[5e Shaped] Discussion Thread

Since Kryx has left I'm considering taking up the mantle of this.  It's an incredible sheet.  He has 4000 lines of javascript embedded within the sheet.  If I do this, I find the light grey buttons with white text to be very difficult to read, at least for my older eyes, so I'd change them in a way TBD to make them more readable.  There's also been a request to move equipment onto it's own tab.  Doing so provides more real estate and allows for describing where an item is (such as a utility belt, component pouch, pouch, backpack etc), and add a magic item area that at a minimum lists the magic items separate from the equipment.  I find on OGL that magic items get forgotten when it's listed in a blob of equipment.  Other than those changes, I'd keep the sheet as is.   I want to focus on any compendium issues first.   I've tried the sheet a bit and so far compendium is fine.  But there hasn't been a post about this in a few months.   Also, another sanity check, are people using this sheet anymore since Kryx recommended switching over to OGL.  If the work was done on this sheet, would people use it?  

I would be using it today, but my players are in love with the Characetrmancer.

Another real estate improvement (that could actually be stolen from the OGL) is making the traits individually collapsible, instead of all or nothing. As for why things are where they are, both Shaped and the D&D 5th Edition by Roll20 Sheet mimic the layout of the official character sheet. Although the equipment does take up space, that's why it's there. Both sheets could be improved by abandoning WotC's decision to have the coin location cut into the equipment area.

I understand.  I'd question the value added by mimicking the paper version.  If equipment were it's own tab showing magic items clearly apart from other equipment, that's value added as my players often forget what magic items they have.  They can't see them in a list of equipment when scrolling down a very vertical page.  Yes, separating money and making it horizontal at the top rather than vertical and cutting into the equipment area is value added.  Same net result but more effective use of space.  In a longer term view, I believe personality/flaws/biography doesn't have to be on the core page.  It's not referenced a whole lot after character creation.  It's taking up needed space.  A Biography tab could store that along with all the biography info and free up a bunch of space so the features/racials/feats start at the top of the 3rd column rather than mid way.  A lot less scrolling and makes higher level character easier to manage.  Making it collapsible on shaped is a good idea.  

Good luck, that is likely a massive undertaking, but welcome, undertaking. It would be great if the Shaped sheet would remain as a solid alternative to the "by Roll20" sheet, considering something like half of all Roll20 games are done with the 5E system. You could update the wiki page for the sheet with a not on your intentions and use to document any further development: <a href="https://wiki.roll20.net/DnD5e_Shaped_Character_Sheet" rel="nofollow">https://wiki.roll20.net/DnD5e_Shaped_Character_Sheet</a>

To truly reach people using the sheet, I would add a collapsible/dismissible section on the sheet itself that says you plan to update the sheet, with a link to the wiki page and/or the forum thread.

Another issue to consider is that most people on Pro tend to have used the manual update of the sheet, rather than one-click. When Kryx was developing, the sheet and the script could easily get out of sync, due to differing pull times on the repo. The recommended practice was to watch the forums, and whenever one updated, go grab or verify that you have the latest code for both. It is my suspicion that many people still have the latest manual update and may not even be aware that the code has changed.

I'm not sure I'll take this on.&nbsp; I know of 3 people from Combat Master thread using it.&nbsp; One person here (Rabulias), but I was expecting more of a response.&nbsp; I have a feeling people took Kryx's recommendation to switch to OGL to heart.&nbsp; It is a huge undertaking because of the sheer amount of code that Kryx developed (not including the API, which itself is quite large).&nbsp; I don't want to do this for 4 people.&nbsp; &nbsp;

Actually, I am not using the Shaped Sheet. Just offering some advice after seeing upset users come into the forums after a sheet has been updated and they had no idea what was going on. Other sheets use the technique I suggest to give fair warning. And Keith makes a good point, too. Those are probably the power users of the sheet. Not sure the best way to reach them. :-/

