D&D 5E (2024) Character Sheet & Builder by Roll20

After our last level-up, one character received extra HP rolls at level 4 and cannot remove them. To correct the max HP, we had to manually apply a negative modifier.

(In the builder, only one roll is displayed, but the total HP is incorrect.)

There is no Spell_Save_DC attribute.  This effects some of the mods from working correctly.  Or using any macro to pull that stat.

Nicole B. said:

Inspector said:

There is no Spell_Save_DC attribute.  This effects some of the mods from working correctly.  Or using any macro to pull that stat.

Thanks for the feedback! I've tossed that attribute (and a few other spellcasting-related ones) into a ticket to get read status next week. I can't guarantee it'll be through dev, review, and QA by next week but we'll at least have it on the board.

Thanks for the reply.  I'll keep my eye out for an update.

Nicole B. said:

Tuo said:

It appears my comment here was eaten by the forum. Ah well.

The way death saves are only shown at 0 hit points is very indicative of the anti-homebrew design approach of this sheet. Say you want to make the combat of your game deadlier, by not having failed death saves reset when you stabilize (so if you're healed up at 2 failed death saves and then go down again, you still have 2 failed death saves) - well, tough luck, because this sheet won't have your back. Play a very specific and narrow way or don't play.

In the realm of "homebrew rules we can imagine but don't know of people actually using", there would be many that the 2014 sheet doesn't support but the 2024 sheet does - such as anything that relies on more than one speed field, spells or weapons with multiple attacks associated with them, attacks with more than 2 damages associated with them, etc. Is the 2014 sheet anti-homebrew because you can't rename currencies to your homebrew world's names like you can on the 2024 sheet? Or because you can't remove default skills that don't apply to your homebrew ruleset? I would argue no, personally, but you may believe so.

Just like the 2014 sheet, there are limits to what we can support. For example, neither sheet currently supports inspiration stacking, which I would guess has become more common with its usage in Baldur's Gate 3. If there are use cases for homebrew that aren't currently possible on the sheet, for example the crit damage homebrew rule that we're working on now, we're happy to add more flexibility in those areas on the roadmap. But the nature of a character sheet that isn't just a series of loose inputs on a page, that allows rolling, lists, automation, building characters, leveling, etc., means that we will have to make some choices on where to apply rules, like we did on the 2014 sheet and like all character sheets do.

I encourage anyone who is using a homebrew rule that the 2024 sheet doesn't support to either post here or send in a ticket describing that rule and how it was supported on the 2014 sheet. That will really help us prioritize places where improved flexibility would be most useful!

Coming across a little hostile there - either way, you absolutely can, and easily, use weapons and spells with multiple attacks with the 2014 sheet, as you can manually add attacks to the list. Just as you can easily control when various checkboxes such as death saves are checked, as the control isn't automated away from you. That is the point I'm making. When you automate processes at the cost of taking away the control of those processes, you alienate people who needed that control to play their own way. The ideal solution is, make the automation optional. Have settings for additional control over the sheet functions. You could have the best of both worlds.

But the showing is that the priorities are not with the users having control over their games. And that is an issue.

... and some of the features that are mentioned as not being available in 2014 are either available (in some cases) or were available (in most others) before Roll20 took the sheet in-house. 

On the other end for anyone that is using "standard" DND and/ or a simple or just social player with minimal or no customization the new sheet is an huge improvement as clearly helps a lot in discriminating what you can do in the different moments.

I have been playing dnd for over 40 years and one of my player is one of the friends with whom we started playing in '83-'84.

A dnd meet is mostly the chatting and the jokes and the having fun with friends, not in the same city anymore, as a side night so a sheet that guides you in remembering what are your possible actions is very useful

Nicole B. said:

tasos t. said:

After our last level-up, one character received extra HP rolls at level 4 and cannot remove them. To correct the max HP, we had to manually apply a negative modifier.

(In the builder, only one roll is displayed, but the total HP is incorrect.)

