DOE: Locations Extension

[dr_venture]

Nah, it was the wyrm thing, of course. Glad you didn't take any of that personally, as when I read back through the post it's almost entirely circumstantial issues that have nothing to do with your work. I very much appreciate all that work, and wanted to respect your request for feedback with a thought-out response. I also appreciate your reply - it sounds like we have very similar backgrounds both in terms of gaming and computers and databases (though it's safe to say you're much more of a code-dude than I).

Keep up the fantastic work, my friend!

[VenomousFiligree]

Just my rampant ego asking, but are people actually using this, and if so, is it useful to them?

Cheers

Yes, my players are planning on making their base the small town of Phandalin at the completion of Lost Mines of Phandelver. So this will be ideal

[dr_venture]

Out of sheer respect for your tremendous work. I'm tossing aside my worries and digging in and trying my hand with your excellent extensions! So far, so good -- my main impression is that the biggest issue will be with FG's interface for large lists of items being rather clunky. In the mean time, I'll write up bugs as I find them (any bugs will be with the Castles & Crusades ruleset). The first:

Location window: if a Player clicks on the "Part of" link at the top of a shared location window, and the location that is being linked to has *not* been shared with the player, then a "<< New location >>" record is created on the player's "Locations" window that does not show up in the GM's "Locations" window. Further, the new location record is locked and uneditable by the player, and since the GM can't see it, it's kind-of orphaned. I know the document linking system in FG is a bit buggy when it comes to groups of records in which some are and some are not shared with players. I'm thinking that there should be a fix to the FG application which just displays a "The document you are trying to view has not been shared with players." alert message to players when they click on links like that.

[Tiqon]

Fornicating wyrms inbreeding wildly.

Almost the alias for my game....

FYI dulux-oz. this does not work with Rolemaster. just tried it. The weather too. Does not work. get the error:

Script Error: [string "Scripts/lsLocationsManager.lua"]:16: attempt to call field 'registerLaunchMessage' (a nil value)
Script Error: [string "Scripts/lsWeatherManager.lua"]:16: attempt to call field 'registerLaunchMessage' (a nil value)

After that I tried it with a PF game I have.

I really had no idea what I was trying out, but I was shocked by the amount of work you must have put into this. You asked if anyone uses it? I don't, first of I play Rolemaster and second dr_venture said all the things that went through my mind when I looked at it (normally not much goes on in my brain, but what did, dr_venture already addressed ).

To be honest ("tbh"; there, have another internet abbreviation, free of charge :P), I was really looking for a way to make a shop, with random items... I'm lazy. I think I will look for one elsewhere on "da innernet"...

[dulux-oz]

this does not work with Rolemaster. just tried it. The weather too. Does not work.

If the Rolemaster Ruleset is not built on the CoreRPG Ruleset then that is correct, it probably won't work.

As it says in the documentation "For the CoreRPG Ruleset v3.0.8+ and all child Rulesets"

Is the Rolemaster Ruleset built off of the CureRPG Ruleset?

Cheers

[dulux-oz]

Out of sheer respect for your tremendous work. I'm tossing aside my worries and digging in and trying my hand with your excellent extensions! So far, so good -- my main impression is that the biggest issue will be with FG's interface for large lists of items being rather clunky. In the mean time, I'll write up bugs as I find them (any bugs will be with the Castles & Crusades ruleset). The first:

Location window: if a Player clicks on the "Part of" link at the top of a shared location window, and the location that is being linked to has *not* been shared with the player, then a "<< New location >>" record is created on the player's "Locations" window that does not show up in the GM's "Locations" window. Further, the new location record is locked and uneditable by the player, and since the GM can't see it, it's kind-of orphaned. I know the document linking system in FG is a bit buggy when it comes to groups of records in which some are and some are not shared with players. I'm thinking that there should be a fix to the FG application which just displays a "The document you are trying to view has not been shared with players." alert message to players when they click on links like that.

Yeah, that's a known "issue" - I'm still trying to figure out a way around it - I believe I do mention it in the Doco somewhere.

Leave it with me and I'll see what I can do

Oh, and welcome to the Dark Side (yes, we've finally seduced him into using the shiny, sparkly extensions - BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA)

[Tiqon]

If the Rolemaster Ruleset is not built on the CoreRPG Ruleset then that is correct, it probably won't work.

As it says in the documentation "For the CoreRPG Ruleset v3.0.8+ and all child Rulesets"

Is the Rolemaster Ruleset built off of the CureRPG Ruleset?

Cheers

Ah! Slipped by my sloppy reading . Probably not. I think Dakadin said something a while back that he wanted to make it so. How that is going I have no idea about. Thanks for the clarification .

[damned]

RMC is not CoreRPG.

[Mask_of_winter]

Works with SWv4 now in the dev channel. Great work Dulux

[dr_venture]

Yeah, that's a known "issue" - I'm still trying to figure out a way around it - I believe I do mention it in the Doco somewhere.

Dude, the documentation is a tome in itself! But I'll get there. I also ran into a bug (with easy workaround) in the weather extension, but will write that up in the appropriate thread. I would be surprised if you weren't aware of it.

Oh, and welcome to the Dark Side (yes, we've finally seduced him into using the shiny, sparkly extensions - BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA)

So far, so good. In practice, all of the empty fields that I don't use of know the info for just disappear when the record is locked, so it's pretty flexible. It's looking like it's going to be more useful than I anticipated, so hat's off to you again!