Official [AD&D 2E Revised] Update thread

First, sorry for the slow response. Ok so I asked about this, and it's *all* the numbering systems that aren't "High = good" that frustrates them, THAC0 is just the worst offender in their minds.  Let me explain. Saving throws, ability checks and proficiencies all appear on cute little power cards with either an "Atta boy you made it." or a "Sucks to be you".  They require no thought on the part of the 3.5-5e ear gamer because of what you were able to make the cards do.  Rogue skills aren't rolled by the player, in general, so they never see that, and from their perspective it's a growing percentage so it fits "high = good".  Again, I as the DM roll the rogue skill, so they never see the number rolled to bake their little noodles. Combat is a whole 'nother thing.  Given the number of players and monsters involved in a "normal" combat, and given that a combat generally lasts about five to six rounds, in that time seeing close to one hundred attack rolls happen in total isn't unlikely.  Because they have no way of knowing the enemy's AC the power card system for attack rolls is a no bueno at the table.  Also since... pretty much everything uses a mooked token there is no character sheet sitting behind that generic goblin they're fighting for the power card to draw from. This means when an attack roll comes up there is no "Yay! You did it!" for them to see.  The 5e player sees their psionicist hit a 15 AC and thinks "Hey that looks good!" only to realize with an attack like that they would have missed the broad side of a barn with a beach ball at five feet.  Adding to this fact is their character sheet displays a number that is less than 10 for their AC, where they are used to seeing numbers greater than 20.  It's not that adaptation for them is impossible, it's that it's counter intuitive to them and makes them frustrated that it's "Not the way it's always been", to them.  Never mind "the way it's always been" is as far as use old timers are concerned a new idea. :) Anyway, thanks for the insight and again, sorry about the delay. Mitch K. Peter B. said: For me, having some numbers go up and down is no big deal as I have always done it that way. I have learned to live with it. I have a few more questions however as I am interested in how your new players sees things.  Since THAC0 and low = good blows their minds, how do they see the other "wonky" aspects of 2E? I am thinking of the following: Saving throws: Low number = good. Roll high = good Ability scores / nonweapon proficiencies: High number = good. Roll low = good Rogue skills: High number = good. Roll low = good. My assumption is that for a modern player, high is always good , so both a high number on the sheet, and a high roll is preferable. I ask because AC and THAC0 seems to come up the most when talking about "old confusing mechanics", but Saving throws and Ability Scores rarely seem to get the same criticism. What is your players opinion on the points above?

Mitch K. said: First, sorry for the slow response. Ok so I asked about this, and it's *all* the numbering systems that aren't "High = good" that frustrates them, THAC0 is just the worst offender in their minds.  Let me explain. Saving throws, ability checks and proficiencies all appear on cute little power cards with either an "Atta boy you made it." or a "Sucks to be you".  They require no thought on the part of the 3.5-5e ear gamer because of what you were able to make the cards do.  Rogue skills aren't rolled by the player, in general, so they never see that, and from their perspective it's a growing percentage so it fits "high = good".  Again, I as the DM roll the rogue skill, so they never see the number rolled to bake their little noodles. Combat is a whole 'nother thing.  Given the number of players and monsters involved in a "normal" combat, and given that a combat generally lasts about five to six rounds, in that time seeing close to one hundred attack rolls happen in total isn't unlikely.  Because they have no way of knowing the enemy's AC the power card system for attack rolls is a no bueno at the table.  Also since... pretty much everything uses a mooked token there is no character sheet sitting behind that generic goblin they're fighting for the power card to draw from. This means when an attack roll comes up there is no "Yay! You did it!" for them to see.  The 5e player sees their psionicist hit a 15 AC and thinks "Hey that looks good!" only to realize with an attack like that they would have missed the broad side of a barn with a beach ball at five feet.  Adding to this fact is their character sheet displays a number that is less than 10 for their AC, where they are used to seeing numbers greater than 20.  It's not that adaptation for them is impossible, it's that it's counter intuitive to them and makes them frustrated that it's "Not the way it's always been", to them.  Never mind "the way it's always been" is as far as use old timers are concerned a new idea. :) Anyway, thanks for the insight and again, sorry about the delay. Thank you for your insight! I love to better understand how people think. I am very glad that the roll templates, or power cards as you call them, work as intended, to make life easier and make results quicker to evaluate, for both you and your players! I completely agree that THAC0 and attack rolls are the worst offender in this regard. I am not against trying to make THAC0 and AC ascending, but since ascending THAC0 / AC is a house rule, there is not official way of doing it. Of the top of my head, I would think that instead of the THAC0 going down from 20, it would just be a bonus, so for instance THAC0 18 would be a +2 bonus. But for AC I am not so sure. The straight forward thing would be to just let it go up from 10, for instance instead of a Chain Mail setting your AC to 5, it sets it to 15. This approach would work mathematically, ie. giving the same odds to hit and miss. The one thing I do not like about this approach, is that AC starts at 10 when you are wearing no armor. Ideally I would think your AC should be 0 when wearing no armor, and then going up from there. However, how to make the math add up with an AC of 0 I do not know. I guess I would have to just subtract 10 from the attack roll to move the entire attack roll scale down. Now you could ask " But wait, if you do not like AC starting at 10 when doing ascending AC, how can you be okay with AC starting at 10 when doing descending AC ", which is a very good question, and to that my answer is  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ . 2E does not make sense, and there is no truth and everything is made up :P I haven't played any other systems, so I do not know how 3.5 or 5E handles the attack roll math, and I do not intent to research them until someone forces me to play those systems. I have enough to do, just trying to support 2E as is  before going off the beaten track.

Peter B. said: Thank you for your insight! I love to better understand how people think. I am very glad that the roll templates, or power cards as you call them, work as intended, to make life easier and make results quicker to evaluate, for both you and your players! I completely agree that THAC0 and attack rolls are the worst offender in this regard. I am not against trying to make THAC0 and AC ascending, but since ascending THAC0 / AC is a house rule, there is not official way of doing it. Of the top of my head, I would think that instead of the THAC0 going down from 20, it would just be a bonus, so for instance THAC0 18 would be a +2 bonus. But for AC I am not so sure. The straight forward thing would be to just let it go up from 10, for instance instead of a Chain Mail setting your AC to 5, it sets it to 15. This approach would work mathematically, ie. giving the same odds to hit and miss. The one thing I do not like about this approach, is that AC starts at 10 when you are wearing no armor. Ideally I would think your AC should be 0 when wearing no armor, and then going up from there. However, how to make the math add up with an AC of 0 I do not know. I guess I would have to just subtract 10 from the attack roll to move the entire attack roll scale down. Now you could ask " But wait, if you do not like AC starting at 10 when doing ascending AC, how can you be okay with AC starting at 10 when doing descending AC ", which is a very good question, and to that my answer is  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ . 2E does not make sense, and there is no truth and everything is made up :P I haven't played any other systems, so I do not know how 3.5 or 5E handles the attack roll math, and I do not intent to research them until someone forces me to play those systems. I have enough to do, just trying to support 2E as is  before going off the beaten track. So yea, 3.5 and 5e, both of which I have played and neither of which do I really want to play again, start at an AC of 10, with armour growing the AC from there.  It works exactly as you theorized.  Turning the THAC0 *inverted* into an attack bonus would be the way to go, but actually programing that might be a nightmare, honestly. Also, about the Rogue skills.  I know there are "blind" roll capabilities with API systems, but all of those are created for 5e or pathfinder 2e and I lack the capability to change the target ability of the blind roll to what the 2e sheet uses.  Do you have any advice into making blind rolls with your sheet, through either API changes or through third party stuff that would allow the rogues in my group to roll their own skill rolls without knowing if they were successful or not? Thanks, Mitch K.  

Mitch K. said: So yea, 3.5 and 5e, both of which I have played and neither of which do I really want to play again, start at an AC of 10, with armour growing the AC from there.  It works exactly as you theorized.  Turning the THAC0 *inverted* into an attack bonus would be the way to go, but actually programing that might be a nightmare, honestly. Also, about the Rogue skills.  I know there are "blind" roll capabilities with API systems, but all of those are created for 5e or pathfinder 2e and I lack the capability to change the target ability of the blind roll to what the 2e sheet uses.  Do you have any advice into making blind rolls with your sheet, through either API changes or through third party stuff that would allow the rogues in my group to roll their own skill rolls without knowing if they were successful or not? Thanks, Mitch K. Well if AC starts at 10, then it should be doable, but there is quite the amount of work to make it work for all the many rolls on the sheet. As for blind rolls, Roll20 sadly do not support that, but there is an  Open Suggestion  for it. Please give it an upvote, and make all your players do the same, so we hopefully can get it implemented some time. I have not started working with APIs yet, so I am of no help there, but I know that there is a browser extension called Stylus. You can read more here:  Oosh recently posted a "Blind Roll"-method, that doesn't need API Final note on the rogue abilities. Not all of them should be blind. If you read through the PHB you will gather that Pick Pocket, or Climb Wall are open rolls as the player will know if he has the item in his hand, or is up the wall, after the roll. Other checks such as Hide in Shadow and Move Silently are blind, as the rogue always believes himself to be stealthy, regarding if he is or not. Final, final note on Pick Pocket. Depending on the rules you use, the target have a small to larger chance of noticing the pick pocket attempt. Now if the target notices it, then the rogue might find out right away with a fist to the face, or the target can leave the rogue thinking he did good, while actually knowing that he was robbed. In either case, Pick Pocket is one of those rolls that can be both open and blind depending on the game and the setting. Just a little fun fact from the rules :)

Yea, looked at stylus, can't make heads or tails of it.  The only advice I was able to locate on it was aimed at the 5e sheet, which does me.. well... less than no good. I've been running physical blind rolls on Rogue skills since about '85 it's just a thing, because the original 1e rules for if you got noticed were fairly brutal and by the description made no sense to me to have the unfortunate rogue know if the target noticed them and was about to completely ruin their day.  Because of that, and the fact that since pretty much *all* of their other skills seemed like the kind of thing the player should always be in doubt if they actually got it right or only *think* they got it right, I have always done the rolling for them.  Nothing induces rogue paranoia like the words "You don't think there are any traps." or "You believe you have disarmed that trap.", or *almost* as good "You believe yourself to be sneaking".  I have left a long line of players with rogue PTSD :). About climb walls, while you are right and they will notice... rather quickly, it also long ago stated that they fall halfway through their round of climbing, which could also create some fun times if kept hidden. Thanks, Mitch K. Going to check out your Oosh link and see if that clears anything up for me. Edit: Looked at that link, it was the same one I looked at earlier, sadly.  I just don't have the requisite knowledge base to turn something aimed at the 5e sheet into something aimed at another sheet.  Oh well, maybe someday Roll20 will take the day or so it would take a huge team of programmers to add what should have been in the basic ability of the system years ago instead of worrying about... oh I don't know dark mode :) Well if AC starts at 10, then it should be doable, but there is quite the amount of work to make it work for all the many rolls on the sheet. As for blind rolls, Roll20 sadly do not support that, but there is an  Open Suggestion  for it. Please give it an upvote, and make all your players do the same, so we hopefully can get it implemented some time. I have not started working with APIs yet, so I am of no help there, but I know that there is a browser extension called Stylus. You can read more here:  Oosh recently posted a "Blind Roll"-method, that doesn't need API Final note on the rogue abilities. Not all of them should be blind. If you read through the PHB you will gather that Pick Pocket, or Climb Wall are open rolls as the player will know if he has the item in his hand, or is up the wall, after the roll. Other checks such as Hide in Shadow and Move Silently are blind, as the rogue always believes himself to be stealthy, regarding if he is or not. Final, final note on Pick Pocket. Depending on the rules you use, the target have a small to larger chance of noticing the pick pocket attempt. Now if the target notices it, then the rogue might find out right away with a fist to the face, or the target can leave the rogue thinking he did good, while actually knowing that he was robbed. In either case, Pick Pocket is one of those rolls that can be both open and blind depending on the game and the setting. Just a little fun fact from the rules :)

I completely agree with you about it being more fun if all rogue checks are hidden Mitch K. said: Oh well, maybe someday Roll20 will take the day or so it would take a huge team of programmers to add what should have been in the basic ability of the system years ago instead of worrying about... oh I don't know dark mode :) My feeling exactly. I sometimes question Roll20s choice on where they spend their resources, but as always there is a lot that I do not know, and someone probably have a business case some where showing how to make money. All we can do for now is to vote on the 5 year old suggestion and hope that it will be implemented some day. The more votes the better, so please force your players to vote as well, as every vote counts :) What I do know is that Roll20 are working on something big when it comes to character sheets and what can be done. They have been giving hits for quite some time. However, from what I gather it is only for the sheet itself, and not how the sheet interacts with the VTT, and since hidden rolls are something handled by the chat and the VTT, I doubt it will be coming any time soon. So back to voting!