We used to have this problem commonly, but it's been a while since I've seen it. Can you give me more details on what your player was doing when it happened? Was the sheet open in two places at one (ex. DM and player both have it open)? Was the roll button clicked/undone multiple times, or just once?

This can be fixed by clicking Level Up to get back into the builder, editing HP, and then clicking "Undo" on the roll 3-4 times. 3 times if you just want to take the first roll that it logged (which is the 9 total, last in the list), 4 if you want to just clear it out entirely (which will default to 8, first in the list). Then you won't need the modifier anymore. Then you can click review character and save it, it won't actually level you up if you don't click your level up to 5, it will just update your choices at the level you're currently at.

We also have a ticket on the board to allow for manually deleting any duplicate HP values in case of this problem, but it hasn't been picked up yet since it's a bit of a lower priority with the modifier and undo workarounds.

Only the player have the sheet open, he went back through the level-up steps to change his hp from average to rolled.

There's no question about that.

I think what people are saying is that the automation, and restrictions currently built into the sheet, should be OPTIONAL, so that others who play a different way, can also use the sheet and play it their way.

Roll20 is a tool and should remain a tool. The staff should not be dictating how people play, putting in text or automation into the sheet that takes away agency from the players or the DM.

Andrea L. said:

On the other end for anyone that is using "standard" DND and/ or a simple or just social player with minimal or no customization the new sheet is an huge improvement as clearly helps a lot in discriminating what you can do in the different moments.

I have been playing dnd for over 40 years and one of my player is one of the friends with whom we started playing in '83-'84.

A dnd meet is mostly the chatting and the jokes and the having fun with friends, not in the same city anymore, as a side night so a sheet that guides you in remembering what are your possible actions is very useful

I wonder if the answer here is to have two different sheets: one fully automated and another with all options customizable, with both usable within the same game.

Saul J. said:

There's no question about that.

I think what people are saying is that the automation, and restrictions currently built into the sheet, should be OPTIONAL, so that others who play a different way, can also use the sheet and play it their way.

Roll20 is a tool and should remain a tool. The staff should not be dictating how people play, putting in text or automation into the sheet that takes away agency from the players or the DM.

I don't know. The 2014 sheet was very, very flexible once you understood how it worked. There wasn't a lot automated. That being said, there were some things I wish were automated when I was playing that wasn't.

What I'd really like is one sheet (to avoid confusion) that is flexible and has automation that can be turned on or off depending on the user's wishes. For example, as a fighter I might want certain automations, and as a wizard I might want different automations, and as a bladelock I might want a different set - some of the weapon automations, and some of the spell automations... but I might not want everything automated that is available for automation. So, for example, I might not want spell preparation automated but I might want spell slot tracking automated. Or something different for a different character.

The sheet should be adjustable to my wants/needs, not the wants/needs of anyone else, including the staff of Roll20. It should work for how I play the game, and be a tool that I can use for my character to track and automate what I want it to track and automate.

I know that is a lot to ask but, it's what I feel would be ideal. The 2014 sheet came very close to what I would want. The 2024 sheet, not so much.

Rick A. said:

I wonder if the answer here is to have two different sheets: one fully automated and another with all options customizable, with both usable within the same game.

Saul J. said:

There's no question about that.

I think what people are saying is that the automation, and restrictions currently built into the sheet, should be OPTIONAL, so that others who play a different way, can also use the sheet and play it their way.

Roll20 is a tool and should remain a tool. The staff should not be dictating how people play, putting in text or automation into the sheet that takes away agency from the players or the DM.

Tuo said:

But the showing is that the priorities are not with the users having control over their games. And that is an issue.

I'd disagree with that. The initial release had very limited flexibility, and that caused a lot of problems for sure, but every addition to the change log since has shown more customization being added to give more power to the user. There are still a good amount of changes to be made to bring it to 2014 levels of flexibility, but it's unfair to say that their priorities aren't on making those changes when they quickly pivoted so that it's high priority because we asked for it. 

