5e Bug Reports (2022)

[Zacchaeus]

Spells are only parsed when the NPC is added to the CT (the NPC on the CT is only a copy of the original). Once added I don't think added spells will parse. You'd need to add the spell to the NPC whilst it's in the NPC spell list and then reparse the spells there or add to the CT to force the spells to parse.

[Minty23185Fresh]

Spells are only parsed when the NPC is added to the CT (the NPC on the CT is only a copy of the original). Once added I don't think added spells will parse. You'd need to add the spell to the NPC whilst it's in the NPC spell list and then reparse the spells there or add to the CT to force the spells to parse.

After my post I had considered this.
I’ll verify, and report back.

Thank you Zacchaeus and Lord Entrails

[EDIT] yes, it is exactly as you say Zacchaeus. Again thanks. Sorry for the false alarm.

[Tooting Dog]

Thanks for the reply. I still don't understand, but will go with what you say. I assumed the chopped-up maps came from the original full-sized map. If what you state is the case that the original full-size map is too low res to be utilized, I don't know how the smaller maps would be of a higher quality if they are derived from that stated low-res map. I guess I am to assume Smiteworks was given higher-res chopped-up maps. But I never said get rid of anything that already comes with the adventure and so adding a good full map (if one were available) would not impact FGC users at all and so not sure why that is being considered as contention. I have found after-market maps that I am using. At one point I thought about pasting together the smaller maps as layers next to each other into one big map but did not investigate how that would work and I don't know how to extract the map files to do this outside of FGU. But no matter. It's a shame there was not a good map provided to Smiteworks. Thanks for the replies!

So, SmiteWorks doesn't have legal access to the high resolution versions. It's possible that they could be given them, but right now they don't have permission to redistribute them since they were not included in the printed versions.

If they do obtain them, and the rights to distribute them, then yes they could put them in. But it would still necessitate that they maintain the low res version for FGC users since it is very likely the high res versions would not work within a 32-bit application. I don't know if the current distribution pipeline has an architecture that supports two different channels. It might, but I haven't seen any indication that it currently does. They could build such, but would it be a wise business decision? Not my call.

[Zacchaeus]

Thanks for the reply. I still don't understand, but will go with what you say. I assumed the chopped-up maps came from the original full-sized map. If what you state is the case that the original full-size map is too low res to be utilized, I don't know how the smaller maps would be of a higher quality if they are derived from that stated low-res map. I guess I am to assume Smiteworks was given higher-res chopped-up maps. But I never said get rid of anything that already comes with the adventure and so adding a good full map (if one were available) would not impact FGC users at all and so not sure why that is being considered as contention. I have found after-market maps that I am using. At one point I thought about pasting together the smaller maps as layers next to each other into one big map but did not investigate how that would work and I don't know how to extract the map files to do this outside of FGU. But no matter. It's a shame there was not a good map provided to Smiteworks. Thanks for the replies!

All of the images are provided by Wizards of the Coast. In the case of the Yawning Portal the maps provided were small and of not great quality since many of the adventures dated to long before VTT's were a thing. The scale of the maps is 10ft rather than 5ft so in order to put a reasonable grid size on the map It would have been necessary to increase the size of the maps provided and that then made the maps too big for FG Classic to handle comfortably. Thus I chopped the maps up in order to make the quality a little better and still get under the FG Classic limits.

I am disinclined to go back into these older modules and update them for Unity. These older maps are fairly horrible to work with as far as removing room numbers and secret doors etc so that a decent player map can be created. It would also mean re-adding all of the encounters, and redoing the line of sight and lighting etc as well. And in the module you are talking about the map wouldn't be all that much better than the ones that are currently in the module. As I say they're fairly small and pixelated to start with and making them bigger will simply exacerbate that problem.

[andrewcr]

Tome of Beasts 3

Glacial Crawler; Acid Spray (Recharge 5-6) ability

The initial spray damage is not correct missing the word "damage" after the word acid.

[Zacchaeus]

Thanks, I'll pass that on to the developer.

[dbachen]

Barbarian / Rage (PHB) The FG effect has a DMG: 4 at level 1, and it's supposed to be DMG: 2
-checked plain campaign no extensions or effects modules
Rage; ADVCHK: strength; ADVSAV: strength; DMG: 4, melee; RESIST: bludgeoning, piercing, slashing

[dbachen]

Herbalism Kit (PHB) -- Exists as an item, but not on the list of adventurer's gear where the other kits are listed. So when you are using the hermit background and click the adv gear table link, it doesn't show up and you have to go find it manually.

[Mach5RR]

The effect for NPCs Healing themselves, actually heals the NPCs target and not the NPC.
As an example, the Unicorn has a a Legendary Action of "Heal Self", which contains the description "The unicorn magically regains 11 (2d8 + 2) hit points." This matches the 5e Fantasy Ground Effects Wiki which states for Basic Healing "The <creature name> regains ndn hit points or The <creature name> regains x hit points." But clicking on the Unicorn self heal actually restores the target, and does nothing if you have no target selected (except for targeting yourself I suppose).

[dbachen]

The effect for NPCs Healing themselves, actually heals the NPCs target and not the NPC.
As an example, the Unicorn has a a Legendary Action of "Heal Self", which contains the description "The unicorn magically regains 11 (2d8 + 2) hit points." This matches the 5e Fantasy Ground Effects Wiki which states for Basic Healing "The <creature name> regains ndn hit points or The <creature name> regains x hit points." But clicking on the Unicorn self heal actually restores the target, and does nothing if you have no target selected (except for targeting yourself I suppose).

Both the healing touch and the heal self have the same wording which is being parsed by FG.. that is "regains 11 (2d8+2) hit points." which gets parsed into the effect on the combat tracker as [HEAL: 2d8+2].

So the behavior with the heal effect is handled with required targeting.. Yes, i know that the legendary says "self", but because of the text parsing it doesn't know to add the (T:SELF)

You would need to code your own effect to add the self, or use an effects coding package to do it.