colored In-line rolls

I'm asking this before going to post it in suggestions on the off chance that it's already implemented... Is there any way to set a background color to in-line rolls? The reason for this is my macros tend to get a little confusing after a while due to just how many numbers are presented at once, so I was wanting to provide a way of organizing them through colored backgrounds if at all possible... I have my attack, damage, and crit ranges all displayed in a single post with my macros, so they are extensively text heavy... I wanted to set my damage rolls to a light blue background and my crit ranges to a light green background, that way it's easy to tell at a glance what rolls are for what.

Not unless you use the API.

You wouldn't happen to know the API script that would be required for this would you? My GM has mentor status, so I might be able to talk him into adding it... this is mostly for his sake after all... we actually went a couple games after I got my macros set up with him having no idea what rolls were for what >.<

There isn't one specifically written... and it would require all inline rolls to be sent via an !api command instead of being able to use them in normal chat.

You can also accomplish this by creating Rollable Tables with custom images to represent the die faces.. colored however you want. This would not need Mentor level access, though it has its own challenges. (one table for attack rolls, one table for damage rolls, etc, and you would lose most of the benefit of inline rolls)

Mark G. said: You can also accomplish this by creating Rollable Tables with custom images to represent the die faces.. colored however you want. This would not need Mentor level access, though it has its own challenges. (one table for attack rolls, one table for damage rolls, etc, and you would lose most of the benefit of inline rolls) Yea... I don't think rollable tables will do for this... Here's what the output of my Macro's tends to look like Cyra launches an assault with her Rogue Blade hitting flatfoot AC [46]/[53]/[40]/[0] striking for [32]/[29]/[34]/[0] damage (crit [54]/[49]/[44]/[0] or better) [0]/[0]/[0]/[0] Cyra's familiar Ruby attacks with her Tail [53] dealing [26] and Stings [50] for [23] injecting poison, then Bites [54] for [23], and rapidstrikes with her claws [45]/[46]/[34] mauling for [26]/[25]/[25] and rending for an additional [40] (Sleep Poison: Fort save DC:[28] vs sleep 1 minute | [1] hours | Claw crits [54]/[54]/[49] deal 1 Con damage no save) as you can see,,, quite number heavy... the second one more-so than the first

The API of choice for making pretty cards seems to be HoneyBadger's Powercards script. However, you don't need that for what you say the issue is: Your GM isn't following how you do your math, yes? Try something like this (simplfied version of yours, set in D20 terms since I have no idea what system you're in): /me launches an assault with her Rogue Blade, hitting Flatfoot AC [[ 1d20 +@{MyDex}[Dex] +@{RB}[Blade To Hit Bonus] +?{MiscToHit?|0}[Temporary To Hit Bonuses] ]], striking for [[1d6[Blade Base Damage] +1d6[Sneak Attack Damage] +@{Str}[Strength bonus] +@{RB|max}[Blade To Damage Bonus] +?{MiscToDamage?|0}{Temporary To Damage Bonuses] ]] I'm on the laptop right now, give me ~30 mintutes and I'll be on my desktop where I can pop this into a macro, roll it, and post a picture of the output. If you post your macro code here, I'm sure somebody can suggest ways to improve it :> Edited to Add: I added a few things to the macro that should have been in the example (like a temp bonus to damage), and here's how it looks when you fire it off: I hope this helps you out.

It's not an issue of my GM not understanding the math... it's that when we're in the middle of a drawn out encounter it often becomes confusing as to which set of rolls are Attacks, which ones are Damage, and which ones are Crit ranges or Other... In this macro the first line of rolls are Attacks the second line are the Damage for each attack the third line are the values I crit on and then the 4th row is for miss-chance which as of late is only needed in rare occasions Attacks with my familiar and another character aren't quite as well organized though.... I've found myself getting confused as to which rolls are for what with these two even... Since both of these characters use natural weapons in their attacks they get a bit cluttered... I only included crit ranges for weapons that have a crit range greater than just 20 to reduce the clutter since a crit on a 20 is easy enough to spot I'll be using the later two macros more often soon... so it's fairly necessary to find a way to reduce confusion...