Single line spells and defined spell tracking update! 4.15.0 Githup PR: Pull Request Hello everyone! It feels like it has been half a year since my last update. But fear not, I am finally back with a new update! Single line spells A little preface to this: When I originally created the new spell section, my goal was to utilise the 2Espell Roll Template, and to make it easier for users to input their data and get it displayed correctly. I therefore made it big and bombastic, right in the middle of the sheet, so everyone would notice it and how awesome it was. I had a lot of whitespace around it to indicate how important it was. I soon learned that one of my own players used the section completely different to what I had imagine, which made me see the errors of my way. In my eager to show off my skills, I had completely forgotten the first rule of design: Less is more, and the value of simplicity. So now I am back with a new slim design to redeem myself. Before After No fields have been deleted. They have only been moved around The focus of this slim design is to get a good overview of your spells. It is quick to see what spells are available, along with a few key metrics for those spells. From my experience whenever a spell is going to be fired, the first question is always, “How far can it go?” and “How many can it hit?”, therefore Range and Area of Effect have been placed up front. I did think about calculating the values of the Range and Area of Effect, but that might come later. It is also easier to find the spells, that have been memorised and to see how many spells are left to cast for the day. Lastly it is no longer possible to click the “wrong” button, as the “Roll Spell Effect” button has been removed. Now the spell can be printed as a roll template. In order to still be able to set all the attributes of a spell the same folding functionality that was implemented on the Psionic powers and the Scrolls, have been implemented here. Clicking the ▼ will “fold out” the spell showing the remaining attributes and the spells description. This functionality was also available in the old design, but I believe the information is presented more elegant now. Before After Spell tracking system selection Default Sheet Settings Sheet Settings tab The sheet has always had 3 different ways of tracking spells:
 Spell Slots Spell Points Arcs / Songs / Winds All of these tracking methods were displayed on the sheet at the same time, making the new player experience terrible. Some fields were important while others should be ignored depending on how you play. I tried to help this by hiding the Spell Points and Arcs / Winds systems, which was helpful to the players only using Spell Slots, but making the experience worse for those using the now hidden systems, as they were force to have 3 systems visible, just to use one. Now there is the option on the Sheet Settings tab, and in the Default Sheet Settings to select what spell tracking system you want to use, and only this system will be visible, ie. the systems are mutually exclusive. The tracking next to each spell line also only shows the active system. Before After Spell Slots Spell Points Arcs / Winds This might not be 100% optimal for people using the Spell Points system, as that system still kinda have a concept of memorization. If anyone needs to use more than one system at a time, please let me know so I can make it possible to show multiple systems together. The spell lines also scale dynamically with the width of the character sheet window. High Wisdom now triggers a popup for bonus spells I came across that bonus spells from high Wisdom only is available to priests, ie. Clerics, Druids, and speciality priests, and should not be given til Paladins and Rangers. Therefore a popup has been added when changing your Wisdom score to anything above 12, asking if you are a priest and therefore is eligible for bonus spells. Fixed bonus spells from high Intuition from PO: Skills & Powers I had accidentally used the Willpower sub ability score instead of Intuition. This has now been fixed. High Wisdom now autofill bonus Winds for Priests Under the Arcs / Winds system, priests also get bonus Winds (more spells), again this is only for priests and not for Paladins or Rangers. If you select that you are a priest in the popup mentioned above then the bonus Winds will be added. NB. If the PO: Skills & Powers sub ability scores are used, then Wind is still calculated using the Wisdom score. Bonus Spell Points from high Intelligence to Wizards When I asked out about if anyone used the Spell Points system, a few people were saying that they planned on using it, so I decided to give it a little love. Under the optional Spell Points system, there is an optional rule (optional optional ? :P) to allow wizards to get a few more spell points from high Intelligence, just like priests get more spells from high Wisdom. Since this is an optional rule, I decided to implement the automation using a checkbox to enable it, instead of autofilling it every time the Intelligence ability score was updated, to incentivise players to ask their DM if they are getting the bonus. This bonus is presumably also only for Wizards and not for Bards. A reference to PO: Spells & Magic where the rule is from is also added to high light this. NB. If the sub ability scores from PO: Skills & Powers are used, Intelligence is still always used to calculate the bonus spell points. Despite PO: Spells & Magic have been published after PO: Skills & Powers, it have not defined when or how to use the sub ability scores. Bonus Spell Points from high Wisdom to Priests Since I added automation for the Wizards it only made sense to also add it for Priests.  The logic here is a bit more complicated as the bonus spell points scale with both Wisdom and level. See the table here: I decided to use the same approach as the Wizard by having a checkbox. I will try to explain my thoughts here: When creating a new character, I think it is more common to input the ability scores first, before adding the class and level. Assuming this is true, I would have to ask the player what level their character is every time their Wisdom score changed, which is nonsensical to me. The checkbox serves to bar of Paladins and Rangers from getting the bonus. I instead decided to use the Priest casting level attribute to determine the level of the priest. This field is located right above the Spell Points fields and is therefore likely to have been filled out before getting to the spell points. This field is not 100% accurate as spells such as Combine can temporarily increase the priest’s casting level without affecting the priest’s actual level, but I think it is close enough to not cause major problems. Paladins and Ranger also use a different casting level from their actual level, but as mentioned above they should not get this bonus anyways, so that is not be an issue. Note: As can be seen on the table above, the priest’s level is only needed when the Wisdom score is 15 or above, so scores of 13 and 14 are just updates the bonus spell points without checking the level. If the Wisdom score is 15 or above and the priest casting level is not set, the following notification will be shown: A reference to PO: Spells & Magic where the rule is from is also added. NB.   If the sub ability scores from PO: Skills & Powers are used, the Wisdom is always used to calculate the bonus spell points. Despite PO: Spells & Magic have been published after PO: Skills & Powers, it have not defined when or how to use the sub ability scores. TL;DR: If all of this is too confusing for you, then just uncheck the checkbox and input your desired bonus manually. Fix delay in showing “Add Spells” for priest sphere of influence I am probably the only one who was annoyed by this, but now it is fixed! Before (Gif) After (Gif) Only show arrows on number input fields in Firefox when needed So Firefox likes to always show the arrows for changing an input fields number, while Chrome only show these when hovering over or focusing on the field. This has cause some of the input to seem rather small on Firefox because so much space is taken up by the arrows. To align the design between Firefox and Chrome, the arrows have now been hidden by default on Firefox, and will only be shown on hover or focus, just like on chrome Before After My DM has starting to bring out the big monsters, as was annoyed that the Hit Dice field could not hold 2 digits and that the Hit Points fields could not hold 3 digits, so I allowed the fields to scale with the window size Updated Saving Throws to tell how much the check was made / missed by The same functionality that was added to ability score rolls have been added to saving throws. This will help determine if a spell critical hit has landed, as it requires both a natural roll result and that the check was missed by a certain amount. However, since the Roll displayed in the roll template includes modifiers, you still need to mouse over the result to see what the raw roll was. The natural roll can be added later down the line if people think that it adds value. Before After 2Espell template: swapped Sensory signature and Knockdown I swapped these two so that the attributes appear in the same order as they do in the PO: Spells & Magic book Before After That is all for this time! I hope the new single line spells will be an improvement to your games. If they are a success, then I would like to do something similar with the weapons, to get rid of the split between hit and damage. It should honestly be a single line, but that is for the future. Best of luck in your coming games and as always, if you find any bugs please let me know!