I also agree that being able to disconnect features and parts of the sheet from automation is very important, and have voiced this several times in 1on1s, so I hope that they take that on board eventually. Automation is great until it makes things slower due to having to create workarounds. 

P.s. My weekly bug reports haven't stopped, we simply haven't come across anything recently which needs fixing and isn't already being fixed or implemented. We're all much happier at the moment, and most of our group are at the point of preferring the 2024 sheets. 

using 2024 sheet builder for Dragon Born Warlock 20th Lvl. The breath weapon isn't working properly, instead of 4 d10 it shows 2 d10, and can't be changed. Same with Eldritch Blast, shows 2 d10 and can't be changed. This was last night around 1030 PM PST.

Nicole B. said:

tasos t. said:

Only the player have the sheet open, he went back through the level-up steps to change his hp from average to rolled.

Thanks, I'll keep an eye out for this.

I am happy to report that a lot of "spell lists in the builder don't load" bugs have been fixed! For anyone who's been waiting on Pact of the Tome, Magical Secrets, or Shadow-Touched.

Pact of the Tome is still broken. Not just grey rectangles; you can at least choose spells now. BUT you can only choose Warlock spells, and that is not how that Invocation works. It's very clear in the writeup that you can choose from ANY CLASS for the spells. Also, where are we with the duplication of things like Magic Initiate? That's still not working.

I don't often play martial classes, so I haven't encountered this one before. The unarmed fighting style gives the character a combat action of Unarmed Strike (Unarmed Fighting) which does 1d6 + str bludgeoning damage. So far, so good. If you're not holding any weapons or shield, the damage goes up to 1d8 + str. The feat creates an effect toggle called No Weapons or Shield (Unarmed Fighting), which I assume is intended to change the damage of the unarmed strike to 1d8. Except, it doesn't seem to have any effect at all. The character also has the tavern brawler origin feat, which creates its own unarmed strike attack, so I thought maybe that's what broke the toggle. So I created a test character who didn't have tavern brawler and gave him unarmed fighting style and...I think I made it worse! Now, when I toggle on the No Weapon or Shield effect, the damage disappears from the unarmed strike in the combat screen. I used the attack just to see what would happen, and it outputs 1d6 damage with no str modifier.

Is this a known issue, or have I stumbled onto something new?

Quick followup: After closing and reloading the test character, the toggle no longer makes the damage disappear; now it does nothing at all just like the first character.

Jay W. said:

Quick followup: After closing and reloading the test character, the toggle no longer makes the damage disappear; now it does nothing at all just like the first character.

Are you using query for advantage and disadvantage that was a bug where it would not apply toggleable roll effects, not sure if this has been patched yet.

David Q. said:

Jay W. said:

Quick followup: After closing and reloading the test character, the toggle no longer makes the damage disappear; now it does nothing at all just like the first character.

Are you using query for advantage and disadvantage that was a bug where it would not apply toggleable roll effects, not sure if this has been patched yet.

It's set to Automatic. I just loaded the character and tried switching to all the other modes, but the toggle still has no effect.

Jay W. said:

I don't often play martial classes, so I haven't encountered this one before. The unarmed fighting style gives the character a combat action of Unarmed Strike (Unarmed Fighting) which does 1d6 + str bludgeoning damage. So far, so good. If you're not holding any weapons or shield, the damage goes up to 1d8 + str. The feat creates an effect toggle called No Weapons or Shield (Unarmed Fighting), which I assume is intended to change the damage of the unarmed strike to 1d8. Except, it doesn't seem to have any effect at all. The character also has the tavern brawler origin feat, which creates its own unarmed strike attack, so I thought maybe that's what broke the toggle. So I created a test character who didn't have tavern brawler and gave him unarmed fighting style and...I think I made it worse! Now, when I toggle on the No Weapon or Shield effect, the damage disappears from the unarmed strike in the combat screen. I used the attack just to see what would happen, and it outputs 1d6 damage with no str modifier.

Is this a known issue, or have I stumbled onto something new?

