D&D 5E MPMB's D&D 5e Character Tools

[Headbomb]

Also, in the combat rules, I feel like things should organized either
1) Alphabetically, or
2) By action type

So that would be either
* Dash (1 a)
* Disarm (1 att)
* Disengage (1 a)
* Dodge (1 a)
* Escape Grapple (1 a)
* Grapple (1 att)
* Help (1 a)
* Hide (1 a)
* Mark (1 att)
* Move Grappled (move)
* Overrun (1 a or bns)
* Ready (1 a)
* Search (1 a)
* Shove (1 att)
* Tumble (1 a or bns)
* Use Object (1 a)

Or
* Move Grappled (move)
* Disarm (1 att)
* Grapple (1 att)
* Mark (1 att)
* Shove (1 att)
* Dash (1 a)
* Disengage (1 a)
* Dodge (1 a)
* Escape Grapple (1 a)
* Help (1 a)
* Hide (1 a)
* Ready (1 a)
* Search (1 a)
* Use Object (1 a)
* Overrun (1 a or bns)
* Tumble (1 a or bns)

 

[Astromath]

Just got an answer about the staff vs. quarterstaff question from WotC customer support. They say its up to the DM to say that it is or isn't. So, my thinking, is, for the sheet, to program the staff to be the same as the quarterstaff and then let the DM to say no if s/he so wishes.

 

[Headbomb]

One situation where having individual Adv./Dis. on individual weapon would be useful: Cursed weapon. Just got a Sword of Vengeance +1, and it gives me disadvantage on attack rolls made by any other weapon. Grr...

It's a rare case, though. Just a spectacular coincidence that I couldn't think of a scenario where you'd really need something on individual weapons, and here I am dealing with exactly that.

 

[morepurplemorebetter]

Been thinking a bit about the general layout.(...)I bring this up because I'm making a human (variant) fighter, and I plan to more or less pick feats every time I can rather than stats improvements, which means I need 8 feats slots.(...)
So I used the following philosophy for the redesign: (...)

I appreciate the effort you put into this and the mockups really help to visualize what you are going for. However, I think very differently about two assumptions that form the basis of your redesign.

Firstly, you want room for 8 feats, which is the (current) theoretical maximum number of feats a character can have. I would argue, as I've done before, that a character sheet shouldn't be designed about the theoretical maximums for anything as most people won't be using it. If you go on designing everything for these kind of approaches to the rules, the sheet will need a lot more adjustments: your suggested limitation of the proficiency section should then instead be an increase in space, the amount of space for saving throw advantages/disadvantages should be increased, there should be 10 more attack fields, place for many more companions/familiars, a couple more "ability save DC's" etc. etc. I'm sorry if I'm exaggerating a bit, but this is what providing room for 8 feats feels like to me.

Secondly, you assume that everybody will be using all pages for their character. The idea behind the lay-out of this sheet is that all you need to play is on the first and second page. Pages three to six are there for the people who want more, but are not essential for everybody. I understand that with some classes the third page is used for some of the class features now that I've incorporated those texts, but I feel this shouldn't change one of the starting points for the design of this sheet.

>> Also ideals/flaws/bonds should be plural, I think.
Only "traits" is plural because, according to the PHB, you should pick two traits and only one ideal, flaw, and bond.

(...)I resubmit my request of having to choose the Dragonborn's Draconic Ancestry separate from the Sorcerer's Draconic Bloodline Draconic Ancestry.

Very cool that you've gotten a clear response from WotC about this! However, I never had any intention of putting in a choice for the Dragonborn's Draconic Ancestry. Currently the sheet supports none. You make it seem that the sheet currently links the Dragonborn's Draconic Ancestry to the Sorcerer's Draconic Bloodline Draconic Ancestry, but this is simply untrue. You get to select it for the Sorcerer, but you have to type it in yourself for the Dragonborn.

