# Feats Database??



## tjoneslo (Dec 27, 2004)

As a sub-forumn to this one, there is a new Feats database. Can someone (perhaps michael) let us know about this project?

Are you planning on entering all of the SRD feats?

I have two netbook collections of feats (Gryphon's netbook of feats by Robert Smith) and the FanCC's Netbook of feats. Are you going to be adding these as well? 

Are these feats for D&D only or are you going to have a way of distingusing feats for D20 Modern? How about other D20 games?

Is there a way to add commments?


----------



## Piratecat (Dec 27, 2004)

Off to Meta, where I know Michael will see it!


----------



## Michael Morris (Dec 27, 2004)

tjoneslo said:
			
		

> As a sub-forumn to this one, there is a new Feats database. Can someone (perhaps michael) let us know about this project?
> 
> Are you planning on entering all of the SRD feats?




Yes.



> I have two netbook collections of feats (Gryphon's netbook of feats by Robert Smith) and the FanCC's Netbook of feats. Are you going to be adding these as well?




Once I'm satisfied the bugs are shaken out of the editor and the new postings mechanics I'll open this up so that anyone can add feats to the database.



> Are these feats for D&D only or are you going to have a way of distingusing feats for D20 Modern? How about other D20 games?




The feats will be for all d20 games.  The system allows you to search according to terms so you can find feats from a specific book or source.  You can also sort feats by two terms instead of the usual 1 vbulletin allows.  By default the system sorts by name and doesn't use a second term.  Another fun setup is to sort by feat type and then by name.  You can also sort by prerequisites then by name.



> Is there a way to add commments?




Yes, when I turn it on   Again, this is still being debugged and I'm also waiting on P-kitty and Russ to decide on the rules for posting in this section of the site.


----------



## Piratecat (Dec 27, 2004)

We're really impressed, though. We're hoping that Michael can do this for any number of databases; I've been having "feat overload" recently when trying to create Grim Tales and d20 Modern characters, and this would help tremendously.


----------



## Crothian (Dec 27, 2004)

would it be possible to see the source of these feats as well?


----------



## Piratecat (Dec 27, 2004)

Yup, that's essential for sorting purposes. There will be an entry for source. That way you can sort by SRD, or Dusk, or d20 Modern, or what have you.


----------



## Morrus (Dec 27, 2004)

Crothian said:
			
		

> would it be possible to see the source of these feats as well?



 To an extent.  As each feat is an OGL document, we can't use IP (including company/product names) in any way except for in s15 of the OGL. The source will be referenced in s15 of each feat's OGL, though.


----------



## thatdarncat (Dec 28, 2004)

That sucks - I would love to be able to sort by wotc books/fr books/mongoose books etc. Or to be able to specify "I have these books" and only see feats from those books.


----------



## Gez (Dec 28, 2004)

Interesting project.

One thing I think is needed is a Martial type of feat for all the feats that can be taken as bonus feat by a Fighter. WotC's insistence that they should be considered General feats is puzzling.

What are the plans for other databases? Spells? Monsters? I'm kinda awed at the colossal work that would represent either of them...


----------



## Morrus (Dec 28, 2004)

Depending on how this one goes, it isn't too difficult to use the same method for databases of other things.  Spells seems the next logical choice.  Monsters seems fairly logical, too.  Magic Items?  

 I'm sure there are plenty of uses for the system.


----------



## Michael Morris (Dec 28, 2004)

Spells are the next step, but then the REVIEWS section beckons.  After that I can go back to other things.  But remember that this is still very much a prototype.  For instance, Russ wants character gen functionality. While that's possible, it does mean the computer will have to be MUCH stricter about the data it will accept from the user.

I also will probably need to divorce the code from being a forum tack on.  Tacking on one database is fine, but if I tack on 6 or 7 then the code suddenly has ballooned to several times its original size and that could be problematic.

It's taken me 6 months to get this far, so please be patient.  At least these days I'm not driving a truck.  However, I'm about at the end of my bankroll and I'm back in school.  In January I'll have to get a job and, once again, the time I'll have to donate to coding will be reduced.

EDIT: As for Monsters, I've spoken with Boz of the Creature Catalogue about database merger.  That will come after the reviews database merger.


----------



## Morrus (Dec 28, 2004)

Michael Morris said:
			
		

> For instance, Russ wants character gen functionality.



 Not strictly - that's a bit more advanced than the idea I had in mind.

 My idea was that you check off items (feats, spells, monsters, what-have-you) as "favourites" (maybe using the subscribe thread system somehow?), and then you can click to go to a page which basically lists your favourites in one place, with all the details.  Basically, it is a page which is your own personalised "campaign guide"  - you could print it out or refer your players to it, or whatever. 

 Perhaps there could even be a couple of input boxes where you put a title, URL of an image and space for an introduction.  You then have a neat URL which describes your campaign world's mechanics, and what feats, spells, monsters and so forth you are using in it.

 I don't know if that's technically doable, though.  Only Michael can answer that one.  I think it's a cool idea, though!


----------



## Gez (Dec 28, 2004)

Yup, it's a cool one.

But I still think the feat db would be more usable if fighter feats are their own category!


----------



## AGGEMAM (Dec 28, 2004)

Gez, didn't you have a SRD spell db once?


----------



## Gez (Dec 28, 2004)

Oh yeah. 3.5. killed it, though. Didn't felt like looking for each new or modified spell in the new SRD, what with the changes in schools, in levels, and in names...

It used to be an XML file rather than an actual DB, though. I know that XML is just a tree-shaped DB format, but still...

And it wasn't SRD, but meant to be a definitive, complete spell list, including closed content, and without all the section 15 clutter, and all that. Which meant that I couldn't legally distribute the full version. And so on.

So, for various reasons, I lost the will to maintain it and continue to upgrade it.


----------



## AGGEMAM (Dec 28, 2004)

Also there are a few folks around here that have build their own SRD websites, Sage comes to mind as being the winner of the contest here. I'm pretty sure they had to use a db or at least a xml file for those to work. We might ask them if they are willing to share.


----------



## Knight Otu (Dec 28, 2004)

While I won't be able to use it for the time being, the database promises to be a very cool feature for the community. If the Monster Database is merged with the Creature Catalog, will the CC still be accessible for non-supporters?
 I realize it is highly unlikely to happen, but a smaller version would be interesting for Living Enworld approved content.


----------



## Michael Morris (Dec 28, 2004)

Gez said:
			
		

> Yup, it's a cool one.
> 
> But I still think the feat db would be more usable if fighter feats are their own category!




Search the special column for "fighter bonus feats" and you'll bring up the complete list of fighter bonus feats 

I'll be working on several preset searches a bit later.


----------



## Staffan (Dec 30, 2004)

Gez said:
			
		

> One thing I think is needed is a Martial type of feat for all the feats that can be taken as bonus feat by a Fighter. WotC's insistence that they should be considered General feats is puzzling.



Not really. It means that the bonus-featness becomes part of the fighter class, where it belongs, rather than the feats themselves. It becomes important if you have several classes that get bonus feats from slightly different lists. For example, see Arcana Unearthed: Mage blades, totem warriors, unfettered, and warmains all get bonus feats as class features, but with different lists. Looking at WOTC's D&D stuff, you get the same thing with Psychic warriors and samurai (OA version).


----------



## Campbell (Dec 30, 2004)

Staffan said:
			
		

> Not really. It means that the bonus-featness becomes part of the fighter class, where it belongs, rather than the feats themselves. It becomes important if you have several classes that get bonus feats from slightly different lists. For example, see Arcana Unearthed: Mage blades, totem warriors, unfettered, and warmains all get bonus feats as class features, but with different lists. Looking at WOTC's D&D stuff, you get the same thing with Psychic warriors and samurai (OA version).



 With 3.5 WotC seems to be moving away from specific lists, included with class entries. For instance, the 3.5 psychic warrior takes feats either from the fighter list, or those with the psionic descriptor. Fighter bonus feats are pretty much 'Martial' feats anyway. They simply tag the feat in the Special section rather than with a  different type.


----------



## Staffan (Dec 30, 2004)

Campbell said:
			
		

> With 3.5 WotC seems to be moving away from specific lists, included with class entries. For instance, the 3.5 psychic warrior takes feats either from the fighter list, or those with the psionic descriptor. Fighter bonus feats are pretty much 'Martial' feats anyway. They simply tag the feat in the Special section rather than with a  different type.



Both methods have their advantages. Having feat subtypes makes it easier to determine whether a class should be able to take a new feat as a bonus feat. Having class-specific lists makes it easier to give the class the specific capabilities it should have - looking at Arcana Unearthed, the Unfettered doesn't get access to Power Attack and stuff like that, while the Warmain doesn't get Defensive Stance (AU's version of Dodge) or Combat Expertise.


----------



## Morrus (Dec 30, 2004)

Michael Morris said:
			
		

> Search the special column for "fighter bonus feats" and you'll bring up the complete list of fighter bonus feats
> 
> I'll be working on several preset searches a bit later.



 The special column isn't searchable.


----------



## Creamsteak (Dec 30, 2004)

Micheal, if this is an example of the standard feat formatting:

[sblock]Armor Specialization
*[General]*

You are especially familiar with not only how to move in a particular suit of armor, but how to defend yourself in it.

*Prerequisites:* Fighter Class level 4th.

*Benefits:* Select a specific suit of armor you're proficient in (normally any, but some variant fighters may not be proficient in all armor types). The maximum dexterity bonus to AC of the armor is increased by 1 and the check penalties are reduced by 2. You may move your full base speed in the armor even if it normally reduces your speed.

*Special:* A fighter may select this feat as a fighter bonus feat.
 [/sblock]

Are you dead set on that? I'd have gone with something that looks more like the way feats are printed in most of the books I've seen.

[sblock]ARMOR SPECIALIZATION *[General]*
You are especially familiar with not only how to move in a particular suit of armor, but how to defend yourself in it.
*Prerequisites:* Fighter Class level 4th.
*Benefits:* Select a specific suit of armor you're proficient in (normally any, but some variant fighters may not be proficient in all armor types). The maximum dexterity bonus to AC of the armor is increased by 1 and the check penalties are reduced by 2. You may move your full base speed in the armor even if it normally reduces your speed.
*Special:* A fighter may select this feat as a fighter bonus feat.[/sblock]

If you could do proper indenting here (without the code statements) I would have done that also. I tried the indent statement, but it creates unnecessary double spacing around indented sections. If there's a simple way to get indented paragraph setup instead of block paragraph, I could possibly find uses (like this) for it.


----------



## Michael Morris (Dec 30, 2004)

It is now 

Sorry about that.  Anyway, setting that up took all of 3 minutes.  It's easier to twink this thing than build it to start with.


----------



## Michael Morris (Dec 30, 2004)

Creamsteak said:
			
		

> Micheal, if this is an example of the standard feat formatting:
> 
> Are you dead set on that? I'd have gone with something that looks more like the way feats are printed in most of the books I've seen.




Yes, but that don't work too well on the web.  I'll play with some other styles of display over the next few days - right now Russ and I have been inputting the SRD feats (and I'm doing the Dusk feats right now).


----------



## Creamsteak (Dec 30, 2004)

Second question. I'm looking at the database, and I see both Micheal Morris and Morrus have submitted some of the SRD feats. That kind of bothers me, though I guess it won't impede practicality with the case of who the creator is stuff.

But, let's say I'm a publisher on these boards, and a feat in one of my products is put up. Then it might really bug me (especially if there is some error, or I've been trying to make sure that all the feats from my books go up under my name to make sure they are all searchable by that note, even if they come from divergent settings or something).

Perhaps a "submitted by" option where we could post something other than a user name? A company? SRD? Leave it blank? I don't know, it just came to mind as a bit odd under certain circumstances.

