search

AuroraLegacy / elements

165 stars 79 forks source link

[PHB24] Ranger & Paladin Classes + Subclasses #277

Open Tel0k opened 2 months ago

Tel0k commented 1 month ago

Resolves #258

tregolani commented 1 month ago

Seeing how I'll be updating my PR with some changes, should we update the "ASI" grants to be pointing towards feats instead (since ASIs are a type of feat now)?

<grant type="Class Feature" id="ID_WOTC_PHB24_CLASS_FEATURE_RANGER_ASI" level="4"/>

should become

<grant type="Class Feature" id="ID_WOTC_PHB24_CLASS_FEATURE_RANGER_FEAT" level="4"/>

NickVendel commented 1 month ago

targeting feats would be type="Feat", and yeah, i think that's the way we gonna do it now.

tregolani commented 1 month ago

targeting feats would be type="Feat", and yeah, i think that's the way we gonna do it now.

These are the IDs for the class feature that grants feats. We'd have a <rules> tag inside this element that would then grant the Feats.

I'm mostly just trying to nail down "ID naming conventions" for my PR edit later this weekend.

NickVendel commented 1 month ago

but why? If all they do is grant Feats, why not just grant Feats right away?

tregolani commented 1 month ago

We need the "Class Feature" element so it shows up in the feature list of the class, just like Epic Boons.

NickVendel commented 1 month ago

ah, yeah, then it should still be _CLASS_FEATURE_ just because it's that type.

Tel0k commented 1 month ago

tbh then they should be selections, not grants.. remember that the feature let you choose between ASI or another Feat for which you qualify.. same thing with Epic Boons..

tregolani commented 1 month ago

Right. We still need the "class feature" element so they show up in the list of class features. We then do a select in the rules of that class feature element to allow the user to pick their feat.

I mostly was asking to change the ID of the "class feature" element to _FEAT instead of _ASI, but in the books it's still called "Ability Score Improvement", so I think my point was moot. We should keep the class feature ID as _ASI.

NickVendel commented 1 month ago

full name would probably be more appropriate, but i won't argue with an abbreviation either

tregolani commented 1 month ago

Well, what's the standard naming convention we want to go with, moving forward? ASI or ABILITYSCOREIMPROVEMENT?

Tel0k commented 3 weeks ago

Resolves #257