If I were to do this, I'm starting to think I wouldn't overlay the main shaped.&nbsp; I'd publish a variant.&nbsp; I have a feeling there may be many power users of this sheet.&nbsp; It does provide enormous flexibility beyond OGL.&nbsp; However, if there's that many power users and not one of them has stepped up to support it, then perhaps it doesn't need support.&nbsp; There's enough workarounds or manual entry of compendium data to not need someone to support.&nbsp; &nbsp;It has been 4 months and I haven't seen hardly any posts requesting support.&nbsp; There's one today in APIs for the companion script, but that's the first I've seen in a while.&nbsp; &nbsp;

Victor B. said: Since Kryx has left I'm considering taking up the mantle of this.&nbsp; It's an incredible sheet.&nbsp; He has 4000 lines of javascript embedded within the sheet.&nbsp; If I do this, I find the light grey buttons with white text to be very difficult to read, at least for my older eyes, so I'd change them in a way TBD to make them more readable.&nbsp; There's also been a request to move equipment onto it's own tab.&nbsp; Doing so provides more real estate and allows for describing where an item is (such as a utility belt, component pouch, pouch, backpack etc), and add a magic item area that at a minimum lists the magic items separate from the equipment.&nbsp; I find on OGL that magic items get forgotten when it's listed in a blob of equipment.&nbsp; Other than those changes, I'd keep the sheet as is.&nbsp;&nbsp; I want to focus on any compendium issues first.&nbsp;&nbsp; I've tried the sheet a bit and so far compendium is fine.&nbsp; But there hasn't been a post about this in a few months.&nbsp;&nbsp; Also, another sanity check, are people using this sheet anymore since Kryx recommended switching over to OGL.&nbsp; If the work was done on this sheet, would people use it?&nbsp;&nbsp; On the Style changes - I'd have to see what you mean first.&nbsp; I like the styling in place currently, but though I'm biased, there is always openness to change. Putting equipment on it's own tab would be useful, but can you add attunement slots (that, bc of artificer, are not static to just 3) and filterable things like rarity, magical or mandane, attuned/ attunable, etc? I've run into compendium issues with the Eberron content (or is it Ravnica?) not showing everything or having blanks in conversion.&nbsp; I think the shaped sheet would benefit from pre-converting all unknown compendium entries marked as npcs or monsters.&nbsp; This would probably take considerable time to do during new compendium adds or game setups, but sometimes doing them on the fly is worse.&nbsp; Especially mid-game when you realize you haven't triggered the parsefromOGL script on that particular monster ... I'd run it for new games, yes.&nbsp; But my games often go on for years, so I don't know when I could get to test it out.&nbsp; Also, even though he isn't supporting the work anymore, I wouldn't feel right if his work was used without his permission.&nbsp; A lot of his heart and soul went into making that sheet and the results are one of the best sheets and scripts I have ever seen on Roll20!&nbsp; Copying and Altering his code without permission gives me an icky feel in the honorable part of me... even if he has left the project.&nbsp; It's still his.&nbsp; And I know you're not necessarily calling it the shaped sheet, but it's still being built on the backbone of it ... Well that's my 2 cents worth.

