Foundry loose integration

[Sword_of_Spirit]

Originally Posted by Farling

I will need to fix the wording of that particular error report.

It indicates that the identified numbered topic does not exist within the RWEXPORT file.

Does your RWEXPORT contain everything in your realm, or is it a partial export?

It's a full export. I tried it again with the updated importer and I didn't get any warnings this time, so maybe something is different, or maybe it was just a glitch.

Originally Posted by Farling

I think this is a BUG in Realm Works: the HOME PAGE topic is not put into the Realm Works Export file.

This will affect anybody who tries to use that page in a realm that they want to export to another user.

Links TO the home page do get put into the Export file, but the topic to which the link points does not get created - maybe this will generate an exception/error during import into a new realm.

Even the "Duplicate Topic" link is disabled, so it isn't a trivial matter to make it a normal topic within Realm Works.

I don't really need the home page, since making a custom landing page in Foundry is probably better practice anyway, and it can include all the links I want from the RW home page.

I will note that the links to it in the import seem to have vanished. So rather than broken links there is nothing. That's not a problem, since otherwise I'd have to delete them manually, but it seems to differ from the expected behavior as I understand it, so I wanted to report on it.

Is it possible to also alphabetically sort the Relationships? I think that's about the only issue I can see left. Everything else seems to be working great.

[Farling]

Version 1.2 is now available.

It contains improvements for the presentation of Connections:

They are sorted in alphabetical order of the linked topics.
They are put into a bullet list instead of just separate paragraphs.
The link information is all presented before the link, and only enough text displayed to show the full connection.

[Farling]

Version 1.3

Two new processing modes have been added:

Only import NEW topics
Any already-imported topics will remain untouched; only new topics will be processed to create new items in your Foundry world.

Overwrite previously imported things
This will overwrite the contents of world things, but will retain the same foundry IDs so that manual links are retained.
Unfortunately, Actors will be deleted and created again (new IDs) since there is no simple way to edit everything attached to an Actor.
Any changes made locally to these things within Foundry VTT will be lost.
Note that this option will NOT delete anything that was previously created but no longer exists in the import file. (maybe a future evolution).

Also:
d% should be recognised as a valid dice formula when creating RollTables (it will be replaced with d100).

[Sword_of_Spirit]

Awesome.

I noticed some of the Relationships are coming through odd, so I made a test topic to see which ones were affected.

The following Relationship types are showing up as "undefined":

Family Relationship to: Immediate Ancestor of
Family Relationship to: Offspring of
Family Relationship to: Union with

Also, with using the RW export instead of RW output, would it allow for an option to have unrevealed snippets show up in Foundry's secret style?

[Farling]

Originally Posted by Sword_of_Spirit

Awesome.

I noticed some of the Relationships are coming through odd, so I made a test topic to see which ones were affected.

The following Relationship types are showing up as "undefined":

Family Relationship to: Immediate Ancestor of
Family Relationship to: Offspring of
Family Relationship to: Union with

Also, with using the RW export instead of RW output, would it allow for an option to have unrevealed snippets show up in Foundry's secret style?

I've identified the wrong relationships, and I'm about to release an update that uses all the correct text (to match what you see in RW).

For unrevealed snippets, do you think that this should only be done in journal entries which are marked as revealed? Otherwise the import will end up marking entire journal entries as secret text.

[Farling]

1.3.1 fixes an issue with relationships sometimes being reported as "undefined".

[Sword_of_Spirit]

Originally Posted by Farling

I've identified the wrong relationships, and I'm about to release an update that uses all the correct text (to match what you see in RW).

For unrevealed snippets, do you think that this should only be done in journal entries which are marked as revealed? Otherwise the import will end up marking entire journal entries as secret text.

I'd probably pick it applying to unrevealed entries by default. That's just a matter of preference. If I reveal an entry and don't want the party to know everything about it, I'll have to either remove the secret formatting from the parts I want them to see, or add it to the parts I don't. Since I often start out with them only getting small bits of information about a topic, having to manually un-secret the info is likely the better option for me. (It's obviously a chore to do compared to RW, but I'll have to do it one way or another regardless.)

[Farling]

Originally Posted by Sword_of_Spirit

I'd probably pick it applying to unrevealed entries by default. That's just a matter of preference. If I reveal an entry and don't want the party to know everything about it, I'll have to either remove the secret formatting from the parts I want them to see, or add it to the parts I don't. Since I often start out with them only getting small bits of information about a topic, having to manually un-secret the info is likely the better option for me. (It's obviously a chore to do compared to RW, but I'll have to do it one way or another regardless.)

I'm working on this at the moment. It gets a lot more complex when you consider how reveal affects linking - the relationships and governed content need to have links hidden if they aren't revealed (or the topic to which they're connected isn't revealed).

And whilst writing the above I've realised that links within the body of the text can't really be replaced with just the text if the linked topic isn't already revealed. I don't have a solution for this particular aspect (other than creating completely separate PLAYER and GM versions of each revealed topic).

Maybe I should simplify this by having a switch for reveal processing. If the TOPIC is revealed, then the body will ONLY contain revealed content - so links to unrevealed topics can be created as normal text. If the topic is NOT revealed, then it will contain everything (since the assumption is that the topic is only of interest to the GM).

[Sword_of_Spirit]

Originally Posted by Farling

I'm working on this at the moment. It gets a lot more complex when you consider how reveal affects linking - the relationships and governed content need to have links hidden if they aren't revealed (or the topic to which they're connected isn't revealed).

And whilst writing the above I've realised that links within the body of the text can't really be replaced with just the text if the linked topic isn't already revealed. I don't have a solution for this particular aspect (other than creating completely separate PLAYER and GM versions of each revealed topic).

Maybe I should simplify this by having a switch for reveal processing. If the TOPIC is revealed, then the body will ONLY contain revealed content - so links to unrevealed topics can be created as normal text. If the topic is NOT revealed, then it will contain everything (since the assumption is that the topic is only of interest to the GM).

Yeah, I hadn't thought about the complication with links.

I can't think of a really good solution. I'd want all the material to come across--most of my topics are only partially revealed, and it would be a real pain to have to go through each one of them after import and copy+paste all the info in from RW.

Maybe the best way is to not worry about it at all, and just have a note that the conversion process doesn't preserve unrevealed states. I could just manually convert all my unrevealed snippets in RW to DM only text before bringing them across so they'll be secret in Foundry; and then after import manually hide the links.

Edit: I just noticed that there is no scene padding. Is there a way to add scene padding on import without it throwing off the map pins?

[Farling]

1.4 is available

FIX: Custom section names should now be decoded properly.
IMPROVEMENT: bold and italic text now encoded as strong and em text (to match how Foundry VTT does it).
FEATURE: Add option to include numbering on section headers, emulating the numbering in Realm Works.
CHANGE: Connections and Content Links now use same topic name format as in Realm Works "topicname ( suffix - prefix )", rather than the format used in topic titles and governed content "prefix - topicname (suffix)".
FEATURE: Add option to handle REVEALED state of things. If a topic is revealed, then its contents will be only the snippets that are revealed, and actors/tables/playlists will only be created from that topic if the containing snippets are revealed, and the topic will have its permissions set for players to be OBSERVERS. For topics which are not revealed, the full contents will be created (and the observer will NOT be set).

This has a first attempt at providing some capability for handling the reveal state of topics and snippets.