foundryvtt-lancer
foundryvtt-lancer copied to clipboard
Eranziel
2.0 - Don't allow NPC Traits to be marked as destroyed
Resolves https://github.com/Eranziel/foundryvtt-lancer/issues/394
As per discussion there, this may not be something you intend to 'fix':
I think this is an important note to have for if/when we do implement system/weapon destruction automation (NPC or otherwise). Though I suspect the existence of the destroyed toggle is fine and should probably be won't fix, since it's not going to simplify the underlying code.
However, I believe the underlying bug is still valid, in that NPC traits are indestructible, and to assist new players & DMs the Foundry System should mimic the expected behaviour from the System rules.
Regardless, this was super easy to do - so if you choose not to merge it, no worries.
Import the NpcFeatureType Enum, explicitly ignore NPC features with item.system.type "Trait" when returning the Context Menu.
I am a bit torn on this one, because I think it's sometimes useful to be able to mark a trait "destroyed" for other bookkeeping purposes. That said, should probably just merge it. It would help avoid confusion.
Eh, my 2 copper these days is to keep the current functionality. More flexible that way.
Perhaps a more suitable solution is to conditionally change the wording of the context menu to avoid confusion?
AFAIK there isn't automation tied to destroyed features right now, so the issue comes from how the wording collides with the game rules.
Off the top of my head, something like "Hide" that accomplishes the same function as "Mark as destroyed" currently so you have the flexibility to use it for bookkeeping as mentioned, while also not using any words a new player might expect to have meaning (Destroyed, disabled). This also means that just by clicking around on the context menus, any new players can tell that there is definitely a difference :)
I do like the idea of keeping the functionality but just changing the wording. "Disabled" might be good, actually? "Destroyed" has a mechanical meaning in Lancer, a "disabled" system doesn't really (unless I'm forgetting something).
@codyhod I didn't mean to close this PR, sorry. It should target master now, if you want to re-create it.
No worries, was thinking about how to make it work without writing bad code and got distracted with other projects.
The issue is still open, I'll come back to it at some point :)