Victor B. said: I understand.&nbsp; I'd question the value added by mimicking the paper version.&nbsp; If equipment were it's own tab showing magic items clearly apart from other equipment, that's value added as my players often forget what magic items they have.&nbsp; They can't see them in a list of equipment when scrolling down a very vertical page.&nbsp; Yes, separating money and making it horizontal at the top rather than vertical and cutting into the equipment area is value added.&nbsp; Same net result but more effective use of space.&nbsp; In a longer term view, I believe personality/flaws/biography doesn't have to be on the core page.&nbsp; It's not referenced a whole lot after character creation.&nbsp; It's taking up needed space.&nbsp; A Biography tab could store that along with all the biography info and free up a bunch of space so the features/racials/feats start at the top of the 3rd column rather than mid way.&nbsp; A lot less scrolling and makes higher level character easier to manage.&nbsp; Making it collapsible on shaped is a good idea.&nbsp;&nbsp; At this point, reading this, you are just making OGL version 2.&nbsp; Appearance-wise you want OGL, function wise you want Shaped.&nbsp; But to add to that craziness ... Charactermancer support would be nice for those that want to make their characters quickly.&nbsp; If not charactermancer, perhaps a Characterbuilder that improves on the Roll20 model specific to your version of the sheet Shaped's Temp HP, and the whole HP block, was rather confusing.&nbsp; So many times my players thought they were updating the max HP only to be updating the current.&nbsp; Then they would put the max in the negative HP Area.&nbsp; And then the Temp HP was difficult to find.&nbsp; It's one area OGL did better at.&nbsp; Sorting that area out would be nice. If you would keep the three columns, put money in line with the Ability Scores.&nbsp; Also add Gem Values as a Monetary type (50 GP Gems, 100 gp gems, 500 gp gems, etc) with the appropriate weight reflected for encumbrance.&nbsp; Because honestly, does anyone care if they have a 100 gp Amethyst or a 50 gp Bloodstone ?&nbsp; Except for Pearls &amp; Diamonds and a couple other gems, most types don't really matter in the end. I know what Kieth and you are saying about the collapsable all or nothing, but be careful before the whole sheet gets filled with buttons.&nbsp; OGL had that issue too - where it was difficult sometimes to put data in for all the buttons it had lying around.&nbsp; (Equiping and unequipping come to mind, with the checkbox being after expanding and overlapping the descriptions/ mods, etc. area - they could have just done that in front of the item description like Shaped did) It would be nice if equipment packs would auto-populate the individual items. Also - there is a flaw in the Shaped sheet I don't know if people ever noticed: - The Spear will get 3 entries (Spear, Spear (Versatile), and Spear (Thrown)) - No Versatile weapon ever had the correct damage associated with it, it was a duplicate of the one-handed version.&nbsp; So both would be at 1d6, though the Versatile should be at 1d8, and had to be changed manually. - All three entries would have weight!&nbsp; So that same 3 lb spear would actually cost 9 lbs of encumbrance!&nbsp; No, more.&nbsp; Because the Spear also had an ammunition entry, which also added weight!&nbsp; So 12 lbs, or 4x as much as it should have been! - Any property of THROWN should only calculate weight in the ammo section.&nbsp; Deleting any other weight entry on the main and/ or versatile entries.&nbsp; Perhaps even avoiding the conundrum of one-handed and two-handed by making another type of entry in the same weapon setting for damage:&nbsp; "As 1-handed Weapon" and "As 2-handed Weapon", outputting both.&nbsp; I think the sheet should also automatically check for an equipped shield and roll only the 1-handed damage if they have a shield equipped.&nbsp; As online virtual players, I've seen players seperate their thoughts on armor class and melee: "I wanna have the best AC possible, so Plate mail and Shield"/ "I wanna have the best damage possible, so Glaive" ... forgetting that they need 2 hands free for the glaive and would have to forgo +2 AC to wield it. In my game we are very RP heavy, so moving the flaws, etc. to a separate tab would actually hurt us.&nbsp; Same with anything biographical.&nbsp; Moving it to the bottom of main page would not, such as after the Dark Line shaped has, which I always referred to as the page break dividing page one and two on the main tab.

Victor B. said: I'm not sure I'll take this on.&nbsp; I know of 3 people from Combat Master thread using it.&nbsp; One person here (Rabulias), but I was expecting more of a response.&nbsp; I have a feeling people took Kryx's recommendation to switch to OGL to heart.&nbsp; It is a huge undertaking because of the sheer amount of code that Kryx developed (not including the API, which itself is quite large).&nbsp; I don't want to do this for 4 people.&nbsp; &nbsp; More people would use a better sheet, trust me. But the issue comes from Roll20 itself - who advertises "With the OGL by Roll20 Character Sheet integration" on every new product it sells.&nbsp; Moving people away from what they have invested a lot of effort in promoting is always difficult.&nbsp; But just as I have always dedicated myself to the best and most improved products and APIs on here, others are like-minded and will use something once the word spreads. Of course, this is something that only is available to Pro subs anyway.&nbsp; So that's how much of the market?&nbsp; That small percentage is your target, but that percentage are the one's interested in a better finished product; it's why I sub.&nbsp; So it's entirely up to you.&nbsp; Shaped is still quite usable, even unsupported (and I'm really sad to here of this news, btw), so you don't have to take it on at all - and doing so would be a tremendous amount of work that you would need a team to help with to keep up with all new products and updates.&nbsp; Look at Aaron and others dealing with UDL, as just an example.&nbsp; And who knows what is next down the line?&nbsp; I've seen what you've gone through with trying to finish Combatmaster ... multiply that headache by 100 ... because if your sheet gets a percentage as popular as CM has, you're in for something you'll never hear the end to or suggestions for... The only way I'd do it is if you did it as a team effort, maybe Juan wants on board, for example.&nbsp; I'd be glad to let my friends beta test it.&nbsp; I think the layout and design would be easy; it's the API and functionality that would be "fun".&nbsp; The latter being what the team would be useful for, if you decide to reinvent the wheel at all.&nbsp; And in that team would have to be focus groups, ones dedicated to the main behavior of the API, the parsing of current and new compendium entries, integration with APIs (including CombatMaster, of course).&nbsp; Each team should have tasks with measurable and defined results that declare completion ... an area with CM you've had issues with (thus the headache when people suggest more functions with it) and why its not done yet.&nbsp; lol

keithcurtis said: Another issue to consider is that most people on Pro tend to have used the manual update of the sheet, rather than one-click. When Kryx was developing, the sheet and the script could easily get out of sync, due to differing pull times on the repo. The recommended practice was to watch the forums, and whenever one updated, go grab or verify that you have the latest code for both. It is my suspicion that many people still have the latest manual update and may not even be aware that the code has changed. Yeah - thats my case - I always downloaded from the github Heard in early development a lot of games could get wiped by that off-sync nature, so I never took chances with the sheet doing that to me.

If this gets more traction, I'll go ahead and do it.&nbsp; As far as your bio/profile goes, I don't know about you, but I don't have a char sheet full page because then I can't see the map.&nbsp; So I have the char sheet about 1/2 or less in size and then I scroll down to find what I want.&nbsp; In a shorter char sheet display, it's much easier to click on a bio button and see your bio without hardly any scrolling than to have a single page that you scroll down on.&nbsp; Much quicker also.&nbsp; I'm not sure why some players like everything on a single page.&nbsp; To me it's busy, messy and harder to find stuff than having dedicated pages requiring little to no scrolling to view the relevant information.&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;

Yeah most of the stuff about Shaped is that as a recommendation, it's better to stay out of the sheet itself as an User Interface. Use the statblock macros or the other sheet-generated macros but as a general recommendation try to stay out of it to do in-game actions, since you may use more time than intended. That's why I've worked hard to add macros (such as a wallet manager macro), freetext's and attachers, to avoid having my players go into their sheet unless they have to add or remove a certain item or equipment, prepare/unprepare a certain spell, etc.

Juan C. said: That's why I've worked hard to add macros (such as a wallet manager macro), freetext's and attachers, to avoid having my players go into their sheet unless they have to add or remove a certain item or equipment, prepare/unprepare a certain spell, etc. Struggle of my life.&nbsp; keithcurtis said: Another real estate improvement (that could actually be stolen from the OGL) is making the traits individually collapsible, instead of all or nothing. +1 Victor B. &nbsp;said: If I were to do this, I'm starting to think I wouldn't overlay the main shaped.&nbsp; I'd publish a variant.&nbsp; Don't know if its worth completely taking over the script. As it stands its working fine for me, but, man, backpack tabs please Roll20. For real. The inventory on all of the sheets is atrocious.&nbsp;