Newbie Dynamic Lighting Questions: "Has Sight" vs. "Token Vision | Vision"

I just upgraded from free to Plus so we can use dynamic lighting. Yay! I don't grasp the difference between the token settings "Advanced" tab "Has Sight" check box and the "Dynamic Lighting" tab "Vision" switch within the "Token Vision" section. The former seems to be more functional. Similarly I don't understand the difference between the token settings "Advanced" tab "Emits Light" boxes and the "Dynamic Lighting" tab "Token Emits Light" options. Thank you for guiding this new user! Allen

Hi Allen! Roll20 is in the process of developing an alternative to Dynamic Lighting. The "Dynamic Lighting" tab you are looking at is actually Updated Dynamic Lighting. The two systems are incompatible. As of this writing, Legacy Dynamic Lighting (LDL) is stable. UDL is under development. I would recommend sticking with LDL for an actual game, as the current bugs in UDL will probably bring frustration and confusion.

Thanks. So you're recommending that for now I just ignore the Updated Dynamic Lighting tab? Also...I just noticed that line of sight doesn't match Pathfinder 1e rules (should be from all corners of square for Pathfinder, not just center). I saw a feature request from a year ago, but it doesn't look like that feature has been added (which surprises me since there are so many Pathfinder 1e players). I hope I'm just missing it...'cause otherwise I don't think I can use dynamic lighting in my game.  Thanks, Allen

Roll20 doesn't perfectly match the LoS rules for a bunch of systems, as a result of allowing all of those systems to be played on the same VTT. Honestly, the LoS/Spell effect rules are a bit garbage in a bunch of game systems anyway - I'd highly recommend finding a ruling system that works best for you and your players on Roll20 and making those rules explicit and consistent for your players. This might mean making one large DM ruling for your PF games "THIS is how we do Line of Sight, because Roll20" ... but that will save you from making constant, small DM rulings on the same issue. There's also that constant of DM rulings: the same rules apply to the NPCs. As long as it's consistent and explicitly stated, no one is disadvantaged. It's not a perfect system, but leveraging DL and LoS to work for you makes it much more immersive for the players - it will require some tweaking of the rules, regardless of the system. Just be consistent, and let hardcore 3.5/PF players know upfront about how LoS works on Roll20 and that you've adjusted the rules accordingly.

That's the approach I use. It works well for most implementations of lighting, too. If lighting works a little bit differently from the game rules, so long as its consistent for everyone, I don't care. That's the way it works at this table. The alternative is to overcomplicate every system to account for every game system published. And yeah. If you want to test UDL and help the devs with constructive feedback, that's cool and useful. But if you just want to run your game smoothly, use LDL for the time being. It will not go away until UDL is completed.

Thanks, again. I'll probably just use LDL...but uncheck "Enforce Line Of Sight." That's more similar to what my group experienced during "the before times" when we could play in person with a battle mat. I'll ask the players what they prefer. But are you saying that the devs might include Pathfinder line of sight rules as an option within UDL? Allen

UDL is still in development. It's hard to predict what may be the final product. My guess is that they will likely stick with centerpoint LOS for the time being, since that is the LDL method and their initial goal is to reach feature parity with LDL before proceeding.