[PF] Pathfinder Sheet Thread 5

Vince said: Please lighten up Alex.  We are not professional survey statisticians and this was our first attempt at creating an online survey.  We volunteer our time(and LOTS of it) to try and please the majority of people using the sheet.  We created the survey in the hopes of hearing from a larger portion of the roll20 PF community. I agree the survey is long.  I had a difficult time getting through it myself.  2 hours. Really? We'll definitely take another look at the survey and make adjustments.  Thank you for your input. Well, I tried a silly light-hearted response at first, and you asked for more specifics! As a result, I gave the survey a usability review. (It's the kind of thing I do for my day job!) I understand you guys are volunteers, and as a result I didn't go into a lot of detail... believe it or not. :) The problem with a review of the survey is that if the survey is really really long  then the review will also be really really long ! I'm sorry if it comes across as too negative--this is just how these sorts of reviews work, although if you're not used to being critiqued I probably should have gone back through and given it a second pass through. I might've been a bit too terse--apologies! As far as length--yeah, it's a long one. You usually want to plan for 15-20 minutes when you've got a 5-question survey and each question has a rating and a free-text entry for each question. You've got a lot of questions here, so if someone wants to fill out the whole thing, you're looking at a long time. Glad to hear you're getting a lot of responses. Good luck!

No worries Alex.  I appreciate your response.  We're finding the survey to be very useful.  BTW: hiding the "advanced, less-used", features has been a common theme and we are currently working toward that end.

On the topic of the survey, I already completed it but I thought of a suggestion after doing so. Would it be possible to get a spell failure roll added to the various options for spells? So we could have it roll that automatically when casting a spell, like the current options to add concentration or caster level checks. Cause it just seems weird to me that the spell failure roll isn't anywhere near the spells on the sheet.

Sounds like a good idea.

Rebel Scum said: On the topic of the survey, I already completed it but I thought of a suggestion after doing so. Would it be possible to get a spell failure roll added to the various options for spells? So we could have it roll that automatically when casting a spell, like the current options to add concentration or caster level checks. Cause it just seems weird to me that the spell failure roll isn't anywhere near the spells on the sheet. That's actually come up before.  I think it may have slipped by our suggestion/todo list. BTW: It's included as a Spellbook button on the beta.

Samuel T. said: 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. You could add queries to it such as ?{vital strike?|y,[[2d6]]|n,0} + ?{evil?|y,[[1d6]]|n,0} or something I suggest that since the #1 complaint seems to be there are too many options already. so not sure how much more we want to add. Right now we're adding switches to simplify things for people who don't need a lot extra. The Holy query could at least go in the "global" damage,  But the vital strike depends on the weapon itself. so you could hardcode the dice Or you can put it in in the weapon like this.(in the beta, you can put this in the inventory, and generate the attacks, which means you wouldn't have to keep retyping it). one number where you see the [name] on hover: [[?{vital strike?|Y,(2*@{damage-dice-num})d@{damage-die}[Vital Strike]|N,[[0]]} + ?{Holy?|Y,1d6[Holy]|N,0}]] alternatively, print 2 numbers and type next to them: ?{vital strike?|Y,[[(2*@{damage-dice-num})d@{damage-die}]]Vital Strike|N,[[0]]} + ?{Holy?|Y,[[1d6]]Holy|N,0}

Thanks, Chris. I'm using the second option because it looks cleaner on the output and just calling the extra type "Extra Damage" It seems to be working alright. Would it be possible in the buffs section to have an option for changing the character's size? I have a character who routinely uses enlarge person and I have been able to handle almost every aspect of that spell from the buffs section except for changing the size of the character from medium or large. Also, it would be awesome if weapons automatically adjusted themselves to be correct for their size.  Keep up the great work guys! Oh, I did try looking into letting the expression fields fully evaluate a command but I didn't get very far and wondered if the sheet really needed to take that processing hit.

We added default sizes for equipment / weapons in v1 in beta, in preparation to calculate adjustments in dice due to size.&nbsp; here is the calculator I wrote that changes damage dice. Please check it for errors. &nbsp;I just made a fix to it for 1d6 or small <a href="https://jsfiddle.net/plutosdad/ex8z0q64/" rel="nofollow">https://jsfiddle.net/plutosdad/ex8z0q64/</a> Here is the FAQ where Paizo finally combined all dice progressions into one: <a href="http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic" rel="nofollow">http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic</a>...

Back with another suggestion... would it be possible to get an option to buff one specific kind of AC instead of just all? For things like some of the tech items from Iron Gods that apply buffs only to touch AC.

You can add a Touch buff. does it not work? However, if you add an AC buff on the same buff row.. im not sure what will happen.&nbsp;

I haven't read all the posts, so I'm not sure if this has been offered/suggested. But if some crazy person(people) with more time than sense were to offer to work on inputting spells into the sheet spellbook (including the markdown for level dependent variables), is there a way (or would someone be willing to do the coding) to import them into individual character sheets? One of the biggest complaints in my groups is that you spend hours setting up a spellbook, but have to redo that work for each character. I thought of setting up a generic character with the spell data filled out as I needed it, then I could just delete the spells that are not used, or mark them prepared. But I would love to setup the spells, then have a way to share them with others. I'm sure it would encourage more usage of the sheet.

chris b. said: You can add a Touch buff. does it not work? However, if you add an AC buff on the same buff row.. im not sure what will happen.&nbsp; ...so you can. How did I never notice that? Ignore me, I'm blind apparently.

Lisa R. said: I haven't read all the posts, so I'm not sure if this has been offered/suggested. But if some crazy person(people) with more time than sense were to offer to work on inputting spells into the sheet spellbook (including the markdown for level dependent variables), is there a way (or would someone be willing to do the coding) to import them into individual character sheets? One of the biggest complaints in my groups is that you spend hours setting up a spellbook, but have to redo that work for each character. I thought of setting up a generic character with the spell data filled out as I needed it, then I could just delete the spells that are not used, or mark them prepared. But I would love to setup the spells, then have a way to share them with others. I'm sure it would encourage more usage of the sheet. You can drag them from the compendium. The GM has to turn on compendium for the campaign on the campaign settings page. Then you go to the button at the top in the right pane that looks like an italic "i" and search for the spell. Hit "Add new spell" to create a blank row Then drag the spell onto the blank row. It will highlight in yellow. Let go of the mouse and the spell will populate. . Notes the sheet must be displayed as a window "in" the roll20 browser window in order to drag and drop. You cannot pop it out into its own window. For it to correctly calculate the spell level, the class name at the top of the Spell page has to be in english and spelled correctly "Sorcerer" "Cleric" etc, for it to match up the correct spell level for spells that are different levels on different lists not all spells are in the compendium, only OGL spells and only from the first few books some spells have errors and can't be parsed. &nbsp;But the majority are there. you don't want to put much more than 40 spells in, the sheet starts slowing down after 80 or so. Here is a motion gif of it for the 5e OGL sheet. It works the same way in Pathfinder:

And the PF sheet. &nbsp;;-) btw: I don't think we have to have our sheet in it's own window for the compendium drag/drop to work. &nbsp;The example below isn't done that way.

that's what i meant, i edited it to be clearer and bolded it. it won't work when popped out.&nbsp;

chris b. said: that's what i meant, i edited it to be clearer and bolded it. it won't work when popped out.&nbsp; My bad. &nbsp;Need coffee.

Vince said: chris b. said: that's what i meant, i edited it to be clearer and bolded it. it won't work when popped out.&nbsp; My bad. &nbsp;Need coffee. it's noon here. I'm on my 4th cup!

Is it just me, or is the 0.71 sheet not updating attack damage modifiers when toggling buffs?

James W. said: Is it just me, or is the 0.71 sheet not updating attack damage modifiers when toggling buffs? Working for me... &nbsp;Are the rest of the sheet calcs working for you? UPDATED: &nbsp;I failed to see the word "DAMAGE". &nbsp;;-( Confirmed bug.

it's damage, i just did the same thing :) I was looking at the attack, but damage appears to not add at all. I wonder when that broke you better go get some afternoon coffee! :P

The good news is that it'll update if you hit the recalc button, but remembering to do that after every toggle will be a pain...

oh good that means it's a quick fix just an event missing. since it looks like they are done merging for the week there is time to get this fix in v.72

James W. said: Is it just me, or is the 0.71 sheet not updating attack damage modifiers when toggling buffs? "...attack damage ..." &nbsp;more coffee

chris b. said: You can drag them from the compendium. The GM has to turn on compendium for the campaign on the campaign settings page. Then you go to the button at the top in the right pane that looks like an italic "i" and search for the spell. Hit "Add new spell" to create a blank row Then drag the spell onto the blank row. It will highlight in yellow. Let go of the mouse and the spell will populate. Thanks for the head's up. I though the idea was to copy and paste the info from&nbsp; <a href="https://roll20.net/compendium/" rel="nofollow">https://roll20.net/compendium/</a>. My husband wasn't impressed. So guess who was doing his spells for my campaign he is playing in. Thanks for explaining to the point where I actually understood. I haven't played with the API stuff yet. Still working on figuring out how the markdown language works, and setting up stuff for my players who don't want to bother. I bother because I am tired of waiting on them to type things in, and some people don't understand how an ex-player setup their macros, so they don't understand to update them. I appreciate the character sheet whole heartedly. Now I need to convince more of my players to use it over Myth-Weavers and manually typed macros.

Would having a second character to test with help any with nailing down the cause of the issue with damage not showing up? Cause I discovered another character with the problem today, and again it's one with two attacks that're almost exactly the same but one works fine and the other doesn't. I could copy that one over to the beta campaign as well if it'd be any use.

Please copy it over RS. &nbsp;I played around with the other character you imported and didn't have any issue getting attack and damage to post...

It's copied over now. Also, I went and checked the first character I imported in her original game and it's still not showing up there, even though it works in the beta campaign. Is it possible there's something specific to the game rather than to the character sheet that might be messing it up?

Rebel Scum said: It's copied over now. Also, I went and checked the first character I imported in her original game and it's still not showing up there, even though it works in the beta campaign. Is it possible there's something specific to the game rather than to the character sheet that might be messing it up? The beta is using different, updated code, so your original characters wouldn't suddenly start working. &nbsp;We mainly wanted to see if the issue existed for us outside of your game. &nbsp;Did we ever ask what version of the sheet you're using? &nbsp;I guess we assumed it's the current live sheet, v71. &nbsp; If the DM is Pro, they could grab a copy of the current beta html, css, and trans(links are at the head of this thread) and change the game to a custom sheet. &nbsp;(Might want to make a backup copy of the campaign if you try this) &nbsp;Bare in mind running the beta code can be risky since it's a WIP and you have to manually update the sheets as we update the code, and we update often... not that you have to constantly update. &nbsp;Some people "freeze" a build of the sheet's code that's working for them and/or until they wish to update. It's hard to say what has changed between v.71 and v.1.x that solved the problem. Other than different sheet code, I'm not sure what could cause the issue of a given character not showing the damage on their attacks. ;-( &nbsp;I'll have a look at the second imported character to see if something jumps out. &nbsp;My assumption is that after we manipulate some of the attributes that determine damage it will post fine in beta. &nbsp;If so, there is quite possibly something flawed in the v71 code. &nbsp;

@Rebal Scum I was able to get your 2nd character to work and I was even able to import him into another game that's using the current v71. &nbsp;The damage also posted in that game, just like the beta. &nbsp; So, see if you can use the Character Vault to import the characters from the beta game, then back into your original game(make sure "Allow players to import their own Characters?" is enabled on your original games settings). &nbsp;You might want to change their names in beta first to avoid any confusion upon exporting them from the vault back to your original game. Post back on your results. &nbsp;Thanks

It seems I'm not able to import those two characters back out of the beta game - when I go to do so several other characters show in the list but the two of mine don't. Edit: Looking at it, I'd guess this is because I don't seem to have access to edit those two characters in the beta campaign, but I do for several of the others so they show up instead. Another edit: Nevermind, the GMs of both affected games are free users (and so am I) so importing anything back to those games isn't happening anyway. Sorry. Also, both games do appear to be using the latest 0.71 sheet. Though when the problem first appeared they weren't, it's persisted for quite a while now.

I just assigned you permission to edit your characters on the beta. &nbsp;I didn't realize allowing players to import was only a paid benefit... It looks like free users can enable character import. Try it again now that I have given you permission to edit. &nbsp;Hopefully they show up for you to import into your character vault.

Vince said: I didn't realize allowing players to import was only a paid benefit... Exporting from the Character Vault to a game requires either the player or the game creator to be a subscriber, but anyone should be able to import a character they control to the Character Vault, regardless of subscription status.

Vince said: I just assigned you permission to edit your characters on the beta. &nbsp;I didn't realize allowing players to import was only a paid benefit... It looks like free users can enable character import. Try it again now that I have given you permission to edit. &nbsp;Hopefully they show up for you to import into your character vault. As James W. said, one of either the DM or the player needs to be a subscriber. In my case neither me nor the DMs of either of the affected games are. I can import the character from the beta game now, but can't export it anywhere useful. Can't even export it to my own game I'm DMing for. :( At this point I'm wondering if it'd be worth it to just recreate the character from scratch on a new sheet, see if that fixes it. It'd be a hassle but doable. I'm thinking maybe something messed up somewhere in a version upgrade in such a way that it's just permanently broken somehow. It'd explain why the older attacks work fine but any new ones I add break, but I dunno how plausible it is.

I have some updates I wrote for the beta for how it decides what to print, i will push those into the v72 I was going to send Roll20 today. Not sure it will fix the problem but at least that part will behave just like beta so maybe. Edit: Ok i've put in the request, Roll20 usually makes the new page available around wednesday. So once you see the page version say ".72" you can try again.&nbsp;

Feedback on simpler view of sheet &nbsp;needed I updated the top post here with survey results (at least the "requests" portion) As expected, most people want to simply the sheet, and have advanced options viewable or not depending on user choice. That is something we are implementing now in beta, which we started before the survey anyway, but now we know which specific sections were too complicated. So far this is what we have, click the "pencil" button at upper left to see the "read" view <a href="https://app.roll20.net/join/801350/kEQ72w" rel="nofollow">https://app.roll20.net/join/801350/kEQ72w</a> technically it's more of a "simple" view than "read" - not sure what metaphor/symbol to use. Spells and Config page have been completely redone (not new features, but look and feel to make it easier to understand) Inventory page redone (new features) Go to the config page and turn advanced options off if they are on, and see what changes (a lot of macro fields become hidden, a lot of new players don't even want to see it) a lot of new options are there like auto-calc hp for players, GMs can choose more hp. etc. HP calcs better explained (I hope) Some fields are only visible if you click "show extra fields" on the config page. we're not really interested in bugs right now (there are some) but more "is this what you were thinking", "does this look easier" etc

The fact that we cannot name the first attack like we can subsequent attacks is kind of a bother when trying to make macros for full attacks with differing weapons, such as an attack sequence with natural weapons.&nbsp; I can get around this by skipping the first attack and just using the ones I can name, but then the template has some blank space between the header and the second attack, like so: Obviously, I'd like to see that extra blank space eliminated, and/or gain the ability to name the first attack like I can the others. Additionally, I'd like to see some support for putting together a full attack using other attacks.&nbsp; I can kinda already do this by messing with the macro text on the attack and the iteratives, but it's kinda a pain.&nbsp; What I'd like to see is: Move the first attack stuff under iteratives, so we can do everything to the main attack that we can do to iteratives (it'll come in handy for the following).&nbsp; Basically, have all the data entered where it is already, but have a "Include 1st attack?" line under iteratives. Give us an "ID" field on for each iterative (defaulting to , so we can specify which attack to pull data from.&nbsp; We'd have to process the macro text in JS to resolve the macro text field down to an actual macro text (hidden) field, since we can't nest variables inside variable names, but this should be easy (just have the JS do a global find/replace for "@{iterativeX_id}" to the actual value of the attribute, triggered when either the ID or macro text fields change). With just those two changes, I could create attacks for all the natural attacks a creature has, then create a "full attack" attack, pick which attacks to include, and have it stay updated based on any changes made to the individual natural attacks. If I get time, I might work on implementing this myself...

So, just looking at it, it is both better, and more cluttered at the same time. I think we're moving in the right direction though. Here are my impressions organized by tab: General Observations In regards to the new edit/view capability. Could we get more granularity on this? Maybe something like have an edit toggle for each box (e.g. edit abilities). Right now triggering edit mode causes everything to rearrange on the sheet and then you have to go hunting for the thing you wanted to change Right hand margins seem to be random from section to section I think that locking the sheet to a set width would go a long way to making it easier to make a clean interface. Right now things move and shift as you get wider, but I don't know that this really gives you a great added benefit Nitpicky, but could we get the "modify, reorder, delete" button to just read "reorder/delete"? There's not really anything you can do with that button to modify a field. Core Tab The area under the Init seems needlessly blank. Defenses Otherwise, looks much simpler to use for reference Attacks/Abilities/Spells Even if the rest of the sheet isn't going to get more focused edit controls, I think that you should be able to add/remove/edit a weapon/Ability/Spell without having to go into edit mode for the entire section. Inventory I haven't used the inventory section enough to really give feedback on what was needed, or even to know what has changed Overall, I'd say it's definitely going in the right direction though. Also, I realize that some of the above is probably bugs, but it's also formatting/design stuff so I threw it in.

chris b. said: I have some updates I wrote for the beta for how it decides what to print, i will push those into the v72 I was going to send Roll20 today. Not sure it will fix the problem but at least that part will behave just like beta so maybe. Edit: Ok i've put in the request, Roll20 usually makes the new page available around wednesday. So once you see the page version say ".72" you can try again.&nbsp; Looks like it's updated to .72 in my games now, and all the attacks do seem to work now. Much thanks for fixing it, and for your patience attempting to find the problem. :)

In Regards to the Simpler Sheet I am still waiting for spell-like abilities to either gain their own 'spellbook button' or be included into another. I would like to see spell-like abilities removed from the NPC's tab and moved to the Spells tab. Other than those two items, I am rather fond of the Simpler Sheet.&nbsp;

I was wondering if spell like abilities should be in spells, or in Abilities (along with special abilities/class features, etc). since usually there are just a few, and monsters/pcs might not actually have spells. I'd have to copy some fields from the top of the spells page over to Abilities then.

Why not just make an additional spell level tab for spell like abilities?

Simon said: In Regards to the Simpler Sheet I am still waiting for spell-like abilities to either gain their own 'spellbook button' or be included into another. I would like to see spell-like abilities removed from the NPC's tab and moved to the Spells tab. Other than those two items, I am rather fond of the Simpler Sheet.&nbsp; I would lean toward adding SLA's into Abilities, giving them their own Command button/menu and moving Spells out of the NPC section entirely.

Scott C. said: Why not just make an additional spell level tab for spell like abilities? Interesting approach.

Not sure if it is something on my character sheets, but it seems like the calculation of skill ranks is off again. &nbsp;Looks like to me that it is not automatically ensuring that character always get a minimum of 1 rank per level/HD. I have not checked this on all of my characters, monsters, npcs, etc. sheets, but it is at least affecting 2 sheets. &nbsp;I will continue to check for a bit more to confirm if it is a bug. CB out.

CB said: Not sure if it is something on my character sheets, but it seems like the calculation of skill ranks is off again. &nbsp;Looks like to me that it is not automatically ensuring that character always get a minimum of 1 rank per level/HD. I have not checked this on all of my characters, monsters, npcs, etc. sheets, but it is at least affecting 2 sheets. &nbsp;I will continue to check for a bit more to confirm if it is a bug. CB out. Thanks for posting CB. &nbsp;Is the sheet auto-calcing for you? &nbsp;Try the Recalc button if not and see if that get's things moving. I did a quick test with a new sheet, stepping thru adding levels and it seems to be working as expected. &nbsp;With "0" in the Skills per Level (Skills/Lvl) column, Ranks Remaining is 1:1 correct with the class Lvl. &nbsp;If I add "1" to Skills/Lvl, it's still 1:1 correct. &nbsp;When I add additional points in Skills/Lvl, it gives the proper calcs. &nbsp;I also added FC Skill points and the math pans out. &nbsp;I didn't test multi-class...

The problem occurs in character sheets for multi-classing characters and when such a character has an Intelligence modifier that is a negative number sufficient to reduce the skill ranks to less than 1 per level. &nbsp;For example, I have a dread kobold zombie that has an Intelligence score of 6 (so -2 modifier), with 2 fighter levels and 2 HD as an undead. &nbsp;Fighters get 2 skill ranks per level (so in this case, it should be getting 1 skill rank per level), while undead get 4 skill ranks per HD (thus, it should be getting 2 skill ranks per level). &nbsp;In the case of my kobold dread zombie monster, it should have a total of 6 skill ranks, but the character sheet is showing only a max of 4 skill ranks. I did use the Re-Calculate button (multiple times), and I reset the skill ranks per level (in the Class Information section under the Core tab), tried the Favoured Skill Ranks bonus, and changing the levels up and down. &nbsp;The issue still persists. &nbsp;It's not a big deal in the case of the kobold dread zombie here (it's just 2 skill ranks after all), but it makes me wonder if the other multi-class creatures with a low Intelligence score have the same issue; at higher HD/levels, it could be a huge disparity. I hope the feedback helps. CB out.

ok, it is only when multiclassed, i see. no one told us that before, and so we could never reproduce it. that was the important piece of info. :) the min is applied at the end, instead of for each class. we'll update to apply it for each class &nbsp;row ( and also 1/HD for monster HDs &nbsp;)

CB said: I hope the feedback helps. CB out. I knew I should have tested the multi-classing&nbsp;dread kobold zombie... &nbsp; ;-o Thanks for detailing the problem. &nbsp;We'll get it rectified.&nbsp; Cheers

Vince said: CB said: I hope the feedback helps. CB out. I knew I should have tested the multi-classing&nbsp;dread kobold zombie... &nbsp; ;-o Thanks for detailing the problem. &nbsp;We'll get it rectified.&nbsp; Cheers Yep, the DKZ needs to become a standard part of any game testing.