Date   

Re: PCGen entering archive mode. #releases #volunteer

robert@...
 

Will there be a way to contribute to keep the web sites up?


PCGen entering archive mode. #releases #volunteer

Paul Grosse
 
Edited

It is with sad news the core team members of the PCGen BoD are stepping down (or handing off the reins to any new blood that wish to take up the challenge).

As of the release of the Pathfinder 2 datasets for 6.08.00 RC7, Andrew Maitland, the Data Lead (the core driving and unifying member of the BoD) will be ceasing any ongoing upkeep and direct involvement with the project. We hope this is accomplished by the end of the year (2019)

Paul Grosse the PR director will hang around and provide advice to anyone attempting to keep the project alive, but will also be limiting his involvement.

The core reasons for the project going dormant are the same as have been stated multiple times in the last year. The core Code Team have had attrition due to RL and nobody willing (or able) to pick up the code and run with it, and without the old time members to explain the code things are continually breaking, gating the releases. And the expected new math library to replace the woefully outdated JEP has never been able to get fully implemented (see above).

The Data team is in better shape because the data is generally easier for new users to start with. But again Andrew was the driving force and repository of why things were done the way they were.

We have had a fine 20 year run from the heady days of Bryan releasing hourly, then daily code updates, to the original D&D 3e SRD being released, through the choppy waters of getting hammered by WotC's refusal to consider the non-SRD info being included (prompting the formation of the separate corporation, Code Monkey Publishing), through the explosion of third party materials causing PCGen's code base to grow by leaps and bounds, though the formation of the 4e and the simultaneous rise of Pathfinder, Starfinder, and now the release of Pathfinder 2e.

Our website will remain up until such as a time that the host decides to quit maintaining it. Our forums have transitioned from Yahoo Groups to groups.io which are free and will continue, our discord channel will continue as long as there are people talking there, our old & broken wiki will be availible, our Friends of PCGen FB page will continue, and there is also a sub-reddit

If anyone wishes to they can take a look at the code here.

 

Paul Grosse (PR Silverback)

Posting on behalf of the Board of Directors.

Bryan McRoberts (Benevolent Dictator)
Martijn Verburg (Chair Monkey)
Andrew Maitland (Data Silverback)
Tom Parker (Code Silverback)
Gwen Thebich (Data 2nd)
Eitan Adler (Code 2nd)


Re: output only prepared spells

@Ferret_Dave
 

as a workaround, we created a set of scrolls that had the 'SPELLS tag added (modified to casterlevel for the NPC involved), equipped all of those and then just printed off the first 8 or so pages of the character sheet - instead of 23 pages for the full spell listing...

Quite a messy hack, but it worked, and we don't often have such high level recurring villian clerics to deal with...
 


Re: output only prepared spells

Andrew Maitland
 

It is?

I guess we should fix it.

I was going to tackle a Prepare Spells list version sheet only, but if we have a broken sheet then that takes priority.

On 12/5/2019 11:19 AM, Robert Singers wrote:
The spellbook is broken for 5e so it's a moot point for some of us.


On 6/12/2019 at 04:07, saxumcaribetum via Groups.Io <saxum.caribetum@...> wrote:

As an alternate voice - I'm happy with the existing format of spell book, with "lite" details.

My enthusiasm is to see a smaller selection of spells in the book - just the ones prepared/known, for ease of printing, saving ink, and ease of reference.

I'm still happy to branch out into the book for the total, full, fluff-inclusive, details. The current detailed spellbook includes page reference.

On 05 December 2019 at 14:59 "Paul Grosse via Groups.Io" <nylanfs=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:

Essentially the whole spell-book format, except for the spells marked as prepared.


Paul A. Grosse


On Thursday, December 5, 2019, 9:54:34 AM EST, ferret.griffin+io via Groups.Io <ferret.griffin+io=googlemail.com@groups.io> wrote:


Greetings,
I want the DESC (which for my sources is well populated with the full spell description), along with the usual stats - range,DC etc.
The whole point here is that *I* don't want to have to use the book.

