Hit points auto calcing is likely something I'll get around too. It's not that hard to do and while there is the skirting the line with copy right given formulas and all that, I already calc defense and level and things so it doesn't personally bother me too much. You still need the rule books to know what to enter. Order of operation starts to get uglier, but can probably be worked out.
I can look into the death saving throws thing as well. I can likely add support for bonuses to just death saves and likely need to make # of failed saves adjustable. Oh the joys of automation and why I should likely avoid it.
Power damage dice... yes it doesn't like split damage dice very well. A sacrifice on the alter of it being able to autocalc crit damage. A better coder could probably write something better, I am not a better coder. You can put it in for the bonus but it won't max on a crit. You could also put it in on the second attack, but again it won't max on a crit on the primary. I look at it as automated helping, not total automation. I'm willing to live with this, because at the table I'd have to do a bit of math as well on crits. No plans to change this.
Damage types are something that I could potentially add to the damage output. I'm a little leery of doing this, but more on that in a moment. I'd have to separate them out of keywords when entered in, but that's not a terribly big thing. I'd likely still leave it as a raw text field, since it has no mechanical effect. I'd do a list but drop downs won't work because you can't select multiple and checkboxes take up a ton of space and I haven't quite figured out how to handle multiple inputs (though I have some ideas).
Pink Rose is correct, recharge directly from the info box is by design for powers that get a roll but also auto recharge at some specific time. The recharge code treats anything that isn't just a number as an auto recharge, thus for those kind of powers you need a way to put a number and still auto recharge. This was the easiest solution. Yes, if you roll from the power list it makes 1 roll for all powers. There seems to be a lack of a clear consensus on this, but this way makes the most sense to me. Again, one of the flaws of automation and why I'm usually not a fan of heavy automation.
You can use the note output to put in pulled values and dice rolls. That's what =() does. However, you don't get mouseover input with that so I don't recommend it for dice rolls, using the second hit line with no second attack is usually better since you can mouseover it. It's mainly for pulling ability score values, which you get by using the first three letters capitalized, =(STR) for example. It also can do basic math, so you could do =(STR+1). You can get your level with LEVEL and 1/2 level with 1/2LVL.
Speaking of mouseover, this is a MT setting. Turn on 'use tooltips' to make the output condensed. This was a change in MT and I made a decision to leave it as one of those things that will be set my MT since some folks (though apparently not many) like the expanded.
Just want to take a moment to point out that I forked the sheet and output displays. Short desc displays on the output like previously and now only notes display on the sheet. Baring that I'm not exactly happy with what I named them, having 2 separate entries seems like a better design and more useful overall.
More output on the powers... I'm not going to do it in the near future. I don't want a bunch of output, it's why I did the split to start with. Technically I could put in toggles for that output so folks could choose. I'm not sure if it would cause a performance hit and there are issues with nested if(): rolls and code{} and how I currently have things set to try and automatically figure out what it should be displaying. I could likely re-write it and go to an all toggle method. I didn't originally because I didn't have the knowhow or the tools to do.
To come back to damage types, it does seem folks would really like it. Since it would technically be on the same damage line and it's often just a word or two I'm not totally adverse to it. I'll add it to the to-do list and see what I can do. Revamping keywords was something I personally wanted to try, so I can likely kill two birds with one stone.
And since tone is hard to grok over the intertubes, I really do appreciate everyones thoughts and feedback.
I wouldn't ask for it otherwise. I'm just not a fan of all ideas, some are easier then others, and ultimately I'm just one guy with not a lot of free time who barely knows what he's doing. But I've got about 40 some odd DL's of the current thing and broke 200 on the previous, plus have seen folks suggest them on other boards, so I'm totally surprised and really flattered that folks use what amount to my random doodlings.
