Feats Database??

[Michael Morris]

Spells are the next step, but then the REVIEWS section beckons. After that I can go back to other things. But remember that this is still very much a prototype. For instance, Russ wants character gen functionality. While that's possible, it does mean the computer will have to be MUCH stricter about the data it will accept from the user.

I also will probably need to divorce the code from being a forum tack on. Tacking on one database is fine, but if I tack on 6 or 7 then the code suddenly has ballooned to several times its original size and that could be problematic.

It's taken me 6 months to get this far, so please be patient. At least these days I'm not driving a truck. However, I'm about at the end of my bankroll and I'm back in school. In January I'll have to get a job and, once again, the time I'll have to donate to coding will be reduced.

EDIT: As for Monsters, I've spoken with Boz of the Creature Catalogue about database merger. That will come after the reviews database merger.

 

[Morrus]

For instance, Russ wants character gen functionality.

Not strictly - that's a bit more advanced than the idea I had in mind.

My idea was that you check off items (feats, spells, monsters, what-have-you) as "favourites" (maybe using the subscribe thread system somehow?), and then you can click to go to a page which basically lists your favourites in one place, with all the details. Basically, it is a page which is your own personalised "campaign guide" - you could print it out or refer your players to it, or whatever.

Perhaps there could even be a couple of input boxes where you put a title, URL of an image and space for an introduction. You then have a neat URL which describes your campaign world's mechanics, and what feats, spells, monsters and so forth you are using in it.

I don't know if that's technically doable, though. Only Michael can answer that one. I think it's a cool idea, though!

 

[Gez]

Yup, it's a cool one.

But I still think the feat db would be more usable if fighter feats are their own category!

 

[AGGEMAM]

Gez, didn't you have a SRD spell db once?

 

[Gez]

Oh yeah. 3.5. killed it, though. Didn't felt like looking for each new or modified spell in the new SRD, what with the changes in schools, in levels, and in names...

It used to be an XML file rather than an actual DB, though. I know that XML is just a tree-shaped DB format, but still...

And it wasn't SRD, but meant to be a definitive, complete spell list, including closed content, and without all the section 15 clutter, and all that. Which meant that I couldn't legally distribute the full version. And so on.

So, for various reasons, I lost the will to maintain it and continue to upgrade it.

 

[AGGEMAM]

Also there are a few folks around here that have build their own SRD websites, Sage comes to mind as being the winner of the contest here. I'm pretty sure they had to use a db or at least a xml file for those to work. We might ask them if they are willing to share.

 

[Knight Otu]

While I won't be able to use it for the time being, the database promises to be a very cool feature for the community. If the Monster Database is merged with the Creature Catalog, will the CC still be accessible for non-supporters?
I realize it is highly unlikely to happen, but a smaller version would be interesting for Living Enworld approved content.

 

[Michael Morris]

Yup, it's a cool one.

But I still think the feat db would be more usable if fighter feats are their own category!

Search the special column for "fighter bonus feats" and you'll bring up the complete list of fighter bonus feats

I'll be working on several preset searches a bit later.

 

[Staffan]

One thing I think is needed is a Martial type of feat for all the feats that can be taken as bonus feat by a Fighter. WotC's insistence that they should be considered General feats is puzzling.

Not really. It means that the bonus-featness becomes part of the fighter class, where it belongs, rather than the feats themselves. It becomes important if you have several classes that get bonus feats from slightly different lists. For example, see Arcana Unearthed: Mage blades, totem warriors, unfettered, and warmains all get bonus feats as class features, but with different lists. Looking at WOTC's D&D stuff, you get the same thing with Psychic warriors and samurai (OA version).

 

[Campbell]

Not really. It means that the bonus-featness becomes part of the fighter class, where it belongs, rather than the feats themselves. It becomes important if you have several classes that get bonus feats from slightly different lists. For example, see Arcana Unearthed: Mage blades, totem warriors, unfettered, and warmains all get bonus feats as class features, but with different lists. Looking at WOTC's D&D stuff, you get the same thing with Psychic warriors and samurai (OA version).

With 3.5 WotC seems to be moving away from specific lists, included with class entries. For instance, the 3.5 psychic warrior takes feats either from the fighter list, or those with the psionic descriptor. Fighter bonus feats are pretty much 'Martial' feats anyway. They simply tag the feat in the Special section rather than with a different type.