Before I said the following in this thread (and I stand by it):

(..)As for selecting the Dragonborn's Draconic Ancestry, this is not a feature that is supported by the sheet. Dragonborn are literally the only race that require you to select something like this and I don't feel it worth the effort to write a whole bunch of code just for this race, sorry.(...)

Also, in the combat rules, I feel like things should organized either
1) Alphabetically, or
2) By action type(...)

Currently, the combat rules are organized by action type. The (second) list you suggests just changes the order of the action types to a non-alphabetical order and handles "1 action or bonus action" as a different type of action. I don't feel that your suggested changes to this would really be a significant improvement, sorry.

One situation where having individual Adv./Dis. on individual weapon would be useful: Cursed weapon. Just got a Sword of Vengeance +1, and it gives me disadvantage on attack rolls made by any other weapon. Grr...

It's a rare case, though. Just a spectacular coincidence that I couldn't think of a scenario where you'd really need something on individual weapons, and here I am dealing with exactly that.

Funny that you have to run into one of the few exceptions As it is a rare case only applicable for 1 weapon, I think you should be able to manage with the weapon description field.

 

[morepurplemorebetter]

I just updated the Spell Sheet Generator to a newer version (yes, not just the character sheet is up for debate ).

Spell Sheet Generator v4.5 (17-8-2015) with the following changelog:
- Added an option to generate a spell sheet with an alphabetical list of all the spells

 

[Headbomb]

I appreciate the effort you put into this and the mockups really help to visualize what you are going for. However, I think very differently about two assumptions that form the basis of your redesign.

Snip

I'm not sure how successful I've been in arguing my case, but I feel you focused way too much on the feats maximum (that pretty much was the least important aspect of the redesign). Like, the feats could kept at 4, with the other 4 becoming notes, with the notes being (optionally) converted into more feats, or more class features space.

The main goal here was to prevent back and forth shuffling between pages 2/3, because the inventory's spread over two pages (both for regular and for magical items), and "character details" also spread over two pages. Personally, I can't see how anyone but low level characters could only make use of two pages, if only because combat conditions are on the 3rd page and the inventory on the 2nd page is so small. As soon as you run into a monster with something special, you'll need to check the 'conditions' on page 3. And as soon as you find something that's not a +1 item (e.g. Necklace of Fireballs), you'll need to make use of the "magic items" on page 3. Likewise if you get something like a horse/cart and load it with stuff ("Other holdings"). So the minimum pages to me seems to be 3. Our entire group (Eldritch Knight (me), Warlock, Rogue, Wizard) switched to using these sheets, and everyone of us always keep shuffling between those three sheets because of the above. The only one that doesn't see much use is the 4th one. So this is not just me speaking here

But if you still insist on a minimum of two, then some things would make a bit more viable.

1) Merge Proficiencies (and keep 9 total) for a longer Class Features section. You ran into length issues earlier, and that would help there.

2) Make the inventory on page 2 bigger somehow. The current one can only have 35 items, and that is extremely limiting.
* This could be done by having those "51-100 lb" boxes use smaller fonts so they span one-line only, thus use smaller overall boxes. Heavily encumbered text could be reduced to "Dis. with Str, Dex, Con based rolls".
* Make the PP/GP/EP/SP/CP icon small and move them in the coin boxes themselves.
* One-box the lifestyle. "Comfortable - 2gp/day"

That should at least let you gain 3 lines, so 6 items in the inventory.

3) Add weight fields to armor/shield/weapons info on the 1rst page. This would save you space in the inventory.

And some other suggestions could still be incorporated. Like movable magic items. (Same for the attuned items on page 2, could be movable within their own section). And adding a weight field to magic items.

 

[morepurplemorebetter]

(...)But if you still insist on a minimum of two, then some things would make a bit more viable.

1) Merge Proficiencies (and keep 9 total) for a longer Class Features section. You ran into length issues earlier, and that would help there.

