Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add GrantItem RE for Raise a Shield to Shields of the Spirit spell effect #18343

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

reaperzeus
Copy link

Update spell-effect-shields-of-the-spirit.json

Added GrantItem Rule Element to the Shields of the Spirit spell effect that applies "Effect: Raise a Shield"

Update spell-effect-shields-of-the-spirit.json

Added GrantItem Rule Element to the Shields of the Spirit spell effect that applies "Effect: Raise a Shield"
},
{
"key": "GrantItem",
"uuid": "Compendium.pf2e.equipment-effects.Item.2YgXoHvJfrDHucMr",
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This uuid should have been converted on extract to: "Compendium.pf2e.equipment-effects.Item.Effect: Raise a Shield".
I suspect this was hand-built rather than extracted, as the keys aren't sorted.
Additionally, the effect description should probably be updated.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You're right I totally forgot to change the UUID to the named version. I'll fix that (pending guidance on the below to do it all at once)

In what order should the keys be sorted? They are currently alphabetical.

The effect description is what's read in the effect on an ally in the aura, who do not get the benefits of the raised shield (until the Greater Security feat which AFAIK is covered by the separate spell effect shields-of-the-spirit-security). It does add that description to the Champion as well even though the Status Bonus doesn't apply to them. Should I figure out how change the description for what's on the Champion vs their allies? I didn't do that since that wasn't done on the effect originally.

I did make this by adding the RE within Foundry and then exporting the JSON to copy the new code into the base effect. How should I do it for something like this? Sorry this is my first time contributing to a big project like this (and using GitHub) so I don't know all the etiquette.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In what order should the keys be sorted? They are currently alphabetical.

Alphabetical would be correct. For example predicate should sorted between key and uuid. This will be automatically handled by the extractor.

The effect description is what's read in the effect on an ally in the aura, who do not get the benefits of the raised shield (until the Greater Security feat which AFAIK is covered by the separate spell effect shields-of-the-spirit-security). It does add that description to the Champion as well even though the Status Bonus doesn't apply to them. Should I figure out how change the description for what's on the Champion vs their allies? I didn't do that since that wasn't done on the effect originally.

The effect is used for both, so try to succinctly describe both. It might be challenging. :)

I did make this by adding the RE within Foundry and then exporting the JSON to copy the new code into the base effect. How should I do it for something like this? Sorry this is my first time contributing to a big project like this (and using GitHub) so I don't know all the etiquette.

Thanks for contributing! Check out wiki.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ahh alphabetical within each one, I see.

Should I close this PR and try again with the normal workflow, or try to salvage this one manually?

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That’s up to you. :)

Per Simon Ward's suggestions:
• Updated the effect's description, explaining what's granted to the Champion and what's granted to their Allies.
• Alphabetized the keys in the new rule element
• Fixed the UUID to the named version
@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
"name": "Spell Effect: Shields of the Spirit",
"system": {
"description": {
"value": "<p>Granted by @UUID[Compendium.pf2e.spells-srd.Item.Shields of the Spirit]</p>\n<p>You gain a +1 status bonus to AC.</p>"
"value": "<p>Granted by @UUID[Compendium.pf2e.spells-srd.Item.Shields of the Spirit]</p><p><strong>Champion:</strong> You Raise your Shield. The effect ends at the start of your next turn or when you're no longer raising your shield.</p><p><strong>Ally:</strong> You gain a +1 status bonus to AC while in the Champion's aura. When an enemy attacks you, they take 1d4 spirit damage.</p>"
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We typically omit the duration as it's in the structured data. Also, the description should only include what the effect actually does, so omit the mention of spirit damage.

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Okay, done! I wasn't sure about the duration since the part of lowering the shield isn't automated. Similarly wasn't sure the extent to which they should have reminders in them.

@simonward simonward added the pr: data update Updates to existing actors and items label Feb 24, 2025
Removed mention of the duration/end conditions from the Champion section, and removed mention of the spirit damage from the Ally section.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
pr: data update Updates to existing actors and items
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants