Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Luke" data-source="post: 22694" data-attributes="member: 602">Re: DazKaz feedbackThanks DazKaz. Haven't forgotten it.Spells, like skills now do, could have their own code to do things - like create new creatures. It just so happens I (hot of the press) have templates working, but the form of it isn't yet finalised.No can do. They are copyright, and providing them is illegal. You need to enter them yourself, or perhaps get an export from somebody else (down the track). I'll be hoping that those using other people's exports actually have the books themselves.You can do this in the "Feats" tab on the creature window, and I'll look into something for the "Level Up" window.RPM knows which feats can be taken multiply, and will throw up a warning message anyway. In "Level Up" (where you should do this sort of thing), a feat is already colour coded green, If you have it.Thanks. A couple of volenteers are looking into providing more tilesets. Your "fog of war" idea is what I actually have in mind eventually for network play. The current BattleMap is really for the DM, but it would be nice if he could "flick the switch" for player view, and show them. My idea for networking is that each character would have movements and sight tiles recorded, so they could refer to their map etc. TileMappers are excellent for being able to record that sort of detail.And I want to do that. It's pretty low priority compared to things that must be done for the beta release though. My thought are that it would be nice if certain items (such as bags of holding, or portable holes) actually "absorbed" weight. I think that very few are going to want to get down to a pouch left/pouch right level. If you think it all through, it's a lot of laborious work - for any kind of user interface - for very little return.Understand, but it's too much assumption. The game rules are huge, and I'd like to eventually get everything done, but I need to get a release 1 out (ie. the beta), and it can't have everything (see "crashes" below).Sorry to hear that. Some seem to have problems, and others report that they think it's stable. That's the nature of alpha version software, and why I must get a release 1 out, that does "guarantee" stability in the "must have" features (whatever they are). Whilst this is an alpha-feedback program, I do try hard to make sure that the "early adopters" get something useful out of playing with it. The most important thing is that everyone has an opportunity to get a pretty decent glimpse of what RPM will be when "finished", and has every opportunity to have a say in how it turns out... <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> Thanks!</blockquote>

Verification