Peter, The rogues page is not working correctly. It used to have a box that showed how many points a thief had to distribute, if they went over it showed negative. Maybe you have it in another location but i cannot find it.

Rick said: Peter, The rogues page is not working correctly. It used to have a box that showed how many points a thief had to distribute, if they went over it showed negative. Maybe you have it in another location but i cannot find it. The box is located right above the heading saying "Level". From your screenshot it seems like The level-class1 field is empty. If you added your rogues level in one of the other boxes, maybe in level-class4, make sure to update the macro to reference the correct field. 

Thank you Peter.   I found the issue.   you have in the program,  class1   I had to manually change that to a 4 and now everything it good.

Rick said: Thank you Peter.   I found the issue.   you have in the program,  class1   I had to manually change that to a 4 and now everything it good. Yeah that was what I was trying to say. Sorry if I wasn't clear I have some functionality that help when it comes to Thac0 but I havnt added it to The rogue skill field.  I will add it to prevent this confusion in the future 

More class checks! 4.15.1 Githup PR: Pull Request Hello everyone! The issue reported above made me realize that I had been lazy with the class checks that was introduced in 4.14.0 , so it has been added to three more fields: Rogue skill points macro (rogue-level-base) Wizard caster level (level-wizard) Priest caster level (level-priest) Whenever you edit these fields one of three things can happen: If you only have a single class with a single level, the macro is updated to use that class. If you have multiple classes to pick from, then it will ask what class to use, and update the macro accordingly. If your macro contains two different classes, ie. @{level-class1}+@{level-class2}, then it is expected that you know what you are doing and ignores the check. Here are some examples. Rogue skill points macro Wizard caster level Priest caster level That is all for this time! Just a quick little improvement for you guys.

Hey Peter, getting this error every time anything touches a level on any character sheet. Any idea what's wrong? SyntaxError: Expected "(", ".", "[", "abs(", "ceil(", "d", "floor(", "round(", "t", "{", [ |\t], [+|\-] or [0-9] but "u" found. I get three to five instances of it, usually 3.

That is because a formula some where is not in the correct format. It can be because there Are too many parenthesis, or you have two + Signs back to back. I do check for a bunch of these scenarios, but not All.  Can you invitere me to your game? Then I can check what is going on? 

Mitch K. said: Hey Peter, getting this error every time anything touches a level on any character sheet. Any idea what's wrong? SyntaxError: Expected "(", ".", "[", "abs(", "ceil(", "d", "floor(", "round(", "t", "{", [ |\t], [+|\-] or [0-9] but "u" found. I get three to five instances of it, usually 3. I made a mistake. I will fix it right away

Bugfix for errors when updating level 4.15.2 Github PR: Pull Request Hello. With my previous update I tried to make a small optimization that caused the level scaling to break. The issue was triggered when any of the level fields were updated, as that would cause the scaling fields to try and calculate nothing. This issue has now been fixed

Peter,  2nd level spell page under the mage is the old format.   You new spell pages are great,   are you updating the 2nd level page

Rick said: Peter,  2nd level spell page under the mage is the old format.   You new spell pages are great,   are you updating the 2nd level page Hey Rick.  You just clicked the wrong "Add" button. Try to look above the old format, All the way to The left of the sheet. There is The button for The new format. 

Psionic QoL and better repeating sections rearrangement! 4.16.0 Githup PR: Pull Request Hello everyone! I got a few suggestions for Psionics and the repeating sections so here is a little quality of life update for you all. Psionic Powers - Secret by DM When first adding this feature, it was a bit on whim. Just something that was easy to program in, and that would be nice. I have since gotten asked how to make powers from books not implemented on the sheet secret, and that is quite the challenge. Especially if the section does not already have a secret power. Therefore I made things a bit hard on myself, but a lot easier for you. Now you can mark any power as secret by adding {{secret=true}} to the macro! Here is how it works. Before If a power was secret its macro would look like this:
 &{2Epsionic} …
 {{powerroll=[Secret by DM](~Thaldrin|repeating_psion-clairvoyance-science_-nq1zeqwiitkmfhxlf4z_action-check-dm)}}  … After Now a secret rolled power will have the following macro &{2Epsionic} … {{powerroll=[[1d20cf20-(@{psionic-mod})]]}} {{secret=true}} … As you can see the macro is now much more readable, and you can also to define your own roll expression for secret rolls! Previously you were restricted to my code behind the scenes. I hope you find this useful!   Psionic only temporary ability score modifier On the weapons tab it is possible to modify the Attack, Damage, and Speed from temporary buffs, such as Bless, Prayer, or Haste. Psionics have a similar system in The Will and the Way where a psionic can Self-Improve and raise his 3 primary ability scores, but only for psionic purposes. This was a little hard to do before as if you changed the actual attribute then it would affect more than just psionics. Fields for this interaction has now been added. In order to make use of these fields, you have to change a powers associated ability score with the new psionic only score. The changes are: @{Constitution} -> @{Constitution-psi} @{Intelligence} -> @{Intelligence-psi} @{Wisdom} -> @{Wisdom-psi} This can be done one of two ways: Delete the entire power and add it again. The auto fill now uses the new fields. Delete the ability score from the powers ability score field and pick it again from the dropdown / auto complete. The dropdown / auto complete havebeen updated to use the new fields. Psionic power checks show base power score attribute and modifier When only rolling the check, the descriptive text of the power score was left out. I thought it was nice to keep this information on the roll, as it is relevant :) Before After Potions and Dust got updated design similar to Scrolls For visual consistency Before After Made it easier to read repeating lines while modifying Rearranging spells, scrolls, powers, etc. was kinda hard because you couldn’t read the name of the thing you were moving. Rearranging weapons was also hard because the button was hard to click as the checkboxes was placed on top of it. Now it should be a bit easier to do rearranging. Before After Added datalist arrows for Firefox Chrome has these neat little arrows showing that an input field has an associated datalist. Firefox do not have this by default, so I tried my best to add it to help indicate where you can get help to auto fill Chrome (gif) Firefox Before (gif) Firefox After (gif) That is all for this time! It will be quite a while before my next update, as I am going to slog through the entire PHB, PO: C&T, S&P, S&M books and check that everything is correct, in a similar fashion as was done in update 4.14.0.

Hi Peter, thanks for you great work! I have a question regarding psionic modifiers. I am using modified wisdom for psionic powers as described in The Will and The way.  Now I have Wisdom of 20 . I have also modified power scores. having a +3. When I launch a power, by the way, I don't see power scores with the new values, but with * at the end. What does it mean? I give you some screenshot here: My natural Wisdom is 18.  May you please clarify? Thanks

Gunner said: Hi Peter, thanks for you great work! I have a question regarding psionic modifiers. I am using modified wisdom for psionic powers as described in The Will and The way.&nbsp; Now I have Wisdom of 20 . I have also modified power scores. having a +3. When I launch a power, by the way, I don't see power scores with the new values, but with * at the end. What does it mean? I give you some screenshot here: My natural Wisdom is 18.&nbsp; May you please clarify? Thanks Hello Gunner For the most in depth description, I would like to refer to my post describing the entire psionic power system, written here:&nbsp; <a href="https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/9311682/official-ad-and-d-2e-revised-update-thread/?pageforid=11101136#post-11101136" rel="nofollow">https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/9311682/official-ad-and-d-2e-revised-update-thread/?pageforid=11101136#post-11101136</a> But in short, there are 2 things going on here: The asterisk (*) means that your Power Score has been modified behind the scene, before being shown. Your overall powerscore has increased above 20, which triggers a special case described in The Will and the Way p. 65. Your Power Score is lowered to 19, meaning a roll of 19 will trigger the power score effect . A roll of 20 now becomes normal failure, and therefore does not trigger the 20 negative effect . You have Enhanced &nbsp;your power score with +3, please note that Enhancement &nbsp;is no the same as a regular modifier. Enhancement &nbsp;is described in The Will and the Way p. 28. When you enhance a power, you get two benefits: A) You get a range for your power score, in this case your base number, 19 (reduced down from 20 as described above), and then counting down 3, thus 18, 17, 16, thereby making the range for your power score result being 16-19. B) An enhanced power no longer never suffer the ill effect of rolling a 1. Please note if you did not intent to Enhance &nbsp;your power, but rather just get a flat +3 to your power score, you should instead move the +3 to the "Mod"&nbsp; (Modifier) &nbsp;box from of the "Enh" (Enhanced) box. If you choose to just get a +3 modifier instead of +3 Enhancement , it will removed the Enhanced &nbsp;bonuses: Power Score will only happen on a 19, and 1 still inflicts a negative effect. I hope this cleared things up. If not, please feel free to reach out again :)

Thanks Peter for your response. As I am new to the platform, I would like to ask you additional questions: where is the best place in the sheet to store temporary buffs on attributes? (like from Strength, Cat's grace spell, or Adrenalin Control psionic power, and so on) where &nbsp;is the best place in the sheet to store&nbsp;temporary&nbsp; buffs coming from spells/scrolls/portions like Bless, Aid, ...? Many thanks :)

Gunner said: Thanks Peter for your response. As I am new to the platform, I would like to ask you additional questions: where is the best place in the sheet to store temporary buffs on attributes? (like from Strength, Cat's grace spell, or Adrenalin Control psionic power, and so on) where &nbsp;is the best place in the sheet to store&nbsp;temporary&nbsp; buffs coming from spells/scrolls/portions like Bless, Aid, ...? Many thanks :) I welcome you. It is always nice to have a new face join the community! Now let me answer your questions. Temporary buffs for attributes: &nbsp;Since the 6 core attributes affect so many things, I just update the number in the table. That way I am sure that the appropriate buffs gets distributed throughout the sheet, such as higher hit or damage from strength. I however keep a record of the original value in the notes box below, so I can go back after the temporary effect wears of. Temporary buffs from spells/scrolls/potions: As for buffs that affects attacks, such as hit, damage, or speed bonus, I either use the Misc Modifier popup that comes when rolling a check if for a one time thing, like a backstab with +4 to attack, or I use the fields for storing temporary buffs for magical buffs such as Bless or Prayer that last multiple rounds. Please note that all positive effects is indicated with a positive number, and negative effects with a negative number. So if you get buffed by Haste, the spell says you get a -2 bonus to initiative, it should be written as +2. This has been done in an effort to try and standardise that numeric bonuses should be positive, and numeric penalties should be negative. Also remember to clear these fields, as if you end a play session with an active buff, then you might forget to reset it before the next session, and have a "permanent" buff going :) I hope this answered your questions. If you have any more questions feel free to ask and I will do my best to answer :)

Hey Peter,&nbsp; another question: are you thinking to refactor the equipment page? It would be great to have more space where to write the object description (specially the magic ones), so that at least improve current readibility in short description field, but in general also for the gears stored. Today I write in this way: But it would be great to have something similar: In case you have other suggestions please let me know. Thanks a lot

Gunner said: Hey Peter,&nbsp; another question: are you thinking to refactor the equipment page? It would be great to have more space where to write the object description (specially the magic ones), so that at least improve current readibility in short description field, but in general also for the gears stored. Today I write in this way: But it would be great to have something similar: In case you have other suggestions please let me know. Thanks a lot TL;DR: &nbsp;I have many thoughts but nothing concrete yet. I have thought about doing something for magical items, but not settled on anything yet. I have thought of adding sections specific for Wands, Rods, Staff, Rings, but since it starts to becomes quite a lot of sections that all describe the same thing, ie. magical items, I played around with the idea of adding a Misc Magical items section, as a catch all for magical items.&nbsp; The main thing holding me back is that I would prefer to add autofill with any new section that I make, to make it easily accessible for new players to understand its usage. I am however a player and would prefer not to read every single magical item from all the books as that would ruin my own play experience as no item would surprise me. There also is the issue that all of these items, work similar but not quite. Rod, Staffs, Wands, and Rings all have different initiative modifiers and different minimum caster levels. They might have charges, or daily resets which would be nice to include but does not work exactly the same. So in short the different magical items seems too different to put into one section, but too samey to put into different sections. A note for the potions and dusts. I think these should have been one section as they are both magical consumable items. A note on scrolls are that they are not really perfect, as one scroll can contain multiple spells, so that if a scroll is destroyed in a fire, then all the spells are destroyed. This is not really included, and I do not know how to do it, since I cannot nest repeating sections. About the Worn equipment . I do not like the design of that section. Ideally I would like a Diablo / WoW style layout with icons for each "slot" on the character, but that is quite above my skill level with HTML and CSS. About the Gear carried . I works okay as is, but does not really tie into any inventory system, ie volume of a backpack and the encumbrance movement system is hidden away on an entirely different page, which is not optimal. As for what you actually asked for : I can add the same functionality, ie. a foldout to with a textarea where you can write a description of your item. I do however think that since this section is not ment to be printed to the chat, I foresee a lot of clicking to fold out and fold in to find the description you are looking for. I might be making things up, but I think that the flow of play is important, and excessive clicking to find information is frustrating.

Interesting thoughts, thanks for sharing. I agree with you about the fact that they are all magical items, even with a lot of differences. I think autofill it would be great, but I am not sure if it is worth the time to feed the datastore with the whole available objects, rather than just asking every player to copy the description of the item by himself. Automation it would be great, but even here a lot of different implementation and complexities that maybe are not for the time spent to generalize the potential implementation.&nbsp; In general I would be happy enough with some fields: description (foldable), category, location, quantity (tbd), charges (tbd). This would at least simplify the fact of going always to the manuals to find the object description. As of today, I copy the description of each item in the bigger notes text area down to the sheet, but is not so trivial to find the object and it is always slowing the game time. Of course this is my opinion, which is opinionable :D

Gunner said: Interesting thoughts, thanks for sharing. I agree with you about the fact that they are all magical items, even with a lot of differences. I think autofill it would be great, but I am not sure if it is worth the time to feed the datastore with the whole available objects, rather than just asking every player to copy the description of the item by himself. Automation it would be great, but even here a lot of different implementation and complexities that maybe are not for the time spent to generalize the potential implementation.&nbsp; In general I would be happy enough with some fields: description (foldable), category, location, quantity (tbd), charges (tbd). This would at least simplify the fact of going always to the manuals to find the object description. As of today, I copy the description of each item in the bigger notes text area down to the sheet, but is not so trivial to find the object and it is always slowing the game time. Of course this is my opinion, which is opinionable :D I feel you. In my game we have a shared sheet with all the magical items. In the very buttom text area I have added all the descriptions. It can be quite the hassle to find that one item in the middle of 20 items :P In your suggestion about fields, you mention category . What did you think should go in this field?

Peter B. said: Gunner said: Interesting thoughts, thanks for sharing. I agree with you about the fact that they are all magical items, even with a lot of differences. I think autofill it would be great, but I am not sure if it is worth the time to feed the datastore with the whole available objects, rather than just asking every player to copy the description of the item by himself. Automation it would be great, but even here a lot of different implementation and complexities that maybe are not for the time spent to generalize the potential implementation.&nbsp; In general I would be happy enough with some fields: description (foldable), category, location, quantity (tbd), charges (tbd). This would at least simplify the fact of going always to the manuals to find the object description. As of today, I copy the description of each item in the bigger notes text area down to the sheet, but is not so trivial to find the object and it is always slowing the game time. Of course this is my opinion, which is opinionable :D I feel you. In my game we have a shared sheet with all the magical items. In the very buttom text area I have added all the descriptions. It can be quite the hassle to find that one item in the middle of 20 items :P In your suggestion about fields, you mention category . What did you think should go in this field? For category I mean something like, sword , rod , armor , and so on. I see this value as a free text to let the player to write down what is the category of the item he wants to add.&nbsp;

Okay. I guess that could be useful. I will think about it :)

Hey Gunnar, not sure how you might feel about this, but i make folders for each character. I put the character sheet in thier folder.&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; I then make handouts for magic items. Once a party member claims that item i move the handout to their folder. I leave all the information in the DM section. Most of the time nobody claims and uses anything untill they are identified. In which case i copy the DM section and move it the readable section.&nbsp; It is a great way for quick access for you to see what they have and even closer look when then use it and wht it does. I did get this from another DM.

personally, i prefer the "old" way because it feels cleaner vs the new "table" style

+1 to table style

The new table style fits more spells in the same amount of screen space, and is much easier to re-arrange.&nbsp; It's also easier to find a particular spell from a long list, since you only need to check one area of the page, rather than three.

I like the newer style personally, but I don't mind having the option for old there. Great stuff by the way! Love the sheet!

Is there a way to list out all the weapons the character had either in a deopdown menu, or in a box in chat?&nbsp; The player would then select said weapon and it would trigger a separate attc/dmg macro. Would rather have 1 button to then select a weapon, than multie buttons, one for each weapon. Thx

gabriel b. said: Is there a way to list out all the weapons the character had either in a deopdown menu, or in a box in chat?&nbsp; The player would then select said weapon and it would trigger a separate attc/dmg macro. Would rather have 1 button to then select a weapon, than multie buttons, one for each weapon. Thx Sure something like this is possible. The basis for such a macro would look like this: ?{Pick weapon| @{character_name|repeating_weapons_$0_weaponname},Your custom attack and damage macro| @{character_name|repeating_weapons_$1_weaponname},Your custom attack and damage macro| ... } However to get all the way that you want to go with both attack and damage you will have to setup some conditions.&nbsp; As the weapons attack and damage values are in different repeating sections, you will have to make your custom macro use the correct reference to each section. My I suggest that you utilize the 2Eattack roll template for your output as it shows both the AC that you hit and damage rolls for both S/M and L. OBS: &nbsp;Since the Melee Hit section is called repeating_ weapons &nbsp;that means that it will be affected by Ghost Rows &nbsp;from both the Melee Damage and Range Hit sections as these are respectively called repeating_ weapons-damage and repeating_ weapons2 . Alternatively you could make two macros. One for selecting the weapon and rolling To Hit, and another pop up for rolling Damage. This would require you to select the weapon you want to attack with twice, but that might be easier than having one macro access two different sections. I hope this is enough to get you started, or for someone else to help you get to where you want to be. Good luck writing your macro! :)

That's a good start.&nbsp; What i was thinking of doing is having 2 separate macros.&nbsp;&nbsp; 1. Select weapon 2. Actual calculation for attack and damage using the 2e template. The second macro would be triggered once a selection is made in the first macro.

gabriel b. said: That's a good start.&nbsp; What i was thinking of doing is having 2 separate macros.&nbsp;&nbsp; 1. Select weapon 2. Actual calculation for attack and damage using the 2e template. The second macro would be triggered once a selection is made in the first macro. I tried to do something like that but I could not make it work. It might be possible but it beyond my knowledge. The only way I know to make it work is to add the full 2e template to next to every weapon in my example above where I wrote&nbsp; Your custom attack and damage macro .

so, I found a potential solution.&nbsp; I'll chase it down and post it here.&nbsp; Someone else did some work on something like this before that I may be able to use. Peter B. said: gabriel b. said: That's a good start.&nbsp; What i was thinking of doing is having 2 separate macros.&nbsp;&nbsp; 1. Select weapon 2. Actual calculation for attack and damage using the 2e template. The second macro would be triggered once a selection is made in the first macro. I tried to do something like that but I could not make it work. It might be possible but it beyond my knowledge. The only way I know to make it work is to add the full 2e template to next to every weapon in my example above where I wrote&nbsp; Your custom attack and damage macro .

