Hiding magic items but show charms on loot filter

Hi guys,

Any ideas how to do that?
I’ve 2 rules, one to show, the other to hide.

Hide: magic items
Show: grand charms, large charms, small charms.

Doesn’t work….

I thought show would override hide

Show should override though the order matters I believe (though I haven't actively re-confirmed that tbh).

However, if you're looking at "magic vs. magic", you don't need 2 rules.

Just make 1 rule:
- Hide
- Magic
- Under equipment, select everything (category checks) and then de-select the few things you do still want to see, such as charms under accessories

That way, you're hiding all magic drops except for the ones you've de-selected again to account for charms, jmods and so on.

Maybe because GC and LC also have unique ones which are not magic items, I don't know if that affects the rules.

Wouldn't it be more sensible to select all the Items to show, instead of deselecting all the items you don't want to show late game?

TeleTabitha wrote: 1 month ago

Wouldn't it be more sensible to select all the Items to show, instead of deselecting all the items you don't want to show late game?

The game starts off showing everything.
So you need a "hide" rule no matter what.
De-selecting them in that hide rule means you only need to deal with 1 rule.
Hiding everything in one rule and then showing them 1 by 1 in a different rule just introduces room for mistakes and instability (as is the case for the OP here).

And since you can select the entire category at once in the hide rule, it only takes 3 clicks to set the starting point (1 each for armor, weapons and accessories).
That's less extra clicks/effort than creating a 2nd rule to show.

So you're "doing less", end up with half the rules to manage, less room for error and get the same end result.
De-selecting the things you want to show within the hide rule is definitely the way to go.


Disclaimer:
That does not apply for ethereal/socketed as that category overlaps with normal/superior/... so these should actually get their own specific show rule.

I find it much easier to think about what I want to see, than disabling everything that I don't want to see. I need multiple rules anyways, because of some items I only want to see the superior editions etc. And when grouped in sensible names like Superior Bases, Chronicle Uniques, High Value Uniques etc. the room for error is minimal imho.

I pondered about it while running

Andariel (got me a

The Grandfather btw ) and in my eyes, multiple hide rules can interact in a way in which it not obvious why one item does not show up, and they interact. If I have an Hide All and then only additive groups, if one group says the item shows up, it will show up, no matter what other groups do. Is that not the case? In the end both can be translated in the other. But with an additive rule I can name what I want to show without another rule being able to invalidate the group's name.

Am I having a logical knot in my head possibly?

If you start out with just one single universal hide then yes, it should end up showing your show rules "no matter what". Unless the interaction with the hide rule fails as seems to be the case for the OP.

Personally, I prefer my rules cleaner and specific. I don't want one universal "everything" rule.

So there's a hide normal, a hide inferior, a hide superior, ... basically, a hide for each distinct category of base item. And those simply have those items de-selected that I don't want hidden, effectively making them "hide all X except for Y".

Plus some have additional show rules. Ethereal/socketed is one as that overlaps with other base categories and hence can't be handled cleanly as part of the hide rules and requires a distinct show rule following up on them. And the others are "purpose specific". E.g. for sets and uniques I have a general hide rule that hides all of them except for the ones I would pick up for myself. Both then also have 2 distinct show rules each. One to show those pieces I still need for the chronicle so that is handled independent of other purposes. And one for those I'd only pick up to trade as I don't want them for myself but they do have enough trade value.

If you start out with a universal hide, you then simply need a show for every single category which basically nets you the same amount of rules in total plus the universal hide on top, always giving you at least one more.

Either approach works though so I guess in the end, it is simply a matter of preference. I just don't want 2 rules having to interact to create the same outcome I could do in one unless there's a logical/organizational reason for it (such as tracking missing chronicle drops separately).