Mutants and Masterminds 3E Official Bug Report Thread

[superteddy57]

No worries. I wanted to provide some reasoning behind the design since it was not transferred from the previous version of the ruleset.

[mfontana]

Sorry about that. I see what I was doing and rebuilt the Super-Breath so that each Power Effect was an item. My original build put both Affliction and Move Object effects in the same Power, which I guess is technically allowed but the formatting isn't as nice. I guess it's going to be a stylistic decision for people on how to construct their Powers.

Here's screenshot of alternate build for Super-Breath

AlternateBuildSuperBreath.jpg

[superteddy57]

Powers are certainly one of the coolest things about the system, but not great from an organizational stand point. I have multiple ways to build powers if you prefer just building the power and it adding the elements without right clicking. If you click on the link for the power, you can use this window to build out the powers as well. The design really came from how the first one did it and just smoothed the rough edges of it.

[Saeval]

What I’ve been doing to keep things easy is I put the damage rank in the name of the attack, for example:
Fire Bolt (Rank 6)
Then when I roll the attack vs the targets defense the damage rank shows up in chat, so the defender can use the damage rank as a negative modifier to his toughness roll which would even out to a dc 15. It’s not pretty but the outcome is still the same.

[DrakosDJ]

There is no automation between Attack and Defensive rolls due to them being contested rolls. The previous ruleset version would automatically roll (in some situations), but that takes dice out of the hands of the player's and DM's. I choose not to pursue this as it would go against some of the guidelines for automation. Attacker rolls attack, defender rolls toughness or defense save manually. So the DC can't be changed, but needs to be tracked in game.

I see what your dying here but I have to say, the automation is a big part of why i use this product. I can understand that you want to keep the control with the user but I liked the system to automate my job as a Gm. I would prefer when someone attacks that the system automatically roll the appropriate defense. In fact I would have liked to see more automation; for things like AoE powers auto hit and rolling the dodge then the appropriate defense roll DC based on the result of the dodge. Same for Perception attacks auto hitting but then rolling the resistance check. These are the more cumbersome fiddly parts that I think is perfect for automation. It speeds up game play. A happy medium is to allow the GM to choose what rolls are automated like in some other rulesets.

The lack of automation would be a big negative for me.

[Saeval]

I can see the argument for both sides and while the level of automation is was drew me away from other VTT’s and to stick with FG I also want the players to be as involved as possible. I know it doesn’t mean anything but rolling my own save feels much better as a player as opposed to the GM dropping a power on my character and then it automatically rolling my save for me. I wish there was a pop up or another box besides the modifier one or something that when you double clicked the save, it asks what the rank of the power you’re saving against is so you can input that and then roll your save and it gives you the degrees of successes or failures. But I’m not a programmer so I don’t think that’s easily done within the framework of Fantasy Grounds and we would need a programmer who is willing to work on this ruleset full time as a contract and not out of the goodness of their own heart like what I think SuperTeddy is doing.

[damned]

At this time I believe there is not going to be any further major reworkings of the ruleset.
It was updated to CoreRPG to give access to a lot of the CoreRPG features like Calendar, Tables, Reference Manual (capability), etc and known bugs were addressed.
I dont believe there will be much else done for this ruleset at this time. I dont think it is economic for them to spend a lot more time on it.
If there is a developer with an interest in maintaining and developing the ruleset they would earn a commission on sales and could drive some of these improvements.

If that sounds like you - get in contact with [email protected]
The big task of porting across to CoreRPG is done and that means that you could concentrate on feature improvements.

[DrakosDJ]

At this time I believe there is not going to be any further major reworkings of the ruleset.

But it sounds like some functionality that was there was removed. He stated that the old ruleset had the automation but he didn't carry it over.

In FG Classic you just included the save DC's in the power description and it rolled the saves.

[TriOpticon]

@DrakosDJ, I think this was more of a design/company decision that products would not automatically roll dice for the player. Of course, that would not stop an extension (I believe) from being written by a 3rd party to add an option to have that happen.

@superteddy57, conditions are not taken into account, and I do not think they were before, correct? That would have to be an extension to add the option, correct?

[ProfDogg]

@DrakosDJ, I think this was more of a design/company decision that products would not automatically roll dice for the player. Of course, that would not stop an extension (I believe) from being written by a 3rd party to add an option to have that happen.

@superteddy57, conditions are not taken into account, and I do not think they were before, correct? That would have to be an extension to add the option, correct?

Automation is fine for games like 5e. Other games, like M&M really need more GM control.