CraftTweaker allows you to set the display name of a stack with IItemStack#withDisplayName(), e.g

<minecraft:apple>;.withDisplayName("Banana")

All of LootTweaker's addItemEntry_____ methods automatically generate loot functions to preserve stacksize, NBT, etc.; so you just need to do something like

somePool.addItemEntry(<minecraft:apple>.withDisplayName("Banana", 21);

I suggest you also look into arrays and loops. They'll be quite helpful in reducing the number of script lines you have to repeat.

In reply to iamcarrotmaster:

 I don't quite understand what you want to do.
It sounds like you want the item generated by a loot entry to be given a randomly chosen display name. Is that correct?

In reply to iamcarrotmaster:

CraftTweaker allows you to set the display name of a stack with IItemStack#withDisplayName(), e.g

<minecraft:apple>;.withDisplayName("Banana")

All of LootTweaker's addItemEntry_____ methods automatically generate loot functions to preserve stacksize, NBT, etc.; so you just need to do something like

somePool.addItemEntry(<minecraft:apple>.withDisplayName("Banana", 21);

I suggest you also look into arrays and loops. They'll be quite helpful in reducing the number of script lines you have to repeat.

In reply to foxegory5:

You can use the same file.

In reply to No_090:

Create an array of the mobs' loot table identifiers and loop over it.
It should look something like this

val mobTableIds = ["example:a_mob", "example:another_mob"] as string[];
for tableId in mobTableIds {
    LootTables.getTable(tableId).getPool("example").addItemEntry(<example:some_item>, 42);
}

In reply to Insane96:

 Update Forge to at least 14.23.5.2779. That method isn't in any earlier versions.
I'll make LT require at least that version in the next release.

In reply to Emberwyck:

Quote from Emberwyck>>

Hi

Trying out this mod, but I'm having trouble. Minecraft is telling me there's no such loot table, however I used /ct loottables target and it gave me a dump file which I used the name of as formatted in the example. Here's a paste bin of it:

https://pastebin.com/2JvZLR5b

Loot table ids follow the format of <domain>:<path>. The ids in your script are missing a domain, since you haven't translated the path in the dumps folder to an identifier correctly. The name of the first subfolder inside dumps/loot_tables is the domain part of the identifier; the remaining part of the path, excluding the .json extension, is the path part of the identifier.
So animania/rabbit_regular should be animania:rabbit_regular, etc.

Is this because it's a mod? From the previous latest comment, it was planned for mods to be supported in the current version?

LootTweaker has supported editing mod loot tables since the first release.
My reply to AtomicWaffle was about modifying unregistered tables. Due to technical limitations beyond my control, to verify that a loot table identifier is valid LootTweaker depends entirely on it being registered with vanilla's list of built-in loot tables.
It's easy for a mod to register an identifier with this registry, but it's not obvious that they need to. Nothing in vanilla breaks if they don't, because otherwise loot tables couldn't be loaded from the data folder of a world.

What 0.0.9 does is add a new method that does not attempt to validate the loot table id at all. The reason for that change is that I personally concluded that it's valid for mods to not register loot tables, under certain circumstances. There's no community consensus on this, since the loot table system is an area most mods deal with little, if at all; so I had to make my own decision after talking to some other mod devs.

Also... Would you be able to add some example scripts in the documentation of how to add conditions? I can't figure out how I'm supposed to do it with the current documentation.

There are several examples in the Example Script. I've been intending to add some examples directly to the type documentation pages, but have to yet to do so.
Also, thanks for telling me there are issues with the docs. Many people don't, so I don't know they need improvements in a particular area.

In reply to AtomicWaffle14:

In reply to AtomicWaffle14: