5e Ruleset - Can you code Poison attacks and Saves into a Weapon Entry?

[Mytherus]

Tried to state it plainly in the title, but this is for the 5e ruleset...I know how you can do basic coding in an actual character sheet but can you do the same for just a weapon "sheet".

Homebrew weapon was made by copying the Shortsword+1 from the PHB, it's supposed to do normal shortsword+1 damage but there's a number of charges per day that allow it to apply an amount of poison damage. This damage allows for CON save for half damage.

Not very complicated and I know how to do this on a player character sheet, but how do you "code" this on a weapon sheet/entry?

Does FGU parse weapon entries for the coding just like a normal character or NPC's sheet?

Thanks.

[Zacchaeus]

By default you cannot code effects into a weapon. But there are extensions which allow for this; probably this one will fulfil your needs https://forge.fantasygrounds.com/shop/items/41/view

Without an extension you would created affects in the players action tab for the saving throw, poison and uses per day. This would not be tied to the weapon but would still worked perfectly well.

[Mytherus]

Thank you. I wound up creating a separate entry (like how spells work with coding) and I will just drop it into the player's action tab.

Not so elegant, but it does work (I tested it).

[brainArid]

By default you cannot code effects into a weapon.

Hi Zacchaeus, is this something that is considered for implementation in the 5e ruleset in the near future? I think that defining editable powers for various record types (item, spell, npc, feats, etc...) really just makes sense for this ruleset, and a lot of the extensions surrounding automation could benefit if this were officially supported.

I came across an extension--Spell Record Actions by Zarestia--and I just thought it was a genius design. They even redirected the output of the parser, to within the spell record itself so you could have the best of both worlds--automatic text parsing and manual override.

I realize that this is a pretty fundamental, and thereby, probably consequential request, but the data manager in me can't help but wonder. Thanks for your time and all your team's hard work on FGU!

[LordEntrails]

Hi Zacchaeus, is this something that is considered for implementation in the 5e ruleset in the near future? I think that defining editable powers for various record types (item, spell, npc, feats, etc...) really just makes sense for this ruleset, and a lot of the extensions surrounding automation could benefit if this were officially supported.

No. Not anytime soon. There is at least one extension onthe Forge that enables this type of functionality, but it's not something the devs have indicated that is high on their list for implementation. (though we never know for sure)

[brainArid]

No. Not anytime soon. There is at least one extension onthe Forge that enables this type of functionality, but it's not something the devs have indicated that is high on their list for implementation. (though we never know for sure)

I see. Maybe they have a larger effects/scripting overhaul in-mind. Or... are you aware of other priorities that we can look forward to? I know that there used to be a public-facing feature request list. But I can imagine that that could be problematic anymore haha. Any way to put in a ticket for prioritization?

[Zacchaeus]

I see. Maybe they have a larger effects/scripting overhaul in-mind. Or... are you aware of other priorities that we can look forward to? I know that there used to be a public-facing feature request list. But I can imagine that that could be problematic anymore haha. Any way to put in a ticket for prioritization?

The current wishlist is broken. But a new one is in production.

[LordEntrails]

It's not so much as updating the effects capabilities, but it's going back to hundreds of DLC products and adding in effects for all the items in those products.

[brainArid]

The current wishlist is broken. But a new one is in production.

Oh that's great news! Thanks for keeping the community involved.

It's not so much as updating the effects capabilities, but it's going back to hundreds of DLC products and adding in effects for all the items in those products.

Hmm...definitely an undertaking. But hear me out, if DLC effects really is the focus, why not leverage the army of FGU users that actually play those modules? By expanding the out of the box functionality for 5E (record-specific powers/actions/effects, or even expanding the scope of effects like we see in some popular extensions) us 'casual FGU user' (if there is such a thing) would be more than willing to populate empty fields. Y'all could crowd source with a repository edited modules and copy-paste the best solutions into the official releases.

I vaguely remember some successful crowd sourcing of modules' maps when lighting and line-of-sight was first released...no...?

[LordEntrails]

It's not impossible, and crowd sourcing has been successfully used for LOS. It's not a bad idea, it just hasn't gotten to the top of the priority list.