u/zeruhur_

Clarifying Oracle Dice Notation in v1.5.0

One of the things I've watched people get confused by since the early days of this notation is the oracle roll line. When you ask the oracle a question and roll dice to answer it, how do you write that down?

The old answer was: use ->. But -> was already the symbol for any resolution outcome — mechanics and oracle alike. The result was ambiguity. When you saw -> No (d6=3), was that a standalone oracle answer, or the tail end of a d: line? Readable in isolation, but inconsistent when mixed with mechanics-heavy logs.

What changed in v1.5.0:

d: is now the preferred notation for oracle dice rolls, exactly as it is for mechanics rolls:

? Do they see Phoebe?
d: d100=60 vs 35 (Unlikely) -> No
=> Distracted, but one guard lingers. [N:Guard|watchful]

? Is anyone home?
d: d6=5 vs 4+ -> Yes
=> Lights are on inside.

The logic is simple: if you're rolling dice, write d:. Doesn't matter whether that roll is resolving an action or answering an oracle question — dice are dice. -> follows to declare the outcome, as it always did.

The old -> Yes (d6=6) format isn't gone. It's now explicitly a shorthand — for when you don't need to show the roll at all:

-> Yes, and... (d6=6)
-> No, but... (d6=3)

Use it when the dice details don't matter and you just want to capture the result. Use d: when the roll itself is part of the story.

The three oracle resolution forms, clarified:

There was also a subtler confusion about when to use d: vs tbl: vs gen: for oracle answers. v1.5.0 pins this down explicitly:

• d: — direct dice roll against a probability or target (yes/no checks, likelihood rolls)
• tbl: — lookup on a named oracle table (Mythic Random Event table, your own custom oracle)
• gen: — compound generator producing multi-axis results

? Does the guard notice me? (Unlikely)
d: d100=60 vs 35 -> No                           (direct probability roll)

? What random event disrupts the scene?
tbl: Mythic Event d100=78 -> NPC Action           (named table oracle)

? What does the oracle reveal about my enemy?
gen: Mythic Event d100=78+d100=34 -> NPC Action / Betray  (compound generator)

Add-on updates:

All three official add-ons are updated to reference Lonelog v1.5.0 as their parent. Oracle examples in the Dungeon Crawling and Resource Tracking add-ons have been updated to use the preferred d: form. Two stray R1/R2 round markers were also corrected to Rd1/Rd2.

Your existing logs are fine. The -> result (d#=N) format still appears in the spec as valid shorthand. This is a clarification, not a breaking change.

Add-on Block Tags Now Consistent Across the Ecosystem

Small but satisfying fix.

The three official add-ons — Combat, Dungeon Crawling, and Resource Tracking — each introduced a structural block to delimit a mode of play: a combat encounter, a dungeon session status, a resource snapshot. The Combat Add-on got this right from the start: [COMBAT] / [/COMBAT], bracket tags, consistent with everything else in Lonelog. The other two didn't. Dungeon Crawling used === Dungeon Status === with no closing tag. Resource Tracking used --- RESOURCES --- / --- /RESOURCES --- with dash separators.

That inconsistency bugged me. If you're using all three add-ons together — which is the point — switching mental models for block delimiters mid-session is friction you shouldn't have to deal with.

What changed:

• === Dungeon Status === → [DUNGEON STATUS] / [/DUNGEON STATUS]
• --- RESOURCES --- / --- /RESOURCES --- → [RESOURCES] / [/RESOURCES]
• Analog notebook alternatives now consistently use --- BLOCK --- / --- END BLOCK --- across all three add-ons

Both updated add-ons are now at v1.1.0.

The Community Add-on Guidelines have also been updated (v1.1.0) with an explicit §3.3 on structural block syntax, so future add-ons get this right from the start. The rule is simple: bracket tags for digital, dashed separators for analog, explicit closing tag always required.

No changes to any notation logic, tag semantics, or examples beyond the block delimiters themselves. If you have session logs using the old format, they're still perfectly readable — this only affects how you write new blocks going forward.

Lonelog grows with two new v1.0.0 add-ons: a standard grammar for dice expressions, and a compact notation for playing cards — standard decks, Tarot, and oracle. Both are live today.

One of the recurring questions in the community has been about consistency. Two players logging the same roll might write 2d6+3, 2D6 +3, or roll 2 six-siders +3. A Tarot draw might appear as "reversed Tower", "The Tower (rev.)", or "XVI r" — all the same card, none the same string.

These two add-ons fix that. They standardise what already lives inside d: entries. If you already write 4d6dl1, you are already compliant. If you write "queen of spades", you now have a shorter way: Qs.

> "The notation is a superset of what you already write. Complexity is opt-in." > > — Dice Notation Add-on

Add-on 01 · Dice Notation · v1.0.0

A standard grammar for recording dice expressions · Requires Lonelog v1.4.0

Core Lonelog gives you d: to mark a mechanics roll and leaves the contents to you. That freedom is intentional. This add-on defines what goes inside, adapted from the open-source rpg-dice-roller specification and extended with Lonelog-specific conventions.

