Roll20 uses cookies to improve your experience on our site. Cookies enable you to enjoy certain features, social sharing functionality, and tailor message and display ads to your interests on our site and others. They also help us understand how our site is being used. By continuing to use our site, you consent to our use of cookies. Update your cookie preferences .
×
Create a free account
This post has been closed. You can still view previous posts, but you can't post any new replies.

Problems with inequalities and "successes"

Greetings, I have noticed several issues with inequalities that result in no dice being rolled. I'm showing all these as /rolls rather than inline rolls so it's more explicit how it's messing up, but it's worth noting that inline rolls do not differentiate between displaying "1" in error and "1" for "1 success. 1. Inequalities hate parentheticals (This may be an order of operations issue, in which case, ignore this one). For instance, doing /roll 1d100<(30-10) displays "1" with absolutely no die roll occurring or the usual annotation of "1 success" Note on #1: This can be solved by using an inline roll to evaluate the parenthetical. So doing /roll 1d100<[[30-10]] yields the correct output. 2. Inequalities hate negative numbers . Doing /roll 1d100<[[0-10]] will always return "1." Note again, that this is NOT "1 success" but rather just an error message of "1." Again, when doing this as an inline roll, no distinction is made between a "1" indicating success, and a "1" indicating that it broke. As an aside to this, I thought to do 1d100<[[ {X,0}kh1]], which works well for simple expressions for X, e.g. (0-10), but as far as I can tell, breaks (displaying "1") if that expression has any additional kh expressions within it. tl;dr: the "successes" part of inequalities in roll20 has some issues where it does not recognize functions it should be performing, and as a result does not roll or calculate certain expressions.
1498531582
Silvyre
Forum Champion
Hey, Matt W. Great write-up of some pain points with Compare Points! Matt W. said: 1. Inequalities hate parentheticals (This may be an order of operations issue, in which case, ignore this one). For instance, doing /roll 1d100<(30-10) displays "1" with absolutely no die roll occurring or the usual annotation of "1 success" As you guessed, this is indeed an Order of Operations issue; dice rolls must be resolved before non-dice math can happen. (Nested inline rolls, however, are resolved before all else.) Matt W. said: 2. Inequalities hate negative numbers . Doing /roll 1d100<[[0-10]] will always return "1." Note again, that this is NOT "1 success" but rather just an error message of "1." Again, when doing this as an inline roll, no distinction is made between a "1" indicating success, and a "1" indicating that it broke. I'm guessing that negative/decimal numbers were simply never coded to be recognized as Compare Points because there aren't many situations where those are needed. For example, comparing a standard die roll to a negative or decimal number does not make sense because standard roll results are always positive integers. However, within Grouped Rolls, being able to use negative/decimal numbers as Compare Points could be potentially very useful (at least for complex macros). I did also bring this thread to the attention of the Dev Team, in case we might glean some more insight.
1498538329

Edited 1498538880
Matt
Plus
Silvyre said: As you guessed, this is indeed an Order of Operations issue; dice rolls must be resolved before non-dice math can happen. (Nested inline rolls, however, are resolved before all else.) Ha! I thought so, but was confused by the lack of any die roll whatsoever. I would have assumed from OoO that I would have at least gotten the die roll to happen before it fell apart. Silvyre said:  However, within Grouped Rolls, being able to use negative/decimal numbers as Compare Points could be potentially very useful (at least for complex macros). Definitely. In context, I was helping a friend with his random encounter macro , where you would determine the chance of a random encounter (higher near tougher dungeons, lower near bigger cities, effects decreasing with distance), and was using the d100 to compare to the percent chance of encounter. For instance, if there was a 10% chance of an encounter, then he would need to roll a 10 or less on the d100. Using the Compare Point should have returned 1 only for successes, but it also returned 1 anytime you got too close to a big city  because the chance of encounter was negative and the Compare Point broke. Silvyre said: I did also bring this thread to the attention of the Dev Team, in case we might glean some more insight. Thanks. Cheers, mate.
Thank you for input on this matter- I will pass the information on to the devs to have a look at!