*Edit:* Another thing occured to me. Are you sure you want these as submitted under the house rules forum as a subforum? It's hiding the latest actual thread in house rules when viewed form the forum index.


----------



## Michael Morris (Dec 30, 2004)

When Dusk reopens the database will go there if Russ lets me (hey - I spent 6 months programming it )


----------



## Creamsteak (Dec 30, 2004)

Sounds like your going to be putting another 6 in on it over time. Don't kill yourself with features, simplicity is often enough to please people. I would have done a few things differently, but I'm not complaining, this certainly could be very cool if done well.

The perfectionist/completist in me is cringing though.


----------



## Michael Morris (Dec 30, 2004)

The bells and whistles can come later


----------



## Morrus (Dec 30, 2004)

Just need to extablish a standard formatting.  Looking at Dusk feats, I see various different styles used on various feats - looks kinda messy.

 Check out the Prereq column here: http://www.enworld.org/forums/forum...t_source&featsearch=Dusk&order=asc&order2=asc

 As you see, some have ability names in caps, others don't, some put the requirement as "13+", some just say "13", some entries are punctuated, others aren't.

 Could you put together a few "style" instructions on the entry page, Michael?  That would keep the formatting and standards the same.


----------



## Creamsteak (Dec 30, 2004)

I totally agree with Morrus on that.

Though I'm not sure whether to capslock feat names or not. They are capslocked in their full out entries in feats, but not in the short descriptions in the feats table. The database however uses one entry to record both sets of data.


----------



## Michael Morris (Dec 30, 2004)

Morrus said:
			
		

> Just need to extablish a standard formatting.  Looking at Dusk feats, I see various different styles used on various feats - looks kinda messy.
> 
> Check out the Prereq column here: http://www.enworld.org/forums/forum...t_source&featsearch=Dusk&order=asc&order2=asc
> 
> ...




Ok, I'll go back and fix my own typos.  Would probably be better to have the style guidelines on a seperate page - I don't want the entry page to get to be too big or set a precedent for the other databases that will be a pain to follow through (the spell database has a MONSTER input screen by comparison).


----------



## Creamsteak (Dec 30, 2004)

Micheal, your Finesse feat is in error.

http://www.enworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=112285

You have the benefit listed in the prereq.

Also, does the database accept like-named entries? Armor Specialization (dusk) is quite different from the three or four other feats I've seen named Armor Specialization.

*Edit:* Two core errors: Craft Rod and Craft Wonderous are currently listed as General instead of Item Creation.


----------



## Michael Morris (Dec 30, 2004)

Creamsteak said:
			
		

> Also, does the database accept like-named entries? Armor Specialization (dusk) is quite different from the three or four other feats I've seen named Armor Specialization.




Yes.  Since each feat is a "thread" as far as the database is concerned the only unique id tag the feat has is it's threadid #.  Names can be the same. Users will have to choose which one they like.


----------



## Michael Morris (Dec 30, 2004)

The feats database is now completely on, with the same permissions as any other forum.  Still hammering out whether or not it stays this way.  If anyone has a problem let me know.


----------



## Mark Causey (Dec 31, 2004)

Michael Morris said:
			
		

> The feats in Wizards of the Coast books like *Complete Divine* or *Complete Divine* aren't released under the OGL and can't be entered here. If you enter a feat from such a source you'll be warned to stop, and if you persist your account could be banned.




Sorry if this isn't what you're looking for, but I found a redundancy in the third item in the list of things to keep in mind at the top of the Feats Database.


----------



## Michael Morris (Dec 31, 2004)

Should be Complete Divine or Complete Arcane.


----------



## Gez (Jan 4, 2005)

I get a message telling me the forum doesn't accept new threads...


----------



## Michael Morris (Jan 8, 2005)

@ Gez - the submissions feature is turned off momentarily.

Ok guys, I've made some fundemental code changes to this thing - it should be back up in a day or so.


----------

