Cantr II Discussion Forum

Another little side project I have been playing around with in my free time.
http://gametools.wastelandgaming.us/charmaker/

It is nowhere near complete at the moment and if you would like to see values/attributes added, feel free to post them. Right now it outputs selections, but it will be expanded to give full text descriptions in the future.


Planned features:

• Actual description text/paragraph generator
• More Traits
• Additional values
• Randomizer
• Expanded for Building/clothing/item descriptions

Nice work CDLS! Great start. I realised I helped make this an issue, so here is my attempt to contribute!

1. 2. at around 3. with a 4., X. skin and a 5. head of 6. 7. hair. His/Her eyes are 8. and appear 9. His/her demeanour is 10. and he/she carries an air of 11.

1. He/She
2. stands/slouches/mopes/stands tall/stands proudly/appears withdrawn/seems aloof
3. Height
4. fat build/skinny frame/athletic body/pear shape/broad chest/toned body etc
X. skin colour! (Knew I'd forget something)
5. full/loose/shaggy/messy/tight
6. short/medium length/long/shoulder length/cropped/curly/bobbed/long wavy/long curly/short curly/feathered/layered/sweeping
7. hair colour
8. eye colour
9. sparkling/curious/shifting/inquisitive/narrow/hooded/hidden/cold
10. relaxed/friendly/cold/withdrawn/threatening/unstable/alluring/scatty
11. mystery/defiance/nobility/charm

Okay maybe I do go a bit far with these things. But I'm happy to help listing more options etc... is what I'm saying...

Otherside wrote: I realised I helped make this an issue,

I was planning on making this anyways for a project I am working on, but felt it could be used for Cantr purposes as well! With that being said, I still appreciate the contribution and am certainly open to hearing more!

Your example is exactly what I am going for, and had working demo of it that I showed to a couple people, but the coding was quite sloppy (as I was simply throwing things together as more of a proof of concept than anything). The layout was ugly, even by late 90's standards

Cdls wrote:ugly, even by late 90's standards

Okay, then I will definitely expand the lists when I get some time. Keep up the work!

Woah..

Description maker = great idea
Those people in Otherside's post = No..just no.

Raspberrytango wrote::shock: Woah..
Those people in Otherside's post = No..just no.

What? You mean there's something wrong with terribly dressed highly-flammable 90s twins that date each other? You're crazy.