Peter, unrelated to my previous question.&nbsp; Specializations.&nbsp; does your sheet calculate or store bonuses for specific specializations?&nbsp; if so, where so I can reference in an attack and damage macro.&nbsp;&nbsp; example: Punching Specialization - +1 attack, +1 damage. what's the field that would store these bonuses for specialization?

(sorry for all the quesitons) - I am also working on thief skill checks.&nbsp; I have this so far, but want the player to select if they are wearing leather, heavy, or no armor.&nbsp; then the check is to be based on the player input.&nbsp; in essence the checktarget would be either ppnoarmort or ppt or&nbsp; pparmort &amp;{template:2Echeck} {{checkvs=Pick Pocket}}{{character=@{selected|token_name}}}{{checkroll=[[1d100cs1cf100-(?{Misc Modifier?|0})]] }}{{checktarget=[[@{selected|ppnoarmort}]] }} {{success=Successfully picked your target's pocket!}} {{fail=you need more practice!}} thoughts how I can add a drop down selection for armor/no armor and do the appropriate check?

gabriel b. said: Peter, unrelated to my previous question.&nbsp; Specializations.&nbsp; does your sheet calculate or store bonuses for specific specializations?&nbsp; if so, where so I can reference in an attack and damage macro.&nbsp;&nbsp; example: Punching Specialization - +1 attack, +1 damage. what's the field that would store these bonuses for specialization? Specialization is only implemented as the default one used for weapons, ie. +1 attack, +2 damage. This is done for the hit of the weapon, but selecting the Specialized Proficiency level, and for damage by checking the Specialization checkbox. Specialization in Punching / Wresteling / Martial Arts with the +1 attack, +1 damage, and +1 table is not implemented. I would suggest you just use the Attack Adj and Damage Adj fields and add these in manually. This also means that you should leave the Proficiency level at Proficient &nbsp;for the hit section and not &nbsp;check the Specialization &nbsp;checkbox for damage.

gabriel b. said: (sorry for all the quesitons) - I am also working on thief skill checks.&nbsp; I have this so far, but want the player to select if they are wearing leather, heavy, or no armor.&nbsp; then the check is to be based on the player input.&nbsp; in essence the checktarget would be either ppnoarmort or ppt or&nbsp; pparmort &amp;{template:2Echeck} {{checkvs=Pick Pocket}}{{character=@{selected|token_name}}}{{checkroll=[[1d100cs1cf100-(?{Misc Modifier?|0})]] }}{{checktarget=[[@{selected|ppnoarmort}]] }} {{success=Successfully picked your target's pocket!}} {{fail=you need more practice!}} thoughts how I can add a drop down selection for armor/no armor and do the appropriate check? I would do it in the following way {{checktarget=[[?{What armor are you wearing?|Leather Armor,@{selected|ppt}|No Armor,@{selected|ppnoarmort}|@{selected|armorname},@{selected|pparmort}}]] }} I would like to simplify the rogue section and remove the three columns Leather Armor, No Armor, Heavy Armor , and just have a single column. Then I would include the Leather / No Armor into the armor selector and just use that. There are so many things I would like to remove from the sheet, to make my life easier.

this is great.&nbsp; One last question on this topic.&nbsp; what would I need to add to the script to reflect the choice made in the Subtitle field?&nbsp; So the output would say No Armor, Leather Armor or Heavy Armor depending on the selection? Peter B. said: gabriel b. said: (sorry for all the quesitons) - I am also working on thief skill checks.&nbsp; I have this so far, but want the player to select if they are wearing leather, heavy, or no armor.&nbsp; then the check is to be based on the player input.&nbsp; in essence the checktarget would be either ppnoarmort or ppt or&nbsp; pparmort &amp;{template:2Echeck} {{checkvs=Pick Pocket}}{{character=@{selected|token_name}}}{{checkroll=[[1d100cs1cf100-(?{Misc Modifier?|0})]] }}{{checktarget=[[@{selected|ppnoarmort}]] }} {{success=Successfully picked your target's pocket!}} {{fail=you need more practice!}} thoughts how I can add a drop down selection for armor/no armor and do the appropriate check? I would do it in the following way {{checktarget=[[?{What armor are you wearing?|Leather Armor,@{selected|ppt}|No Armor,@{selected|ppnoarmort}|@{selected|armorname},@{selected|pparmort}}]] }} I would like to simplify the rogue section and remove the three columns Leather Armor, No Armor, Heavy Armor , and just have a single column. Then I would include the Leather / No Armor into the armor selector and just use that. There are so many things I would like to remove from the sheet, to make my life easier.

gabriel b. said: this is great.&nbsp; One last question on this topic.&nbsp; what would I need to add to the script to reflect the choice made in the Subtitle field?&nbsp; So the output would say No Armor, Leather Armor or Heavy Armor depending on the selection? The subtitle field is kinda wonky as it is expected to only be used for the characters name. In all ways a super bad design! Well you would have to add the question again, since this time you need a different value, so something like this {{character=@{selected|character_name} in ?{What armor are you wearing?|Leather Armor|No Armor|@{selected|armorname}} }} This will require the user to select their chosen armor type twice, which is really annoying. I do not know of a way around this for your use case sadly. Good luck with your macro.