Also tested it out with a brand new fighter + unarmed fighting. Had the exact same issue where the damage disappeared when toggling on, which fixed itself after reloading the sheet (same as you). Seems like it's a problem with the baked in 'Unarmed Fighting Unarmed Strike Damage 2' modifier not doing what it's meant to do. Weird that it has '2' at the end instead of saying D8 for example, could just be set up wrong on the backend.

Nicole B. said:

Jay W. said:

I don't often play martial classes, so I haven't encountered this one before. The unarmed fighting style gives the character a combat action of Unarmed Strike (Unarmed Fighting) which does 1d6 + str bludgeoning damage. So far, so good. If you're not holding any weapons or shield, the damage goes up to 1d8 + str. The feat creates an effect toggle called No Weapons or Shield (Unarmed Fighting), which I assume is intended to change the damage of the unarmed strike to 1d8. Except, it doesn't seem to have any effect at all. The character also has the tavern brawler origin feat, which creates its own unarmed strike attack, so I thought maybe that's what broke the toggle. So I created a test character who didn't have tavern brawler and gave him unarmed fighting style and...I think I made it worse! Now, when I toggle on the No Weapon or Shield effect, the damage disappears from the unarmed strike in the combat screen. I used the attack just to see what would happen, and it outputs 1d6 damage with no str modifier.

Is this a known issue, or have I stumbled onto something new?

You've found something new, I fear. I'm going to look into this, I wasn't able to find an immediate answer to why this is happening, but it appears to also have something to do with our modification system, like the breath weapon.

Thanks for confirming. As always, I'm glad to help find those sneaky bugs hiding in obscure places!

Nicole B. said:

In the realm of "homebrew rules we can imagine but don't know of people actually using", there would be many that the 2014 sheet doesn't support but the 2024 sheet does - such as anything that relies on more than one speed field, spells or weapons with multiple attacks associated with them, attacks with more than 2 damages associated with them, etc. Is the 2014 sheet anti-homebrew because you can't rename currencies to your homebrew world's names like you can on the 2024 sheet? Or because you can't remove default skills that don't apply to your homebrew ruleset? I would argue no, personally, but you may believe so.

For the fun of it, I decided to take another look at this comment.

Additional speed field, check (achieved by using custom resource tracker)

Weapon with multiple attack options (directly drawn from compendium)

Attack with more than 2 different damages (custom ability injected into the attack template via the description field)

These are all things made possible because the user has control over the sheet. Now show me yours.

Starr Saphyre said:

Pact of the Tome is still broken. Not just grey rectangles; you can at least choose spells now. BUT you can only choose Warlock spells, and that is not how that Invocation works. It's very clear in the writeup that you can choose from ANY CLASS for the spells. Also, where are we with the duplication of things like Magic Initiate? That's still not working.

FWIW, I just tried creating a new Warlock character, choosing Pact of the Tome as my first invocation. The list seemed to include all spells, not just Warlock spells. For example, Guidance was one of the choices for the cantrip, and that's not a Warlock cantrip. I didn't compare the list against all possible cantrips. Same thing for 1st level spells - there were more on the list than just Warlock spells, but I didn't compare the list against all possible 1st level spells.

Maybe it's not working on previously created characters?

Nicole B. said:

SNIP

I think where we differ is that you're looking at what you, as roll20, can provide for the sheet, while I am looking at what the community can do with the sheet. As despite nearly a decade of requesting custom compendium still isn't a thing, how the compendium data interacts with the sheet isn't at all relevant to what the users can make happen on their own initiative with the sheet. The community is cleverer by half than what you think, and if the users are given the keys to the functions of the sheet, most problems can be solved by simply asking for help from the community. As I quite enjoy helping people with problems, to me it's far more valuable to be able to apply my knowledge to the sheet in ways that the designers may not have thought of, than whatever it is that makes the data easier to work with behind the curtain where it's inaccessible to the user beyond the very specific intended way. You might think that ideally you would leave no gaps in the system to fill, no problems to fix, but we both know that isn't reality. So it's better to give the users the tools to make the game their own.

