4 hours ago, Aluthin77 said:

Thanks Just checked mine but it isn't in as that either lol

You'd have to delete your custom one first and restart if you haven't

2 hours ago, Darzil said:

You'd have to delete your custom one first and restart if you haven't

Thanks just done that and found it, all sorted.

Love the builder, it's pretty much a must have now with so many books out. I do have one issue with it. The defensive and deflection qualities don't seem to stack with armor. The wording on those two qualities are "A character wielding a weapon with the Defensive quality increases his melee defense by the weapon's Defensive rating" and "An item with the Deflection quality increases the wearer's ranged defense equal to its Deflection rating." Edge of Empire pg 156. The official ruling in the FAQs (question 2) is: "When a character can choose between two static defense values, (for example, if he is in cover and is wearing armor that has a defense value), he chooses the better of the two values. Then any armor, talents, and item qualities he has that “increase” his defense value are added to the static value he chose." The defensive and deflection qualities should, therefore, stack with armor because armor provides a static value while those two qualities say they increase defenses. Item qualities seem to be baked into the program, so I don't think I can change them myself.

With all due respect, that doesn't just seem to fly in the face of the FAQ, it directly contradicts it. The FAQ, as quoted above, says that you use the highest STATIC defense, not the item that provides the highest value. And it says that " any armor, talents, and item qualities he has that 'increase' his defense value are added to the static value he chose." Any , as in, all of the ones you have , and certainly not none of them because you pick only the highest one and add nothing to it. So the armored robes would provide the highest static defense (indeed, the only static defense) of 1. The weapons have no inherent defense, but between the lorrdian gemstone, curved hilt, and riot shield, he has 5 ranks of defensive and 4 of deflection, which "increase" defense values by one each. Admittedly, defensive training does nothing here because it specifically says it replaces any defensive qualities on the weapon.

Defenses according to the FAQ: 6 melee, 5 ranged

I for one am disinclined to take even the lead developers word for something that directly contradicts published text, while leaving so many questions unanswered. How does it interact with talents like sixth sense? How do you justify allowing sixth sense to increase whatever defense you've selected as your best (the character builder currently does this), but not a defensive weapon based on almost exactly the same wording? Supposing you have a weapon with defensive 3 (but no reflective), and a personal shield generator (melee and ranged defense 2). Do you have to pick one of them and have defenses of either 3/0 or 2/2, or can you use the weapon's melee defense and the armor's ranged defense? I can't answer those questions purely on the quoted Sam Steward passage. I can answer them based solely on the FAQ. If Sam Steward wants a one source concept, he should flesh it out and print new errata.

No the Defensive trait is actually, "grants the user defense X" and not ADDs X defense.

But as you have already stated that the developer is incorrect, then there is little anyone else can do to tell you otherwise. But as far as the Generator is concerend, the creator only has it work according to the actual rules, not your interpretations of them...so either 1) learn to deal with your house rules, 2) create your own program or 3) follow what the rules actually state

1 hour ago, JalekZem said:

No the Defensive trait is actually, "grants the user defense X" and not ADDs X defense.

But as you have already stated that the developer is incorrect, then there is little anyone else can do to tell you otherwise. But as far as the Generator is concerend, the creator only has it work according to the actual rules, not your interpretations of them...so either 1) learn to deal with your house rules, 2) create your own program or 3) follow what the rules actually state

while you are correct, your phrasing/tone was a little harsh to venatus. he's apparently new to the game/forum, maybe we could all try to be a little nicer to newcomers to encourage growth in our hobby (and FFG star wars in particular), more customers for FFG star wars means they're more inclined to keep the license longer and produce more books.

On 5/2/2017 at 7:33 PM, Qeyleb said:

I can't work out why all Crafted Cybernetics show Encumbrance 1. The data file clearly has <Encumbrance>0 .

I am also wondering about this. None of the standard cybernetics have encumbrance, and I can't find anything in Special Modifications that would GIVE them an encumbrance value, but they ALL appear to have one in the Character Generator Wizards. Is this just a typo in the Cybernetics crafting wizards?

Thanks for all your hard work, this program truly is amazing.

1 hour ago, Zero Trellian said:

I am also wondering about this. None of the standard cybernetics have encumbrance, and I can't find anything in Special Modifications that would GIVE them an encumbrance value, but they ALL appear to have one in the Character Generator Wizards. Is this just a typo in the Cybernetics crafting wizards?

Sounds from this post like it'll be fixed in next released version :

11 hours ago, JalekZem said:

No the Defensive trait is actually, "grants the user defense X" and not ADDs X defense.

But as you have already stated that the developer is incorrect, then there is little anyone else can do to tell you otherwise. But as far as the Generator is concerend, the creator only has it work according to the actual rules, not your interpretations of them...so either 1) learn to deal with your house rules, 2) create your own program or 3) follow what the rules actually state

"DEFENSIVE (PASSIVE) Defensive weapons are particularly good at fending off incoming melee attacks. A character wielding a weapon with the Defensive quality increases his melee defense by the weapon's Defensive rating." Edge of the Empire, pg 156.

