I have a question regarding the monster races. It seems many monster races do not have their feats automatically selected. This can be useful because some GM's might not want the default. On the other hand, it can be a pain to have to go check the manual to determine what feats they should have if you do want to default. If a feat is bootstrapped, it cannot be removed by the user without going into the editor. So, my question is, what do people prefer? Would you rather have all the feats bootstrapped or not? Currently, it appears to be mixed.
-
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
Monster races and their feats
- Thread starter Sendric
- Start date
saintaurik
Well-known member
While it can be a pain to look them up in the manual I prefer this so that as you said I can customize them. A few of my players tend to look everything up so I prefer to make then non standard to keep it new and fresh for everyone.
NullCascade
Member
My suggestion is to handle it as follows:
Monster "races" (the ones defined in .user files) should not have the feats gained from monster/class hit dice (but should have the feats marked with a B -- bonus feats as part of their type) bootstrapped.
However, it would be rather nice if we went through and made .stock files out of our .user files as well. The pre-made monsters in these .stock files would let us quickly pick the default monster configs that show up when browsing the encounter builder.
This would let DMs both build custom versions of monsters when they wish to, as well as simply place the default P&P options using the built-in encounter tools. Best of both worlds, but certainly a bit of extra work for the community to get these resources made.
Example:
"3.5 - Monster Manual 1.user" -- Contains the core race, that any DM can build up as normal and customize to their heart's content.
"3.5 - Monster Manual 1.stock" -- Contains creatures that use the data from the .user file, with the feats from the related book already pre-chosen. These can be imported into a portfolio using the encounter builder, nice and searchable.
Monster "races" (the ones defined in .user files) should not have the feats gained from monster/class hit dice (but should have the feats marked with a B -- bonus feats as part of their type) bootstrapped.
However, it would be rather nice if we went through and made .stock files out of our .user files as well. The pre-made monsters in these .stock files would let us quickly pick the default monster configs that show up when browsing the encounter builder.
This would let DMs both build custom versions of monsters when they wish to, as well as simply place the default P&P options using the built-in encounter tools. Best of both worlds, but certainly a bit of extra work for the community to get these resources made.
Example:
"3.5 - Monster Manual 1.user" -- Contains the core race, that any DM can build up as normal and customize to their heart's content.
"3.5 - Monster Manual 1.stock" -- Contains creatures that use the data from the .user file, with the feats from the related book already pre-chosen. These can be imported into a portfolio using the encounter builder, nice and searchable.
Last edited:
This has been discussed before, and is ultimately probably the best way to handle it. I also like the idea of bootstrapping the bonus feats and keeping the other slots versatile.
One thing to keep in mind is that if we do the stock files, they'll have to be a separate release. They would get large very quickly, and not everyone is going to want them, so they'll be kept as a separate package.
Thank you for your feedback.
ShadowChemosh
Well-known member
Yep made me think the same thing. I was going to ask Colen for some pointers as I admit I have no clue where to even start with such code.
Yep made me think the same thing. I was going to ask Colen for some pointers as I admit I have no clue where to even start with such code.
That would be awesome. I'll table this until you've determined if that's something you'll be able to do.
NullCascade
Member
Hm. Should be possibly by doing the following?
1. Create a new special to bootstrap to each monster race. Name it something like "Customize?"
2. Use a script such as this on the special:
3. I have not yet looked into how to bootstrap feats via code, but you can use the normal bootstrap window. Bootstrap the feat as normal, but put in the following condition to only apply them if the "Customize?" check is not given.
There is likely a way to optimize this, and look for the child special. You can have a single "Customize?" special that all monsters share, and put the bootstraps/scripts on the monster race entry itself. This would be more ideal than creating a new special for every single monster available.
1. Create a new special to bootstrap to each monster race. Name it something like "Customize?"
2. Use a script such as this on the special:
Code:
~ We only add ranks/feats if the customize field is not checked.
doneif (field[hIsOn1].value = 1)
~ Add our skill ranks.
hero.child[kHide].field[kUserRanks].value += 23. I have not yet looked into how to bootstrap feats via code, but you can use the normal bootstrap window. Bootstrap the feat as normal, but put in the following condition to only apply them if the "Customize?" check is not given.
Code:
fieldval:usrIsCheck = 0There is likely a way to optimize this, and look for the child special. You can have a single "Customize?" special that all monsters share, and put the bootstraps/scripts on the monster race entry itself. This would be more ideal than creating a new special for every single monster available.