PS, I'm a big fan of Toll the Dead too, and I've found the two damage fields served by the attack entry of the 2014 sheet to be perfectly serviceable for the two different damage modes of the spell (and I got so used to it being that way that I completely forgot it wasn't set up like that in the compendium). But you can also make it work with a query for the different die size, and the cantrip dice scaling will play ball with the 2014 sheet.

This sheet is like a phone that cannot make phone calls.. then saying how great it does (or will do, in theory) all the extra stuff when all I want to do is make a phone call.  Keep sight of what the users want, please.  If you sent me a copy of the last 2014 sheet before it was taken in house I'd be happy!

Just checking in again on the feedback that I've given before (February 13, 2024; June 18, 2024; November 11, 2024). My caveat is that I haven't done any testing over the past few months, and I just opened up my 2024 test game (from cold storage) and took a quick look through these items.

Out of 18 suggestions/requests, it looks like 6 are fully or almost fully implemented, 5 are at least partially implemented or still need some refinement, and 7 have not been implemented in any way whatsoever.

For me, #1, #2, and #10 are deal-breakers for me using the new sheet.  #1 and #2 relate to creating a 2024 version of my Statblock Macromule, and #10 is something that I'm not going to deal with not being able to easily hide the Journal name of NPCs.  If I create an NPC named John who is secretly a Vampire Lord, and I need to have them make a roll, what shows up in chat is 'Vampire Lord' because that is the name of the character sheet.  Changing the name on the Manage Info tab also changes the Character Name!  There's no way to make a roll that displays as 'John'.  I honestly don't understand how the 'npc_name' field isn't part of the 2024 sheet in a way that is editable separate from the 'character_name'.

