Heh. Maybe I'm mixing up sugarcube and harlowe now.
No there is a bug in Harlowe and it was discovered before in another question on this forums, where I asked the person asking the question to open a new issue on the Harlowe project repository so that it's developer could know about the problem and it seem like the questioner decided not to do so.
@timsamoff: Could you open a issue related to the problem you found with (random:)'s second parameter not being optional.
Comments
You should probably try something like:
If the lower bound is 0, you can omit it, by the way.
Just checked this, though, and it does work (thank you!). But the macro does, in fact, require two parameters to work without error:
@timsamoff: Could you open a issue related to the problem you found with (random:)'s second parameter not being optional.
https://bitbucket.org/_L_/harlowe/issues/87/random-macro-requires-two-variable