• Please note: In an effort to ensure that all of our users feel welcome on our forums, we’ve updated our forum rules. You can review the updated rules here: http://forums.wolflair.com/showthread.php?t=5528.

    If a fellow Community member is not following the forum rules, please report the post by clicking the Report button (the red yield sign on the left) located on every post. This will notify the moderators directly. If you have any questions about these new rules, please contact support@wolflair.com.

    - The Lone Wolf Development Team

Dice Rolling For Spells

  • Thread starter Thread starter errett at triusenterprise
  • Start date Start date
E

errett at triusenterprise

Guest
Hi All-

Since there seems to be a bit of discussion of new functions for AB,
I thought I would chuck in my 2 cents. While I think the current work
on the previous datafile issues and the inventory issues are more
important, this may be *relatively* simple to implement.

I'm only familiar with the Warhammer Fantasy Battles, but there may
be other game systems which rely on a similar function. In WFB when
you choose your spells you roll a D6 and then choose the
corresponding spell from the selected list.

Certainly you may want to allow your players to choose which spells
they wish. So this feature would need to be able to be turned on and
off. However, in terms of secret (and validated) lists, it would be a
neat function (IMHO) to have the ability to roll a die (from within
AB) and have it add the appropriate spell to the list of options for
the model.

Preferrably this would not be allowed to be changed unless the whole
model was removed and recreated. While this would not deter those who
may want to control (or 'cheat' as some rules may call it) which
spells their models have by deleting and recreating the model; it
would enforce a certain fairness in that the spells which come to the
table were actually rolled for when this type of validation was
enabled.

So just an idea, I hope that this does not seem presumtuous to write
to the list. I think AB is far and away the most useful tool I've
encountered for wargaming and I cannot see playing without it! I hope
to see its continued evolution.

Thanks for any time spent (or wasted!) on this conjecture.
Errett
 
You've identified the key issue here yourself. Since there is no way to
appropriately control the veracity of the roll (the user can delete the
unit and create it again until the desired results are obtained), it really
is of little use to add this to AB. It is equally useful to presume users
are on the honor system, roll an actual die themselves, and then select the
corresponding option/item.

This feature IS on the todo list, but it has been dropped to a very low
priority because of this issue. Instead, it is easiest to simply setup the
data files to allow the user to specify the option/item that the user
wants. The user can make the die roll in front of his fellow players to
keep things legitimate, then he can select the corresponding option/item
within AB. Otherwise, the honor system can be used, as described above.

I don't mean to be discounting your suggestion here at all. For honest
players, it's a really useful idea. But the majority of players use AB as a
means of validating their rosters, and there's no way for AB to validate
the random selection of items/options with absolute certainty. So this
particular feature is of limited utility to the majority of users. That's
why it's been dropped to low on the priority list.

Hope this makes sense,
Rob


At 01:41 PM 4/20/01 +0000, you wrote:
>While this would not deter those who
>may want to control (or 'cheat' as some rules may call it) which
>spells their models have by deleting and recreating the model; it
>would enforce a certain fairness in that the spells which come to the
>table were actually rolled for when this type of validation was
>enabled.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (650) 726-9689
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com
 
Hi Rob-

Thanks for your response. I think you are right, this is sort of
an 'honor system' issue. Any chance you have your todo list posted
somewhere? I'd hate to put out any more redundant suggestions.

Thanks,
Errett
 
Don't worry about being redundant. Actually, seeing the same request
multiple times is a GOOD thing, since it gives me a good feeling for how
many people would find a particular feature valuable. If only one person
asks for it, it goes on the list. If 20 people ask for it, it gets bumped
up a lot higher on the list. :-)

The todo list is a mish-mash, including all of my notes about
implementation ideas/issues. It's definitely not suitable for public
consumption. :-) Since I'm just one person, there's no spare bandwidth to
clean up a duplicate of the list and post it somewhere. Sorry about that. :-(

But, as I said, it's actually beneficial for me to get the redundant
requests. So don't hesitate sending them in. :-)

Thanks, Rob


At 12:41 PM 4/21/01 +0000, you wrote:
>Hi Rob-
>
>Thanks for your response. I think you are right, this is sort of
>an 'honor system' issue. Any chance you have your todo list posted
>somewhere? I'd hate to put out any more redundant suggestions.
>
>Thanks,
>Errett


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rob Bowes (rob@wolflair.com) (650) 726-9689
Lone Wolf Development www.wolflair.com
 
Back
Top