Arthur B said: Well, this is exactly what the status indicators are for. Alternatively, you can use one of the three bubbles to enter a flight height value (I use the center bubble for health, the second for the AC value and the third as "helper field" for all kind of values, like the flight height. No, that's what they have been made to do by the users. They are "catch-all" text fields. Nothing more. They aren't dynamic or special in any real way. And that's ok for things that don't merit specific attention. But in Table Top RPG, there are numerous variables that easily clutter up a game board. The solution should point to working with the existing token or in said above topography instead of forcing a user to work out side of a design. I tend to disagree Stephen L. said: Game Master said: That is not a fix Chris. That is a work around. That is what I have right now. With the use of the "bars" it's a cobbled band aid. I see a lot f replies like this. Replies that indicate that a suggestion is not good enough for votes or implementation unless it cannot be replicated in anyway in game so sorry. As a paying customer, that's not satisfactory. It would be like Facebook telling it's users, I know an instant messaging feature would be really great, but did you know you can just talk to each other on their wall directly? I appreciate your response and that is a great idea until a real solution is introduced. In their defense, Roll20's development team is a lot smaller than Facebook's. There are a lot of features that would be great to implement, but they have to prioritize which ones they're going to work on. These features all take some time to plan, design, implement, and test. If a feature like this were done, it would also make more sense that not just tokens have height counters, but terrain gets height as well. Perhaps a better way to design this would be to have a topological map feature that allows users to draw topological contours defining the elevation of areas on the map. Perhaps these contours would be drawn on a new layer, perhaps called the "topology" layer. By default, tokens would have a elevation set to whatever the elevation is in the topological area of the map they're standing in. Then, sure, for flying/burrowing creatures, there could be a widget to adjust this elevation. It would be more difficult though to decide then how Euclidean distance is going to work for the measurement tool. Should the distance use start and end points located on the ground? Should we assume that the start and end points have the same elevation? If either of the endpoints overlap a creature, should we use their elevation instead? This is a more difficult design decision, since on the VTT we are working with a top-down 2D projection instead of a 3D perspective projection. In the software development world I'm used to (scrum/agile) you would not stop or never start a project simply because it is too complex. You would decide what would bring the most value to the stakeholder/user whatever, get your requirements and start there. If your sprint won't allow you to finish then you splice the work you can do and deliver as often and as early as you can. Now, I understand that Facebook is larger than Roll20. My comparison was for easy understanding of the root problem with these forums not the difference in dev teams themselves. A better comparison would be to say to Ford before power windows started: We would like a switch to control a motor to roll down our window for us in our sedans. To which they reply: "That isn't really needed, they have a hand crank to raise and lower the window." To your other point however, in development you do not say, User x wants flight and distance calculated into tokens and then go we will also work on topography. That is separate feature. Separate development. You risk not getting anything done. Which I fear is why we still have 2 years + waiting on knock-out-of-the-park requests like macro folders. Because the user base is too busy defending Roll20's dev team and not demanding timely requested features. They aren't raking in facebook or ford money, but I promise you, they are making money. I sympathize with the work that goes into this great platform, but that doesn't free them from the repsonibiity of creating quality content on a timely basis either :)