For the *prepared* spells, I want the full description format - so it's just a matter of working out how to filter the output so only prepared spells are output using the normal pdf output sheet.
 


 


--
--Paul Grosse
--PCGen BoD, PR Silverback
@Nylanfs


 


Re: output only prepared spells

robert@...
 

So it is correct that I cannot print out a wizard character sheet after having prepared spells for the character?
I get an "Cannot perform the requested operation until all page are rendered. Please Wait" error.


Re: output only prepared spells

Robert Singers
 

The spellbook is broken for 5e so it's a moot point for some of us.


On 6/12/2019 at 04:07, saxumcaribetum via Groups.Io <saxum.caribetum@...> wrote:

As an alternate voice - I'm happy with the existing format of spell book, with "lite" details.

My enthusiasm is to see a smaller selection of spells in the book - just the ones prepared/known, for ease of printing, saving ink, and ease of reference.

I'm still happy to branch out into the book for the total, full, fluff-inclusive, details. The current detailed spellbook includes page reference.

On 05 December 2019 at 14:59 "Paul Grosse via Groups.Io" <nylanfs=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:

Essentially the whole spell-book format, except for the spells marked as prepared.


Paul A. Grosse


On Thursday, December 5, 2019, 9:54:34 AM EST, ferret.griffin+io via Groups.Io <ferret.griffin+io=googlemail.com@groups.io> wrote:


Greetings,
I want the DESC (which for my sources is well populated with the full spell description), along with the usual stats - range,DC etc.
The whole point here is that *I* don't want to have to use the book.

For the *prepared* spells, I want the full description format - so it's just a matter of working out how to filter the output so only prepared spells are output using the normal pdf output sheet.
 


 


--
--Paul Grosse
--PCGen BoD, PR Silverback
@Nylanfs


 


Re: output only prepared spells

saxumcaribetum
 

As an alternate voice - I'm happy with the existing format of spell book, with "lite" details.

My enthusiasm is to see a smaller selection of spells in the book - just the ones prepared/known, for ease of printing, saving ink, and ease of reference.

I'm still happy to branch out into the book for the total, full, fluff-inclusive, details. The current detailed spellbook includes page reference.

On 05 December 2019 at 14:59 "Paul Grosse via Groups.Io" <nylanfs@...> wrote:

Essentially the whole spell-book format, except for the spells marked as prepared.


Paul A. Grosse


On Thursday, December 5, 2019, 9:54:34 AM EST, ferret.griffin+io via Groups.Io <ferret.griffin+io@...> wrote:


Greetings,
I want the DESC (which for my sources is well populated with the full spell description), along with the usual stats - range,DC etc.
The whole point here is that *I* don't want to have to use the book.

For the *prepared* spells, I want the full description format - so it's just a matter of working out how to filter the output so only prepared spells are output using the normal pdf output sheet.
 


 


--
--Paul Grosse
--PCGen BoD, PR Silverback
@Nylanfs


 


Re: output only prepared spells

Paul Grosse
 

Essentially the whole spell-book format, except for the spells marked as prepared.


Paul A. Grosse


On Thursday, December 5, 2019, 9:54:34 AM EST, ferret.griffin+io via Groups.Io <ferret.griffin+io@...> wrote:


Greetings,
I want the DESC (which for my sources is well populated with the full spell description), along with the usual stats - range,DC etc.
The whole point here is that *I* don't want to have to use the book.

For the *prepared* spells, I want the full description format - so it's just a matter of working out how to filter the output so only prepared spells are output using the normal pdf output sheet.
 

--
--Paul Grosse
--PCGen BoD, PR Silverback
@Nylanfs


Re: output only prepared spells

@Ferret_Dave
 

Greetings,
I want the DESC (which for my sources is well populated with the full spell description), along with the usual stats - range,DC etc.
The whole point here is that *I* don't want to have to use the book.

For the *prepared* spells, I want the full description format - so it's just a matter of working out how to filter the output so only prepared spells are output using the normal pdf output sheet.
 


