Authoring Kit Updates Needed

[chiefweasel]

Hi all, just working with the editor and had a question questions. I know HL does not allow you to change the names of ability names in the editor, and in the authoring kits, its really tough. I am looking for an easier way to support more game systems. In this case Traveller. I would like to copy over the Pathfinder game system and basically but out what i don't need and use the rest.

So I guess the question I am asking is that is there any plans to update the authoring kit to allow better control over a system? Like if I could change the text of the abilities in PF to Traveller ones, I could easily code skills, and such to work off of it. But right now the only method I have is the authoring kit. It seems that a few simple changes to the editor could help to create nonD20 style games.

I am open for a discussion regarding this if anyone can help at all. Thanks.

[BoomerET]

Update authoring kit to allow better control?

You have complete and unbelievable control, but if you're only using the editor, then you're going to a bit disappointed.

You need to get your hands dirty on xml and scripting.

If you need assistance, there's the Hero Lab Authoring Wiki, while it is a bit behind, it's where you should start.

I had started on a Traveller 5 ruleset for Hero Lab, but have given up shortly after receiving my books from the Kickstarter.

I'd be glad to offer assistance where needed, but I'm just starting to learn it as well.


BoomerET

[RavenX]

Originally Posted by chiefweasel

Hi all, just working with the editor and had a question questions. I know HL does not allow you to change the names of ability names in the editor, and in the authoring kits, its really tough. I am looking for an easier way to support more game systems. In this case Traveller. I would like to copy over the Pathfinder game system and basically but out what i don't need and use the rest.

So I guess the question I am asking is that is there any plans to update the authoring kit to allow better control over a system? Like if I could change the text of the abilities in PF to Traveller ones, I could easily code skills, and such to work off of it. But right now the only method I have is the authoring kit. It seems that a few simple changes to the editor could help to create nonD20 style games.

I am open for a discussion regarding this if anyone can help at all. Thanks.

As far as I know, they limit access to game systems to help prevent software piracy. Pathfinder source code isn't something they normally allow us to access, and due to the fact that hero lab is Pathfinder's Official character builder, I have serious doubts you'll be getting access to source code to modify for Traveler. I'm not an expert on the Traveler system, as I've never actually run it, but I was basically told if I wanted tabs similar to what appears in Pathfinder I'd have to build them from scratch and figure things out on my own. (Or in some cases I just got silence). I've managed to rebuild some of the tabs from Pathfinder (such as the Condition Tab) and rebuilt all the things I needed for Deathwatch from it. I had to spend hours studying the Kit Wiki and slowly building the things I wanted on that tab until it was finished. Best hope you've got is to look at the tabs from Pathfinder you want and figure out the source code to build from scratch. My recommendation would be to use something like EditPad to build your tabs, but be prepared to spend hours studying the code from Savage Worlds, 4e, and Alternity (yes you can access Alternity source code as I've recently discovered). This would be your best bet.

[chiefweasel]

This is my point though. While the editor is fine for modifying existing system, the Authoring kit isn't helpful at all. If there were a method, like widgets, you could drop in to add tabs, or change text. things like that, you shouldnt have to reinvent the same items time and time again for each game syste, the screen, or attributes. I'm sure that LW doesnt write the code for a tab each time they do a different game system. Isnt that the purpose for OO programming?

[Mathias]

chiefweasel, in this thread: http://forums.wolflair.com/showthread.php?t=9078 you should vote for "d20 system mechanics" - a project to add a d20 base system to the authoring kit that users could then modify into the specific d20 system game they're interested in.

[RavenX]

Originally Posted by chiefweasel

This is my point though. While the editor is fine for modifying existing system, the Authoring kit isn't helpful at all. If there were a method, like widgets, you could drop in to add tabs, or change text. things like that, you shouldnt have to reinvent the same items time and time again for each game syste, the screen, or attributes. I'm sure that LW doesnt write the code for a tab each time they do a different game system. Isnt that the purpose for OO programming?