"DEFENSIVE (PASSIVE) Defensive weapons are particularly good at fending off incoming melee attacks. A character wielding a weapon with the Defensive quality increases his melee defense by the weapon's Defensive rating." Age of Rebellion, pg 169.

"DEFENSIVE (PASSIVE) Defensive weapons are particularly good at fending off incoming melee attacks. A character wielding a weapon with the Defensive quality increases his melee defense by the weapon’s Defensive rating." Force and Destiny, pg 163.

So... why is it "actually" granting a static defense? As to what is the "actual" rules and what is "my interpretations," words have objective meaning. I'm not going to rehash my last post, but there is just no reasonable way to interpret what the rulebook and the FAQ say as compatible with what Sam Steward said. I'm not saying he's "wrong," ultimately he has the authority to change the rules as he sees fit. Whether you choose to believe that a forum post trumps published material is your choice, but it isn't a question of interpretation and the answer isn't clearly you're right and I'm wrong. So before you go insulting people, you might want to check your facts and assumptions.

The character generator follows the rules as most recently established by developers, be it through published material or Q&A responses.

It's not a perfect system, but considering errata seems to not be on the horizon (it hasn't been updated in a long, long time), it's the most consistent option available.

Oggdude's generator is going to stick with whatever foolish answers Sam Stewart chooses to give, regardless of whether Sam has contradicted what was previously unambiguous RAW. It's just something that we have to live with. Until such time as Oggdude graciously makes his source code available (which I expect will be never), we can't do anything about 'fixing' the way the app works so that it conforms to how we run our own games (if we as GMs choose to ignore silly dev rulings).

Just carry and show the items with Defensive or Deflection, it'll be on the PCS to remember to add that defense to their static defense rating when they equip the gear while at your table. My table also prefers the original ruling, and if someone forgets to add an extra setback or two, is on them.

11 hours ago, Tom Cruise said:

The character generator follows the rules as most recently established by developers, be it through published material or Q&A responses.

It's not a perfect system, but considering errata seems to not be on the horizon (it hasn't been updated in a long, long time), it's the most consistent option available.

That's a perfectly reasonable position. When I originally posted the question I was unaware of these new rulings by Sam Steward, but I have no problem with Oggdude choosing to follow them. I just felt the need to explain that my position was equally reasonable. Especially when people started getting offensive about it. Speaking of, where does one look for these unpublished rules changes?

1 hour ago, venatus said:

where does one look for these unpublished rules changes?

FFG Developer Answered Questions

10 hours ago, ShadoWarrior said:

FFG Developer Answered Questions

Thanks

Since this seems to be a contentious topic:

15 minutes ago, OggDude said:

Since this seems to be a contentious topic:

Wow. Everyone, if you have not already donated, now is the time.

3 hours ago, OggDude said:

Since this seems to be a contentious topic:

This is an awesome addition to an already awesome program, thanks OggDude!

Is it available in the program now? I am not seeing it available on my installation. It is showing that I am running version version 2.1.0.1 (the web install, which should automatically DL new updates). I have tried closing the program and restarting it, to que the download, but nothing yet.

Thanks again for all of your hard work. It really is greatly appreciated.

It'll be in the next release. Speaking of which, I finally added all the adversaries and encounters for FLT (there was a bunch of them; took forever). I just need to add changes to the main data, do a couple of more ship images and silhouettes, and send everything through the translator one more time. Then, I think it'll be ready. Maybe by Monday, I'm hoping.

19 minutes ago, OggDude said:

It'll be in the next release. Speaking of which, I finally added all the adversaries and encounters for FLT (there was a bunch of them; took forever). I just need to add changes to the main data, do a couple of more ship images and silhouettes, and send everything through the translator one more time. Then, I think it'll be ready. Maybe by Monday, I'm hoping.

That's excellent. Will the crafted cybernetics showing encumbrance values be fixed in that release as well?

Also, I noticed that the Manipulate Force Power: Control Mechanics is not showing Force Dice for the Mechanic's skill - 3rd option on the far left tree, I edited the data file in my own version to allow this, but it should probably be in the core settings for the program.

Thank you again for your time and dedication to the SW universe.

If there's any last minute bugs to report, now's the time. The release is ready, just giving it a bit of a shakedown. I may release tomorrow unless something comes up.

Oh, and I fixed the Control: Mechanics ability. In fact, here's everything I fixed for this release. If you've found something that's not here, please let me know:

Data Fixes:

