GURPS ATE1 Template File

[TorgSmith]

I have finished the Doc - Medic and uploaded it to gcarepo.
http://www.motoslave.net/gcarepo/view.php?pkgid=182

It requires PK's GURPS After the End 1 Wastelanders.gdf.

I do not know the best way to do this. Is somebody going to collect them into one file as they get deemed fit for consumption?

I kind of would like to do one specialization from each template so they could be checked. Once they are good, I can create the rest of the specializations quite quickly with minimal changes and risks of error.

I anticipate the rest going much quicker than this one did. :)

[TorgSmith]

I have just updated this package. It now include all four specializations.

For those interested in an example of using list injection in an advanced GDF file creation, this has it. The #ChoiceList is providing the injection.

[ericbsmith]

First, let me say this excellent work. I like your use of List injection, something I hadn't considered, but it works perfectly here.

That said, time for my critiques; nothing major, just a few minor corrections and suggestions.

First, I noticed in several places in the selectx() dialogs that for itemswanted() you used the keyword "atleast 1, atmost 100" - while this doesn't technically cause any errors, that keyword doesn't exist. The correct one to use is "upto", and providing an upto limit for itemswanted() is unnecessary in all the instances in this template anyway. The only time I used the upto 100 limit is when I had itemswanted(atleast 0, upto 100) because GCA wigs out if the atleast value is 0 and no upper limit is set.

Next, I notice that the Physiology modifier dialog pops up multiple times, for multiple skills, on adding the template. This gets to feel a little redundant, and in the past I've consolidated the types of dialogs by having the template include a single #InputReplace() directive, with the output being injected into the appropriate skill name extensions in the adds() section. This is especially good for a game like ATE where all the skills are almost certainly going to be for the Human specialty.

In the select4() dialog for:
#newitem(DI:Delusion (“No one will attack a medic who’s healing someone!”)
You somehow inserted slanted double-quotes around the name extension. Unfortunately, these are non-standard ASCII character so GCA won't render them properly when displayed in the select dialog. The quotes can simply be deleted, as you did in the select3() dialog using that same #newitem

In select7() I would remove the generic Survival skill and list all the normal land based Survival specialties instead. Note also that Survival (Radioactive Wasteland) is in the Basic Set, so there's no need to use a #newitem for it here; it also doesn't have a default.

In the[LISTS] for the select9() I was trying to find out why you used atleast 7, upto 8 for the limits, then I saw the note about spending 1 point on unchosen primary or secondary skills. Honestly, for this kind of dialog I would just include all the primary and secondary skills in the list for the select9()

[TorgSmith]

Originally Posted by ericbsmith

First, let me say this excellent work. I like your use of List injection, something I hadn't considered, but it works perfectly here.

That said, time for my critiques; nothing major, just a few minor corrections and suggestions.

Thank you for the feedback.

Originally Posted by ericbsmith

First, I noticed in several places in the selectx() dialogs that for itemswanted() you used the keyword "atleast 1, atmost 100" - while this doesn't technically cause any errors, that keyword doesn't exist. The correct one to use is "upto", and providing an upto limit for itemswanted() is unnecessary in all the instances in this template anyway. The only time I used the upto 100 limit is when I had itemswanted(atleast 0, upto 100) because GCA wigs out if the atleast value is 0 and no upper limit is set.

I was looking at that and did not see any errors so went with it. I will change it as I would prefer it was correct.

Originally Posted by ericbsmith

Next, I notice that the Physiology modifier dialog pops up multiple times, for multiple skills, on adding the template. This gets to feel a little redundant, and in the past I've consolidated the types of dialogs by having the template include a single #InputReplace() directive, with the output being injected into the appropriate skill name extensions in the adds() section. This is especially good for a game like ATE where all the skills are almost certainly going to be for the Human specialty.

They are not all Physiology. Each one has three different skills. I had thought about that and was thinking there is a chance that people would want different things for the different skills. One skill could be planned to be used offensively and another defensively. If the user is not really picky they can just click through.

Originally Posted by ericbsmith

In the select4() dialog for:
#newitem(DI:Delusion (“No one will attack a medic who’s healing someone!”)
You somehow inserted slanted double-quotes around the name extension. Unfortunately, these are non-standard ASCII character so GCA won't render them properly when displayed in the select dialog. The quotes can simply be deleted, as you did in the select3() dialog using that same #newitem

I don't know how many times I have removed those quotation marks. I just checked my base work file and they were there. I have removed them. Lets hope they are not there on the next one I upload. 8O

Originally Posted by ericbsmith

In select7() I would remove the generic Survival skill and list all the normal land based Survival specialties instead. Note also that Survival (Radioactive Wasteland) is in the Basic Set, so there's no need to use a #newitem for it here; it also doesn't have a default.

I could have sworn I looked for the Radioactive Wasteland, guess I missed it.
I will put the land based Survivals in, but I would also want to keep the open one so they could add in their own that might not be in the list.

Originally Posted by ericbsmith

In the[LISTS] for the select9() I was trying to find out why you used atleast 7, upto 8 for the limits, then I saw the note about spending 1 point on unchosen primary or secondary skills. Honestly, for this kind of dialog I would just include all the primary and secondary skills in the list for the select9()

They are only supposed to choose one point so I figured I could end the template with one point available that they could go back and spend if they wanted to. That list is pretty big already so I would kind of like to keep trim.

I am into the Hulk now. I doubt I will get it done tonight, but I should get a ways through it.

[ericbsmith]

Originally Posted by TorgSmith

I was looking at that and did not see any errors so went with it. I will change it as I would prefer it was correct.

