5E - Better Combat Effects Gold

[bratch9]

Its probably related to Capital Gains. I have a fix that will be up tomorrow.

The spell damage issue was also reported to me... I dont have this forge extension, not sure if you have mine...

With a messing in your forum I should get a notification if you update a fix for this.. ( Then I can update my thread as well. )

Let me know via dm, if you need access to the extension or not. ( I dont have yours, I have the non-gold old version.. )

-pete

[Bonkon]

I have a fix and will be in the next update

Good Day Rhagelstrom
Thanks for the quick response!

[rhagelstrom]

Version Update: 5.2
Feature: Conditional operator ATKDIST returns true if the distance between the attacker and target is <=. Only valid with IFT. No targeting required
Feature: Option to turn off performance logging
Fixed: Conflict with Capital Gains and probably others
Fixed: Script error when damage applied is negative
Fixed: Ongoing saves not completly working as intended
Fixed tags SDMGOS,SREGENS, STREGENS, SDMGOE, SREGENE, STREGENE firing when the were not suppose to
Fixed: Conditional Operators ADV/DIS not working in some situations
Under the Hood: Formatting
Under the Hood: Luacheck for automated code warning/error checking

I think this should fix the b9 issue but if it doesn't let me know and I'll take another look at it.

Sneak attack should be fully automated now. It's a mouthfull however and I'll probably make a macro in the future so it isn't so complicated but you can get there with the raw codings. See below and also examples on how to use some of the new conditional operators

Sneak Attack Range; ATURN; IF: !ADV; IF: !DIS; IF: ATK(weapon); IFT: RANGE(5,enemy); IF: CUSTOM(Sneak Attack Advantage); ATKHADD: Sneak Attack Damage; DUSE

Sneak Attack Advantage; ATURN; IF: ADV;  IF: ATK(melee,weapon); IF: WEAPON(finesse); ATKHADD: Sneak Attack Damage; DUSE

Staff of the Magi; ATK: 2 spell

Fire Elemental [NPC]

Fire Form; IFT: ATKDIST(5,melee); TATKHDMGS: 1d10 fire

[Lo Zeno]

Its probably related to Capital Gains. I have a fix that will be up tomorrow.

I'm afraid the fix did not actually fix the issue with Advanced Spell Damage.

Here's an example of the issue:

Screenshot 2023-02-15 232353.png

The Warlock in the screenshot casts Hellish Rebuke on the enemy, using a 3rd level spell slot (the 3 highlighted in blue). The spell is supposed to calculate automatically the damage as if cast at 3rd level, but as you can see in the chat it rolls damage as if it was a 9th level spell slot.
I do NOT have the Capital Gains extension, so it's not related to that. In the screenshot above I enabled only BCEG and Advanced Spell Damage

[bratch9]

I'm afraid the fix did not actually fix the issue with Advanced Spell Damage.

Here's an example of the issue:

Screenshot 2023-02-15 232353.png

The Warlock in the screenshot casts Hellish Rebuke on the enemy, using a 3rd level spell slot (the 3 highlighted in blue). The spell is supposed to calculate automatically the damage as if cast at 3rd level, but as you can see in the chat it rolls damage as if it was a 9th level spell slot.
I do NOT have the Capital Gains extension, so it's not related to that. In the screenshot above I enabled only BCEG and Advanced Spell Damage

The main issue, after looking, is that both extensions change 'getPCPowerAction' but dont call the original function... So in this case BCEG replaced the version in ASD which replaces the ruleset version. ( Also some other issue with NPC character sheet interaction that I did not look into... the drag from a npc sheet instead of the CT damage... )

Not sure on a good solution to this.. will have to have a think.. and maybe some DM chat between the extensions.

-pete

[rhagelstrom]

The main issue, after looking, is that both extensions change 'getPCPowerAction' but dont call the original function... So in this case BCEG replaced the version in ASD which replaces the ruleset version. ( Also some other issue with NPC character sheet interaction that I did not look into... the drag from a npc sheet instead of the CT damage... )

Not sure on a good solution to this.. will have to have a think.. and maybe some DM chat between the extensions.

-pete

I'll DM you and we will get it sorted

[rhagelstrom]

Version Update 5.3
Feature: Macros tags SNEAKATK, RAKISH, for rogue sneak attack automation and rakish audacity - Requires Advanced Effects Extension
Fixed: Some tags without modifiers not processing

The previous sneak attack codings were not quite correct. You can code Sneak Attack and Rakish Audacity with but the entire thing gets to be a long mess. The macros make it much easier.

Sneak Attack; SNEAKATK; ATURN

Rakish Audacity; RAKISH; ATURN

If you use RAKISH, you don't also need SNEAKATK as RAKISH takes care of everything.

Damage is determined based on rogue level. If you want damage based on a class other than rogue, then you would code it like the following:

Sneak Attack; SNEAKATK: homebrewclass; ATURN

If you have "Insightful Fighting" you can add that effect to the rogue and then make that effected a targeted effect to whatever enemy you are fighting. This will allow SNEAKATK to also grant Insightful Fighting when it applies.

SNEAKATK also works on NPCs, where the damage is based on the CR (half rounded up) of the NPC.

[rhagelstrom]

Version Update: 5.4
Fixed: OOB.type for client SNEAKATK support
Fixed: On add tags not doing something when target is self
Fixed: Tags without modifiers not processing
Fixed: 5E effects with the tag LIGHT were being prevented from being disabled
Fixed: Reported situation where rSource is nil where it shouldn't be. Likely another extension or ruleset bug. Log to console and fail silently
Fixed: STURNRE/STURNRS needs adjusting with refactor
Update: Database calls for how SW wants them with the next update

[Lo Zeno]

I assume this update does not address (yet) the compatibility issue with B9's advanced spell damage; I was wondering if you guys found a way forward and we can hope to be able to use the two extensions together again in the future, or if it looks like it won't be possible?

[rhagelstrom]

I assume this update does not address (yet) the compatibility issue with B9's advanced spell damage; I was wondering if you guys found a way forward and we can hope to be able to use the two extensions together again in the future, or if it looks like it won't be possible?

We talked about it and have a path forward but are waiting on the SW update since that also sort of comes into play.