PF2E Playlist
Page 3 of 15 First 1234513 ... Last
  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Trenloe View Post
    1) It's not Pathfinder rules, correct. But that's why the option is under "House Rules".
    I was under the impression that the base rulesets didn't include house rules.

    Quote Originally Posted by Trenloe View Post
    2) It's not "disabling automation". It's disabling the critical confirm, two different things. Critical automation is still there (roll equal or above your crit chance to do double damage).

    You expected something different from "Critical Confirm = Off" I know, you wanted it to disable criticals entirely. But that is not what it does and it is not what the wording of this "house rule" actually describes - it turns critical confirmations off, or turns it off just for PCs. It doesn't turn double-damage-on-a-critical off at all. If it was called "Critical Damage = Off" then I'd understand where you're coming from, but it's not!
    It is disabling automation because when the option is turned off the automation of the confirm roll does not happen. I wasn't referring to the automation of the critical damage. My believe is that, in Pathfinder, if there is no confirmation roll made, there should be no forced critical damage as FG simply doesn't know if the attack was a critical hit or not. If toggling the confirm automation off symbolized the automatic criticals (such as in 5e), then that is fine. But in that case, having the untargeted automated confirmation rolls always count as a critical hit is a bug since FG has no way of determining if the confirmation roll was successful. The confirmation roll is irrelevant even with the option turned no. (This is not the case for targeted attacks, but we are talking about the new functionality, not the old.)

    Also, for the record, I'm not referring to critical hits on a natural roll of a 20. Most of the attacks that caused problems in my game were rolls of 19 for shortswords and longswords. FG was automating critical damage without knowing if the attack even hit. Granted, if the player is rolling damage, it most likely hit.

    Quote Originally Posted by Moon Wizard View Post
    Have you tried applying the "IMMUNE: critical" effect? This will ignore any critical damage. In PFRPG, this is automatically applied for creatures with a type of "Elemental", "Ooze", "Aeon" or "Swarm".
    Exactly what am I applying this effect to? The context of this new change to FG is that there is no target for FG to check effects on.
    [5E/4E/PFRPG/3.5E] Attack critical state tracking added for untargeted attack and damage rolls.
    Also, how do I apply an effect for fortification, say 20% immunity to crits?
    Last edited by Nickademus; November 17th, 2016 at 04:23.
    I never claimed to be sane. Besides, it's more fun this way.

  2. #22
    Trenloe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Newcastle, UK (for a bit)
    Posts
    26,517
    Quote Originally Posted by Nickademus View Post
    I was under the impression that the base rulesets didn't include house rules.
    That's the section where the Critical Confirm option is listed under - #1 below. Please pay attention!



    I really don't know why you're insisting on arguing about this option (unless you just want to argue for the sake of arguing). This option is not new, it's been there for as long as I can remember, and you're the first that I can remember complaining about it.

    The functionality of this House Rule has been explained to you more than once. It should not be changed, as everyone who knows how this works will then be screwed and start complaining - many voices to your one.

    You've asked Moon Wizard to add an extra option to disable auto-critical damage - which is the right thing to do, not demand an existing option's functionality be changed. He's told you why he can't do it.

    I suggest if you want it to work "your way" that you investigate making an extension for it.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	3.5E Critical Confirm.jpg 
Views:	275 
Size:	56.6 KB 
ID:	16420  
    FG Con 16 Fantasy Grounds Online RPG Convention - Postponed New date To Be Confirmed.
    Register at www.fg-con.com for all the latest info.

    Private Messages: My inbox is forever filling up with PMs. Please don't send me PMs unless they are actually private/personal messages. General FG questions should be asked in the forums - don't be afraid, the FG community don't bite and you're giving everyone the chance to respond and learn!

  3. #23
    If you drag the critical damage roll from the chat window onto an entry in the combat tracker, and that entry has an effect with "IMMUNE: critical" on it, then the critical portion of the damage should be resisted.

    There is no support currently for fortification. You could apply the "IMMUNE: critical" effect as a single use effect when you need it.

    Regards,
    JPG

  4. #24
    I'm not arguing about anything. I'm trying to understand what Smite Works was hoping to achieve with this new feature, as I stated already. As I see it, the feature only works in the PF ruleset if the Critical Confirm option (House Rules; never noticed the heading, thank you) is turned off, which I imagine is only for a minority of PF games. And I never said the Critical Confirm option should be changed. You should read my posts more carefully as I already stated that for JPG. I was asking for a second option to be added and was told why it couldn't. You are right. Now I'm reporting that the new feature is not working as described to me.

    Alright, how about this. No arguing, just reporting a bug.

    New Bug:
    In the PF ruleset, assuming the Critical Confirm option is turned on, FG ignores the confirm roll when determining the success of a critical roll if no CT entry is targeted. (Since there is no AC to compare the confirm roll against, it shouldn't ever think the critical successful unless rolling a nat 20 on the confirm roll.) Currently every critical threat is treated as a confirmed critical and will roll critical damage.
    I never claimed to be sane. Besides, it's more fun this way.

  5. #25
    Patou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    South-shore of Montreal, QC. Canada
    Posts
    492
    Hi Super Team FG,

    I have not tried this yet in creating a new 5E campaign but is the ability to add pictures visibly in the story line something doable as they are in the Reference Manual or will this remain exclusive?
    Patou a.k.a: Patmaster
    Challenging players since 1987
    2E, 3.5E & now 5E
    https://twitter.com/PatouLeFou
    Discord = @PatouLeFou

  6. #26
    Trenloe's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Newcastle, UK (for a bit)
    Posts
    26,517
    Quote Originally Posted by Patou View Post
    I have not tried this yet in creating a new 5E campaign but is the ability to add pictures visibly in the story line something doable as they are in the Reference Manual or will this remain exclusive?
    Exclusive to the Reference Manual.

    http://www.fantasygrounds.com/wiki/i...erence_Manuals
    FG Con 16 Fantasy Grounds Online RPG Convention - Postponed New date To Be Confirmed.
    Register at www.fg-con.com for all the latest info.

    Private Messages: My inbox is forever filling up with PMs. Please don't send me PMs unless they are actually private/personal messages. General FG questions should be asked in the forums - don't be afraid, the FG community don't bite and you're giving everyone the chance to respond and learn!

  7. #27
    LordEntrails's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    -7 UTC
    Posts
    11,151
    Blog Entries
    9
    As Trenloe references you, you can add them to a Reference Manual you create (typically with Par5E and then modifying the xml) but there is no capability to add them to story entries (for us or SmiteWorks).

  8. #28
    Patou's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    South-shore of Montreal, QC. Canada
    Posts
    492
    Quote Originally Posted by Trenloe View Post
    Thanks guys (Trenloe & LordEntrails)
    Patou a.k.a: Patmaster
    Challenging players since 1987
    2E, 3.5E & now 5E
    https://twitter.com/PatouLeFou
    Discord = @PatouLeFou

  9. #29
    Has FG's memory footprint been improved with 3.2? I have noticed I'm using less ram than I would normally when launching FG, which is nice to see. That's without removing stuff from one of my campaigns. Just not sure if it is an improvement with 3.2 or just something else on my end reducing the footprint.

  10. #30
    I had an odd issue last night that only happened to one player. On his attack rolls the first roll was not registering against his target but the subsequent rolls did register. I had him make sure he hadn't accidentally hit that option near the dice modifiers and he says he didn't. Yet anytime he switched targets this occurred and it was only his PC, no one else had this issue.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
FGU Twitter Sweepstakes

Log in

Log in