Active Framework Designers

Talk about whatever topic you'd like, RPG related or not. (But please discuss things related to our software in the Tools section, below.)

Moderators: dorpond, trevor, Azhrei

Lee
Dragon
Posts: 958
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2011 2:07 am

Active Framework Designers

Post by Lee »

Hi everyone,

This is a roll call to all active framework designers. I need to bounce some stuff off of you all so please make a post :) If you prefer being contacted through email, please provide the address.

Thanks.

User avatar
Toby
Giant
Posts: 109
Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2012 12:46 am
Location: Georgia
Contact:

Re: Active Framework Designers

Post by Toby »

I'm continually working on my framework for Battlelords of the 23rd Century. I'm not sure that I will ever make it available, though I may work with the company to make it available. They seem to like to hang on tight to their IP.

Toby

User avatar
Xaelvaen
Dragon
Posts: 498
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2011 9:49 pm
Location: Somewhere between Heaven and Hell

Re: Active Framework Designers

Post by Xaelvaen »

I suppose that depends on what you mean by 'active' heh. I hand-write all the frameworks we use for the many different games we play, so I'm constantly coding frameworks. I just don't really publish them on here because I don't automate a lot of content or 'safeguard' it for online play. However, for whatever your needs be, if I can assist, I'll gladly do so.
"An arrogant person considers himself perfect. This is the chief harm of arrogance. It interferes with a person's main task in life - becoming a better person." - Leo Tolstoy


User avatar
Full Bleed
Demigod
Posts: 4736
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 11:53 am
Location: FL

Re: Active Framework Designers

Post by Full Bleed »

I try to add a handful of new features to my Pathfinder framework every month... especially as players advance and need new abilities created to mesh with the existing system. And when I don't have anything like that to add, I pull a feature or two from my own wish-list that might make GMing a little easier. I hesitate to call myself a "framework designer" though... as I feel more like a slow and steady brick layer.
Maptool is the Millennium Falcon of VTT's -- "She may not look like much, but she's got it where it counts."

Lee
Dragon
Posts: 958
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2011 2:07 am

Re: Active Framework Designers

Post by Lee »

Thanks for the replies so far. I hope more will chime in as we go.

This is more of a launching thread for more specific topics regarding the expanding MT's ease of use, balanced against the need to be system agnostic. The top 3 things on the table are:
  • I'm currently putting together a generic architecture/approach to initiating campaign building; with the entry point being setting the statistical and informational foundation for character generation.
  • I'm writing an expansion (though separate) MT's dice expression functionality, making it broader while keeping it agnostic.
  • Data management beyond the current Token model
There are more, but I'll limit it to these 3 until they have traction before moving to other things. So, essentially, this thread is to collate contact information, while 3 other threads will start on these 3 topics.

Edit: I forgot to mention that this is also to gather contact information to ask for permission to position framework availability on a more visible setting, and the general "feelings" of those that develop them with regard to this. This is in relation to my fork's impending launch.
Last edited by Lee on Thu Aug 29, 2013 11:50 am, edited 3 times in total.

Lee
Dragon
Posts: 958
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2011 2:07 am

Re: Active Framework Designers

Post by Lee »

Full Bleed wrote:I hesitate to call myself a "framework designer" though... as I feel more like a slow and steady brick layer.
:lol: As do I think of myself while writing my L5R framework. A harder system to nail down to a framework, I haven't seen. It's very fanciful, thereby, arbitrary where there should be more cohesion.

But if it's slow we are, then that's all the community's got; better that than nothing at all :lol:

User avatar
Bhoritz
Giant
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2010 10:31 am
Contact:

Re: Active Framework Designers

Post by Bhoritz »

I don't know if I am really a framework designer. I steal good ideas from better peoples and I use them to fit my own needs. They are quite crude and, given the way I use them, quite peculiars. They are available on my blog (link below).

So designer, not much, but active, yes...

User avatar
CoveredInFish
Demigod
Posts: 3104
Joined: Mon Jun 29, 2009 10:37 am
Location: Germany
Contact:

Re: Active Framework Designers

Post by CoveredInFish »

I have developed a number of frameworks and would update them to solve urgent issues or serious bugs. I wouldnt consider me an "active" developer/designer right now, since the stuff I did is at a point I consider it "done" and I have no current need for something else :)

User avatar
aliasmask
RPTools Team
Posts: 9024
Joined: Tue Nov 10, 2009 6:11 pm
Location: Bay Area

Re: Active Framework Designers

Post by aliasmask »

I'm far from active, but I have lots of opinions. Most of the stuff I create I try to make generic enough to be reused while testing the limits of MT macroscript. This includes some thought and research on data structure models and framework building tools.

User avatar
Full Bleed
Demigod
Posts: 4736
Joined: Sun Feb 25, 2007 11:53 am
Location: FL

Re: Active Framework Designers

Post by Full Bleed »

Lee wrote:
  • I'm currently putting together a generic architecture/approach to initiating campaign building; with the entry point being setting the statistical and informational foundation for character generation.
  • I'm writing an expansion (though separate) MT's dice expression functionality, making it broader while keeping it agnostic.
  • Data management beyond the current Token model
#1 and #3 are the most interesting to me. I'm all for anything that makes storing and using data easier and faster. I still feel that the focus on scripting in MT has left a lot of users behind or pushed them along to other VTTs.

I noted, a very long time ago, that MacroscripT was a dual edged sword. Nearly everything awesome in MT has been done using it for a very long time. The last two cool features added to the MT core were probably the onTokenMove event (and that requires scripting to be useful) and, before that, probably the initiative panel... so that's getting pretty far back. But, for the most part, MT has been all about MacroscripT for years with very little core design improvements made. Heck, even now, I know better than to suggest features that aren't scripting-centric. There is a chance that something with script will get in over the next year... virtually zero chance to see any new "features" though.
Maptool is the Millennium Falcon of VTT's -- "She may not look like much, but she's got it where it counts."

User avatar
Xaelvaen
Dragon
Posts: 498
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2011 9:49 pm
Location: Somewhere between Heaven and Hell

Re: Active Framework Designers

Post by Xaelvaen »

Hmm - the razor-thin line is drawn here I think. I'll be as concise as I can:

1 - This is how I already approach building a framework for the next system we play. Create Properties, create macros to alter these properties, etc. I'm interested to see how you could possibly simplify this process and remain agnostic. Individual scripting seems to be the only way to go here, especially since I do custom frame layouts for the 'character creation' process, depending upon the focus of the system in question.

2 - I'm always a fan of more dice expressions - in example, it'd be nice to have a built-in White-Wolf like dice expression that can show a list of rolls and auto-count the successes, without needing a 'decent' sized macro to do so.

3 - Lib:Tokens are the bread and butter for coding a campaign framework, so any way to make this data flow faster is certainly worth it.

All in all, the line boils down to I'm not willing to lose -any- of the power of Maptools for even a singular shiny interface doodad - but I think you know this already. There are several scripting paths, however, that would be ridiculously more functional (and user-friendly) than the complexity of coding they entail. Movement-counting would be the first of this list of over-complicated situations I'd throw in there. For me, movement-counting and locking is part of building a framework because it directly relates to the campaign/token properties.

As far as contact information, I check this site more than my email ;)

And finally, to the point of framework availability, I don't 'safeguard' my frameworks for online play. Anyone can do anything out of sequence, poke around on buttons, 'cheat', and more - so I don't really find them worthy of uploading for anyone to grab whenever, since there are so many 'better' more protected frameworks already out there. Mine are designed for incredibly fast play because we use them for projector-based tabletop, not online. However, in the past, when asked for these frameworks, I freely share them. So, should the more 'framework-lite' approach be desired for your inquiry, my feelings would be to list them anonymously. I'm really not fond of 'credit where credit is due' when I'm using a free, non-profit tool like Maptools.
"An arrogant person considers himself perfect. This is the chief harm of arrogance. It interferes with a person's main task in life - becoming a better person." - Leo Tolstoy

Lee
Dragon
Posts: 958
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2011 2:07 am

Re: Active Framework Designers

Post by Lee »

Well, this is definitely a starting point for much discussion, and I'm sure to keep an open door to opinions and suggestions when the time arrives.

@Xaelvaen, Full Bleed

1 - It is part of the entry concept I plan to execute. Perspectives have been discussed before, and this phase primarily focus on the creative aspect of using MT; answering the question "Okay, I've loaded the tool. Now, what do I do?" If you launch to design, the initial entry would be a process querying the underlying structure of the framework e.g. stats, the rest at a later time. Stats are tied to dice. Part of the process is marking which is a necessary or optional attribute. It would then lead you to a preference of hosting these: default campaign props, a library token, or even a database. If it's the latter, will it be centralized or distributed? Parts defined here are open to external modification settings created as part of initial process or defined later on. Modifications can overlay. For example a racial and job/class modifications can overlay the generated character, modifying to a final outcome. Modifications can be permanent or temporary.