Re: output only prepared spells

Steven High
 

You're just wanting basic parameters and an abstract, right? You can use the book if you need a full description of the Spell, right?



On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 at 04:58, ferret.griffin+io via Groups.Io <ferret.griffin+io=googlemail.com@groups.io> wrote:
Fyi -  the sources I use include book name and page number for all the spells, so that final bit is ok, but, the idea is to have all the info up front.
 
Would this just be a filter in the Output sheet? happy to code this with some guidance...
 


Re: output only prepared spells

@Ferret_Dave
 

Fyi -  the sources I use include book name and page number for all the spells, so that final bit is ok, but, the idea is to have all the info up front.
 
Would this just be a filter in the Output sheet? happy to code this with some guidance...
 


Re: output only prepared spells

Andrew Maitland
 

It can be done, just be about 60 minutes making it work. Give or take.

On 12/2/2019 12:33 PM, Paul Grosse via Groups.Io wrote:
It would probably be a custom spellbook that is checking for known & Prepared and only outputting those.


Paul A. Grosse


On Monday, December 2, 2019, 3:27:36 PM EST, Dave Griffin <ferret.griffin@...> wrote:


Fyi -  the sources I use include book name and page number for all the spells, so that final bit is ok, but, the idea is to have all the info up front.

Would this just be a filter in the Output sheet?



On Mon, 2 Dec 2019 at 20:16, Saxum Caribetum <saxum.caribetum@...> wrote:
On 2019-12-02 16:20, ferret.griffin+io via Groups.Io wrote:
I know I can do that, but then that's just a list of spell names, whereas what we want is the full spell descriptions, *just* for the prepared spells.

Means that the big-bad has maybe 2-3 pages of spells rather than 23(!) and all the spell area effect/range/affect calculations are all done.

I'd second Ferret's plea.

The standard output for a Prepared-spell caster, is to print the entire spellbook, plus a small condensed table of names of spells prepared.

Our PCs don't use this option - the players faff around with their spell choices and dip into the big fat splat books they like so much;

I, on the other hand, as SG, would like to have explanatory notes for the spells and effects that an NPC is about to use for 10-20mins, before I move to the next NPC.

I'd like a spellbook for PREPARED casters, which looks like the spellbook for the SPONTANEOUS casters - expanded details of current spells known or prepared. Then when the notes state "cast cast Ferret Weaver's Incantation Of Fiery Words" I have some idea what it does, without having to

1) determine on the fly which book it comes from

2) find the book

3) find the spell in the book

Phew!


-- 
Neil Taylor "Creo Imaginem Mente"
ArM Code 1.5 5++ Ca++ R++p H++ ?L Y(96) T(5)- SG+++ G++++ P++ HoH(Ma++ Q+ Hg+) Fz(E)++ C++ :-) Cd++
Saga site at http://homepage.ntlworld.com/saxum.caribetum/
Sub Rosa Ars Magica zine - https://www.facebook.com/subrosamagazine/
--
            oxxxxxxx{;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>


--
--Paul Grosse
--PCGen BoD, PR Silverback
@Nylanfs


Re: Using .FORGET on a spell

"Bryan Hanson
 

On Sun, Dec 1, 2019 at 07:20 AM, markjmeans wrote:
VISIBILITY:HIDDEN
Thank you for your response, and sorry in my delay, but I wanted to get to where i could verify something.  I thought I had tried VISIBILITY as a work around and confirmed that yes I had.  Spells seem to be one of the places where visibility does not work. I can see the point of adding the PRE requirement, but that still seems like a work around.  

And it really doesn't answer my question of how should FORGET be working with spells. Is it expected that they still appear int eh known spells list in the GUI for you to select or is that really a bug. To my mind if they are forgotten then they should not show up anywhere.  The GUI included.

I also see your point about the potential issue with other sources and impacts, but that is a completely different issue. 

Cheers,
Bryan


Re: output only prepared spells

Paul Grosse
 

It would probably be a custom spellbook that is checking for known & Prepared and only outputting those.


