I just checked out the new sheet changes in 1.4. The changes are interesting. What I Like I really enjoyed the ability to display the items (that being said, I still really very much wish something is available for attacks and equipment, just to provide more information to the GM when it is requested by the player — as this is by and far probably going to be requested the most by the GM). Edit: I also really love being able to drag the skills to the macro bar. That's fantastic as well, and something I think the players will enjoy too. What Could Be Improved Change the name of the box (to show info) from "Name" to "Info". That makes a lot more sense. Or, even better yet, just use a generic icon that represents info, like such: Saves horizontal space, gets the point across, and has a clickable nature like a button. What I Don’t Like I see what you tried to do with macro support. But it’s just way too much. Not only is it too much, but I honestly don’t understand it. Maybe it’s from my lack of using the Action section, but it’s literally overwhelming. Again, I don’t see anyone using this. I can’t emphasize this enough — it just doesn’t make sense for Cypher System, and the book itself makes this abundantly clear, and I think it’s putting more effort into this than need be. More importantly, the changes you made with the chat output already answer the questions you are asking with the Action section. The player doesn’t need to know if he succeeds or fails, because it’s obvious — the GM sets the difficulty, and the player compares what they got on the chat output. I just can’t restate this enough that the Action section needs overhauled or removed completely, because it’s just adding complexity to something that isn’t complex in the first place. Making Things Better So here are my suggestions for improving it further Change "Name" buttons to "Info", or use a generic "Info" button like I posted above, which has the added benefit of looking like a button already. Remove the Action section (I honestly think it's something you don't need to maintain at all and takes up too much of your effort — again I could be wrong, but I think it's a design decision that you could make that saves you time and allows the sheet to be focused on far more important things) Instead, add an Options section that presents the following check boxes (if all are off, assume no dialog is ever shown): Ask for Cost on roll? (default to on) Ask for Effort on roll? (default to on) Ask for Difficulty Modifier on roll? (default to on) The Flow of Input For A Roll Get rid of Difficulty (This is addressed near the end) Get rid of Asset (This should be combined with Bonus) Get rid of Bonus (This should be combined Asset) I was thinking this was something else, but I honestly hate the idea of being asked if I want to add a +1 or +2 every single time. I'm not sure about it, because it already feels like the macros are too heavy. Here’s how the flow of input should be presented to the player: Initial Bonus to roll (+1 or +2) (But I still don't like the idea of including this, but I understand why it has to be.) Initial Cost (How much does it cost me to simply attempt this action? This is the first thing the player determines. This also determines if the player has enough remaining Stat points to even apply effort.) Difficulty Modifier (What bonuses/penalties has the GM placed upon me? This is so I have a good idea of if I will manage to help reduce the difficulty by a decent amount or if I should still consider applying effort) Effort to Roll (What effort am I putting into the roll?) Effort to Damage (What effort am I putting into damage) Initial Roll Bonus . I really don't like that a whole dialog entry has to be put up for entering this since it's so simple to add. I know this isn't your fault, Natha, but I just wish it could be avoided, because it's so rare that this will be a thing, but I get it. Initial Cost . When a player is using an ability or skill, the first thing they need to calculate is how much is it going to cost just to do this one thing. So they should enter this first. Difficulty Modifier . The next thing they will likely do is ask the GM what modifiers will apply (including assets, penalties, etc.). They want to know this before determining how much effort to apply. Effort to Roll . The next thing they need to determine is how much effort they want to apply, because now they know the cost and the modifiers. Effort to Damage . Then the last thing is applying effort to damage. (It would be very awesome if there was a way to combine this into one dialog, but I’m not sure if it’s possible.) If you make these changes above, everything would be pretty amazing and simplified, and then we can forget about the issues of difficulty. But if you still wanted to bother with difficulty... Enable GM To Set Difficulty (Pivately or Publicly) For Players Here’s a really cool idea… Give the GM access to three macros. These macros would set the difficulty within the API, and it would compare the difficulty set by the GM to the task that the player rolls. The three macros could be like the following: Set Difficulty (Private) Set Difficulty (Public) Reset Difficulty When the GM sets the difficulty privately, the API knows the difficulty, but the players don't. When this macro is pressed, it pops up a dialog box asking for the GM to enter the difficulty. When the players roll, they see what the difficulty has been set as in the chat output, and the roll informs the player if they succeed or fail based on the roll and the effort they applied. When the GM sets the difficulty publicly, the API knows the difficulty, and it announces what the GM has set as the difficulty in the chat to all players. When the player rolls, the chat output informs them of success or failure. When the Reset Difficulty macro is pressed. It doesn't pop up anything — it just notifies the GM that the global difficulty has been reset to 0. If the GM sets a 0 difficulty, it is assumed that no difficulty is set, and the chat output behaves like it does now when no difficulty is set. This also solves an important problem — imagine that the GM doesn't want to tell the player the difficulty before the roll because that breaks immersion, but the GM does want to be completely open about what difficulty s/he sets. By doing this, it gives the player the confidence that the GM did set and stick with that difficulty (without fudging), and the player knows for sure that this was a proper success or fail. Then this would be the macro setup I would have as the GM, and it's all that I need: This, I believe, would be the ultimate solution to the problems in that it gives the GM control, and it gives the GM the power to either share the rolls or keep them hidden. It reduces the amount of back and forth between GM and player, particularly about difficulty. If the player wants to know the difficulty, the GM will have already set it and announced it via the API to the chat automatically. If the GM wants it private, but still wants to set it to be fair with the players, the GM can do that as well, and after the players roll. And if the GM wants to just do it all in his/her head, then that can be done as well by simply not using the macros (this is probably what I would do, or I'd do the private Difficulty). So I think that's pretty awesome. (With that being said, I did think of a potential downside to this "cool idea": Let's say the GM sets a difficulty for a task — maybe a perception task — and asks for all players to make a roll. Then one player makes a roll before all other players. The other players will then be able to see the difficulty of the roll, and then they can go in and apply more effort to try to overcome what they might perceive as a difficult roll. It's not immediately obvious to me how to overcome this, but beyond this one downside, everything else sounds great. Maybe the solution is another macro button for the GM: "Resolve Rolls", which will then inform each individual player — who made rolls — of if they succeeded or failed, but it sounds a bit more complex than it should be. But ultimately I, as the GM, don't mind undertaking this slight bit more complexity in order to not break immersion or ask player to fudge around with entering more numbers each time they want to make a roll.) Edit : Sorry about the wonky formatting of this forum post. Copying and pasting from a text editor into Roll20's forums and text entry fields is always a huge pain. Edit 2 : P.S. Didn't want to make it sound as if I'm being hugely critical. I really do love all the effort you put into this. Cypher System in itself is not that complex. I believe it is the GM's responsibility to handle everything related to difficulty and the calculations. Moving that effort onto the players (by having them have to enter the difficulty and calculating their assets and bonuses and modifiers and costs) seems like a less than ideal way to handle it, because it puts the effort on the players when, already, Cypher System is designed for the player to do most of the work anyways — asking the player to be responsible for setting the difficulty and asking them to calculate and enter their assets and bonuses (which is a conversation they need to have with the GM anyways), seems a bit too much at this point. Edit 3: I realized an issue with my interpretation of the "Bonus" section. We haven't made it to a point where that has become a thing in our games, so the thought of dealing with it is just annoying. However, I don't think this is your fault Natha. This is more of an annoyance with Cypher System itself for adding in the mechanic to modify the roll value.