The World of Avlis

Hey all!

I wasn't sure of the exact right spot for this thread, so other team members if you'd prefer it somewhere else please move it, thanks!

With the recent development update you can use the chat command '/magic spellui' to see the various spells you have available, categorize them by metamagic (works for AMS toggles like transmutant, white necromancy, etc.), hide/shown certain spell levels, and use the spells from the window.

If it's a spell that has multiple choices (like Protection From Alignment) a sub-window will open for you to pick an option then you can pick a target. Currently the sub-window will show to the right of the main window.

The purpose of this thread is to get feedback from you all on things you might want to change, update, adjust, etc. with it. I'm also pondering a similar window for Psion powers so changes to this could feed into that.

Things I'm Already Aware Of/Planning On Doing:

• Refactoring the code to not need as much string parsing (should help speed things up a bit.)
• Potentially adding a delay in building out the window and the resulting buttons (should help with avoiding TMI or too many instructions errors for creatures with a lot of spells.)
• Fixing the bug for Metamagic Domain spells for clerics not being castable from the window.
• The background for the UI and its sub-window are intended not be shown (to lessen how much the window blocks.) This will go into the next update. This could potentially be made a toggle.
• Investigating if the background for the window, rather than being either on or off, can be updated to have a transparent background like what the chat window has.
• Investigate displaying the number of uses for a spell on/near the spell button along with keeping the spell uses in the tooltip for the button.

So, with all that context: Are there elements to the window you might want adjusted, changed, reorganized, etc.? I can't promise I'll fix or pull in every single thing suggested, but I'll be sure to review everything and at least give it some time and investigation.

Thanks for reading!

- DM/CCC Caydo / Seven

First to say I think I'm really going to like the Spell UI when I get used to it! It feels very modern-MMO with customizable floating bars.

So you'll still use the base Spellbook for assigning spells to slots, and if you want any spells on your hotbar (G.Sanc!)
One of the first things I tried to do with the UI was to drag a spell to the hotbar because I was trying to reset based on what I could get in the UI.

I would prefer a solid background to no-background, but semi-transparent is better than both. Being able to know where the window begins/ends easily and clearly is important.
It would be nice if it opened at a size that didn't have scroll bars. I just like fewer scroll bars
If the metamagic-tokens could be reduced to a dropdown I think you could "slim up" the average needed width. ... Alternatively it could be setup like a 2 COL table (no meta) (clear) | (Empower) (Maximize) | (Extend) (Quicken) , which had a hide-show bool to reduce to one line


Magic Carpet Ride.... I would love if it had a feature to assign "Spell Groups" (Grp1, Grp2...) which were mapped to user entered text (Buffs, Offensive, Control, Dispel, AMS-Fatespinner...) and you could add spells to the group, then display spells by GROUP rather than by level.

I think I would also prefer to organize the display in my own way as Tel remarked.

Yes, spell groups would be most welcome. I'll point out that there are some spell groups: Schools (Abjuration, Illusion, etc). I don't think those would be as good as custom groups, but they are groups.

While it is manageable, the separation of each metamagic spells to different "tabs"(?) is a bit awkward. I guess this is due to the spontaneous casters, where metamagic permutations would put far too many icons on the UI. Though I see that the spell level is an include/exclude filter-style and the meta-magic is a exclusive focus filter-style. Could the meta-magic be the include/exclude filter-style?

If the Schools were the groups we get, then I'd hope for again the include/exclude filter-style instead of the exclusive focus filter-style.