[Script] PowerCards 2 (Thread 2)

You still didn't answer my questions, Ziechael. :> Given the math you're using, you can cut a lot of repeat out by using the re-roll dice mechanic. Is there a reason you're not? Given that rakes 1 and 2 use identical math, why not use the repeat powercard function? :) HB: I'm looking forward to testing and debugging PC3.x. Please say this won't be a Dev-only branching?

GenKitty said: You still didn't answer my questions, Ziechael. :> Given the math you're using, you can cut a lot of repeat out by using the re-roll dice mechanic. Is there a reason you're not? Given that rakes 1 and 2 use identical math, why not use the repeat powercard function? :) HB: I'm looking forward to testing and debugging PC3.x. Please say this won't be a Dev-only branching? I've stopped writing PowerCards on the dev server and am creating is solely on the production servers. I'll send you the script here in a little bit. Just need to add a few things and it should be ready for testing.

GenKitty said: Given that rakes 1 and 2 use identical math, why not use the repeat powercard function? :) Because I'm a dinosaur, who, while a massive fan of change and advancement, is very very slow to incorporate advancements when what i've been doing has worked fine. I also just plain can't keep up with my day job, building my campaign AND keeping up with the amazing work HB is constantly putting into this script. To that end, i didn't realise repeat was there... or if i had seen it i may have misunderstood and assumed it would create a duplicate entry rather than one with unique rolls. Also, to further explain my plight, i write SOOOO many PC's that i tend to use a template and if it works i'll just stick with it ;) However, thanks to your gentle berating i'll now be incorporating the repeat function in all applicable scenarios (i really need to read through the latest tag list in more detail...). [edit] aside from using queries to determine the repeat factor... could i also use the 'how many magic missiles' formula to generate the output?

I'm not sure about using a formula to derive the number of attacks on a repeat tag. I'll toss that at HB to answer. I haven't actually used the repeat function before, myself, because all of the attacks I write for can have different targets, which repeat doesn't handle. What I'm big on is the rerolls, because of the pathfinder game I play in. When the reroll-once mechanic was added to the dice engine, I was overjoyed and my macros became much leaner as a result. Pssst: Not berating. Nudging :>

GenKitty said: I'm not sure about using a formula to derive the number of attacks on a repeat tag. I'll toss that at HB to answer. I haven't actually used the repeat function before, myself, because all of the attacks I write for can have different targets, which repeat doesn't handle. What I'm big on is the rerolls, because of the pathfinder game I play in. When the reroll-once mechanic was added to the dice engine, I was overjoyed and my macros became much leaner as a result. Um... using the target info charms you can have different targets. My Scorching Burst macro for Wizard in D&D 4e... !power {{ --format|encounter --name|Scorching Burst --leftsub|Standard Action --rightsub|Encounter --target_list|@{target|1st|token_id} | @{target|2nd|token_id} | @{target|3rd|token_id} | @{target|4th|token_id} | @{target|5th|token_id} | @{target|6th|token_id} | @{target|7th|token_id} | @{target|8th|token_id} | @{target|9th|token_id} --Attack:#?{Number of targets|1}|[[1d20+5]] vs Reflex (%%token_name%%) --Hit:|[[1d8+3]] fire damage }}

I did say gentle berating! Hmm, repeat is nice for trimming it down but doesn't allow me to number the individual tags to aid identification... still its nice to know it exists. I'll test the magic missile option myself to allow the illustrious author to spend time on more important matters than my ignorance. As for lean macros, i'm a fan of large impressive blocks of text that really show my players that i'm working hard so that they don't have to... and copy/paste takes a lot of the work out of it anyway ;) I've reverted my original problematic ones back to non-inline which has fixed them but i've certainly learned a lot from this attempt to bug-fix so thanks for that at least :)