2) Make the inventory on page 2 bigger somehow. The current one can only have 35 items, and that is extremely limiting.
* This could be done by having those "51-100 lb" boxes use smaller fonts so they span one-line only, thus use smaller overall boxes. Heavily encumbered text could be reduced to "Dis. with Str, Dex, Con based rolls".
* Make the PP/GP/EP/SP/CP icon small and move them in the coin boxes themselves.
* One-box the lifestyle. "Comfortable - 2gp/day"

That should at least let you gain 3 lines, so 6 items in the inventory.

3) Add weight fields to armor/shield/weapons info on the 1rst page. This would save you space in the inventory.

And some other suggestions could still be incorporated. Like movable magic items. (Same for the attuned items on page 2, could be movable within their own section). And adding a weight field to magic items.

I do insist on making the sheet workable with only the first and the second page. I don't think room for magic item descriptions, conditions, or combat rules are essential parts of a sheet. It is great to hear you use the third page so much, because that's why I added it, but I want to accommodate those players that prefer a less-is-more approach as well (my group has some of those ).

1) With the help of Noah Ivaldi the space issue for class features has been resolved. If you are referring to the things that are currently added to the third page, then your suggestion is not enough. There would be a lot more space needed than just three lines to make all these invocations/ki features/metamagic/maneuvres fit in the Class Features section.

2) My players have never had an issue with the 38 items, but, in all honesty, we have not gone beyond level 10 in 5th edition yet.
* I tested this, but with the current box size the font size would have to be 4. And the box size can't change if you want to fit your suggested text next to it because it is pretty long to fit on 1 line
* I would hate to make the coin icons smaller, because a lot of work went into them. They are already pretty small in the printed version. I guess it could be more compact, making room for maybe 1 whole equipment line.
* I don't think this will save that much space, because with your suggestion it becomes rather wide. But it can easily be made to fit with any size of coin-boxes. Its current size is also dictated by the size of the coin-boxes.

These alterations could make room for 1 line of equipment, and maybe even 2. But I don't think 3 is that viable. It is a lot of work for 2 extra equipment lines. I'll keep it under advisement, but I currently don't have that much time to spent on redesigning anything.

3) I decided against doing this when I was making these sections. Not all armours/weapons have weight so the field would be left empty often. Those sections are already really busy with fields and I don't want to put more fields there, making it look too cluttered.


Do you really need to be able to move the three magic items on page 2? There are only 3... If I find the time I can look into this, but it is just as much work making this for just these three fields as it was making it for all the other fields, so that's why I'm hasitant.

Having the magic items on page 3 be movable/sortable is not a bad idea! I'll see when I can implement that.

 

[rillithis]

I never knew PayPal worked with country/language settings. I just assumed Paypal would use the language of the person clicking the button, not of the person to whom the account belonged. Thank you for letting me know! I've added the link on the download page to show English. But I'm not sure if there's anything that would've stopped transactions from the US, because I've received donations from the US without any problems before.

Worked like a charm, this time. Thank you so much for your hard work on these sheets. Have a brew or two on me! - Joseph "Eric" Englert

 

[Noah Ivaldi]

Athinar, since you get responses so easily, could you ask them to add this to the errata page?

Wizard: Arcane Recovery-
Here, "once per day" means you must finish a long rest to use this feature again.

EDIT: Oh, MPMB, there's a thought! Maybe you could add a link to the 5E errata page on your sheet like you did for the "Get the latest version of this sheet on enworld.org" on page 2. I think that "Click here for 5E errata" would fit under your link on the second page or under the character name on the third . . . Then again, why not just take out the extra character name box from the third page and put it there with room to spare? Just a thought.

 

[Headbomb]

Do you really need to be able to move the three magic items on page 2? There are only 3... If I find the time I can look into this, but it is just as much work making this for just these three fields as it was making it for all the other fields, so that's why I'm hasitant.

I figured you could just re-use whatever code you used for the equipment section. Copy-paste job, adjust for 3 lines instead of 14 (or however many).