No they don't reinvent the wheel, you think I will once I finish Deathwatch? Now that I have a functional tab for most things I need, I can just copy and paste and make the necessary changes now. However, I will say that my code skills have improved greatly from learning to tinker around in xml as well. I've build entire data files from just raw xml and I feel pretty happy about that. For Pathfinder I am pretty sure they started with a copy of the existing game system for d20. Which Mathias has mentioned and is most likely your best bet. However, I can say that if I were making money off something I wouldn't want to give away all my secrets either. I understand the anti-piracy thing they're doing and I agree with it. Mathias and Aaron have been quite instrumental in helping guide me through data creation in XML, all you have to do is ask for help and wait a little while on the forums. It isn't that bad.

[BoomerET]

Ditto for the Castles & Crusades ruleset I'm working on. Started with the base, read the Wiki, asked questions here, and I must admit I'm quite proud of my work, I'm sure RavenX feels the same way.


BoomerET

[RavenX]

Originally Posted by BoomerET

Ditto for the Castles & Crusades ruleset I'm working on. Started with the base, read the Wiki, asked questions here, and I must admit I'm quite proud of my work, I'm sure RavenX feels the same way.


BoomerET

Very much so. Deathwatch turned out to be a much more complicated build than I initially thought it would be, but I've made enough effort on it and gotten it to a point I am happy with it. I just have to smooth out bugs and get a few more things implemented and it will be something truly special.

[chiefweasel]

But Ravenx you did reinvent the wheel. Had all that code been available to you, you wouldn't have needed to create it. Now of course you can reuse it, but no the first time, even though it already existsed.

Mathias, I agree that the d20 stuff would help, but to be honest the d20 and PF editors can make a new game system using either of those systems as the core. I am curious about other systems such as a d6 system. Just changing the ability fields is not possible with the editor. If it were you could jury-rig something.

But something like a module that could be dropped in for abilities, like one module for d20, one module for d6 and so on. Some like what is done for web creation, you drop a wiget in and modify it to meet your needs. Now I know all this is very complicated, but Ravenx, how much time would you have saved if you didnt have to create all those screens? Not all of the users of the tool are programmers. We found this out with asking for help with the community files. I am not a programmer, and so with the authoring kit there is no way I can consider making/helping with new game systems. I can mess with the editor fine, but the two are seperate beasts.

Don't get me wrong here, I'm not complaining about the product, I think the LW guys know me well enough by now to know that. I just asking a questions and wondering if maybe the authoring kit coould be looked at again to see if it could be simplified and made more user friendly.

[RavenX]

Originally Posted by chiefweasel

But Ravenx you did reinvent the wheel. Had all that code been available to you, you wouldn't have needed to create it. Now of course you can reuse it, but no the first time, even though it already existsed.

Chiefweasel, think of it from a different perspective. If a teacher hands you all the answers to the test up front, what are you really learning?

My reasons for embarking on this little coding adventure is more than just building a game system. My goal was to dissect the compiler and see what made it work. To learn how it did things and how it works. Yes having the code available would have made things easier, and it still would simplify some things, but what would I have learned from the experience?

Simply doing a copy/paste doesn't tell me the mechanical aspects of what I'm doing, nor does it simplify the process of hunting for bugs and fixing things. It's like taking a .user file you created for pathfinder and dropping it into your 3.5 folder. It's not going to work without needing repairs, lots of repairs, some of which might be frustrating. Building it from scratch minimized the errors I ran into along the way. It is far easier to handle one bug here and there than to track down dozens of them all at once. Looking for fields that don't exist that still need to be created, etc.

For Shadowrun 5 from what I know Mathias has rebuilt the files from scratch. I'm not sure what parts of 4 he chose to recycle, but some things you still have to do from the ground up. Deathwatch has been a learning process for me. One with great benefits. I will be able to expand what I created to include Dark Heresy and Rogue Trader, but there will be some changes needed before I can add Black Crusade and Only War (due to the presence of a +30 for skills that wasn't present in previous iterations of the game system). I haven't even looked at the Dark Heresy system second edition beta so I have no idea what changes were made. For all I know I might have to scrap what I've done and start over to build a working 2e system for 40K rp.