Once the skeleton is sufficient for quick character generation (just the stats really should be enough), then a GM in design or a player in client view can drop a token on the map and it will trigger the creation/defining process; pulling the structure out from where it was defined (i.e. lib:, campaign props, or db) and arraying them on a dialog. Stats tied to dice will have controls to roll the stat, with a master control to do all in one go.

As a designer adds more stuff to the framework, stuff created with older models will have prompts within their interfaces asking the user to update to requirements etc.

On the player/client view, he should have only the stuff he/she needs to get started quickly. Characters are assigned as usual,and in the event the player doesn't have one assigned yet, he/she should still go through the character generation process, which is limited compared to what the GM can do. Created characters are tied to the data source they were created from so updates can be fed into/read from these sources without having to write macro code for it (of course, one can still write macro code for it). Changing the source would need decoupling from the framework maker.

Apart from a quick character, dice controls, an expression builder, and relevant tools will be present.

There's a lot more planned really. It'll waste time to itemize them all as it is better to talk about it as the actual design process is ongoing

2- The roll expressions MT can employ are quite sufficient. But we all know there are some crazy systems out there that employ variations that MT can't do by default, resulting to macro coding to achieve desired results. I'm making tangible controls that go toward an expression builder. Conversely, the expression builder can be fed a roll directly. Rolls can be saved, and shared to others.

I've expanded rolls to:
  • Reverse keep/drop behavior, if desired. Keeping the lowest roll(s), or dropping the highest.
  • exploding dice can be capped
  • a modifying value can be added to each die in a roll and to the roll total (this should take care of all the funky stuff I saw in other systems)
3- As mentioned, we'll have SQL and tables; not because it is better than what we have now, but because there might be potential users who are more versed with this method, and growing the community of builders is vital. It's at a primitive level right now, but it can already do a lot.

I'm also looking at the Token scheme, working toward what was discussed somewhere else about making the token just what it is supposed to be: a representation of a character on the map. My goal is to make it lightweight. We shouldn't be sending "bulky" tokens across the network in the first place. We all know how that markedly slows things down. The end result might be decoupling the heavier aspects of a token (Individual Fog?) and host it somewhere else, with real changes to the model being the only thing sent to where the data is stored. Lastly, a token should always be up to date on all maps it is in; each a clone that is tied to where its properties are hosted. So, updating Token A on Map 1 will also update Token A on Map 10. Updating can either be concurrently across all map, or on demand, when a switch to another map is made.

Again, a lot more to mention, but I'll stop at these. The specific threads will be more appropriate for detailed discussions.

Thanks.

Edit: I forgot about #4 With regard to framework "visibility", there are 2 aspects. The primary aspect is a more upfront presentation, either within the tool or an external host akin to an app store; answering the user question "This is the game system I'm playing, I wonder if anyone made a framework for it?" with an evident, perhaps urgent, control or link. The secondary aspect comes with designers interested in becoming more connected to those who use their work. This has evident pros and cons that I need not say that come with demand.

Well that's all for now.

User avatar
Xaelvaen
Dragon
Posts: 498
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2011 9:49 pm
Location: Somewhere between Heaven and Hell

Re: Active Framework Designers

Post by Xaelvaen »

I really dig your approach Lee - you are focused -so- well on combiningg everything to make the MT process go more smoothly, without eradicating an existing flavour - at least in theory. I really like your idea for auto-defining character attributes on dropdown - for some situations, so I'd assume (or foolishly hope, take your pick lol) there'd be a way to disable this. In example, I build frames that you fill in the blank to assign token properties, and that way I can even describe the token properties. So instead of just Strength + ________, it gives a description of how strength functions in this particular mechanic, because one word can mean many things to many people. Obviously, the ability to customize this in your MT approach would solve that issue as well =D

Anywho, as I said, I dig the concepts with which you're starting. Once you have your layout and the like, just link me your Kickstarter/etc, I'll be there. =)
"An arrogant person considers himself perfect. This is the chief harm of arrogance. It interferes with a person's main task in life - becoming a better person." - Leo Tolstoy

yorick
Cave Troll
Posts: 93
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2012 8:05 am

Re: Active Framework Designers

Post by yorick »

Semi-active, more handy with duct tape than with design. I've cobbled together a DnD 5e framework from bits and pieces, and I keep adding to it / adjusting it as the 5e rules change.

I'll be following this thread with interest.

Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”