Ok. In this situation I would move to multiple-line macros, with output like this: Target 1: AC [diceroll] vs Name for [diceroll] damage, +[diceroll] if a crit Target 2:AC [diceroll] vs Name for [diceroll] damage, +[diceroll] if a crit Target N:AC [diceroll] vs Name for [diceroll] damage, +[diceroll] if a crit Secondly, use 1d20r>X where X is your critrange. My Pathfinder character uses 1d20r>18. The downside is you HAVE to mouseover the diceroll to see if you've rerolled multiple times because if you keep rolling over X, it will keep rerolling until you roll under. So a 20 followed by a 20 followed a 2 will only show the 2, unless you mouseover. That said, as long as you don't have any bonuses to hit that apply in the case of a crit, this format is marvelous for consolidating dice rolls. If your GM is open to using API scripts, we can get even fancier. I don't have any examples of multiple melee attacks on the same target, but here are some cards from my 4e game to give you an idea. There's a downside to the cards you need to be aware of: If you have an attack that can attack a variable number of targets, the cards do not handle it gracefully, if you want line by line readouts like I suggested above.

The cards don't handle it gracefully because it would be too cumbersome to deal with as a player each time you use the macro. :D If Riley adds the multi-target option I suggested, it will be much simpler to manage.

I'm honestly not sure about either of those... Multi-line macros feel excessively cluttered to me in all honesty... and those cards feel even more cluttered... The card would be useful for spells and abilities though... here's what one of my macros looks like: /em attacks with her Tail [[1d20+ @{weapon1attack}]] dealing [[@{weapon1damage}]] and Stings [[1d20+ @{weapon5attack}]] for [[@{weapon5damage}-@{halfstr}]] injecting poison, then Bites [[1d20+ @{weapon2attack}]] for [[@{weapon2damage}-@{halfstr}]], then rapidstrikes with her Claws [[1d20+ @{weapon3attack}]]/[[1d20+ @{weapon3attack}]]/[[1d20+ @{weapon3attack}-5]] mauling for [[@{weapon3damage}-@{halfstr}]]/[[@{weapon3damage}-@{halfstr}]]/[[@{weapon3damage}-@{halfstr}]] and rending for an additional [[@{weapon4damage}]] (Sleep Poison: Fort save DC:[[10+floor(@{hitdie}/2)+@{con-mod}+2]] vs sleep 1 minute | [[1d3]] hours | Claw crits [[1d0+@{weapon3critmin} + @{weapon3attack}]]/[[1d0+@{weapon3critmin} + @{weapon3attack}]]/[[1d0+@{weapon3critmin} + @{weapon3attack} -5]] deal [[1]] Con damage no save) Weapon#attack: @{bab}[BAB] +(?{Divine Power (1=yes)|0}*(@{Level}-@{bab}))[Divine Power] +@{weapon#stat}[Ability] +@{size}[size] +@{weapon#enh}[Weapon Enh] +@{weapon#focus}[Weapon Focus] +1[Prayer] +2[Heroism] +3[Skin of the Hero] +3[Divine Favor] +?{Flank (1=yes)|0}*2[Flank] +2[Enhanced Familiar] +?{Misc Atk|0}[Misc] Weapon#damage: 1d4 +@{weapon#damagestat}[Ability]+@{weapon#enh}[Weapon Enh] +@{weapon#specialize}[Weapon Specialization] +?{Size difference|2}d6[Fell the Greatest Foe] +1[Prayer] +2[Heroism] +3[Divine Favor] +2[Enhanced Familiar]

Here's your Rogue Blade attack as a power card... which also has the benefit of custom crit ranges for weapons... ... doesn't look that cluttered to me. But I am biased since I wrote the thing. :D

Pssst. [NH] those damage rolls ^_-

:P