feat: Native CCSS World Settings - Default Section Config by Actor Type

[kgar]

In world settings, for each eligible actor type, allow for setting up default section configuration for each relevant tab. This is to include

• Section Order
• Section Visibility
• Adding/Removing Arbitrary Custom Sections

When adding custom sections and configuring them, Tidy should require only a name for the section. Then, when the relevant sheet is being rendered without local section configs, if it has such a section in it (whether by manually adding one of having an item with that section declared), then the section's order and visibility (and whatever else exists by this time) should be enforced.

Sample use case:

• The GM configures a custom section "Ammo" to appear after "Consumables"
• When a player drops an "Ammo"-sectioned item onto their sheet, then that section should appear after "Consumables"

That is to say, the custom section doesn't have to exist on any of the sheets when configured at the world level. This is opportunistic configuration, meaning it should make a best effort with what is given at the time, based on the GM's preferences in World Settings.

Sample use case - user has override:

• The GM configures a custom section "Ammo" to appear after "Consumables"
• The has a section config which specifies that "Ammo" should be before "Equipment"
• When a player drop an "Ammo"-section item onto their sheet, then that section should appear before "Equipment"

In essence, the sheet's more specific section config settings should completely override the GM's world settings, if specified.

When showing default settings (i.e., the user doesn't have an override in place) on the sheet tab's Section Config application, it should trim down the relevant list of sections to what the user can see on their sheet.

Questions:

When displaying default settings in the sheet's section config, should it 🅰 Show a simplified config setup that is relevant to what sections the user can currently see? 🅱 Show the full list that the GM has specified for that actor type / tab?

✅ Option 🅰 makes more sense, because the GM's fuller view of all the possible tabs they want to organize is going to be too much for a player to deal with and will raise too many questions. We should make it easier for everyone.

[A1exanderWebb]

I likewise think that option A makes the most sense from an ease of use standpoint. I think this would be a helpful enhancement, especially for gms that cycle though a large amount of player characters.