5E - Aura Effects

[razzed1]

Is there a way to set Lulu's (BGIA Hollyphant) Aura of Invulnerability? PCs within 10 feet of her cannot be affected by spells of 5th level or higher. Or, barring that, just using a general aura that just shows who would be indie of it?

Thanks!

edit: I know how to do the general. Now, just wondering about the spell level caveat.

[Zacchaeus]

There's no effect you could create that would allow that to be automated. You can just create a dummy aura to work out who might be covered.

[razzed1]

Thank you, Zacchaeus! That is what I had worked out, but wanted to appeal to greater minds.

[eriktedesco]

Hi all!

I'm pretty bad at coding stuff. Would it be possible, for you guys, to write down in this thread the code of the main aura types?

Thank you very much in advance (for hearing me out and/or writing the code).

[Eriwan]

Since the distance of sight it yet to be added by the devs, the idea of the over lapping paladin's areas made me think about doing something similar with Bright light, dim light, no light. But afterward, I got sad when I realize that contrary to MS Excel, I can not exclude something if something else is there ("!" doesn't work for an IF: CUSTOM ()).
Still, without using "no light" anymore, if someone cast Light or ignite a torch they can then apply AURA: 10 all; candle; dim light. Futhermore, if even work with Sunlight Sensitivity (as long as they also have IF: CUSTOM (sunlight); DISATK; DISSKILL: perception), Sunbeam could therefore apply AURA: 30 all; bright light; sunlight and AURA: 60 all; dim light; sunlight, and that trait would trigger great.
Nevertheless, I haven't figured out how (don't think it's feasable) to implement something similar for those without darkvision in the dim light, since been in bright light won't counter the dim light effect on them (for a camp fire emiting bright 20, dim 40), hence still applying the DIS on the perception skill. :\

[Kiqjaq]

... As far as the minus going that’s very odd, I’ll have to look into what may be causing that.

I hope it's not considered forward, but as someone about to play a game with Aura of Despair I went ahead and fixed this so I could use this extension, and figured I might as well share. (I didn't see any other post saying it was fixed at least.) I also made it work with PFRPG, but that's easy (just added the xml tag and pointed it to 35E instead of 5E if DataCommon.isPFRPG). For the record I'm on FG Classic.

I'm pretty sure that effect removal wasn't working for auras with negative values because, on line 91 in checkAuraAlreadyEffecting(), it was using string.match(str, str) to check for existing auras. But string.match uses something similar to regex to match, and a minus sign is a special character for matching the shortest repeating substring or some such, so only positive values were being matched properly. I swapped that line for string.find(str, str, 1, true) so that it would treat the second argument as a plain string instead of as a pattern and it seems happier now.

Hope I'm not being a bother/my change actually helps, and thanks for the great extension!

[kevininrussia]

I hope it's not considered forward, but as someone about to play a game with Aura of Despair I went ahead and fixed this so I could use this extension, and figured I might as well share. (I didn't see any other post saying it was fixed at least.) I also made it work with PFRPG, but that's easy (just added the xml tag and pointed it to 35E instead of 5E if DataCommon.isPFRPG). For the record I'm on FG Classic.

I'm pretty sure that effect removal wasn't working for auras with negative values because, on line 91 in checkAuraAlreadyEffecting(), it was using string.match(str, str) to check for existing auras. But string.match uses something similar to regex to match, and a minus sign is a special character for matching the shortest repeating substring or some such, so only positive values were being matched properly. I swapped that line for string.find(str, str, 1, true) so that it would treat the second argument as a plain string instead of as a pattern and it seems happier now.

Hope I'm not being a bother/my change actually helps, and thanks for the great extension!

This is not working in Unity with negative values. Still does not remove the effect when out of the Aura and spams the chat box with [ALREADY EXISTS]

This is the only line you changed correct?

if string.find(sLabel, sEffect, 1, true) then

[Kiqjaq]

This is not working in Unity with negative values. Still does not remove the effect when out of the Aura and spams the chat box with [ALREADY EXISTS]

This is the only line you changed correct?

if string.find(sLabel, sEffect, 1, true) then

Yup, that's the only one I changed. Besides adding PFRPG to the xml and the version check in the init() to point it to the correct EffectManager.
I just redownloaded the extension and only changed that line, just to make sure, and it seems to work happily with negative numbers in 5e. Screenshot_1.png Honestly that sounds quite strange. I was only getting the [ALREADY EXISTS] spam with negative auras before I changed the check, presumably because it was unable to identify that the aura effect was already there and so kept trying to reapply it on every move.

But I'm running FG Classic and haven't touched FG Unity yet.

[Stv]

I think I've encountered a problem with the operation of this extension but I'm not sure if it's working as intended, or if it is a bug.

If I create the aura effect on one character and then apply the effect to that character, all is good and working properly.
If I then apply that same effect FROM the 1st character to another one, then when that second character moves their version of the effect is removed from them.

Is this as intended, and if not can it be fixed?

Cheers, Steve.

[Rades]

I hope it's not considered forward, but as someone about to play a game with Aura of Despair I went ahead and fixed this so I could use this extension, and figured I might as well share. (I didn't see any other post saying it was fixed at least.) I also made it work with PFRPG, but that's easy (just added the xml tag and pointed it to 35E instead of 5E if DataCommon.isPFRPG). For the record I'm on FG Classic.

I'm pretty sure that effect removal wasn't working for auras with negative values because, on line 91 in checkAuraAlreadyEffecting(), it was using string.match(str, str) to check for existing auras. But string.match uses something similar to regex to match, and a minus sign is a special character for matching the shortest repeating substring or some such, so only positive values were being matched properly. I swapped that line for string.find(str, str, 1, true) so that it would treat the second argument as a plain string instead of as a pattern and it seems happier now.

Hope I'm not being a bother/my change actually helps, and thanks for the great extension!

Thanks very much for this update, it's nice to be able to use simple -2 ATK etc auras.

I'm noticing though that this seems to clash with the IF: FACTION() feature of the extension. Example: with your modified version, AURA: 10 foe; Atk Penalty; ATK: -2 works and is removed properly when tokens move, but AURA: 10 foe; Atk Penalty; IF: FACTION(foe); ATK: -2 is not removed. (In other words, auras with IF: FACTION are now behaving like negative value auras in the unmodified version.)

I know this is a redundant example since you wouldn't need both a foe-only aura and a foe faction check, but it was just to demonstrate how the same aura fails simply by adding the IF: FACTION component. But any aura with IF: FACTION seems broken, for example: AURA: 10 foe; Flame Aura; IF: FACTION(!neutral); DMGO: 1d4, which works fine with the unmodified extension.