Sample PowerCards 3.0 macro... only includes conditionals for tags. Nothing yet for conditionals in content however. Eldritch Blast (w/Hex Option) !power {{ --tokenid|@{selected|token_id} --emote|//@{selected|token_name} unleashes a blast of eldritch energy at his foe.// --format|atwill --name|Eldritch Blast --title|Components: V, S ^^ Duration: Instantaneous ^^ Eldritch Blast creates additional beams at 5th, 11th, and 17th level. You can direct all the beams on the same target or at different ones. Make a separate attack roll for each beam. --leftsub|Standard Action --rightsub|Range 120 ft. --Attack:|[[ [$Atk1] 1d20 + 4 [Cha Mod] + 2 [Proficiency] ]] | [[ [$Atk2] 1d20 + 4 [Cha Mod] + 2 [Proficiency] ]] vs AC --??$Atk1 base <> 20 AND $Atk2 base <> 20??Hit:|[[1d10]] force damage and the target is pushed up to 10 ft away --?{Hex|$}??$Atk1 base <> 20 AND $Atk2 base <> 20??!Hex:|^* **+** [[1d6 [Hex] ]] necrotic damage --??$Atk1 base >= 20 OR $Atk2 base >= 20??Critical Hit:| [[2d10]] force damage and the target is pushed up to 10 ft away --?{Hex|$}??$Atk1 base >= 20 OR $Atk2 base >= 20??!CritHex|^* **+** [[2d6 [Hex] ]] necrotic damage }}

Ziechael said: I did say gentle berating! Hmm, repeat is nice for trimming it down but doesn't allow me to number the individual tags to aid identification... still its nice to know it exists. I'll test the magic missile option myself to allow the illustrious author to spend time on more important matters than my ignorance. It can... you just have to edit the script to get it to show the attack numbers. I should probably make that an option you can configure when you set the number of attacks. Here's a simple three target magic missile macro that will show the names of each target and how much damage they take. !power {{ --name|Magic Missile --target_list|@{target|1st|token_id} | @{target|2nd|token_id} | @{target|3rd|token_id} --!Target:#3|**%%token_name%%** takes [[1d4+1]] force damage }}

This is why I shouldn't have serious discussions when I first get up. For some reason, my brain was not associating the Repeat tag as being the same thing as I use for my variable multiattacks :> I'm more awake now!

If you want to test out PowerCards 3.0 before I make a thread... whisper me. I'll send you the gist link before I go to work this evening. Be warned however, it is not dev server friendly.

Wake up GK! Get yourself some coffee or something. Maybe a cup of cream...

I want to go on record and say that I (personally) love the token charms, and use the hell out of them. When I edited the 5e character sheet to add PowerCard function to everything (prior to the roll template implementation), I set up a single button to cast any spell and only roll the fields necessary for that spell type. It was a problem with things like Magic Missile, etc., until I started using charms. Now the script looks like this: !power {{ @{format} --charid|@{character_id} --emote|@{spellemotetext} --name|@{spellname} --leftsub|@{spellcasttime} --rightsub|@{spellrange} --Prepared?:|@{spellisprepared} --Concentration?:|@{spellconcentration} --Ritual?:|@{spellritual} --Components:|@{spellcomponents} --Duration:|@{spellduration} --target_list|@{spelltarget} --Target#?{Number of targets|1}:|**$$#cf0000|%%token_name%%$$** ~~~ ^* **Attack:**~R[[1d20 + [[@{attackstat}]] [Attack stat mod] + @{PB} [Proficiency Bonus] + @{global_spell_attack_bonus} [Active Spell Attack Bonus] ]] | [[1d20 + [[@{attackstat}]] [Attack stat mod] + [[@{PB}]] [Proficiency Bonus] + @{global_spell_attack_bonus} [Active Spell Attack Bonus] ]]~R ~~~ ^* **AC:**~†%%bar3%%~† ~~~ ^* **Damage:**~R[[@{damage} [Base Spell Damage] + [[@{damagestatbonus}]] + [[@{damagemiscbonus}]] + @{global_spell_damage_bonus} [Active Spell Damage Bonus] ]]~R ~~~ ^* **Damage Type:**@{damagetype} @{spellcrittext} --Higher Spell Effect:|@{spellhighersloteffect} --Description:|@{spelldescription} }} !slot @{character_id} spell_slots_l?{Spell Slot Level?|@{spellbaselevel}} 1 Granted, the last line is just a line break to then run a script to automatically increment the spell slot, but you get the gist. We set the target listing in the spell target field, so people can edit accordingly, spell dependent.

