discussion: rethinking the relationship between parties and Worlds

[rsek]

at least one related system (Dungeon World) already makes the 1 party = 1 world assumption. and FVTT's KB recommends using modules (w/ Compendia) as a way to address the use case of "I want to use this material across multiple campaigns in the same setting":

and now there's GUI tools like the module maker, too, so migrating is less onerous for ppl w/ less technical expertise.

Benefits

• single source of truth for Supply: a world-level settings object. IIRC, settings can be a DataModel, so we can just use our condition meter model for that.
  • retire a bunch of code used to keep supply in sync across multiple PCs.
  • circumvent permissions-related issues? or at least shunt them to SETTINGS_MODIFY instead of requiring ppl to have permission to edit the whole character?
• simplify the shared actor type?
  • shared progress items => progress items in the world collection? i don't hate it. JE-only progress is hypothetical right now, but it'd work pretty well there, too.
  • shared asset items => asset items in the world collection? this makes me uneasy. IME, custom assets are likely to live here even if they're not assigned to a player.
  • shared sheet notes => dump in a JE?

Challenges

• i'll have to write a non-trivial migration :grimacing:

Stuff to think about

• how are related game systems (PbtA, BitD) handling this?
  • Dungeon World has a party tracker that flies out from the actors tab. i like it -- an intuitive place to keep it, IMO
  • haven't used BitD for FVTT yet, but its emphasis on the party/crew as its own character might provide us with the most robust example