Everyone,
Here is the new spell calculator that will allow Rote Quality and 9/8 again quality: https://www.dropbox.com/s/hrgovs6ykd...lator.zip?dl=0
Thanks Inodiv for pointing this out.
Just an FYI on how this rolling works now is the following:
1. It rolls the initial die pool determined by the Arcana level, Gnosis of the caster, and other bonuses
2. It applies Rote Quality, so it re-rolls all failures
3. It applies the 9/8 again Quality to all combined rolls
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Spell Calculator
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Hardwire99 View PostI was under the impression that they were mutually exclusive, what makes you think that they are not. In the book it just mentions re-rolling the dice that failed. There is nothing that I see that would state that the Rote Quality can be used with the 8/9-Again qualities. If I missed that then please point it out. The Rote Quality is bad enough without adding the 8/9-Again quality also.
Leave a comment:
-
Inodiv is right you can stack 9/8 again on rote quality. I will fix that now and let you know when it is updated.
Leave a comment:
-
I was under the impression that they were mutually exclusive, what makes you think that they are not. In the book it just mentions re-rolling the dice that failed. There is nothing that I see that would state that the Rote Quality can be used with the 8/9-Again qualities. If I missed that then please point it out. The Rote Quality is bad enough without adding the 8/9-Again quality also.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Taldorblackfire View PostHey Inodiv,
Glad this is still working great! What bug do you mean?
They aren't supposed to be mutually exclusive.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Taldorblackfire View PostHey Hardwire99,
No, it does not currently calculate casting time, just the spell casting factors at the moment. Try this link: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/4697fb2oy...UyfCVGgfa?dl=0
That one should work
Leave a comment:
-
This is great, I was thinking about something like this during our last session, thanks so much for sharing.
Leave a comment:
-
Hey Hardwire99,
No, it does not currently calculate casting time, just the spell casting factors at the moment. Try this link: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/4697fb2oy...UyfCVGgfa?dl=0
That one should work
Leave a comment:
-
I can't download the calculator at this time, but I will try later. I don't see where it calculates the Casting time. dose it do that. I.E. every Yantra beyond the first ads another turn to the casting time, casting from a grimiore doubles the ritual time, you can get 1 extra dice per casting interval during ritual casting. ETC.
Leave a comment:
-
Hey Inodiv,
Glad this is still working great! What bug do you mean?
Leave a comment:
-
Swinging back by to say that this is definitely awesome. Been using it to double check some spell numbers when things got complex in my current game.
95% usable in its current state, the only real bug is that 9-again/Rote issue.
Leave a comment:
-
Hey griffalo,
It does work if Advanced Duration is applied, which I believe is the intent. I don't believe there is a way to make Indefinite without having Advanced Duration.
WHW,
I will look into creating a combined spell, though I feel that may in itself be a project of its own since there are a few options you can do with Combined Spells such as having different spell factors for each spell.
Zan
Have you tried using Mono to run the program?
Thanks
Leave a comment:
-
This IS awesome! But in the spirit of wanting someone else to do all the work for me, I have a Mac, and I'm not about to use BootCamp for this. Is there any chance you can write a version that's OSX- or iOS-friendly? Or host it on a site so everyone can use it in a browser?
I too thought the masses needed an app for this as soon as I saw the spell process, but I'm a QA tester, not a developer. I can only break.
Leave a comment:
-
The calculator doesn't allow you to do that. If you pick 9 again and then try to apply Rote Quality, it cancels 9 (or 8) again and applies Rote Quality.
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: