Mark, as we've previously discussed, at great and very painful length, it's pretty clear we dont see eye to eye on a fair number of things. I will, once more, strongly refute the direct accusation you made to me previously as well as your comments above in which you appear to not so subtly accuse me once more. I have not, in any way shape or form, prevented any player/GM/group from playing 5e in whatever way they see fit! If anyone does feel like I have dictated a certain playstyle to them then by all means let me know! Your continued suggestions that I am somehow dictating the ruleset or style of play for 5e groups due to the decisions I make over the direction of the sheet are completely without merit or justification. I wish you all the best in taking the sheet in the direction you wish to go with it and as I have said before I am sure you will find a playerbase that is interested in (and desires) the changes you plan to make ---- Obviously my opinion on things isnt going to match everyone elses and there are plenty of options for those that want to go in a different direction than I choose to....from using the fields and functions on the sheet differently (ie. by adding roll queries for things like casting level or target), to setting up their own macros/token actions optionally using the fields that the sheet provides, to using parts of the sheet and customising it in a major or minor way. I think i've always been pretty clear that people could go and grab the code and do whatever they like with it and many many have both now and in the past. The sheet already provides support (either directly or indirectly) for rules or options I dont use but it does so in a way, as Genkitty has alluded to in the targeting example, by staying as close to a "core" or "default" setup as possible whilst leaving room for people to customise as they wish. That way anyone new or unfamiliar with the system or even roll20 can get a much easier start since what the sheet provides them should match up largely to what their expectations would be after reviewing the basic rules or the roll20 help documentation/videos. In the case of the AC debate specifically (auto taking the highest) the difference is essentially between providing one option and allowing people to customise/enhance/change that based on their own needs, or auto including a customisation/change/enhancement and asking players to use a workaround if they do not want to use it. To be clear, I can see why for many players something like that is desirable and useful. But it is a customisation based on a decision taken by the sheet author that means users have to subtly adjust to that decision...which might be fine for those that desire it but less so for those that do not want it.