RPTools.net

I have incorporated the feedback and here an the idea of what I am aiming for so far. Firstly there seemed to be a large focus on the fact that marking was included and a little bit of consternation due to the perceived fact that the change was 4e specific whilst disregarding the fact that the targe...

This looks like something completely specific to DnD 4E with little application outside of that. IMO, it has no place in a system agnostic MapTool. Well, I think that response is a little overzealous... but there is some truth to it if it builds in the concept of being "marked" and expect...

[quote="Full Bleed"] Arrows are ok... but I think having custom underlays is the way to go to indicate things like threat range and different kinds of targeting (be it called targeted, marked, evaluated, etc.) We've got nice states that are overlays and you see how the community has respon...

I'm not sure how much we need a permanent targetting thing, as much as I'd like to see targetting by "selection." That is, I have my macros for my token that I have imitated, and then I select the tokens I'd like to use the ability on. This way I don't have to remember to unset tokens as ...

I'll have to look at what Craig wrote, but my presumption is that each token has a list of GUIDs of tokens that it is targetting. Your presumption is correct. As well as a list of tokens that are targeting it. The synchronization of target/targeted and the small amount of extra space it takes up wo...

Do any systems other than 4e have a marked relation between tokens? This is starting to sound very system specific... The way marking is used in 4e (a form of taunting) is specific, but you could use the "mark" functionality in other places, anywhere you want the functionality of you can ...

Well, arrows are a good idea, but I think colored lines would still be good too. I mean, when you float over a token it would be the lines affecting just that token that would show. So any token connected to it by say... a green line, would be targetted by the token you floated over, and any token ...

Hmmm, I think the best way to do that is use the /stp command and tables. I've not messed with tables at all, but since with the /stp command you can change properties you can change any of the values the program uses to create new names on token creation (but not existing tokens...) In the not too...

This Thread is so the Visual Representation of Targets/Marks (Not Just 4e)) does not get derailed with comments about macros. I have made modifications that allow me to add/remove targets and marks to tokens I have also started adding the ability for macros to interact to targets and and marks. What...

I am adding the ability to associate Targets and a Mark with tokens in MapTool. The way it works is tokens can have several targets, (as well as several tokens targeting it), Marking works the same way as 4e, a target can only mark 1 and int turn can and only marked by 1 token. At the moment I have ...

You can use any roll for a table call. If no roll is given then it uses the default but it doesn't look as though the new variables work with tables. For Example [Power=10] yields « Power=10 ⇒ Power = 10 = 10 » [d10+Power] yields « d10+Power ⇒ 8 + 10 = 18 » but /table Cards d10+Power yi...

Hello all. I am using some very generic macros to alter things like healing and damage to PC tokens. For instance: Damage /stp [HP=HP-Damage] I hit the macro and supply the damage integer, but when the macro runs, you can't see any output in the chat screen. The macro runs and removes the hitpoints...

jfrazierjr wrote:Also, I just tried the whole roll(x,y) thing inside [] and was told I was a cheater....heh... not exactly what I expected...

Just place a space between the opening square bracket and the roll so
[ roll(x,y)]

So let's say I have a table: MyTable: ------------- 1 Hello 2 World ------------- and then the following macro: [myVar=1] /tbl MyTable myVar It throws an error, undefined variable myVar. This is 1.3.b35. This came up because I was contemplating populating a table with initiative values and token na...

A good discussion though Craig I agree! This is an excellent discussion. With one exception, I haven't interfered with the execution of any of the original commands. Instead I've added new methods/fields/properties to existing classes. That way the existing commands can still use the old methods an...