Multiple Iterations if you roll below # becomes #

I've been fiddling around with roll 20 specifically for 5e and sw5e, I was wonder if there was a way to do multiple comparisons and then add them together for example [[{1d8, {3}}kh1]] doing something like this where if it's less than 3 choose three Say for example I wanted to do 3 of these types of rolls Is there a way to not do [[{1d8, {3}}kh1 + {1d8, {3}}kh1 + {1d8, {3}}kh1]]  Or perhaps is there a way similar to the 1d8ro<3 mechanic to facilitate this end What i've opted to do is ?{Force Points| 0, {0d0} | 1, {1d8,{3}}kh1 | 2, {1d8,{3}}kh1 + {1d8,{3}}kh1 | 3, {1d8,{3}}kh1 + {1d8,{3}}kh1 + {1d8,{3}}kh1} But it's a lot

Couple ways you can do this:  method 1: [[{1d8, 1d8, 1d8, {3}, {3}, {3}}kh3]] method 2: [[{1d8,{3}}kh1 + {1d8,{3}}kh1 + {1d8,{3}}kh1]] (the method you wrote above) There are probably others. Where you get into trouble is if you want to choose the number of d8s rolled, generally for that you generally need a Mod (API Script) which requires the campaign owner to have a Pro account.

Hmmm I gotchu, that okay wasn't sure if there were any sneaky thing one could do

There is a suggestion for Custom dice syntax that could handle this easily, so considering adding your voice and vote to it. But in the meantime my favoured workaround would be {?{Force Points|0}d8 + ?{Force Points}d3r<2cs0}k?{Force Points} It does cause a bit of a mess in the tooltip from all the re-rolls to force 3's to appear. If the minimum of 3 is static you could create a rollable table and then roll that using ?{Force Points|0}t[tablename]

I should have said *unless RainbowEncoder has a method* LOL. 

One thing to mention: it's usually possible to build a macro that does X amount of things, the tricky part is if you want a macro that manages a variable number of things: on this roll we'll have 3 things happen, on this roll we'll have 4 things, etc. This kind of thing is not really supported on Roll unless usign a custom script. It's sometimes possible to hack the system to do what you want if descriptive about what you need, but it's always hacky and clunky. This is a reason to support that Custom Dice Syntax suggestion if you haven't already!