1. Consistency between roll templates
• Partial - Roll templates are have been partially implemented, and devs have said that more will be added. They also don't use a narrow fixed width.
• However, it's not clear to me how much of the roll template syntax will be available for custom macros.
2. Attributes
• Partial - Some attributes on the sheet are now manually editable, but it appears that there are still a lot of duplication of values that could easily be a single value ('ac' versus 'npc_ac')
• I'm guessing that a lot of the attributes are not going to change (there's no reason to change the 'experience' attribute that I can think of), but there is definitely a lot of bloat and unused 'legacy' attributes on the current character sheet.  For instance, there are a ton of 'npc_*****' attributes on the sheet, that may as well be the same as the non-NPC values and just have a single attribute that is used whether the sheet is set to PC or NPC. There are other issues, such as the 'class' versus 'multiclass1' attributes and they show on the sheet versus how they combine into 'class_display'.
3. Allow 'numerical' fields to accept non-numerical inputs or attribute calls
• No - Does not appear to be possible
• That way features could accept a modifier, such as Initiative adding Dex plus Proficiency Bonus.
4. Whisper Type
• No - I'm not seeing this
• Please include a 'GM only' whisper setting into the sheet/sheetworkers.  It sounds like that is included on the Pathfinder 2E sheet now, so I'm guessing this is already on the roadmap, but I want to highlight it just in case it's not.
5. Standardized PC versus NPC layout
• Yes - I think? I haven't tested the sheet enough to see if there are edge cases, but it appears to have more functionality, and the difference between PC and NPC layout is likely intentional and useful.
6. Output for all repeating items
• Yes - it appears that most things have an 'output' roll.  It looks like there are a few edge cases where that isn't true (such as PC Proficiencies & Languages)
7. Item Mods
• Yes. But I haven't tested enough to know if they are all functioning correctly or not.
8. Custom skill rolls / Alternate Skill Checks
• Yes! 
• The interface for rolling a custom skill check is still very clunky.  I hope this gets cleaned up and made easier.  If I want to roll a Strength (Acrobatics) check then I would like to quickly click on the 'Dex' button that is listed as the Mod for a quick one-off or to make the change, instead of going through the Settings Cog to the right.
9. Vision & speed settings
• Yes! 
• The interface for adjusting speed is still clunky, but it vastly improved.
10. Name options
• No. This is even worse than the 2014 sheet, because there's no way to set the 'npc_name' separately from the 'character_name'.
• I would love it if there was a field for a 'true name' or 'nickname' so that PCs could have their full name listed in one place, but a shortened name referenced elsewhere.  Similarly, for named NPCs, it would be possible to have the nickname display show 'Nobleman' until the players meet the NPC and learn his name is Lord Leremon III.
• If I have a PC or NPC that I want to 'hide' their true identity from my players, I have no easy way of doing that other than changing the name of the character in the Journal.
11. Conditions / Spell effects
• Yes! But...
• It looks like there is the option to add custom Conditions, and Modifiers. It would be nice to have others, e.g. it would be cool if the 'Blinded' condition could adjust the 'Vision' stat automatically.
• It still doesn't look like there's any way to add a 1d4 roll to Saving Throws from Bless.
• This relates to #3 above: Allow 'numerical' fields to accept non-numerical inputs or attribute calls.
12. Vehicles
• No.
• Vehicles are not currently supported in any meaningful way.  
13. Colored indicators/tags for spells, traits, etc.
• No. I'm not seeing any clear indicators in the spell list for Ritual, Concentration, etc.
• This idea for different colored 'prepared' icons for spells, and likewise for traits or other repeating items. Or some other way of identifying/distinguishing items in these lists.  That would be easier than modifying each one individually with emojis. It would also be really nice to have some kind of indication if a spell is 'always prepared' due to a clas/subclass feature (e.g. a Paladin Oath spell) or if the item is on the sheet due to an item, etc.
• And even in List view, the Spells tab still takes up too much space. There really needs to be a more 'Ultra Compact' view. But it is much better than it used to be.
14. Attunement
• Yes!
15. DM-Only fields within description fields for spells, attacks, etc.
• No.
• It would be really nice to have a DM-only section of descriptions for pretty much everything.  A good example is a Giant Spider's Web feature.  If the description is shown, then players will see in chat when the attack is rolled what they have to do to get out of the Web.
16. Inventory 'Containers'
• No.
• Please include a way for inventory to be 'placed' inside another item, such as a sack, or a Bag of Holding, and allow for the weight to be modified automatically as needed. 
17. List Ordering for Language Translation
• Please ensure that list ordering according to language is implemented.
• No. I'm not seeing this...
• But as users we likely won't ever see this directly because it will be embedded into the code itself.
18. Alternative Critical Damage Calculations
• Many tables allow for alternative critical rules, such as 'brutal criticals'. It would be great if there was an option for that.
• No, but maybe? I played around with modifying a standard Dagger attack for a bit, and I honestly can't tell what is happening with the Critical Damage roll. This might just be bugged and need to be logged and fixed.
• I changed the Crit Override to d4, 0 , 4 and was getting a 2d4+3 roll for some reason. Character has an 8 strength for a -1 strength mod, clicking on the Crit Damage button should have given a roll of 1d4-1 for the regular damage, and 4 for the crit damage.
• 
• 

Starr Saphyre said:

Pact of the Tome is still broken. Not just grey rectangles; you can at least choose spells now. BUT you can only choose Warlock spells, and that is not how that Invocation works. It's very clear in the writeup that you can choose from ANY CLASS for the spells. Also, where are we with the duplication of things like Magic Initiate? That's still not working.

I'm not able to replicate this - the choices that are presented to me under "Pact of the Tome Spell Choice" are not the same as what's presented to me as "Level 1 Spells". Can you log out/back in and then share a screenshot of what you're seeing? The only theory the team and I could come up with was that the request for spells failed and it fell back to the last spell request you made, which may have been choosing a Warlock spell.

Could you clarify what you mean by "duplication of things like Magic Initiate"? I brought that phrase back to the team and there were 2-3 guesses as to what this might be in reference to.