Paul A. Grosse


On Monday, December 2, 2019, 3:27:36 PM EST, Dave Griffin <ferret.griffin@...> wrote:


Fyi -  the sources I use include book name and page number for all the spells, so that final bit is ok, but, the idea is to have all the info up front.

Would this just be a filter in the Output sheet?



On Mon, 2 Dec 2019 at 20:16, Saxum Caribetum <saxum.caribetum@...> wrote:
On 2019-12-02 16:20, ferret.griffin+io via Groups.Io wrote:
I know I can do that, but then that's just a list of spell names, whereas what we want is the full spell descriptions, *just* for the prepared spells.

Means that the big-bad has maybe 2-3 pages of spells rather than 23(!) and all the spell area effect/range/affect calculations are all done.

I'd second Ferret's plea.

The standard output for a Prepared-spell caster, is to print the entire spellbook, plus a small condensed table of names of spells prepared.

Our PCs don't use this option - the players faff around with their spell choices and dip into the big fat splat books they like so much;

I, on the other hand, as SG, would like to have explanatory notes for the spells and effects that an NPC is about to use for 10-20mins, before I move to the next NPC.

I'd like a spellbook for PREPARED casters, which looks like the spellbook for the SPONTANEOUS casters - expanded details of current spells known or prepared. Then when the notes state "cast cast Ferret Weaver's Incantation Of Fiery Words" I have some idea what it does, without having to

1) determine on the fly which book it comes from

2) find the book

3) find the spell in the book

Phew!


-- 
Neil Taylor "Creo Imaginem Mente"
ArM Code 1.5 5++ Ca++ R++p H++ ?L Y(96) T(5)- SG+++ G++++ P++ HoH(Ma++ Q+ Hg+) Fz(E)++ C++ :-) Cd++
Saga site at http://homepage.ntlworld.com/saxum.caribetum/
Sub Rosa Ars Magica zine - https://www.facebook.com/subrosamagazine/
--
            oxxxxxxx{;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;>


--
--Paul Grosse
--PCGen BoD, PR Silverback
@Nylanfs


Re: output only prepared spells

saxumcaribetum
 

On 2019-12-02 16:20, ferret.griffin+io via Groups.Io wrote:
I know I can do that, but then that's just a list of spell names, whereas what we want is the full spell descriptions, *just* for the prepared spells.

Means that the big-bad has maybe 2-3 pages of spells rather than 23(!) and all the spell area effect/range/affect calculations are all done.

I'd second Ferret's plea.

The standard output for a Prepared-spell caster, is to print the entire spellbook, plus a small condensed table of names of spells prepared.

Our PCs don't use this option - the players faff around with their spell choices and dip into the big fat splat books they like so much;

I, on the other hand, as SG, would like to have explanatory notes for the spells and effects that an NPC is about to use for 10-20mins, before I move to the next NPC.

I'd like a spellbook for PREPARED casters, which looks like the spellbook for the SPONTANEOUS casters - expanded details of current spells known or prepared. Then when the notes state "cast cast Ferret Weaver's Incantation Of Fiery Words" I have some idea what it does, without having to

1) determine on the fly which book it comes from

2) find the book

3) find the spell in the book

Phew!

-- 
Neil Taylor "Creo Imaginem Mente"
ArM Code 1.5 5++ Ca++ R++p H++ ?L Y(96) T(5)- SG+++ G++++ P++ HoH(Ma++ Q+ Hg+) Fz(E)++ C++ :-) Cd++
Saga site at http://homepage.ntlworld.com/saxum.caribetum/
Sub Rosa Ars Magica zine - https://www.facebook.com/subrosamagazine/


Re: output only prepared spells

@Ferret_Dave
 

I know I can do that, but then that's just a list of spell names, whereas what we want is the full spell descriptions, *just* for the prepared spells.

Means that the big-bad has maybe 2-3 pages of spells rather than 23(!) and all the spell area effect/range/affect calculations are all done.


