[PF] Pathfinder Sheet Thread 5

I can, yes. Here's the one that's not working: And for reference, an older one that works fine: I'm not seeing any difference between the two aside from intentional ones like the ammo count, and yet the attack in the top picture doesn't show damage when rolled while the attack in the bottom picture works perfectly. Edit: In case it makes a difference, I'm using Firefox v49.0.2.

Thanks Rebel Scum.   Normally Damage is hidden if you have dice ="0" and Damage Ability="none" Did you try changing dice to "0",  roll/attack and then set it back to "1"?   Also play with the damage ability to see it changes anything as well.

also hit the recalc button, i thought it would redo all the macros but maybe it didn't

I tried all of that, setting dice to zero, rolling and back to normal and rolling again, and also damage ability to both dex and str, rolling after each and then back to none, but no luck. Also tried recalculating after doing that and that didn't change anything either. Damage still doesn't show up. Interestingly, crit damage appears to show just fine when it rolls a crit, it's only the normal damage that's missing. Also, normal damage on iterative attacks also doesn't show up.

Can you access the damage related attributes from a macro? &{template:pf_attack}{{ Damage=[[@{selected|repeating_weapon_$0_damage-dice-num}d@{selected|repeating_weapon_$0_damage-die} + @{selected|repeating_weapon_$0_damage_macro}]] }}

Recently I've been having a lot of players complain about their sheets not sticking with updates, and that the Recalc button gets stuck (Meaning it can't finish the Recalc for some reason or another). Some background skills (specifically the Crafts, Lore, Artistry, etc) aren't auto-calculating and sometimes aren't adding the Attribute modifier. Also, I wanted to come in and say that I am not actually looking forward to the idea of making it so I have to have an Inventory log for every piece of equipment I have, and seems to me would be a very quick way of locking up the sheets with a ton more logs, like spells once did. I don't see why weight can't be added on the section for armors and have that added into the calculation for carry capacity, and I fail to see why we would need an Inventory slot for it. In addition to this, I do have a suggestion for attacks, as some time back, people were saying they shouldn't calculate the weight because sometimes you would have three different versions of the same attack. I was wondering if it was possible to make the attack section more akin to a weapon section. Basically, you would enter in the base info for the weapon, which you could roll normally as a normal attack. Then underneath that, have an expanded section where you could include variant attacks that could be rolled. So rather than making three attacks for Longsword, PA Longsword, and whatever else, you make one for Longsword and then make variant rolls for it in that same macro housing.

Refresh: I had thought the problems with refresh not finishing went away with .69. if you know of any ... I suppose the best way we could find and fix would be to import the sheet into our beta site and let us know which one it is, then we could see the data. Usually it happened because of something unexpected that causes the refresh to stall before finishing. It still happened before but the user never knew. I know we also had some problems with certain skills and attribute but I thought those were all fixed. Equipment: Would you like a 'quick add' type separate section for unslotted/random items that may have weight , for which you don't need all the extra data. just a bunch of lines in a box, not a repeating section? close to the section we removed.. I suppose having separate weapon and armor lists, in addition to the equipment list, might help. it would at least be faster since we'd have less total fields per row. We already decided not to combine the different abilities and feats into one list for fear of another problem for users dealing with it. Attacks: i think the linking weapons to attacks in two lists is sort of headed in the direction you describe. We were thinking for attacks linked to weapons of greying out the fields that are tied to the weapon in edit mode, to somehow make it cleaner. To group similar attacks: I did add a named group to the weapon, so instead of grouping by melee, ranged, you could make up your own groups, and those would be used in the initial menu that appears in chat when you pres "all attacks". It could be used the way you describe, make a "greatsword" group and in that you put all your greatsword attacks, but each is slightly different. thanks for your feedback.

Just a quick bug report: the PC skillbook macro doesn't seem to generate the skills-macro attribute until you toggle Unchained skills on/off; after that it seems to update just fine.

I noticed that under skills, the craft skills are not adding the Int bonus.

thanks ill try to fix those today

The idea behind the overall changes with the equipment section are awesome but the beta visual changes completely counteract it. First up the current .69 equipment page is simple, very simple and easily legible. The currency section for example is perfect as it is. It's slim and easy to see at a glance. On the beta site it takes up double the space for no reason? Do people really need to track more than 5 numbers on the current .69 version? Even if you needed a 6th or 7th number there is still space to expand the current versions input boxes without the excess visual clutter. Then we have the weight section and loads/lifts. Having it up top does seem to be a good idea with how big equipment list can get but why is it getting the same treatment as the currency section? There is no reason for that field to be doubled in size. The .69 version once again was simple and presenting everything at a glance on the two different rows it had. Now we have 5 different rows of items with far too much spacing with the same visual clutter the currency section shows. Last up is the new equipment section itself. Now I'm not sure I fully understand how the new beta idea works yet but some thoughts anyways over it. The idea with having one location for all items now including the weapons and armor simplifies the sheet quite a bit. That is a nice change there! The .69 worn equipment list up top was removed? It was great at seeing what was worn at a glance with simple properties. From what I see the new beta does not have a similar list yet? My suggestion is to keep the worn equipment list up top as in .69 but the items are auto generated when you select a matching drop down for an items corresponding location like the beta page has. With that it would make the .69 worn equipment portion either uneditable or have a matching drop down menu from each of the slots with tagged equipment from the carried plus currently worn tags. I did a bit of a mock up to to show my idea.   Also not quite sure what the repeating section bubbles has to do with equipment yet nor the spell level like tabs. I need to obviously play with it a little more. But I just got back from a long work trip and was checking out some pre-game stuff before my session today. This is what I just noticed at first glance after reading the post on the previous page about it.

Thanks. I was just working on such a quick glance list for worn items so that's good. We were going to make it a tab on the list, such as "slotted items worn" or something, which would be almost the same idea....  the width: yes the loads should be on one line. .. there may be other ways to shrink it down.  any other areas that look cluttered please let us know. Note we added an "edit" (pencil) button similar to the 5e shaped sheet. But it's not technically "edit' and "readonly", more like "small view with much fewer editable fields" vs the "expanded" view now. please check it out , and it works on "all" view as well. This is our attempt to make it more manageable. Since most players may not use 80% of the fields. (which is why we added a check to hide the spells tab entirely) Here is what tabs will look like (radios are hidden): I'm not sure im crazy about it. we could easily make many more, or much fewer categories. (the 2nd other should be "multiple" categories for items like the Klar , actually that's the only one I could think of)

Just looked at the updates and it looks much much cleaner with the lifts/loads section now! Lift is listed twice in place of load it looks in the sub header. The edit view button you mentioned also great. That's the kind of clean, simple with good ease of reading all mixed together. Though I think changing the carried weight background from black to the blue would a minor fix in that mode. Can't wait to use that mode on some of the other pages. Also for categories what about something like this. Weapons, Ammo, Armor, Magic Items, Consumables, Other, All. Less and more broad categories so the text doesn't get cut off in the tab itself would help with a cleaner look I think if that is what you are not sure about. Is it possible to have maybe one more category that is player named if someone were to want something more specific?

With tabs we could do a player named field . the dropdown would have to be "custom" or something, we can't change the text in dropdowns which is why i didn't do it yet , i wasn't sure if that would be confusing.  I suppose in your list, wands and potions would both go in the 'consumables', since they'd have similar extra fields (going to add a macro field so people can easily enter the roll they want to take effect, magic missile damage or CLW or whatever).

Version .71 submitted that fixes the skills not updating. In addition, we created a survey:&nbsp; <a href="https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/BL797KV" rel="nofollow">https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/BL797KV</a> please forward this link to your players if they do not come to this forum often.&nbsp;

Hello, I am currently experiencing an issue with my Spellbook. When I add a spell to any level, it creates a duplicate in every level of spell in the book. E.g. I'm trying to add 'Detect Magic' to my Cantrips section but whenever I do it creates the exact same spell in the levels 1,2,3 etc pages.&nbsp;

Did you enter the spell level? Until you add a level it displays the spell on every tab so you can find it. Just enter a "0" in the "level" field next to the class name&nbsp;

Yes, that appeared to be the problem, now I feel silly haha. Thank you.&nbsp;

The recalc button seems to be checking the "Is NPC" box every time I use it...

You must have hit dice or type/subtype filled in. If you want to use HD for monster &nbsp; levels you can put it in the the class gird I guess we can turn that off... Since I'm version 1 it wil just be a manual thing.

The import script I'm using fills in creature type and subtypes, so that would explain it.

They already merged the .71 version, but that "auto set" &nbsp;feature will be removed in v1.00. it's there now just to help DMs make sure their monsters have IS_NPC set. Since in v1.00 that will become an important checkbox that will change some behaviors on the sheet. But once that is done, is_npc won't auto-set anymore it will be a manual toggle. if you check out the beta, you can see i totally redid the compendium parsing for monsters. I hope to add parsing from an actual statblock so custom and non OGL monsters can be easily added, I think since I have the compendium parsing done it should be easy: just divide up the statblock into the compendium fields. But now, you can manually add the monster to the special import section (big box around it) then &nbsp;hit "import", and it will reverse engineer the base attributes and attack rows etc, and plug them into the sheet. So now DMs won't have numbers changing on them unexpectedly, and also you will be able to use conditions and buffs on monsters. In&nbsp; the code this is all in the&nbsp;NPCParser module.

Gareth P. said: Yes, that appeared to be the problem, now I feel silly haha. Thank you.&nbsp; we need to call it "spell level" or something, it is a common error. or maybe highlight it if it is empty.

chris b. said: Gareth P. said: Yes, that appeared to be the problem, now I feel silly haha. Thank you.&nbsp; we need to call it "spell level" or something, it is a common error. or maybe highlight it if it is empty. Could you default it to whatever spell level tab the user is currently on? That would seem to be the way a lot of people are assuming it works anyways.

So for the last few months, I have been having massive lag problems with roll20 and the pathfinder character sheet and was getting to the point where I was hating my character and was convinced that I&nbsp;was lagging out so much because of my massive use of macros and also that the tons information being written to the console was slowing it down. Turns out folks that I didn't have chrome's hardware acceleration turned on. Turns out that checkbox makes a huge &nbsp;difference when it comes to roll20 and the character sheet. I am so happy now because now I don't have to compromise my macro loving character sheets!

Samuel T. said: So for the last few months, I have been having massive lag problems with roll20 and the pathfinder character sheet and was getting to the point where I was hating my character and was convinced that I&nbsp;was lagging out so much because of my massive use of macros and also that the tons information being written to the console was slowing it down. Turns out folks that I didn't have chrome's hardware acceleration turned on. Turns out that checkbox makes a huge &nbsp;difference when it comes to roll20 and the character sheet. I am so happy now because now I don't have to compromise my macro loving character sheets! Interesting. &nbsp;Glad this had a happy ending. FYI: Here's a screen shot of the Chrome Settings&gt;Show Advanced&gt; "Use hardware..."

Is there any remote possibility extra rows for extra non-crit dmg and extra crit dmg on weapons? I love these additions to the sheet, but I have more than one use for them. For example, my weapon has the Holy property and I have Vital Strike, both very situational abilities, so it has been really nice being able to add them in using the extra damage rows without having to edit the macro itself. However, I can only add in one, not both. I can add one on the weapon and one using the global options but that makes it so that the global one applies to all of my attacks which aren't appropriate. I could add in the extra stuff using the weapon note section, but I'm already using that for information on criticals. Though it would be really nice for a critical note section that only showed up if a critical happened. Again, loving the extra stuff. Just hoping we could have a few more rows.

There seems to be a bug with the interaction between the skill option to Enforce Required Training and the Knowledge skill book macro. With that option turned on and Use background skills enabled the knowledge button is removed from the adventure skill book, even if there are some knowledge skills that the character is trained in. If the All Skills skill book is selected then multiple instances of the knowledge macro are present in the skill book. If the Enforce Required Training option is enabled and Disable Unchained Skills is disabled, the Knowledge macro is displayed as expected, but when that is selected then the knowledge skill book displays knowledge macros that the character is not trained in. The Enforce Requires Training works correctly for skills that are not knowledge skills. Displaying them only if the character has at least one rank in that skill.

Vince said: Can you access the damage related attributes from a macro? &{template:pf_attack}{{ Damage=[[@{selected|repeating_weapon_$0_damage-dice-num}d@{selected|repeating_weapon_$0_damage-die} + @{selected|repeating_weapon_$0_damage_macro}]] }} Sorry for not getting back to this. Is this something to just past into a macro, in the normal chat box, in the attack's macro text somewhere? Or somewhere else entirely? Also, am I right in thinking the $0 should be $1 or $2 or whatever according to however many other attacks are in the list above it?

The # is either the position in the list (starting with 0), or, you can click on the ID arrow, and instead of $X use the whole id string there, which is probably something like -k83jfji-fik498f &nbsp;etc .(no dollar sign if using ID) you can paste it into the chat area, but you nee to put your character name in front like this: @{charactername|repeating_weapon_$0_damage-dice-num} if you paste that in, a number should appear matching the row. did you try recreating the bad row by hitting "add" and then entering the values again? (or are there too many bad rows?)&nbsp;

Ok. Using the ID and putting it in a normal macro (Not on the sheet, one of Roll20's default ones) gives me an empty roll template with one line for damage. If I mouse over the damage number I get "Rolling 1d8 + 0 [Total] + 0 + 0 + 0 = (6)+0+0+0+0" in the popup which looks accurate to what it should be, using the same attack row I posted earlier. So it can access the attributes fine, just can't seem to get them into the actual attack. I also tried recreating the bad row, but the newly created copy has the exact same problem of no damage roll showing up. Edit: Out of curiosity I tried adding the exact same attack to my character in a different game, and on that one the attack roll is missing but the damage shows up fine, with the attack row set up exactly the same. I also tried adding it to a character that isn't mine in a third game I'm DMing for, and with that one both attack and damage showed up fine. I don't know if that helps any, but in case it does.

what's confusing is it's pretty much the same as the other attack that works in your two examples. And if you create a new one with the same values it doesn't work, but i can create them and they work. Can your GM export your character then import it into our Beta? The link to the Beta site is in the first post on the thread. I think Plus is enough to do that. that way we can take a closer look at your sheet and the data behind it.

feedback needed please watch this video. We figured out how to make fields auto-expand (after you click or tab out)&nbsp; For some fields like the "details" appearance at the top, this seems like a good choice. &nbsp;This would allow those fields to be fully visible and not be cut off. But also, they take up a lot less room. full video: <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTvBvhkSA0g" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTvBvhkSA0g</a> click to play short 7 second gif: and here &nbsp;is read view: section is smaller: definitely nice for details section.&nbsp;

Nice job with the auto expanding entry fields. That some smooth coding magic right there!

I like the auto-expanding fields. I also have a question. My character has a familiar, which has half of my character's total hp. In the "HP adj2" box, but I can't seem to figure out how to reference my other character's total HP. This is what I currently have: [[ @{Ami|HP|Max} ]] My main character is Ami, and my familiar's name (the one whose character sheet I'm actually using code on) is named Seams. Any idea how to get this to work?

You cannot reference another sheet from inside the sheet. A pro account could use TokenMod to do it. But it can only be done via the API.

Within an auto-calculated field it would be similar to entering an inline roll, which could only be determined "post sheet" from chat. This doesn't work on the sheet for calcs that must be rendered on-sheet, pre-chat. &nbsp;I believe you can reference non-calculated attributes between sheets. &nbsp;Again, they will only be seen as an attribute name ie "@{foo|something}" when looking at the primary sheet, but if you pull the data for the primary sheet's attribute, the secondary/referenced sheet's data will be used. &nbsp;So it's somewhat possible to reference attributes between sheet's.

Was playing around with the spell points and noticed that there may be a bug (or maybe just a feature not yet implemented). The spell points attributes don't appear to be linked. You can enter a Spell Points formula up at the top of the spell class tab and the mod field is correctly filled in with it, however the actual spell points attribute's max is not updated with this value. The forula in the SP field is:&nbsp;4+@{CHA-mod}+2*(@{class-0-level}-1). The character has 18 charisma (+4 mod) and is second level, so 10 is the correct SP value here. As you can see, there is 0 SP available in the max column.

that is spell resist spell penetration buff up there. I updated this in Beta to say "spell resist" spell penetration to be more clear just the other day we have to redo how "spell points" work on the sheet. right now there is really not much support besides that bottom row with numbers. I just use class features "max" uses to calculate point pools I need right now.

Ah, ok, so that was SP for Spell Protection up top. Gotcha Only problem with using the class features stuff is that those are repeating sections and can't be linked to a token.

Hey everyone, I'd like to help contribute to the development of this sheet, but before I clone the repo and start trying to make edits, I was wondering if there were any structures in place for dealing with that behemoth of a file. &nbsp;Like is there some side repo with different source files and grunt jobs or something to compile it all so that you're not dealing with a single 1.83Mb file, or are all the current contributors just geniuses who can understand and work around that whole thing?

chris b. said: what's confusing is it's pretty much the same as the other attack that works in your two examples. And if you create a new one with the same values it doesn't work, but i can create them and they work. Can your GM export your character then import it into our Beta? The link to the Beta site is in the first post on the thread. I think Plus is enough to do that. that way we can take a closer look at your sheet and the data behind it. Again, sorry for the delay. I think I managed to get this to work myself, unless there's something special about the GM doing it that's required. The character is Melrai Haudegan, and should be near the bottom of the character list in the beta campaign - that's where she showed up for me, at least.

Samuel W. said: Hey everyone, I'd like to help contribute to the development of this sheet, but before I clone the repo and start trying to make edits, I was wondering if there were any structures in place for dealing with that behemoth of a file. &nbsp;Like is there some side repo with different source files and grunt jobs or something to compile it all so that you're not dealing with a single 1.83Mb file, or are all the current contributors just geniuses who can understand and work around that whole thing? Links for the beta files are always at the top of this thread. &nbsp;(beta links:&nbsp; htm ,&nbsp; css ,&nbsp; trans ) &nbsp;Anyone can grab those files to modify, same as the main repo on github. &nbsp;I try to keep the beta files as updated as possible. &nbsp;Warning: the beta code can be pretty crazy depending on what's being worked on... &nbsp;Currently Chris is the "Lead programmer" (he makes the BIG bucks) with a couple of us assistants. &nbsp;We have a forum on the Dev where the PF sheet authors communicate. &nbsp;For obvious reasons it's best to control the who and what on the sheet. ;-) &nbsp;PM Chris and or myself and we can continue this in private. &nbsp;Cheers

Rebel Scum said: Again, sorry for the delay. I think I managed to get this to work myself, unless there's something special about the GM doing it that's required. The character is Melrai Haudegan, and should be near the bottom of the character list in the beta campaign - that's where she showed up for me, at least. Thanks Rebel Scum. &nbsp;We'll have a go at trying to figure this out with an actual test subject.

Rebel Scum said: Again, sorry for the delay. I think I managed to get this to work myself, unless there's something special about the GM doing it that's required. The character is Melrai Haudegan, and should be near the bottom of the character list in the beta campaign - that's where she showed up for me, at least. thanks

Hrm. Thanks for the usability survey, guys, but the usability survey itself is kind of unusable. Broken in a lot of places and way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way too long! =/

Alex said: Hrm. Thanks for the usability survey, guys, but the usability survey itself is kind of unusable. Broken in a lot of places and way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way too long! =/ Point taken. &nbsp;;-) Any specifics on the survey Alex? &nbsp;Thanks

Vince said: Alex said: Hrm. Thanks for the usability survey, guys, but the usability survey itself is kind of unusable. Broken in a lot of places and way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way&nbsp;way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way way too long! =/ Point taken. &nbsp;;-) Any specifics on the survey Alex? &nbsp;Thanks Question #4: "4. Did it take you more or less time than you expected to set values on the Pathfinder Sheet?" followup answer: "If more, what can we do to improve ease of finding information?" As written, these two aren't always related. Question #8: you have these categories as a sliding scale: Never / Rarely / Only if i have a problem / Often / Very Often Ignoring the typo in "Only if i have a problem", the value itself is an orange in a sea of apples. It's like "On a scale of 1-5, how do you rate this application?" "1 / 2 / Purple / 4 / 5" . It might make sense to you but it won't make sense to most of your survey takers. Question #9 "With which device do you typically use the sheet?" These aren't all devices, they're a mix of brands, operating systems, and devices. Question #11 "How often do you listen to Hello From the Magic Tavern?" Guess I do not, because I don't understand why this is on the first page? It caused my wife to give up on the survey because it felt like an ad. Question #12-Question #22 The Pages and Sections Section a. In Chromium, this section isn't usable unless you scroll horizontally. That's pretty broken. Horizontal scrolling is a pain in the backside for a user, so when you're designing or building something, you want to avoid it whenever possible.* * There are artistic reasons why you might want to do this, but it should be done consciously if so--this doesn't look like an artistic choice to me. b. The sections and questions aren't in the same order that they are in the sheet, and they sometimes aren't referred to by the same name. Question #12 I can't figure out what many of these sections refers to. Question #18 Abilities (on core soon to be back on own tab) If you're moving them back to their own tab then why are we evaluating them where they are? Question #21 How useful is spells page for: You list spontaneous and hybrid casters but not prepared casters? Do you just not care about prepared casters? End of Second Page At this point, although I'm working on a few things, I'm about an hour in and I decided not to fill out most of the sections on page 2. Last night my players all got about 5 minutes in and gave up. You want an online survey to be 5 minutes long at the most--you're asking someone to donate you time, and the more time you ask for, the fewer people who will give you that time. Plus, a 3 minute survey won't have many questions on it but it'll get answered far more often--with a 2-hour survey, even the stuff that gets filled out won't get sent to you. Page Three a. What do you &nbsp;mean by "Ability to combine attacks with one click (for full attacks)" ? I have no idea. b. What does this mean? "Macros to set spell level per spell" c. "Ability to split up rolls and damage such as in official Roll20 OGL 5e sheet."&nbsp;I have no idea. I haven't played any 5e let alone used the 5e sheet. Page Four This is really what the survey should be all about. And it's page four! Overall This sheet is designed for you and a couple of power users who use a lot of Roll20 features. You've self-selected the survey to only be usable for them; you're not going to get any responses from the huge mass of people who aren't power users and maybe play in one or two campaigns. Try reducing it to two pages, probably page 4 followed by page 3. My usability recommendation: drop everything else.

Please lighten up Alex. &nbsp;We are not professional survey statisticians and this was our first attempt at creating an online survey. &nbsp;We volunteer our time(and LOTS of it) to try and please the majority of people using the sheet. &nbsp;We created the survey in the hopes of hearing from a larger portion of the roll20 PF community. I agree the survey is long. &nbsp;I had a difficult time getting through it myself. &nbsp;2 hours. Really? We'll definitely take another look at the survey and make adjustments.&nbsp;&nbsp;Thank you for your input.