Ability to separate players

Many times, pc's get separated. Roll20 in its current form doesn't seem to be able to handle the task. All pc's stay on the current map. If one gets transported to a different area, or had to complete a task on his/her own, all the pc's as far as I can tell, have to follow. I think the ability to put players on different maps would be a great feature. That is, with the ability to make sure that only the pc's to see only the map that pertains to them. Separate maps, sub-campaigns? Something like that could be possible I think. Thank you

Yes, good suggestion. I ran into this problem during my very first adventure.

I agree, but not only about using different maps: a way of handling separate Text Chat Boxes would be necessary, too. And the same goes for sound: separate audio channels for the Roll20 Jukebox (not everyone is hearing the same if they aren't together) and voice, for when a GM is communicating with "the other party" or the isolated member(s).

Here is how I would resolve that issue. I would have the "Players" strip, that shows which page they are on, be able to be clicked and then it would expand showing all the players. Then you can drag a specifically selected player to another page and another Players Strip appears (maybe of a different colour, like blue, a third being green, etc) on that page. Then the selected player is moved from the rest of the selectable players, from the Main strip (red one) to the newly created one (blue). Then if you drag a strip to a strip they merge back into the main red one again.

another Players Strip appears (maybe of a different colour, like blue, a third being green, etc) on that page. How about just using the player's ping/Tokbox color?

Using Roll20's current resources I would do the following: Copy the current campaign. Open the campaign copy in a separate tab. Tell the player(s) that are splitting up to go to the campaign copy. Ctrl+tab# to switch between the two. - Gauss

@ Gauss Have you actually tried that? I was wondering how well it worked and if you use TokBox for voice chat or another service, or do you not use voice chat? I had a group split up and was able to jump back forth (this was during an encounter) fairly easy. There was a little confusion at first but it worked out pretty well. We use skype for voice chat and had roll20 for text so everyone could see and hear what everyone was doing which didn't matter in this instance but I could see why you would want it.

I have opened up multiple copies before. I imagine multiple instances of tokbox would be problematic. I had not considered the voice problem when I posted as I do not always use it. As it is, my group is switching to skype since it is more stable than tokbox so that eliminates that problem (for me) anyhow. :) I was just trying to suggest a workaround, not state that the idea wasn't a good one. :) - Gauss

I thought your idea was good, which was why I had asked. I was thinking of trying it the next time my group split up and was just wondering if you had run into any problems.

Main problem with running multiple instances of Roll20's VTT is that you are running multiple instances of Roll20's VTT. :) Joking aside, sometimes Chrome (I use chrome) gets buggy when you do things like that. Refresh or reboot chrome fixes it. Still, when I do have 2 or 3 VTTs open simultaneously I rarely see a problem. Note: I have only been using Roll20 for about a month so take what I have to say with a grain of salt. Still, I am loving it and some of the games I am wanting to use on it could require 2 or more Roll20 VTTs open simultaneously so I have tested that capability out. - Gauss

Gauss, Have you tried to run two Roll20 instances by using two different web-browsers? In that way, perhaps the user accounts aren't colliding . . . If the answer is yes, are you getting the same bugging behavior as well? I still need to make a such test.

Axel: No, I've used two instances of Chrome in both tabbed and non-tabbed methods. When I have more time I will play with it to confirm what the bugs are (assuming they persist) and how they might be caused or dealt with. I was only doing a preliminary exploration of multiple instances being open a couple weeks ago in order to explore options for Star Fleet Battles. - Gauss

Here is how I would resolve that issue. I would have the "Players" strip, You know, I kept reading this and trying to figure out how having the players naked would help. >facepalm<

You know, I kept reading this and trying to figure out how having the players naked would help. >facepalm< Oh, now I see what Seedle really meant! :-p

So, any actual input on adding this?

Given how quickly you can log into a Roll20 game, I'd say the best current workaround would be to have a separate IM app running to keep everyone in touch, and then simply to get the players not in the current encounter to log out. For example, if playing in a Google Hangout, have a 'lobby' running in Skype. It'd be the same as in a face-to-face game where the GM leaves the room with one player, or gets some others to go and put the kettle on. I can see that there could be an issue with the Chat archive, but in a video/audio game that shouldn't be too much of a problem.

With skype, I just message the player directly. And I approve of the copying campaign idea.

THIS! Players get separated often in campaigns.

+1 The copying a campaign is a workaround but it's way too clunky to be used a lot. I mean players going back an forth between campaigns during a session is not how this should work.

Is this a possible work around? &nbsp; Can some users play in Google+ and others play in the normal Roll20 interface? In theory, yes. However, players in Google+ will only see/hear (for video chat purposes) other Google+ players, and players on Roll20 will only see/hear other players using Roll20. So it's really not a recommended way or doing things, and not something we officially support.

This is an essential. +10 to this.

+1 for me spreading voice/ ability to mute players by gm is essential

+1 Chat/talk groups or rooms would be nice to keep players separated in case you need it. I find it essential.

+1