarifications.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kelrugem View Post
    yeah, it is basically the same When you have more than one attack you direct them to separate targets or all at one target In the 3.5e character and NPC sheets one has a full attack button where all attacks are rolled simultanously When one then has a target all attacks are directed to that target. But one also has buttons for making the attacks alone and not with the other remaining attacks

    Much success

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

Posting Permissions

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

Log in

Log in