ahhh.. chatgpt my friend:
What I want to is test FIELD1. There is a yes or no answer. 2 routes for FIELD1. But when this is done I want to test both of the prior routes for FIELD2. Again yes and no. So each submission will be tested and actioned for FIELD1 and for FIELD2. But after a route is followed in Pabbly it seems you can't merge those two routes back together.
ChatGPT said:
Thanks — now I understand your scenario clearly. You are
not trying to create a waterfall or decision-tree. You are trying to do a
multi-stage evaluation where all submissions go through FIELD1 logic, and then regardless of which branch FIELD1 matched, you want the workflow to continue and evaluate FIELD2 next.
Visually,
you want this:
Trigger
↓
Router #1 (FIELD1: Yes/No)
├── If FIELD1 = Yes → ACTION(s)
└── If FIELD1 = No → ACTION(s)
⟶ (MERGE BACK TO ONE PATH)
↓
Router #2 (FIELD2: Yes/No)
├── If FIELD2 = Yes → ACTION(s)
└── If FIELD2 = No → ACTION(s)
And the problem:
Pabbly’s router
does NOT support merging branches back into one stream. Once a router splits, each route is isolated — you cannot naturally “join” them again.
That’s why your FIELD2 test becomes unreachable without duplicating logic.
The solution (the correct Pabbly pattern for your use-case)
To test
FIELD1 and FIELD2 independently,
do NOT put FIELD2 under the routes of Router #1.
Instead, do this:
- Router #1 → FIELD1 Yes/No
- (actions per route)
- Then continue the workflow AFTER the router
- Router #2 → FIELD2 Yes/No
So your structure should be:
Trigger
↓
Router #1 (FIELD1 Yes/No)
├── Route 1: If FIELD1 = Yes → ACTION(S)
└── Route 2: If FIELD1 = No → ACTION(S)
↓ (this is important — after the router, not inside it)
Router #2 (FIELD2 Yes/No)
├── Route 1: If FIELD2 = Yes → ACTION(S)
└── Route 2: If FIELD2 = No → ACTION(S)
This way:
FIELD1 is evaluated and handled
Then
regardless of the path, you return to a
single stream
FIELD2 is then evaluated cleanly in a second router
Why this works
Routers in Pabbly are
parallel branch modules, not
sequential “if/else if/elseif” stacks.
If you try this:
Router #1
├── Route 1 → Router #2
└── Route 2 → Router #2
…it fails because routers do
not allow a shared downstream node.
So the
correct approach is:
- Let Router #1 finish completely
- Then place Router #2 after that router block
- Run the next condition set independently
Your logic becomes:
Test FIELD1 once → take Yes or No action
Test FIELD2 once → take Yes or No action
Exactly what you described.
If you want, I can now give you one of these:
Reply with
A, B, or C
| Option | What I will send you |
|---|
| A | A diagram + step-by-step build screenshots for FIELD1/ FIELD2 setup |
| B | An optimized version that avoids running unnecessary tasks |
| C | A Pabbly-ready JSON workflow export (you can import and just edit your fields) |
Which do you want next?
You said:
a
ChatGPT said:
Great — here is
Option A: the clean diagram + step-by-step instructions for your exact FIELD1 + FIELD2 routing logic in Pabbly.
THE LOGIC YOU WANT (visual)
Trigger
↓
──────────────
Router #1 (Test FIELD1: Yes/No)
──────────────
├── Route 1 (FIELD1 = YES) → Action(s) for Yes
└── Route 2 (FIELD1 = NO) → Action(s) for No
↓ (both merge here automatically — this is the key)
──────────────
Router #2 (Test FIELD2: Yes/No)
──────────────
├── Route 1 (FIELD2 = YES) → Action(s) for Yes
└── Route 2 (FIELD2 = NO) → Action(s) for No
↓
END (or continue workflow)
Meaning:
- Every submission gets tested on FIELD1
- Then regardless of which FIELD1 result happens, the same submission continues and gets tested on FIELD2
- No duplicated routes
- No dead ends
- No routing conflicts
STEP-BY-STEP BUILD IN PABBLY
STEP 1 — Trigger
Add your trigger (Webhook, Form, Google Sheet, etc.).
STEP 2 — Add Router #1 (FIELD1 test)
Inside Router #1 create
two routes:
| Route | Condition | Example Condition |
|---|
| Route 1 | If FIELD1 = Yes | FIELD1 (Text) → Equals → Yes |
| Route 2 | If FIELD1 = No | FIELD1 (Text) → Equals → No |
Then in each route, add whatever actions must happen for FIELD1.
STEP 3 — IMPORTANT → DO NOT NEST FIELD2 HERE
After Router #1 finishes,
scroll down and click “+” BELOW the router, not inside it.
This is what prevents the merge problem.
STEP 4 — Add Router #2 (FIELD2 test)
Again, create two routes:
| Route | Condition | Example Condition |
|---|
| Route 1 | If FIELD2 = Yes | FIELD2 (Text) → Equals → Yes |
| Route 2 | If FIELD2 = No | FIELD2 (Text) → Equals → No |
Add your FIELD2 actions under each route.
FINAL RESULT IN YOUR WORKFLOW
It should look exactly like this
in order:
1) Trigger
2) Router (FIELD1)
Route 1: Yes → actions
Route 2: No → actions
3) Router (FIELD2)
Route 1: Yes → actions
Route 2: No → actions
4) (Any further steps if needed)
WHY THIS METHOD WORKS
- Routers in Pabbly split paths, but cannot merge paths
- By placing Router #2 after Router #1 (not inside it), you force the workflow back into one universal path
- Then your second condition set runs reliably for every submission
This gives you:
✔ FIELD1 evaluated once
✔ FIELD2 evaluated once
✔ No duplication
✔ No breaking of routes
✔ Clean logic flow
