Effects library

[Blackfoot]

I also noted today that 'types' screw up negative AC effects.
Example:
AC:-3 armor;AC:-3 shield
these are ignored..
AC:-3
works fine...
So you can't use an effect to remove your shield for example... or to temporarily take off your armor & shield while using 'Wild Shape'.
You CAN add your armor & shield as effects and then remove them when using wild shape... I'm not sure this is great.. but it can be done.

[Nickademus]

I don't believe that penalties in Pathfinder have a type. All penalties are generic and stack.

[Blackfoot]

I don't believe that penalties in Pathfinder have a type. All penalties are generic and stack.

Sadly, you are incorrect... at least in function. Effects are not bonuses or penalties.. they are 'effects' so types do apply since a negative AC 'effect' would reduce a specific 'type' of AC. Generic 'penalties' are all well and good... but the functionality for 'effects' would be much more functional if 'types' applied to negative effects. See example.

[Callum]

I also noted today that 'types' screw up negative AC effects.
Example:
AC:-3 armor;AC:-3 shield
these are ignored..
AC:-3
works fine...
So you can't use an effect to remove your shield for example... or to temporarily take off your armor & shield while using 'Wild Shape'.

I can't see a scenario in which adding types to negative effects would be beneficial. Since, with your approach, you are hard-coding the penalties in, you may as well use "AC: -6; armor and shield bonus negation".

You CAN add your armor & shield as effects and then remove them when using wild shape... I'm not sure this is great.. but it can be done.

I always put armor and shield in as effects - if you don't, the bonus stacking won't work properly.

[Blackfoot]

I can't see a scenario in which adding types to negative effects would be beneficial. Since, with your approach, you are hard-coding the penalties in, you may as well use "AC: -6; armor and shield bonus negation".

Your solution wouldn't work right ... the AC vs touch attacks would be reduced by 6.
AC:-6 armor
would only reduce the AC vs attacks that armor actually applies to.

I always put armor and shield in as effects - if you don't, the bonus stacking won't work properly.

That really clutters your tracker if everyone does that, plus they DO actually stack correctly for armor, shield, and deflection bonuses now (not so much for the natural since it is an odd case).

[Nickademus]

Sadly, you are incorrect... at least in function. Effects are not bonuses or penalties.. they are 'effects' so types do apply since a negative AC 'effect' would reduce a specific 'type' of AC. Generic 'penalties' are all well and good... but the functionality for 'effects' would be much more functional if 'types' applied to negative effects. See example.

I think you misunderstand. I said nothing about effects. Smite Works models the rulesets after the rule system sharing their name. Therefore the Pathfinder ruleset is designed to operate like the Pathfinder rules. My comment was about the nature of penalties in Pathfinder. It's possible, if penalties have no types in the Pathfinder rules, that Smite Works intentionally made it so that penalty effects in Fantasy Grounds likewise do not register types.

[Nickademus]

I always put armor and shield in as effects - if you don't, the bonus stacking won't work properly.

I believe this bug was fixed a few updates ago. Now you can put a 4 in your armor field of your AC, and when you apply an effect like 'AC: 5 armor' your AC will only raise 1 point due to the overlap of 4 points of armor bonus.

[Moon Wizard]

Nickademus is correct, this was added a couple revisions ago (to check bonus types vs. AC component values). I'm looking at the ruleset code that does it right now.

Thinking about Blackfoot's issue with regard to AC penalties, I investigated the code and the same update that compared the bonus type to existing bonuses also disables penalties for those types. I will fix in next beta push.

I think I will leave the size bonus for CMB as is for now, since I don't see an easy way to do this with the existing code, and he has a workaround.

JPG

[Callum]

Your solution wouldn't work right ... the AC vs touch attacks would be reduced by 6.
AC:-6 armor
would only reduce the AC vs attacks that armor actually applies to.

You're quite right - it was foolish of me to suggest it. My issue was really with putting fixed numbers into the effect, when what you're actually looking for is "negate the armor and shield bonuses this character currently has". The beast way to achieve that, it seems to me, is to turn off the armor and shiled bonuses.

That really clutters your tracker if everyone does that, plus they DO actually stack correctly for armor, shield, and deflection bonuses now (not so much for the natural since it is an odd case).

It does clutter the Combat Tracker a bit; on the other hand, it lets you see at a glance those effects on the AC, and it gives you the ability to turn off the bonuses with a click.

Thanks for letting me know that the bonuses do stack correctly now - I'd got so used to the way it used to work, I'd overlooked that update!

[turelus]

Here's an updated version of the Effects module, adding the Pathfinder version of Inspire Courage (as suggested by HoloGnome) along with scaled versions for higher levels. I haven't split it into two modules (one for each ruleset) for reasons of backward compatibility, but could do so if people thought this was a good idea.

Thanks for the update Callum, but late on the thanks but as I am mid campaign I wasn't checking here for updates.