• Unmatched Devastation was misspelled. If this signature ability has been purchased for a character, it'll need to be purchased again.
• The Holocron of Outer Rim and Piloting Space had the wrong price. It is now 100,000.
• Suljo Warde's Holocron also had an incorrect price. It, too, has been fixed.
• Added the holocron found on the "Sanctuary" from the "Lessons from the Past" adventure in the back of the Force and Destiny Core Rulebook.
• The Mk. III Modular Backpack increased encumbrance threshold by 3. It is now properly set to 2.
• The Mk. IV Modular Backpack was misspelled. It is now spelled correctly.
• The Saber Throw (Improved) talent was incorrectly set to be an action. It is now passive.
• The Menace talent was incorrectly set as a Force talent. This has been fixed.
• The Burly talent was lowering Cumbersome qualities, but not encumbrance. It is now also lowering encumbrance.
• The Tarvix adversary from the "Chronicles of the Gatekeeper" import directory had a formatting issue in its special ability. This has been fixed.
• Added "Powered Melee" to the available categories of the "Custom Grip" attachment.
• Crash Gear from "Endless Vigil" had an incorrect soak value. It is now correctly set to 1.
• Added weapon effects to the Powerful Blast talent. Any weapon with the Blast quality will now get a +1 to Blast, and all mines and charges will get a +1 to damage. Items must be held or equipped to get these bonuses.
• Changed the Armored Drop Suit vehicle's silhouette to 1.
• The "Control: Mechanics" Force ability of Manipulate was missing the die modifier for the Mechanics skill. If purchased, it will now show Force dice for the Mechanics dice pool.
  

Code Fixes:

• The default work directory in AppData was, once again, not being created when needed. This was due to the major changes I made in settings and data paths. This has been fixed once again.
• In the Data Editor, when adding a custom skill, changing the source would cause an exception. This has been fixed.
• In Item Attachments, when choosing a vehicle attachment that increases a defense zone, all such mods would be combined into a single selection. You may now, once again, make individual selections for each mod.
• In the Career pane, you could resize the columns of the career skill list. You can no longer do this.
• In Encounter in GM Tools, gunner roster positions were not being displayed. This was due to the new HTML processor being a lot more picky about structure than the old IE-based web control. Gunner positions are now displayed properly.
• In Encounters in GM Tools, minion pips in rosters would show a destroyed ship at trauma threshold, instead of trauma threshold + 1. This has been fixed.
• In Encounters in GM Tools, minion ship thresholds and counts in rosters showed an ellipse instead of a circle. This has been fixed.
• In Encounter in GM Tools, if you created a roster, and then modified the alternative name of an adversary in the roster, the new name would not show up in the roster. The roster will now be updated after any alternate name change.
• In GM Tools, numeric up/down controls inside grids were using an older version of the control that requires a click outside the control before value changes take effect. This old version has been removed and GM Tools grids are now using the proper control. This means that value changes take effect as soon as the value of the up/down control is changed.
• In Groups, base inventory did not support crafted items. This caused crafted items transferred to the base to disappear. This now works properly.
• In the Morality pane, when changing morality, the pair grid would lose track of which pair was selected. This caused the notes section to disappear. This should no longer happen.
• In the Crafting dialog, fixed a few issues with the "Two-Handed" Lightsaber craft effect.
• When changing the skin from the launcher, the change would not take affect until after the launcher was closed. Skin changes will now take affect immediately.
• Using GM Grants on a character with obligation or duty options would reset the options the first time GM Grants was used. After that, it kept the setting. This odd behavior has been resolved.
• In the Droid Tech specialization, there should have been a line from Hidden Storage to Deft Maker on the right of the tree. This has been fixed.
• In the Crafting Dialog, 0 encumbrance items from templates would always end up with 1 encumbrance, even if encumbrance didn't change. Encumbrance will now only be updated if there was an actual change.
  

On 3/20/2017 at 4:42 PM, Arrakus said:

I posted this some time back.

Was wondering if it was considered for implementation.

Thanks.

I did not see a "New Features" section. So I am curious on if this was able to be successfully implemented.

Other than that, as always, outstanding job. Truely impressive.

Meaning to ask this. Sometime ago, you asked if there was a desire to have this program be compatible with Roll20. I am forsure interested and would very much like to see this happen. There is a popular character sheet app on Roll20 and I know of the author. I can reach out to make contact if that has not been done already.

Just not sure how much of priority this would be.

15 minutes ago, OggDude said:

• In the Crafting Dialog, 0 encumbrance items from templates would always end up with 1 encumbrance, even if encumbrance didn't change. Encumbrance will now only be updated if there was an actual change.

Just to clarify, you specifically mention here IF encumbrance changes. Is this in reference to adding an inbuilt weapon? Specifically in regards to a cybernetic appendage or implant, shouldn't that encumbrance become absorbed into the function of the cybernetic, and therefore show no encumbrance value?

As examples, I would point to the Repulsor Fist, Implant Armor, Cybernetic Weapon Implant, and Cyberscanner Limb, all of which have inbuilt "items" that would normally add encumbrance, but do not appear to do so in cybernetic form. Is there information somewhere that states otherwise?

Thanks again for your incredible work with the generator.

10 minutes ago, Arrakus said:

I did not see a "New Features" section. So I am curious on if this was able to be successfully implemented.

Other than that, as always, outstanding job. Truely impressive.

Meaning to ask this. Sometime ago, you asked if there was a desire to have this program be compatible with Roll20. I am forsure interested and would very much like to see this happen. There is a popular character sheet app on Roll20 and I know of the author. I can reach out to make contact if that has not been done already.

Just not sure how much of priority this would be.

+1 on the Roll20 export feature. That would be absolutely fantastic, and such a HUGE timesaver.