Yeah, it wasn't actually causing any errors with the template, I only mention it because of best practices. Five templates later you'll want to use it the "correct" way and it's doing something funky and you won't know why.

Originally Posted by TorgSmith

They are only supposed to choose one point so I figured I could end the template with one point available that they could go back and spend if they wanted to. That list is pretty big already so I would kind of like to keep trim.

That's not how I read it; I think the reason for listing as "spend 1 point" is because each of the eight skills is supposed to have 1 point in it, not because you are limited to only 1 point to pick unchosen primary/secondary skills. That is, I don't see why you can't spend 1 point multiple times on unchosen skills, up to the eight choices available at 1 point each. Templates are not usually that limiting, and often times the final choice list of Background skills is quite large.

Another thing I really like to do with the templates is avoid situations where users are forced to open up the book/PDF in order to actually make the choices in the template. It's one thing to look up what something does, it's another to be forced to do so just to figure out what the choices on the template actually are.

[TorgSmith]

Originally Posted by ericbsmith

That's not how I read it; I think the reason for listing as "spend 1 point" is because each of the eight skills is supposed to have 1 point in it, not because you are limited to only 1 point to pick unchosen primary/secondary skills. That is, I don't see why you can't spend 1 point multiple times on unchosen skills, up to the eight choices available at 1 point each. Templates are not usually that limiting, and often times the final choice list of Background skills is quite large.

Yes, I can see this.

The Hulk is going to take me more time than I expected as I want to get the choice of gargantuan and normal sized in with the x block of choices. It is doable, but I want to put some thought into it so it is not an ugly mess.

I have made the changes to the Doc template and cleaned up some duplicate script. I went ahead and posted it since the Hulk is taking longer than I expected. http://www.motoslave.net/gcarepo/view.php?pkgid=182

[TorgSmith]

Eric, you are doing the following script in the Monster Hunters 1 GDF.

#BuildCharItemList(Advantages where name is "Extra DX", template(#newitem(AD:_Increase or Modify %ListItem%, existing(AD:%ListItem%)))),
AD:Extra DX,

This looks like you are trying to allow the addition of additional levels to the AD:Extra DX when it may exist on the character already.

It looks like it is going through the character that is built up to this point and replacing all occurrences of "AD:Extra DX" with "AD:_Increase or Modify Extra DX".

Is this an accurate description of what is happening?
What is the purpose of "existing()", does it just copy existing properties over to the new advantage?
If it is needed additional times do you recommend creating more with just slight changes in the name of the advantage?

[ericbsmith]

Originally Posted by TorgSmith

Eric, you are doing the following script in the Monster Hunters 1 GDF.

#BuildCharItemList(Advantages where name is "Extra DX", template(#newitem(AD:_Increase or Modify %ListItem%, existing(AD:%ListItem%)))),
AD:Extra DX,

This looks like you are trying to allow the addition of additional levels to the AD:Extra DX when it may exist on the character already.

It looks like it is going through the character that is built up to this point and replacing all occurrences of "AD:Extra DX" with "AD:_Increase or Modify Extra DX".

Is this an accurate description of what is happening?
What is the purpose of "existing()", does it just copy existing properties over to the new advantage?
If it is needed additional times do you recommend creating more with just slight changes in the name of the advantage?

OK, a simple example:

#newitem(AD:_Extra Magery, existing(AD:Magery))

Here I'm creating the advantage _Extra Magery. In a Selectx() window, if you try to add the new advantage _Extra Magery to the character GCA will look for the existing() trait and add that instead, so on the right-hand pane you'll have the existing Magery advantage, and the existing cost won't count against the cost limit for that window.


Now, #BuildCharItemList() allows you to create a list of traits for display in the selectx() dialog using a set of criteria and filling in the list using a predefined template as appears within template() tag. Basically, you can look at traits that the character has already selected and generate a list of traits to add to the selectx() list so that existing traits can have their levels increased or be otherwise modified. I use this in Monster Hunters (and maybe a few other places) to generate a set of "_Increase or Modify" Traits for those character templates which specify something like "or add two more points to an already possessed Secondary skill" or for instances where a leveled advantage is included in more than one advantage list.


In the case you grabbed from Monster Hunters I used #BuildCharItemList() to look for only one specific advantage, Extra DX, because by using the #BuildCharItemList() I can actually create empty lists. That is it will only create the #newitem() for "AD:_Increase or Modify Extra DX" if the character already has the Extra DX advantage; if the Extra DX advantage is not already present on the character the new trait won't be generated.

Now, the final note is that the existing() tag is part of the trait in the #newitem() that is within the template() portion of the #BuildCharItemList().

[TorgSmith]

I left off the #BuildCharItemList() and went with just the #newitem(..., existing()) and it worked like a champ. It was using the correct cost for the AD:Extra ST. Now I am moving forward again. :)

[TorgSmith]

I don't know if anybody can lend a pair of eyes.

I have uploaded the script in its current form here. (Edit: I have removed the link and file as it is no longer needed.)

The issue has to do with the list injection. On the Hulk Bruiser template, it is going through all the SelectX() in the Template section. When it is supposed to work the injected part from the List section, it silently fails. I check the logging window and don't see anything but the #newitem() warnings. It does look like there are more #newitem() warnings than what I would expect, but I don't know how they are generated.

The Doc template is working. There is an issue with what I am giving them to choose from on the background skills, but I can fix that later. There is also an issue with the Striking ST advantage cost with Gigantism on the Hulk template that I will fix later as well.