The problem it solves: Without a standard, the same roll can be written a dozen ways. Tools can't parse it, and shared logs stay ambiguous. This add-on fixes that without changing the structure of any log entry.

What it covers:

• Standard NdS dice, percentile d%, and Fudge/Fate dF
• Keep/drop modifiers: 4d6dl1, 2d20kh1 (advantage / disadvantage)
• Exploding !, compounding !!, and penetrating !p dice
• Re-roll r, unique-result u, and min/max clamps
• Dice pools counting successes and failures
• Inline roll descriptions with // and group rolls
• Common patterns for D&D/OSR, PbtA, Ironsworn, Fate, Savage Worlds, and percentile oracles

Example:

@ Strike the guard
d: Attack 2d6+2=9 -> Hit
=> I land the blow. He stumbles back against the door.

@ Generate ability scores
d: Stats 4d6dl1 // STR=15, 4d6dl1 // DEX=12, 4d6dl1 // CON=9

? Does the trap reset automatically?
d: Mythic 2d10=47 -> Yes, but...
=> It will — but there is a delay. I have one crossing.

@ Fight through the dark (Savage Worlds)
d: Fighting d8!+2d6! =12 -> Hit
// space before = separates result from the exploding modifier

The add-on splits into two parts: a practical reference covering everything needed for play, and a complete specification for tool developers and edge cases. Modifier execution order, compare-point conflicts, and iteration limits are all documented.

Add-on 02 · Card Notation · v1.0.0

A standard notation for playing cards in session logs · Requires Lonelog v1.4.0

Core Lonelog already acknowledges card draws as a valid resolution mechanic — it just doesn't define how to write the card. This add-on covers three types: standard playing cards, Tarot (Major and Minor Arcana with upright/reversed orientation), and oracle decks.

The problem it solves: Without a standard, logs fill with inconsistent spellings: "Q of spades", "queen♠", "Queen Spades". Tarot draws fare worse — "reversed Tower", "The Tower (rev.)", and "XVI r" are all the same card.

What it covers:

• Standard deck: Qs, Ah, 10d, RJkr — compact and unambiguous
• Major Arcana: M16 (The Tower), M16r (reversed)
• Minor Arcana: KnCu, 7Wa, PgSwr (reversed) with all four suits
• Oracle decks: free-text card names with optional short deck prefix
• Multi-card spreads in single-line and multi-line formats with named positions
• Common patterns for Carta, For the Queen, Ironsworn oracles, and horror games

Example:

@ Search the body
d: draw=3h -> Minor find
=> A folded note, damp and illegible.

? Can I trust the merchant?
d: draw=Jc -> Scheming youth
=> No.

? What force opposes me here?
d: draw=M16r // The Tower reversed -> Everything breaks
=> The structure was already failing. I just arrived at the wrong moment.

// Three-card spread (single line):
d: Past=5Sw, Present=KWa, Future=ACu

// Oracle deck with short prefix:
d: Crow=The Lantern -> Safe passage
d: Crow=The Abyss   -> Something follows

Card draws follow the same d: / = / -> pattern as dice. No new core symbols are introduced. The card identity uses = as the raw result; the interpreted outcome goes in -> as always.

Compatibility & License

Both add-ons require Lonelog v1.4.0 and the core notation (§3). They are independent of each other and of all existing add-ons. Adopt either one, both, or neither — core Lonelog works exactly as before.

Both are released under CC BY-SA 4.0, matching the core system. You can get them from the Lonelog itch.io page.

This update is a focused, single-feature release: the **Multiple Actors** convention (§3.1.1) has been **promoted from the Combat Add-on into the core specification**.

### What Changed

Until now, attributing an action to a specific character — a companion, a second PC, or a named NPC — required loading the Combat Add-on. That felt like too high a barrier for something that comes up naturally in any solo game with more than one active character.

Starting with v1.4.0, you can use `@(Name)` directly in core notation to attribute an action to a specific actor. The bare `@` still means your primary PC, so there's no disruption to existing logs.

```

@ Slip into the archive

@(Jonah) Keeps watch at the door

d: Stealth d6+5 vs TN 4 -> Success

=> We're inside without raising the alarm.

```

The convention works for co-op solo play, games with a party, or any scene where a companion's action has its own mechanical resolution.

### Why Promote It?

Multi-character scenarios aren't a tactical edge case — they're a regular part of some solo play. Keeping this syntax locked behind an add-on meant users had to pull in combat-specific overhead just to log a companion's roll. Promoting it to core keeps the add-on focused on what it does best: initiative, round tracking, and HP.

### Compatibility

No breaking changes. Existing logs are unaffected. The Combat Add-on retains a reference to this convention and expands on it with enemy and group attributions.