Ability to change options...

[Warmonger]

I'm trying to figure out if there is a way to change certain options in an option.

Such as using a script to evaluate if a certain ruleset is chosen, and if it is, to say, enable the footnote choice of the option, or to change the show setting of the option.

[Colen]

At 02:18 PM 6/3/2005 -0400, you wrote:

>I'm trying to figure out if there is a way to change certain options in an
>option.
>
>Such as using a script to evaluate if a certain ruleset is chosen, and if
>it is, to say, enable the footnote choice of the option, or to change the
>show setting of the option.


You can change the visibility of the option by using option[id].visibility
= 0 or 1, but you can't change things like the footnote state. If you could
do that, what would you try and do with it?

[Warmonger]

I was looking into a way to do one of three things with an option. 1. List it in the details of the unit it's attached to. 2. List it as a footnote at the bottom of the roster. 3. Supress its printing entirely.

[deathlynx]

To me this sounds like the Magic options from AB2.0 Warhammer Fantasy...Select one option and it's in the list, select another and it's a footnote? I think the concept is to not have to create a completely second set of identical information for a footnote option and a list...

[Warmonger]

Exactly. I'm trying to avoid having to create two options for each one.

[rob]

What I'm confused about is why you'd want to control this behavior on a
per-option basis? I would think you'd either want to use footnotes or not,
so that's how AB was designed. Please explain the rationale of this one to
me....

-Rob

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (408) 927-9880
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com

[deathlynx]

Some users preffer to have the info directly on the list, while others feel it's only nescessary to refference it once at the end of the list...It's a personal prefference thing...

In the afformentioned WFB example, I preffer my wizzards to have the spells on list individually so that I can mark which ones I get (it's random every game) but some people don't want that much info repeated over and over when they can simply print it once at the end of the list and mark the spell numbers next to each wizard...

Some options (like spells) have a paragraph or more of info which would need to be typed for both versions otherwise...

[rob]

So for an individual user, the preference would be all or nothing, eh? That
seems to make sense. It also makes for a COMPLETELY different solution to
the problem. :-)

The solution would be to allow users to turn on/off footnotes. When turned
off, any options that are designated as footnotes would be treated as
normal options. When turned on, the footnotes would be honored, as
specified by the data file author. So the author would decide what stuff
makes sense to treat as footnotes, and then the user can override the
behavior as he sees fit.

This is something that could be done without a great deal of complexity in
the code.

-Rob

At 09:33 PM 6/4/2005 -0400, you wrote:

>Some users preffer to have the info directly on the list, while others
>feel it's only nescessary to refference it once at the end of the
>list...It's a personal prefference thing...
>
>In the afformentioned WFB example, I preffer my wizzards to have the
>spells on list individually so that I can mark which ones I get (it's
>random every game) but some people don't want that much info repeated over
>and over when they can simply print it once at the end of the list and
>mark the spell numbers next to each wizard...
>
>Some options (like spells) have a paragraph or more of info which would
>need to be typed for both versions otherwise...


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (408) 927-9880
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com

[Warmonger]

Partly correct from what I was stating. To stick with the WFB scenario. Choices I would like to have: 1. Print the spells by the wizard. 2. Print the spells as a footnote. *3.* Print nothing at all, as I use the Spell Cards that were available on the website for download, so I want my roster to be 2 pages of units as opposed to 4 pages of spells I already have full info for!

So if this can be done..... COOL. But how? I'm missing how to do it. (Without creating two options for each spell to print or not print, and how.)

[rob]

At 03:03 AM 6/5/2005 -0400, you wrote:
>Partly correct from what I was stating. To stick with the WFB scenario.
>Choices I would like to have: 1. Print the spells by the wizard. 2. Print
>the spells as a footnote. *3.* Print nothing at all, as I use the Spell
>Cards that were available on the website for download, so I want my roster
>to be 2 pages of units as opposed to 4 pages of spells I already have full
>info for!

Sorry for the confusion. My focus was on the footnotes issue. By adding a
user option to enable/disable footnotes, the user can control between
options #1 and #2. Through selection of a user option provided by the
author, the user can control between options #1/#2 and #3 (i.e. print or not).

The issue that is important from my proposed approach is that the
enablement or not of footnotes would apply to ALL optoins - not just
spells. Other equipment options would either be put into footnotes or
detailed with each unit, according to the setting picked by the user.

Or do things have to be individually controlled for each option?

-Rob

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (408) 927-9880
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com