Peter, I have a question about the Attack template.&nbsp; I wrote a macro that will reference a rollable table if the roll is a natural crit of 20.&nbsp; this is good.&nbsp; However, I have a player (druid) who will often transform to bear form.&nbsp; in bear form, if the attack hits with an 18+ it does additional damage. is there a way to set up a condition for the attack template, if it's 18+ to show the additional damage while maintaining the nat20 crit portion? here is the macro I have right now: &amp;{template:2Eattack} {{title=@{selected|token_name}}} {{subtitle=attacks}} {{weapon_used=@{selected|repeatingweapons$0_weaponname} }} {{ac_hit=[[@{selected|repeatingweapons$0_ThAC0}-(1d20+(?{Attack Roll Modifier|+0})+(@{selected|repeatingweapons$0_attackadj})+(@{selected|strengthhit}))]]}} {{dmg_s=[[@{selected|repeatingweapons-damage$0_damsm}+(?{Damage. Modifier?|+0})+(@{selected|repeatingweapons-damage$0_damadj})+(@{selected|strengthdmg})]]}} {{dmg_l=[[@{selected|repeatingweapons-damage$0_daml}+(?{Damage. Modifier?|+0})+(@{selected|repeatingweapons-damage$0_damadj})+(@{selected|strengthdmg})]]}} {{crit_s=}} {{crit_l=}} {{crit=[[1t[Fighter_Critical]]]}} {{fumble=[[1t[fumble-melee]]]}}

gabriel b. said: Peter, I have a question about the Attack template.&nbsp; I wrote a macro that will reference a rollable table if the roll is a natural crit of 20.&nbsp; this is good.&nbsp; However, I have a player (druid) who will often transform to bear form.&nbsp; in bear form, if the attack hits with an 18+ it does additional damage. is there a way to set up a condition for the attack template, if it's 18+ to show the additional damage while maintaining the nat20 crit portion? here is the macro I have right now: &amp;{template:2Eattack} {{title=@{selected|token_name}}} {{subtitle=attacks}} {{weapon_used=@{selected|repeatingweapons$0_weaponname} }} {{ac_hit=[[@{selected|repeatingweapons$0_ThAC0}-(1d20+(?{Attack Roll Modifier|+0})+(@{selected|repeatingweapons$0_attackadj})+(@{selected|strengthhit}))]]}} {{dmg_s=[[@{selected|repeatingweapons-damage$0_damsm}+(?{Damage. Modifier?|+0})+(@{selected|repeatingweapons-damage$0_damadj})+(@{selected|strengthdmg})]]}} {{dmg_l=[[@{selected|repeatingweapons-damage$0_daml}+(?{Damage. Modifier?|+0})+(@{selected|repeatingweapons-damage$0_damadj})+(@{selected|strengthdmg})]]}} {{crit_s=}} {{crit_l=}} {{crit=[[1t[Fighter_Critical]]]}} {{fumble=[[1t[fumble-melee]]]}} I don't think so. The roll template only have 2 outcomes for damage: Normal and Critical. The best solution would be to make the template do critical damage on any attack roll of 18+ and add the damage that way, but then you would not be able to actually critically hit on a 20. I think your best odds are to manually check the attack roll and add the bonus damage whenever it is needed. Now I do not know if your druid friend in bear from deals the same S/M and L damage, but if your friend deals the same damage, ie. 1d6 against both S/M and L enemies, then you could add the bonus 18+ bear damage to the L damage. That way you would always have one number showing the sub 18 damage roll and the above 18 damage roll. As I can see you do not use the critical damage portion of the macro, you can set it up so that it always crits on 18+ and add the bonus bear damage to the critical damage rolls. This will show you the damage, but you will also get the rollable table result which might be more confusing than adding the damage manually.

Progress Update It has been quite some time since my last announcement, but now I am finally ready to share something. Well... no. Since March I have spend my time reading through all the Dragon Magazine, Sage Advice for AD&amp;D 2E (issue&nbsp; 148 to 273... over 100 issues!) &nbsp;in the hopes of finding all the corrections and errata for spells and mechanics, as the books themselves have proven an unreliable or unclear source. I have also learned from experience that you guys' trust in me to get things right are way higher than I imagined. A lot of people I have talked to have used the spells, weapons, and other autofill content without second guessing or checking the source for correctness. Only the biggest of nerds, the truest of rules lawyers have reached out to me, which honestly scares me and made me realise my responsibility in getting this&nbsp; just right . This research have given me new perspective on the rules and changed my philosophy. Old&nbsp; philosophy: By the Book, RAW (Rules as written) Originally my plan was to implement content on the sheet exactly as written in the books (with the exception of adding level scaling to spells for easy reading), including spelling errors, bad wordings or ambiguous texts. I wanted to avoid adding my own bias to any spell as my reading could be different from the next guy (which has already happened for several spell) and thereby leaving any ambiguous spell up to the players and DM who were playing the game. My expectation was that you guys would edit the spells in your games to fit your needs or how you play. New philosophy: Intentions over RAW Now I want to add content, mainly spells, as they were intended to work. If a spell has an official correction from a Sage Advice then the correction will be added. If a spell is merely suggested to work differently or with a caveat, then it won't be included. Only hard correction, or design intentions will be added. Originally TSR printed new version of their books to correct errors, for instance the original PHB (the blue book) had 11 printing runs. After going to the new revised format (the black book) nearly all corrections were carried over, but some new errors were introduced, so it had 2 printing runs. After this TSR &nbsp;stopped printing newer version of their books to correct spells, and decided that updated spells would be printed in The Wizard/Priest Spell Compendium books instead (along with all new errors!). An example of such a spell is the &nbsp; Symbol &nbsp; spell which was given a completely new description in The Wizard Spell Compendium,&nbsp; to alleviate all the confused it caused, &nbsp;that would take priority over the original description in the Players Handbook. In order to ensure traceability of these changes, all the sources for a spell will be listed in the macro for a spell. So if a spell is originally from the PHB, but got new version in a Spell Compendium and later got a correction in a Sage Advice (such as the Symbol &nbsp;spell) then all three sources will be added as references to the spell template. I will add links to the Sage Advice forum threads on Dragonsfoot on the wiki page to help access this rather obscure information. So what about the next update? As of writing this post I haven't started writing a single line of code for the next update. All the work done has been purely research. So you will have to patience yourself for anything new as the real work begins now! I will be going through, the PHB, PO: Combat &amp; Tactics, Skills &amp; Powers, Spells &amp; Magic and check the content. When it comes to spells, they will be checked against their source book, the compendium books, and the Sage Advices. So no more edge cases right? Well not entirely. A few things in my research have stood out to me. The 1st level wizard spell, from Complete Wizards Handbook, have been changed from 1st level to 7th level which kinda breaks my structure in the sheet. I am not entire sure how I will handle this. Some spells are still wrong / confusing / ambiguous in the Spell Compendium books, so these either have to stay ambiguous or it has to be a ruling from me. My current thinking of these things is that I will add a note on the wiki page about the worst offenders of edge cases, to help inform players and DMs about this. Then they can hopefully make a ruling for their game. That is it for this time I hope you guys will be patient with me as I continue to work through all of this content. If there is one thing I have learned, then it is: There is no final rule. Everything is made up!

Didn't every DMG say that the DM's decision is final? Or did I dream that?