Okay, so looking at Pact of the Tome, it actually IS working, but the header reads "Warlock - Cantrip", which threw me. Sorry on that one. As for Magic Initiate, build a character who is Human (species) and Acolyte (background). Select Magic Initiate as the Human Feat, which now means you have two occurrences of that Feat. When you get to spell selection, it only processes one of the Magic Initiate Feats, and doesn't let you select spells for the other. (And if you take it again at higher level, same problem; Spell Selection in the builder is only taking one occurrence of Magic Initiate, not multiple.)

Why is there no Custom Race option in the 2024 sheet? That was a great feature of the old 2014 sheets which allowed for those instances where you need to use a non-standard species. We are just starting a Dark Sun campaign and it would be great if we could add in the setting races such as Mul or Half Giant.

Reposting what I said about a week ago, and has not been fixed, or even acknowledged:

The Monk's Deflect Attack ability is wrong on the character sheet. The amount deflected is supposed to be 1d10+Dex modifier+Monk level but the button that is supplied on the sheet only rolls 1d10+level.  And, there's no button on there for the amount of damage that is redirected which should be 2 rolls of the Martial Arts die + Dex modifier.

Also, the button on the sheet for the Uncanny Metabolism ability indicates a heal of 1 roll of the Martial Arts die + Monk level but it doesn't actually heal. I don't know if it's meant to or not but I had to do it manually. This should be done automatically.

Saul J. said:

Reposting what I said about a week ago, and has not been fixed, or even acknowledged:

The Monk's Deflect Attack ability is wrong on the character sheet. The amount deflected is supposed to be 1d10+Dex modifier+Monk level but the button that is supplied on the sheet only rolls 1d10+level.  And, there's no button on there for the amount of damage that is redirected which should be 2 rolls of the Martial Arts die + Dex modifier.

I confirm that the damage reducing part of the feature is incorrect; I have a player playing a monk. However, the redirected damage part does have a button, up in the attacks.

I see it, now. It's in the wrong place, then (IMO). It should not be listed in "Attacks" because you're not taking the Attack action and it's not an attack. You're taking a Reaction. It should be where the ability is described in the Reaction block.

keithcurtis said:

Saul J. said:

Reposting what I said about a week ago, and has not been fixed, or even acknowledged:

The Monk's Deflect Attack ability is wrong on the character sheet. The amount deflected is supposed to be 1d10+Dex modifier+Monk level but the button that is supplied on the sheet only rolls 1d10+level.  And, there's no button on there for the amount of damage that is redirected which should be 2 rolls of the Martial Arts die + Dex modifier.

I confirm that the damage reducing part of the feature is incorrect; I have a player playing a monk. However, the redirected damage part does have a button, up in the attacks.

Eh, it's dealing damage to someone and it requires a saving throw. There are plenty of things in the attack section that fit that pattern. I'm fine with it there, but the damage reduction part does need to be fixed.

Eh. Maybe. But, the sheet is so cluttered as it is with all the things (in some cases, unnecessary things) on the 2024 sheet, that condensing the two into one entry would help with the readability of the sheet, and make it easier to find the button.

keithcurtis said:

Eh, it's dealing damage to someone and it requires a saving throw. There are plenty of things in the attack section that fit that pattern. I'm fine with it there, but the damage reduction part does need to be fixed.

The 2024 character sheet is not letting me change the crit range values. It is automatically returning to 20 whenever I change it to less. I  have a player that's a champion fighter and I want it to crit on a 19 instead of us having to remember that a 19 is also crit but the sheet isn't recognizing or saving any other value besides a 20 as a the crit threshold 

Sadeke S. said:

The 2024 character sheet is not letting me change the crit range values. It is automatically returning to 20 whenever I change it to less. I  have a player that's a champion fighter and I want it to crit on a 19 instead of us having to remember that a 19 is also crit but the sheet isn't recognizing or saving any other value besides a 20 as a the crit threshold 

I cannot recreate this works as intended for me.

Edit: One thing I did notice is after setting the crit threshold and closing the sheet when I reopen the crit threshold doesn't reflect the correct number but it still functions. My advice is set the threshold to 1 run the attacks, close the sheet and reopen try attacks again and see if it works.