Sean G. said: Wake up GK! Get yourself some coffee or something. Maybe a cup of cream... A mile long walk around the neighborhood, followed by a strong shower, does marvels to clear the mind :> Those spell-cards look lengthy as well as impressive. No bodyfontsize adjustments to make them take up less room? :> (The ability to use smaller fonts is one of the things I adore about Powercards, fitting more information per square inch!) I'm happy to report that my round 1 of PC3.x testing went well! I have basic attacks in both Pathfinder and 4e style behaving as one would like, and I'll work on more complicated attacks in my next round of testing.

Haven't even made an attempt to do so. On attack spells like Magic Missile, you're already losing the entire chat window on a full cast. :) I'll be trying to break PC3 in a little bit. It's more fun that way.

Just had an awesome idea for mass attacks from multiple tokens, like say a pack of goblins. Will only work for DM's since the "target list" would be populated with info from msg.selected.

And Sean G's spell template is basically a roll template you define in a macro instead of in the html character sheet.

Definitely. For the HTML character sheet, I just remove all the enters to make it the long line of code and it actually works beautifully. The only thing a person has to do, is ensure the @{spelltarget} field contains the appropriate number of total attack possibilities. Since all the data is called from that specific repeatable field, it's the only way to have it set up so it can pull the data from the spell book itself. I'm not recommending it -- just saying that it sure made me come to love charms. It allowed me to organize the data for things like Scorching Ray, which had variable target amounts:

*twitch* Were I to run a 5e game, I'd be making spell handouts and linking to them for the details, and only putting stuff in the spellcards pertinent to the specific casting. Long cards like that drive me nuts ^_^ (One reason I love Pathfinder, I can link to the SRD)

I hate looking things up in game. Hehe. We put as much information on the card as possible, so we don't have to tear through books. Consider for a moment 80% of that card is just attack information.

Joshua M. said: I FIGURED IT OUT!!! If you have a space after --tokenid|@{selected|token_id}, then it won't work. You need to be sure that there is no extra space after that line. Thank you! I can't tell you how frustrating it was to change my triple bracket error ( '[[[') and have the macros that used to work still not work. But thanks to you, I found a space after my target_list, and bam, it worked! Now to go back through _every_ macro. Better that frustration than still banging my head against the "what am I doing wrong?!?" wall.

Oh... I figured out the space after the charid/tokenid problem. I just haven't pushed out the version with that fix just yet. Got a couple other things to look at too.

Hi there i am very new too this whole power card thing and too be honest i have no idea how too code anything. Really like the idea of useing power cards but was haveing trouble getting the single attack to work with charms. the scrpit poops up this code SyntaxError: Expected "(", ".", "[", "abs(", "ceil(", "d", "floor(", "round(", "t", "{", [ |\t], [+|\-] or [0-9] but "a" found. after useing this example of the power card !power --name|Single Target Attack --target_list|@{target| |token_id} --Attack|[[1d20+5]] | [[1d20+5]] vs %%AC%% Armor Class (%%token_name%%) --Hit|[[1d8+3]] slashing damage if it is something simple sorry to waste your guys time. i really enjoy using roll2o and just trying to get things up and going for my first campiagn.

Ok sorry figured it out i had my char sheet not done right too pull the information i was looking for. Now time to firgure out how too make it look like a power card attack with all the bells and whistels.

HoneyBadger said: Oh... I figured out the space after the charid/tokenid problem. I just haven't pushed out the version with that fix just yet. Got a couple other things to look at too. I've recreated the bug GenKitty talked about a few weeks ago, and it's coming from the same problem. If the macro has the line "--format|encounter " (note the blank space at the end), it will try to take the format labeled "encounter ". A workaround for this is cloning the format lines and writing a blank space at the end of each one, like this: encounter: --txcolor|#FFFFFF --bgcolor|#440000 encounter : --txcolor|#FFFFFF --bgcolor|#440000

I've found Powercards to be oddly twitchy about whitespace; I think it's just something we all have to be aware of and check as a part of debugging our cards. Heya, Bradford. I suggest starting off small and easy and building up to more complicated macros. What system are you playing?

Regarding whitespace at the start or end of anything... I just have to add some .trim()'s here and there to fix those problems. Will try to push out the fix for those tomorrow. Picked up some more overtime at work tonight.

Hello there playing 4E DnD at the moment and like the look of the power cards and stuff and have been working a little with the macro's trying too get them too work right... totally agree we are starting off small right now and will improve later when we learn more.

Here's some inspiration for you, Bradford. :> Here's three macros from one of the PCs in my 4e group: A melee basic attack, a single-target attack, and a variable multi-attack. They rely on a handout to contain the proper formats. !power {{ --name|**@{selected|token_name} | Melee Basic Attack** --format|atwill --leftsub|At-Will --rightsub|Standard Action --Keywords:|Weapon --Attack:|[[1d20 + @{HalfLevel} + @{Str} +@{Blade-P} + @{Blade-A-CFEM} + ?{MiscToHit?|0} ]] vs [[@{target|Foe|AC}]] @{target|Foe|token_name}'s AC --Damage:|[[ ([NH]1d8) +@{Str} + @{Blade-D-FEMM} + ?{MiscToDamage|0} ]] damage | Crit [[ (1*8) +@{Str} + @{Blade-D-FEMM} + [NH]2d6 + ?{MiscToDamage} ]] }} !power {{ --name|**@{selected|token_name} | Guiding Strike** --format|atwill --leftsub|At-Will --rightsub|Standard Action --Keywords:|Arcane, Weapon --Attack:| [[1d20 + @{HalfLevel} + @{Cha} +@{Blade-P} + @{Blade-A-CFEM} + ?{MiscToHit?|0} ]] vs [[@{target|Foe|AC}]] @{target|Foe|token_name}'s AC --Damage:|[[ ([NH]1d8) +@{Cha} + @{Blade-D-FEMM} + ?{MiscToDamage|0} ]] damage | Crit [[ (1*8) +@{Cha} + @{Blade-D-FEMM} + [NH]2d6 + ?{MiscToDamage} ]] --^1On Hit:|@{target|Foe|token_name} suffers -2 to ?{AC, Fort, Ref, or Will?:|AC} until the end of Ekima's next turn. }} !power {{ --name|**@{selected|token_name} | Dragon Breath (Blast)** --format|enc --leftsub|Encounter --rightsub|Minor Action --Keywords:|Blast, Lightning --Effect:|Bolstering Breath: Allies in area gain +1 to all attack rolls until the end of Ekima's next turn. --AoE:|Close Blast 3 --Attack:|vs Reflex --target_list|@{target|1st|token_id} | @{target|2nd|token_id} | @{target|3rd|token_id} | @{target|4th|token_id} | @{target|5th|token_id} | @{target|6th|token_id} | @{target|7th|token_id} | @{target|8th|token_id} | @{target|9th|token_id} --Target#?{Number of targets|1}:|[[ 1d20 + @{HalfLevel} +2 + @{Con} + ?{MiscToHit?|0} ]] vs %%token_name%%'s %%Ref%% --Damage:|[[ ([NH]1d6) +@{Con} + ?{MiscToDamage|0} ]] **Lightning** damage | Crit [[ (1*6) +@{Con} + ?{MiscToDamage} ]] }}

Bleh... looks like I need to re-write the whole critRoll / failRoll process with all the structural changes of the msg.inlinerolls object. Something somewhere just isn't working the way it should or used to (if it ever worked properly).

Going to add this feature that popped into mind while I was messing around with PowerCards 3 stuff... turn anything into an inline "roll"! :D

Getting much much closer to releasing PowerCards 3. Just got a few irksome things to work out yet. Unfortunately... I cannot see any way to combine conditionals ("roll helpers on steroids") with target info charms in an easy to use manner, both in the script and in macros. So this will work best for single target attacks only really. Here's the macro that shows how the conditionals work in PC3. It was used to make the screenshot below. !power {{ --name|Attack --Attack:|[[ [$Atk] 1d20 + 4 [Str Mod] ]] vs [!@{target||AC}!] **AC** (@{target||token_name}) --?? $Atk base == 1 ?? Critical Miss:|You fumbled! --?? $Atk base <> 1 AND $Atk total < @{target||AC} ?? Miss:|You missed! --?? $Atk total >= @{target||AC} AND $Atk base <> 20?? Hit:|You hit! You dealt [[1d6+3]] damage. --?? $Atk base == 20?? Critical Hit:|You critically hit! You dealt [[2d6+6]] damage! }}

D: I'm excited.

HoneyBadger said: Getting much much closer to releasing PowerCards 3. Just got a few irksome things to work out yet. Unfortunately... I cannot see any way to combine conditionals ("roll helpers on steroids") with target info charms in an easy to use manner, both in the script and in macros. So this will work best for single target attacks only really. I've been thinking about the issue since you first said you were having troubles making the two work together. Short form: I think it will be ok. Longer form: The target info charms are best utilized when crafting a variable multi-attack macro, or at least, that is what I use them for. When I know exactly how many targets I'm hitting and it is the same number every time, I use a static non-charmed approach. Of the RPGs I play (Pathfinder 4e, 5e, and 13th Age), I can not see myself getting into a situation where I have a variable multi-attack with individual damage outputs, unless I start getting into whirlwind attacks and the like in non-4e games. 4e games is always 'multiple attack rolls, single damage roll' so I'm covered there. I'm sure once you release PC 3.x to the masses, we'll start hearing from the edge cases where a variable multi-attack with unique damage rolls would be useful, and when that happens we can offer sympathy and maybe by then something will have changed to make charms & conditionals work nicely together. I'll tell you what I'm really really looking forward to, though.... variables. Variables I can shove dice rolls and math into. So I can do something like 'Damage: 22 (13 from precision)', or 'Critical Hit! Add 34 damage for 40 total!' Give me variables and I'll lament being unable to give you my firstborn :>

GenKitty said: *twitch* Were I to run a 5e game, I'd be making spell handouts and linking to them for the details, and only putting stuff in the spellcards pertinent to the specific casting. Long cards like that drive me nuts ^_^ (One reason I love Pathfinder, I can link to the SRD) thats how i do it Sean G. said: I hate looking things up in game. Hehe. We put as much information on the card as possible, so we don't have to tear through books. Consider for a moment 80% of that card is just attack information. i set the link as the powercard name, so clicking on "Ray of Frost vs Target" pops open the handout. ive done that with every ability, feature, feat, spell, attack, ect ect ect for 5th edition.. so min info on card to prevent chat spam, complete detail at a single click

GenKitty said: I'll tell you what I'm really really looking forward to, though.... variables. Variables I can shove dice rolls and math into. So I can do something like 'Damage: 22 (13 from precision)', or 'Critical Hit! Add 34 damage for 40 total!' Give me variables and I'll lament being unable to give you my firstborn :> I got variables are working... so far. I'm sure there are a billion ways they're gonna break though. :D

PowerCards 3 won't be released until I finish re-writing the roll parser and inline roll builder functions. This will get rid of the bug you can see in that screenshot where the [11] is not red even though a one was rolled. For some reason, it's only looking at the last die roll instead of all of them. THe re-write is also intended to allow [NH] and [XPND] to work with conditionals and variables.

Re-posting this here, to ensure that you get the alert for it: HoneyBadger said: PowerCards doesn't work with nested inline rolls yet. Waiting on Riley to finish updating that on the dev server before I finish re-writing that part of the script I haven't had problems with nested inline rolls in power cards. Here's my Melee Basic Attack macro from my current 4e game: !power --format|atwill --charid|@{character_id} --emote|@{character_name} swings his dagger. --name|@{power-1-name} --leftsub|@{power-1-useage} --rightsub|@{power-1-action} --!Range|@{power-1-range} --Target:|One creature --Keyword:|Weapon --Attack:|[[1d20 + [[@{power-1-attack}]]]] vs. @{power-1-def} --Hit:|[[[[floor(@{level} / 21)]] [Lv21] * @{power-1-weapon-num-dice}d@{power-1-weapon-dice} + @{power-1-weapon-num-dice}d@{power-1-weapon-dice} + [[@{power-1-damage}]] + #bloodiedTarget ]] damage. The attack line produces 1d20 + 9 and the damage line produces 0 [Lv21] * 1d4 + 1d4 + 0 + 0 * 2 [Gauntlets of Blood] My GM reports that the campaign is using version 2.3.7.

I will resume testing PC3.0 come monday; my free time this weekend goes to Sunday's game. However! Here's my contractually obligated, " Alas, if only I could give you a first born child, HoneyBadger! (And no, I didn't promise it to The Aaron, either) "

Maybe it was just the roll I tried. I dunno, but I couldn't get inline rolls to work. Will check again later.

Yeah, The Aaron has almost enough kids already. =D

Alas, if only I could give you a first born child, I love how he she used the term "a" first born child, not "his" first born child, so better be watchful Aaron!

Pssst: She. ^..^

For those of you testing the PowerCards 3 beta version... I just updated it with variables you can call anywhere ( I think ). So you should be able to do something like the following macro. It's still very rough and error prone though. I'm still poking around in the guts to make it better. !power {{ --name|Fiery Blade --Attack:|[[ [$Atk] 1d20 + 4 [Str Mod] + [$Bless] 1d4]] vs AC (+[^Bless] from Bless) --Hit:|[[ [$Dmg] 1d8 + 4 [Str Mod] + [$FireDmg] 1d6]] damage ^^ ^* [![^Dmg] + 4 [Str Mod]!] slashing, [![^FireDmg]!] fire }}

PowerCards 3 beta link updated again... make sure you have the 9:05 am version for today. Was some nasty bugs in the previous version.

HoneyBadger, when Powercards 3 does get out of beta, will you be adding a "How to use" like you did for Powercards 2? The instructions for Powercards 2 were instrumental for me be able to use the script. Ryeaa

Ryeaa said: HoneyBadger, when Powercards 3 does get out of beta, will you be adding a "How to use" like you did for Powercards 2? The instructions for Powercards 2 were instrumental for me be able to use the script. Ryeaa Yup.

Bruticus said: GenKitty said: *twitch* Were I to run a 5e game, I'd be making spell handouts and linking to them for the details, and only putting stuff in the spellcards pertinent to the specific casting. Long cards like that drive me nuts ^_^ (One reason I love Pathfinder, I can link to the SRD) thats how i do it Sean G. said: I hate looking things up in game. Hehe. We put as much information on the card as possible, so we don't have to tear through books. Consider for a moment 80% of that card is just attack information. i set the link as the powercard name, so clicking on "Ray of Frost vs Target" pops open the handout. ive done that with every ability, feature, feat, spell, attack, ect ect ect for 5th edition.. so min info on card to prevent chat spam, complete detail at a single click Different folks, different strokes. I dislike needing to look anything up. I prefer everything right there so I don't have to locate any information. And, as I also pointed out, the PowerCard itself, was 80% the length because of the 5 attacks. Since we use the voice chat for everything, I never care about chat spam. I cut down on length, by organizing data, and once I finish table mark-up, I'll be cutting down even more:

Teaser Here is a Pathfinder Gunslinger under the two versions of Powercards, showing off a Misfire (critical fail), normal hit, and a possible Critical Success Powercards 2.4.15a (this version doesn't include the possible flaming from Divine Bond) Powercards 3.0b !power {{ --name|Shocking Pistol^^Single Shot --title|Shock weapon, d6 is SHOCKING --bgcolor|#E6BE8A --txcolor|#000000 --bodyfontsize|12px --leftsub|Silva --rightsub|Ranged --!Attack1|**@{target|target1|token_name}:** AC [[1d20cf<[[?{MaxMisfire (+1 if Paper)|2}]]ro20 + @{Silva|Double}[NormalBonus] +?{PointBlank?|1}[PB] +?{MiscToHitBonus?|0}[MiscHitBonus] ]] --^1Damage:|[[ [NH]1d8 + [NH]1d6 + @{Silva|Double|max} [GunBonuses] + ?{MiscDamageBonus|0} [Misc] +?{PointBlank?|1}[PB] ]] B/P + [[ [NH]3d8 + (3 * (@{Silva|Double|max} [GunBonuses] + ?{MiscDamageBonus|0} [Misc] +?{PointBlank?|1}[PB]) ) ]] if crit }} !power {{ --name|Silva~~~Shocking Pistol - Single Shot --leftsub|Ranged --rightsub|Non-Provoking --bgcolor|#E6BE8A --txcolor|#000000 --bodyfontsize|12px --Target:|@{target|Foe|token_name} --Hitting:|[[ [$Shot1]1d20cf<[[?{MaxMisfire (+1 if Paper)|2}]] + @{Silva|Double}[NormalBonus] +?{PointBlank?|1}[PB] +?{MiscToHitBonus?|0}[MiscHitBonus] ]] vs **Touch AC** --??$Shot1 base <= ?{MaxMisfire (+1 if Paper)|2}??!Misfire|$$#F00|**Misfire!**$$ No Damage --??$Shot1 base >= [[?{MaxMisfire (+1 if Paper)|2}+1]]??^1Damage:|^^[[ [$GunDMG]1d8cf0cs100 + @{Silva|Double|max} [GunBonuses] + ?{MiscDamageBonus|0} [Misc] +?{PointBlank?|1}[PB] ]] B/P +[[ [$ShockDMG]1d6cf0cs100 Shock]] S +[[ [$FlamingDMG]?{Flaming(1d6cf0cs100 if yes)|1d0cf1} [Flaming] ]] F=[[ [^$GunDMG +^] 0d0+ [^$ShockDMG +^] 0d0+ [^$FlamingDMG +^] 0d0]] --??$Shot1 base >= 20??!^1Crit|$$#060|//Possible Crit!//^^**Crit Confirm:$$** AC [[1d20cf<[[?{MaxMisfire (+1 if Paper)|2}]] + @{Silva|Double}[NormalBonus] +?{PointBlank?|1}[PB] +?{MiscToHitBonus?|0}[MiscHitBonus] ]] for + [[ [$CRIT]3d8cf0cs100 + (3 * (@{Silva|Double|max} [GunBonuses] + ?{MiscDamageBonus|0} [Misc] +?{PointBlank?|1}[PB]) ) ]]^^[[ [^$GunDMG +^] 0d0+ [^$ShockDMG +^] 0d0+ [^$FlamingDMG +^] 0d0+ [^$CRIT +^] 0d0 ]] **Post-Crit Total** }}

Lol... guess what was added to roll templates today... the ability to test for greater, less, and between numbers.