Information
Introduce a new entry type for AdventureData and BookData that allows encounters to be directly imported into the Encounter Builder or Initiative Tracker.
Who would use it?
Anyone using the Encounter Builder or Initiative Tracker, especially DMs running pre-written adventures or structured homebrew content.
How would it work?
Add a new entry type (e.g., "type": "encounter") that defines the composition of an encounter in a structured way.
Minimum required fields:
A list of creatures ({@creature ...} entries, defaulting to XMM or standard sources)
Quantity of each creature
Example:
{
"type": "encounter",
"creatures": [
"{@creature commoner}",
"{@creature wolf}"
],
"quantities": [
10,
1
]
}
Optional future extensions could include:
Pre-set HP rolls
Initiative rolls
Grouping (e.g., squads)
Notes or tactical hints
Encounter difficulty metadata
Why should this be added?
-
Eliminates repetitive manual setup
Currently, DMs must manually recreate encounters from text, adding creatures one by one into the Encounter Builder. This is time-consuming and error-prone, especially in large encounters. This feature would reduce that friction to a single click.
-
Bridges content and tools
Right now, adventures/books and the Encounter Builder exist as separate systems.
This aligns with how DMs actually run games: reading encounters and immediately needing to run them.
-
Improves usability during live play
During sessions, speed matters. Being able to instantly load an encounter: Avoids breaking immersion, Reduces prep time mid-session, Helps less experienced DMs run content more smoothly
-
Standardizes encounter structure in homebrew
Homebrewer would gain a consistent way to define encounters.
This feature would significantly improve usability, reduce friction, and strengthen integration across tools by allowing encounters defined in adventures/books to be instantly usable in the
Upvote - f0rgetful (absentminded)
Upvote - squirrelinthetree (Squirrel)
Upvote - julitutu (julitutu)
Upvote - n1tro_dynamite18 (nitro_dynamite18)
Upvote - rememberthenetid (RememberTheNetID)
Upvote - jona_91178 (Jona)
Upvote - alicenull (.Λlicenull)
Upvote - the_hydro (The_Hydro)
Votes: +8 / -0 / ±0
Information
Introduce a new entry type for AdventureData and BookData that allows encounters to be directly imported into the Encounter Builder or Initiative Tracker.
Who would use it?
Anyone using the Encounter Builder or Initiative Tracker, especially DMs running pre-written adventures or structured homebrew content.
How would it work?
Add a new entry type (e.g., "type": "encounter") that defines the composition of an encounter in a structured way.
Minimum required fields:
A list of creatures ({@creature ...} entries, defaulting to XMM or standard sources)
Quantity of each creature
Example:
{ "type": "encounter", "creatures": [ "{@creature commoner}", "{@creature wolf}" ], "quantities": [ 10, 1 ] }Optional future extensions could include:
Pre-set HP rolls
Initiative rolls
Grouping (e.g., squads)
Notes or tactical hints
Encounter difficulty metadata
Why should this be added?
Eliminates repetitive manual setup
Currently, DMs must manually recreate encounters from text, adding creatures one by one into the Encounter Builder. This is time-consuming and error-prone, especially in large encounters. This feature would reduce that friction to a single click.
Bridges content and tools
Right now, adventures/books and the Encounter Builder exist as separate systems.
This aligns with how DMs actually run games: reading encounters and immediately needing to run them.
Improves usability during live play
During sessions, speed matters. Being able to instantly load an encounter: Avoids breaking immersion, Reduces prep time mid-session, Helps less experienced DMs run content more smoothly
Standardizes encounter structure in homebrew
Homebrewer would gain a consistent way to define encounters.
This feature would significantly improve usability, reduce friction, and strengthen integration across tools by allowing encounters defined in adventures/books to be instantly usable in the
Votes: +8 / -0 / ±0