Re: output only prepared spells

Paul Grosse
 

I make prepared spell lists for different situations and then it has a page of just those with check boxes


On Sun, Dec 1, 2019 at 6:43 PM, ferret.griffin+io via Groups.Io
<ferret.griffin+io@...> wrote:

Greetings,

Is there a way (for a high level cleric) to output only the spells that have been prepared, rather than all that are known ? 
And I'm thinking here of the 'full' spell description rather than just a list of spell names...

I.e for the Ref to use for a high level baddie and not have to print out dozens of pages of irrelevant spells, but still have all the details immediately to hand ...

 

--
--Paul Grosse
--PCGen BoD, PR Silverback
@Nylanfs


output only prepared spells

@Ferret_Dave
 

Greetings,

Is there a way (for a high level cleric) to output only the spells that have been prepared, rather than all that are known ? 
And I'm thinking here of the 'full' spell description rather than just a list of spell names...

I.e for the Ref to use for a high level baddie and not have to print out dozens of pages of irrelevant spells, but still have all the details immediately to hand ...

 


Re: situation tag via equipment?

@Ferret_Dave
 

Sorry, bad examples, I had added both the magnifying glass (Fine detail) and scales (By weight) as two situational skills, and managed to paste an example of half of each instead of just one...
Worked out that the problem was that I'd left the equipment in a backpack rather than equipping it !

Works correctly as expected.
 
 


Re: Using .FORGET on a spell

markjmeans
 

The problem with FORGET is that many sources may refer to the ability/item/spell/skill/whatever that you want removed. I have run across this situation in PFS source material that, among other things, bars almost all crafting feats. The solution for PFS support was to add a PRExxx that makes it unavailable (and thus red in the chooser) to all PCs, and so that a player directly add it. Then, just in case there is some other ability or thing that refers to it and tries to add it to the PC, I also use CLEAR the description and  replace it with text that states this feat is not available in PFS. Also, some things in PCGen can be set to VISIBILITY:HIDDEN and some cannot. For those that can be hidden, you can use that as a third method to block it’s use and display on the character sheet.

 

From: main@pcgen.groups.io <main@pcgen.groups.io> On Behalf Of "Bryan Hanson
Sent: Sunday, December 01, 2019 06:57
To: main@pcgen.groups.io
Subject: [pcgen] Using .FORGET on a spell

 

I am crossposting this from pcgenlstfilehelp to see if anyone here may know the answer to my question.  It has not garnered any response on that group. 

 have tried searching and don't know if I am doing something wrong, this is a bug (known or not), or just not supported.  (or how it should work)

For some reason .FORGET doesn't seem to work for me on a spell. I went back and recreated it with just the RSRD and a simple homebrew LST to make sure it was not something else in the datasets causing an issue.  

After trying this and reloading everything (even exiting the program just to make sure) 

Alarm.FORGET

And the spell is still showing up on the spell list for known spells.  What is odd is that I see an error introduced in the rsrd_kits.lst file with an unconstructed reference tot he spell Alarm so i am assuming it is actually forgetting it.  Likely the line in that file with the error is 

SPELLS:SPELLBOOK=Prepared Spells|Daze|Detect Magic=2|Resistance|Alarm|Charm Person|Color Spray|Mage Armor|Magic Missile=2|Blur|Bull's Strength|Darkness|Fox's Cunning|See Invisibility|Dispel Magic|Displacement|Fly|Lightning Bolt|Invisibility (Greater)|Phantasmal Killer|Scrying|Stoneskin|Hold Monster|Lightning Bolt[Empower Spell]|Wall of Force


So the question is if it is forgetting the spell, why is it showing up on the spell list of known spells  in the program?  Using a different spell (Hideous Laughter) which does NOT throw any errors 

Hideous Laughter.FORGET

I see the same thing.  Datasets load fine this time and show green. but when I go to add spells it is still on the list.  

I can .MOD and .COPY the spell just fine, it is when i just use .FORGET it doesn't seem to go away from the spell list. 


Am i doing something wrong or is this an issue?

Bryan