module db.xml vs client.xml

[crleonhard]

I'm pretty sure that in FGC when I split module content between a db.xml and a client.xml file I could keep some content as non-public GM-only while still only maintaining a single module for both GM and players, but when I try that now in FGU it appears that all tables are public to players even if they're only contained in the db.xml and not marked public... Did something change, or am I misremembering something about how these files work?

[Zacchaeus]

A module which contains a client.xml is a player module and contains only player material (and defaults to shared). A module containing db.xml is a DM module and does not default to shared (although it can be shared by changing that in module activation). There's no way (and never has been) to have a module which has elements of player only and DM only material. A table in a DM only module will not be visible to players unless the table (or the module as a whole) has been shared with the players from inside of the campaign. A table in a player module will be visible to the players.

So, if we take the 5e Players Handbook as an example; this is a player module which defaults to shared and the players can load and view 100% of the content. On the other hand the DMG is a DM module and nothing in that module can be seen by the players unless the DM has specifically shared parts of it (such as a reference manual page, a Magic Item, or a table etc) from inside of the campaign.

[Moon Wizard]

FGC used to perform that split in the underlying data; but it caused lots of issues for sharing. In FGU, modules should contain only a db.xml or a client.xml file.

Regards,
JPG

[Zacchaeus]

FGC used to perform that split in the underlying data; but it caused lots of issues for sharing. In FGU, modules should contain only a db.xml or a client.xml file.

Regards,
JPG

Oh, yeah. I remember now. There was another file name other than client or db. Hah, how time flies and the memory dims.

[crleonhard]

OK, thanks for the clarification!