Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add common rune magic when embedding a cult #153

Closed
wake42 opened this issue Jan 4, 2022 · 5 comments · Fixed by #529
Closed

Add common rune magic when embedding a cult #153

wake42 opened this issue Jan 4, 2022 · 5 comments · Fixed by #529
Assignees
Labels
type: enhancement Improvement to existing feature. Use "feat: " commit message
Milestone

Comments

@wake42
Copy link
Collaborator

wake42 commented Jan 4, 2022

When adding a cult to an actor all the runemagic that is common to that cult should also be added.

I see two ways of doing this (and I'm leaning towards option 2)

1. Refactor the cult/runeMagic connection

so that cult has a list of runeMagic items (now the link is on the runeMagic item, pointing to what cult it belongs to). The list would need to contain an object like

{
  originId: string, // the uuid of a runeMagic, for example pointing to a runeMagic compendium
  embeddedId: string // the id of the runeMagic after it is embedded in the actor (empty for world items)
}

One downside of this refactoring is that if you have a runeMagic item and want to roll on that, you need to go through all items in the actor to find the corresponding cult since the link is the other way around.

2. Add a list of runemagic uuid rqid to cult

but keep the runeMagic items pointing to cults. The advantage of this is that the refactoring is much smaller.
One should be able to drag multiple runeMagic items to a cult and also have a way of editing/removing from that list.

See also #236

@wake42 wake42 added the type: enhancement Improvement to existing feature. Use "feat: " commit message label Jan 4, 2022
@wake42 wake42 added this to the release milestone Jan 4, 2022
@Moonpile
Copy link
Contributor

Moonpile commented Jan 4, 2022

Remember that some cults don't have all the common rune magic. For the list see RQG starting at page 289.

@wake42
Copy link
Collaborator Author

wake42 commented Jan 4, 2022

Yes, that's why we can't use a default list, but have to embed the runeMagic list on each cult.

@wake42 wake42 added type: feature New feature not currently present. Use "feat: " commit message and removed type: enhancement Improvement to existing feature. Use "feat: " commit message labels Mar 1, 2022
@wake42 wake42 mentioned this issue Mar 6, 2022
15 tasks
@wake42 wake42 modified the milestones: release, Alpha Release Mar 6, 2022
@wake42 wake42 added this to the 2. Character creation stage 2 milestone Mar 19, 2022
@wake42 wake42 added type: enhancement Improvement to existing feature. Use "feat: " commit message and removed type: feature New feature not currently present. Use "feat: " commit message labels Aug 14, 2022
@wake42 wake42 modified the milestones: 1.18.0, 1.19.0 Sep 8, 2022
@Moonpile
Copy link
Contributor

There should be some way of collapsing or filtering out the common rune magic so that it's easy to see the special rune magic.

@wake42
Copy link
Collaborator Author

wake42 commented Apr 25, 2023

Maybe marking the "common" spells in the rune magic table is enough? You can always rearrange your spells in the order you like them.

@Moonpile
Copy link
Contributor

Maybe marking the "common" spells in the rune magic table is enough? You can always rearrange your spells in the order you like them.

I ended up moving the special rune magic to the top for my pre-gens, but this is one where multiple people said they'd like to be able to focus on just the special Rune Magic. Really with one or two exceptions in the common stuff, you won't care about the common stuff much of the time.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
type: enhancement Improvement to existing feature. Use "feat: " commit message
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants