[5e Shaped] Version 8+

William C. said: Not sure why, but after the update when it comes to weapon damage rolls, you can no longer add no modifier. If you try to select that option, it automatically reselects either Dex or Str depending on whether it's a melee or ranged weapon attack. Tested and have same.  Also applies to attack mod; although this is not likely to ever be the case

TheWebCoder said: Also worth noting that during the upgrade, quite a few of my player's weapons were added repeatedly, and some information was changed. For example, the monk's staff appeared three times, and the bonus fire damage was gone. Yeah, our fighter had his trident replicated about 6 times with variable text (1h, 2h, versatile, etc). We just deleted the extras.

TheWebCoder said: So it doesn't get lost, what's the interim solution for GWF in 9.0.1? Can someone please give a detailed example? The answer is on the same page where you asked the question: Kryx said: Dvergr76 said: [Using 9.0.1] Hmmm... how would I set up "Great Weapon Fighting" style on the new sheet?&nbsp; See&nbsp; <a href="https://bitbucket.org/mlenser/5eshaped/issues/164/" rel="nofollow">https://bitbucket.org/mlenser/5eshaped/issues/164/</a>... It'll be part of 9.1.0

William C. said: Not sure why, but after the update when it comes to weapon damage rolls, you can no longer add no modifier. If you try to select that option, it automatically reselects either Dex or Str depending on whether it's a melee or ranged weapon attack. This had been addressed in this thread as well as on bitbucket. 9.1.0

TheWebCoder said: Also worth noting that during the upgrade, quite a few of my player's weapons were added repeatedly, and some information was changed. For example, the monk's staff appeared three times Please read the changelog.

If anyone else is curious about a temporary solution for GWF for 9.0.1:&nbsp;<a href="https://screencast.com/t/Rw1p400yFB2" rel="nofollow">https://screencast.com/t/Rw1p400yFB2</a>

TheWebCoder said: If anyone else is curious about a temporary solution for GWF for 9.0.1:&nbsp; <a href="https://screencast.com/t/Rw1p400yFB2" rel="nofollow">https://screencast.com/t/Rw1p400yFB2</a> The reroll on GWF is only once. It should be "ro&lt;2".

Kryx said: William C. said: Not sure why, but after the update when it comes to weapon damage rolls, you can no longer add no modifier. If you try to select that option, it automatically reselects either Dex or Str depending on whether it's a melee or ranged weapon attack. This had been addressed in this thread as well as on bitbucket. 9.1.0 Ah I may have scanned over it as it says "edge case" which it clearly is not.&nbsp; Bonus action light weapon attack is the best example.&nbsp; Glad to see it will be resolved in 9.1.0 thanks.

Kryx said: TheWebCoder said: If anyone else is curious about a temporary solution for GWF for 9.0.1:&nbsp; <a href="https://screencast.com/t/Rw1p400yFB2" rel="nofollow">https://screencast.com/t/Rw1p400yFB2</a> The reroll on GWF is only once. It should be "ro&lt;2". Ah, and the fail with this hack is that crits don't work. I even tried enabling bonus damage on crits, but no dice. Literally. Easy enough to roll again tho.

Jim W. said: Ah I may have scanned over it as it says "edge case" which it clearly is not.&nbsp; Bonus action light weapon attack is the best example.&nbsp; Glad to see it will be resolved in 9.1.0 thanks. This was literally addressed in the changelog known issues for 9.0.1: Handled for new imports and a workaround &nbsp; #147: NPC action: changing ability bonus for attack to "nothing" is reset to Str This is an edge case that only applies to things like Bat. It needs to be solved, but it requires a change that alters how I get and save data from the server. That is too risky for 9.0.x. In the mean time importing from SRD or JSON will parse the correct attack or damage by adding positive or negative bonuses. It can be manually adjusted as well. I will solve this for 9.1.0 or later. The reasoning it is not in 9.0.1 is written right there. I spent a fair amount of time informing the user through this thread, my bitbucket, and through the changelog. I don't expect you to necessarily read everything, but this is very clearly covered in the changelog. Please use the resources that I dedicate time to informing users.

okay to what god do I need to sacrifice a goat to to get the new version

Simon O. said: okay to what god do I need to sacrifice a goat to to get the new version Any campaign using the roll20 version of Shaped should be updated. If you're using a custom sheet you need to manually update.

I've asked this in another thread but I'll ask directly. I apologize if this has been asked before. I'm not quite used to new version so I wonder is it possible to revert back 9.0.0 for those who don't want to use the update?

Jack said: is it possible to revert back 9.0.0 for those who don't want to use the update? I don't think that's quite how it works...

Jack said: I've asked this in another thread but I'll ask directly. I apologize if this has been asked before. I'm not quite used to new version so I wonder is it possible to revert back 9.0.0 for those who don't want to use the update? Roll20 only has 1 version of my sheet. I asked that this process be changed:&nbsp; [Dev] Sheet Versioning and Updates But it doesn't seem like it will. The only way to stick to a version is to install a specific version from Github as a pro user.

Jack said: I've asked this in another thread but I'll ask directly. I apologize if this has been asked before. I'm not quite used to new version so I wonder is it possible to revert back 9.0.0 for those who don't want to use the update? 9.0.0 was never online, what you would want to revert to is 7.12.2, and reverting to 7.12.2 in turn is not possible for two reasons: 1) There is no downgrade mechanism for sheets - any sheets you have opened once with 9.0.1 will not work well with 7.12.2 2) The game creator needs to be a pro subscriber to manually set the sheet, otherwise you have to use the current live version of a sheet.

The "Auto Revert Advantage/Disadvantage" no longer seems to be working after the conversion. Is this a known issue?

Andy B. said: The "Auto Revert Advantage/Disadvantage" no longer seems to be working after the conversion. Is this a known issue? Please ensure you have the latest version of the script.

Kryx said: Andy B. said: The "Auto Revert Advantage/Disadvantage" no longer seems to be working after the conversion. Is this a known issue? Please ensure you have the latest version of the script. Tested this with live API and sheet and have same issue.&nbsp; Seems the API has not changed in 12 days? I have never used ths feature so not sure if it worked for me before.&nbsp; Tested in the shaped testing campaign and same issue.

If there is a bug with a feature of the API (as auto reverting advantage is, as noted on the settings page) then the Shaped companion thread on the API forum or Lucian's github are the places to address it.

I've got a troublesome problem with the new update. the sheets have jumped from 7.1.12 to 9.0.1 and some of the spells on the characters disappear, even though they were set there before the upgrade and they were deleted as I was filling them in. I thought it was a case of the things being deleted from unticking the spell attack, but it made the greater invisibility spell invisible permanently.

My particular instance of weirdness was 6 hours ago. &nbsp;Clicking and dragging in weapons into newly made empty data fields no longer works. &nbsp;Well it does, but doesn't autofill all the data. &nbsp;version 9.0.1

I'm finding some of my monsters have their attacks messed up with the conversion to 9.0.1. For example, the zombies tied to a necromancer (and thus getting his Proficiency Bonus to damage) had their slam attacks turned into "melee spell attacks" keyed off of Wisdom instead of Strength and the damage bonus changed from +3 to +6. Likewise a bugbear got all his melee and ranged attacks turned into melee spell attacks. (I can fix his longbow, but his flail keeps insisting it's a melee spell attack, even though it's correctly keyed to Strength now and it shows "melee weapon attack" when I switch the attack into edit mode.) ETA: Like Fill-In, I'm noticing spells missing from spellcasters' sheets post-conversion. The aforementioned necromancer lost one of his prepared spells. Side note: I really, really miss the Spells page. Having the all the spells in one giant column on the main page when editing is incredibly unwieldy.

The new spells layout (bug?) makes preparing spells rather clunky. Since the columns are no longer fixed width, the prepared buttons are sprinkled all over and you have to hunt and peck for them. Editing spells is also more difficult now, since they're displayed in one long, wrapped line, which causes the spells to jump around as you open and close them.

Rob A. said: Side note: I really, really miss the Spells page. Having the all the spells in one giant column on the main page when editing is incredibly unwieldy. Did you try the expand btn for editing spells? It's nice for editing gear too.

TheWebCoder said: Rob A. said: Side note: I really, really miss the Spells page. Having the all the spells in one giant column on the main page when editing is incredibly unwieldy. Did you try the expand btn for editing spells? It's nice for editing gear too. Ah. That helps. Thank you. (I still miss the old Spells page, but this is a decent work-around.)

@Aiden The spell layout is fixed in 9.1.0. @Rob A. For things stuck in melee spell attack, switch the select to something else and then back to Melee Weapon Attack.

Oh, I forgot to mention I didn't just lose one spell. I lost like 3 or 4 that were just filled in the title, and 2 that have been deleted while I was adding information.

Jebediah S. said: My particular instance of weirdness was 6 hours ago. &nbsp;Clicking and dragging in weapons into newly made empty data fields no longer works. &nbsp;Well it does, but doesn't autofill all the data. &nbsp;version 9.0.1 Please see the OP which has instructions for reporting issues on BitBucket. Please provide a reproduction case so I can experience the problem myself.

Fill-in said: some of the spells on the characters disappear, even though they were set there before the upgrade and they were deleted as I was filling them in. I thought it was a case of the things being deleted from unticking the spell attack, but it made the greater invisibility spell invisible permanently. I haven't heard any reports of spells failing to upgrade until now. Did you let the upgrade complete? What spells failed to upgrade? Have you ensured that filtering is not hiding the spell? If you've truly lost a spell you'll have to re-add it from either the SRD or type it. Sorry for the inconvience.

Rob A. said: I'm finding some of my monsters have their attacks messed up with the conversion to 9.0.1. For example, the zombies tied to a necromancer (and thus getting his Proficiency Bonus to damage) had their slam attacks turned into "melee spell attacks" keyed off of Wisdom instead of Strength and the damage bonus changed from +3 to +6. If you're having specific monsters not parse correctly please provide a reproduction path on Bitbucket. I do not know what you mean by "zombies tied to a necromancer" - that is not in their monster manual statblock. Rob A. said: Likewise a bugbear got all his melee and ranged attacks turned into melee spell attacks. (I can fix his longbow, but his flail keeps insisting it's a melee spell attack, even though it's correctly keyed to Strength now and it shows "melee weapon attack" when I switch the attack into edit mode.) A bugbear's attacks are weapon attacks when I drag it from SRD. Did you change the wording? That's the only cause I can thinkin of that would impact the parse.

Aiden said: The new spells layout (bug?) makes preparing spells rather clunky See&nbsp; <a href="https://bitbucket.org/mlenser/5eshaped/issues/156/" rel="nofollow">https://bitbucket.org/mlenser/5eshaped/issues/156/</a>... which has some screenshots of how it'll look in 9.1.0

Kryx said: Rob A. said: I'm finding some of my monsters have their attacks messed up with the conversion to 9.0.1. For example, the zombies tied to a necromancer (and thus getting his Proficiency Bonus to damage) had their slam attacks turned into "melee spell attacks" keyed off of Wisdom instead of Strength and the damage bonus changed from +3 to +6. If you're having specific monsters not parse correctly please provide a reproduction path on Bitbucket. I do not know what you mean by "zombies tied to a necromancer" - that is not in their monster manual statblock. Rob A. said: Likewise a bugbear got all his melee and ranged attacks turned into melee spell attacks. (I can fix his longbow, but his flail keeps insisting it's a melee spell attack, even though it's correctly keyed to Strength now and it shows "melee weapon attack" when I switch the attack into edit mode.) A bugbear's attacks are weapon attacks when I drag it from SRD. Did you change the wording? That's the only cause I can thinkin of that would impact the parse. My zombies (standard, from the JSON database) had their Slam attacks turned into spell attacks without damage during the conversion. The attacks had damage ticked and filled in when viewing in edit mode, but didn't actually post it to chat. It did post the freetext to chat, even though that box was empty in edit mode. Not sure it'll happen again, but it happened when converting from 7.x to 9.x when the live version of the sheet updated.

Kryx said: Fill-in said: some of the spells on the characters disappear, even though they were set there before the upgrade and they were deleted as I was filling them in. I thought it was a case of the things being deleted from unticking the spell attack, but it made the greater invisibility spell invisible permanently. I haven't heard any reports of spells failing to upgrade until now. Did you let the upgrade complete? What spells failed to upgrade? Have you ensured that filtering is not hiding the spell? If you've truly lost a spell you'll have to re-add it from either the SRD or type it. Sorry for the inconvience. Yes I let the upgrade complete. but the thing I didn't check was the filtering, which made the "disappeared" spells come back after I removed clicked off the filters. thanks for the help!

Fill-in said: I didn't check was the filtering, which made the "disappeared" spells come back after I removed clicked off the filters. thanks for the help! Great to hear it was just filtering! Enjoy!

alexander h. said: My zombies (standard, from the JSON database) had their Slam attacks turned into spell attacks without damage during the conversion. The attacks had damage ticked and filled in when viewing in edit mode, but didn't actually post it to chat. It did post the freetext to chat, even though that box was empty in edit mode. Not sure it'll happen again, but it happened when converting from 7.x to 9.x when the live version of the sheet updated. Do you mean upgrade? Conversion is the word I use for OGL conversion. Hmm that doesn't make sense as the slam is just: Melee Weapon Attack: +3 to hit, reach 5 ft., one target. Hit: 4 (1d6 + 1) bludgeoning damage There is nothing in there that would be parsed as a spell. For Upgrade errors anything not caught during the testing period (which everyone was invited to) can't retroactively be fixed. Any creature that converted with a mistake has to be either manually fixed or reimported (really quick with SRD or JSON). If there is a creature that converts funny and you'd like fixed for a later release please let me know on the issue tracker.

I looked through to see if anyone else had this issue and I'm not sure if anyone did, but it seems that when upgrading to the new sheets, if the NPC text was not written in freetext (i.e, you wrote it only &nbsp;in display text rather than freetext), then the description goes completely blank. I've had to go and rollback a campaign to salvage some of my homebrew npcs that have lost trait descriptors for this reason. This is the roll20's live version, by the way. (edited for clarity, it's npcs, not players)

Seems 9.0.1 has hit roll20, any news as to when we'll 9.1?&nbsp;

Mike said: Seems 9.0.1 has hit roll20, any news as to when we'll 9.1?&nbsp; Not released to Pro's yet - I think he was aiming for sometime soon but I guess these issue reports take time to look at/comment on even if they are not actual bugs and so maybe it will push 9.1 back a bit.

So, it would seem the version 9.0.1. is a broken mess, sorry to say so. I am in 2 rather big westmarches-style campaign and a couple smaller ones. Each of them had their NPC sheets basically destroyed, with attacks and spells not working and the DMs breaking down in frustration over what seems like an untested Beta version of a sheet, modificators being a mess and anything homebrew basically either being gone or at least broken. It's a cointoss on that one, it seems. The same obvioulsy goes for player sheets, with anything that can not not just be added from the SRD broken and even that not working properly.&nbsp; (Like all the spells adding damage and saving throws, attacks being multiplied, text just not displaying in chat no matter what boxes you tick and what fields you fill out...) Now I know you keep saying stuff will be fixed in 9.1., but why push out a broken version of the sheet through an update to begin with? People and especially DMs usually have better things to do than repairing literally hundreds of sheets. So unless 9.1. hits the live update of roll20 very, very soon this is just plain silly and essentially unusable.

Pakki said: I looked through to see if anyone else had this issue and I'm not sure if anyone did, but it seems that when upgrading to the new sheets, if the NPC text was not written in freetext (i.e, you wrote it only &nbsp;in display text rather than freetext), then the description goes completely blank. I've had to go and rollback a campaign to salvage some of my homebrew npcs that have lost trait descriptors for this reason. This was fixed during the bug finding process. See&nbsp; <a href="https://bitbucket.org/mlenser/5eshaped/issues/111/" rel="nofollow">https://bitbucket.org/mlenser/5eshaped/issues/111/</a>... It first upgrades the freetext for all sections. For traits it then checks if display_text exists. If display_text exists and content doesn't (if no freetext existed in old versions) then content is set to display_text. If content exists than display_text is added on with a line break.

Jan D. said: So, it would seem the version 9.0.1. is a broken mess, sorry to say so. Hundreds of people are using the sheet without issue. Please do not spread falsehoods. The sheet was heavily tested for 2 weeks. I also provided a period where people could test their campaigns and provide feedback. If you're experiencing issues in 9.0.1 outside of the minor fixes in 9.1.0 then it is likely that you have not let the upgrades complete. There is a message on every sheet when it starts upgrading to inform you that you need to let it complete. If you close the sheet before that point then you will experience problems like you're experiencing.

Jan D. said: So, it would seem the version 9.0.1. is a broken mess, * CUT* but why push out a broken version of the sheet through an update to begin with? People and especially DMs usually have better things to do than repairing literally hundreds of sheets. So unless 9.1. hits the live update of roll20 very, very soon this is just plain silly and essentially unusable. I've seen very few issues, none game-breaking or even character breaking.&nbsp; I know if you close a sheet without letting it update to the new sheet you get issues - and it can take 5-15 minutes to convert a sheet I think [maybe longer with slow connection or if Roll20 is busy?].&nbsp; There was extensive testing in the Shaped Testing campaign.&nbsp; Please don't conflate a lot of people talking about minor issues into a 'it's broken' statement - I think most of us are greatful that so much work is being put in by one person and the result is pretty damn good.

Jim W. said: it can take 5-15 minutes to convert a sheet I think The upgrade should occur in 10 seconds or less in most cases. Maximum 40 seconds for the many spell cases Jim W. said: I think most of us are greatful that so much work is being put in by one person and the result is pretty damn good. Thanks for saying so. It's nice to see these messages during times of release.

Kryx said: Jim W. said: it can take 5-15 minutes to convert a sheet I think The upgrade should occur in 10 seconds or less in most cases. Maximum 40 seconds for the many spell cases Maybe on a fast connection - mine is wireless in the UK and I can watch the various sections arrive over several minutes.&nbsp; I tend to let it run a bit longer just to be sure - much less time consuming than recovery from character vault or rebuild from SRD - so I have never had to do this on a live sheet due to this cautious approach.

Jim W. said: Maybe on a fast connection - mine is wireless in the UK and I can watch the various sections arrive over several minutes.&nbsp; I tend to let it run a bit longer just to be sure - much less time consuming than recovery from character vault or rebuild from SRD - so I have never had to do this on a live sheet due to this cautious approach. Wow, that sounds terrrrrrrrrible! Well hopefully the "save everything as silent" change will speed it up when I am able to finish that (it won't be as part of 9.1.0).

I can also report a few cases where some descriptive text was lost for my homebrew monsters, where i apparently added them into the wrong section. There seems to be a few cases where this is not fixed, as i made 100% sure to let every sheet complete its upgrade before closing or messing around within it. Not a big deal, but i can definitely also report this behaviour pointed out by a few people before.

zerosius said: I can also report a few cases where some descriptive text was lost for my homebrew monsters, where i apparently added them into the wrong section. There seems to be a few cases where this is not fixed, as i made 100% sure to let every sheet complete its upgrade before closing or messing around within it. Not a big deal, but i can definitely also report this behaviour pointed out by a few people before. It's definitely possible. From our tests we caught this scenario, but perhaps some missed. If those missed the value should still be in the display field which you can print out in chat via the normal method: @{NAME|repeating_trait_ID_display_text}

zerosius said: I can also report a few cases where some descriptive text was lost for my homebrew monsters, where i apparently added them into the wrong section. There seems to be a few cases where this is not fixed, as i made 100% sure to let every sheet complete its upgrade before closing or messing around within it. Not a big deal, but i can definitely also report this behaviour pointed out by a few people before. Same here. A lot of my monsters lost their descriptions, and all of their attack rolls failed to convert in their entirety. Any ones that do convert are converted to spell attack rolls. I'm going to roll back my campaign to an older version and use the older version of the sheet since I need those monsters for my campaign...

Kryx said: zerosius said: I can also report a few cases where some descriptive text was lost for my homebrew monsters, where i apparently added them into the wrong section. There seems to be a few cases where this is not fixed, as i made 100% sure to let every sheet complete its upgrade before closing or messing around within it. Not a big deal, but i can definitely also report this behaviour pointed out by a few people before. It's definitely possible. From our tests we caught this scenario, but perhaps some missed. If those missed the value should still be in the display field which you can print out in chat via the normal method: @{NAME|repeating_trait_ID_display_text} Ah thx, didnt think about that ;) I wish i could report in more detail were there was something going wrong, but it seems kinda random (?) I just this week added a homebrew monster from the tome of beasts, and half of its traits converted and half not, although i am fairly certain i put it all in the display section. Gonna try to see if i can find a pattern on what might have caused it.