Hiding "Attributes & Abilites" tab ?

Hi ! Is there any way, API or not, to hide the " Attributes & Abilites " tab to the players ? Cheers!

Not within the VTT, but an extension might be able to do that. But that extension would be on the player's side of things.  Why? 

To make sure they neither can read nor change what's written there

Reading: wouldn't it be their own character? Why would reading it be an issue? Attributes: Just tell them that changing the attributes can damage the character sheet (assuming you are using one). Abilities: You could use a macro mule instead. 

The Abilities part of that tab should always be visible to players. They can use it to improve their experience. The Attributes part of that tab should be hidden by default IMO for anyone using a character sheet. I'd like if there was a separate section for adding your own custom attributes, which again should be visible to players, but the basic Attributes part should be hidden - it's an unnecessary distraction for both players, GMs, and sheet authors.

I agree, it would be great if that part of the character sheet could be hidden away when using custom character sheets.

I disagree. Long, but well-meaning opinion follows... There have been many, many times when I have needed to reference a value there for something that does not display on the character sheet, or to find out what an attribute's range is, to change a stuck or damaged value to what it is intended to be, or even to discover the name of an attribute for the purposes of a macro. Removing the tab to solve one table's behavioral issue also removes a valuable tool from countless others who need it. Telling players not to edit it unless they know what they are doing should be enough for common sense and good behavior to take over. At a table, you could tell them not to rip up or burn their character sheet or they might cause it damage to their character or the play of the game. The same principle applies. If a player is cooperative, RPGs work. If they are destructive, they fail. Consider, if you have the type of player who would destructively edit the Attributes tab, what is to stop them from destructively editing their character sheet? tl;dr: Stopping players from editing the Attributes tab is a social issue, best solved through social tools.

I wouldn't object to the information on it being presented in some more readable way - but remember, a lot of stats will never be on this list (any repeating sections, autocalcs, and more), and the organisation of the current stats is terrible and not easily searchable. Keith, the list of methods you list are interesting, but there's a couple I find questionable. "to reference a value there for something that does not display on the character sheet": I might not be the usual user here, but if I ever wanted that, I'd use Inspect element or look at github. Searching the attributes list for a stat, especially one you don't know the name of, seems like a painful experience and I cant imagine many people do that. "or to find out what an attribute's range is" - how do you do this via the attributes tab? "to change a stuck or damaged value to what it is intended to be" - this is the one that caught my eye, because it's the one I would strongly recommend no one ever do. It's probably not true any more, but there was a time where if you manually altered a stat on the attributes list, it could become disconnected from the attribute on the sheet. By doing this, you could introduce corruption in journal, and those two stats would never again related to each other. I would always advise against fiddling with stat values there that also exist on the character sheet.(This also makes me wonder how you are determining a stat's value is not what it's intended to be - if it's through looking at the attributes tab, you should be very wary of that.) "even to discover the name of an attribute for the purposes of a macro" - many sheets now sensibly show that in the title attribute, and you can find it out by the inspect element or looking at github. In summary, everything suggested here can be done in other ways except for manipulating a stats values which, in my opinion, should never be done through the Attributes tab. I do think if that part of the sheet continues to exist, it should be reworked to better present the information it contains (make it searchable, at least). As it exists, it's an eyesore at best, and there should be better ways to get the information you want. As for your TLDR, I agree with that generally. Just like the advise to stop people drawing things on the battlemap - talk to your players, warn them off doing things that cause problems.

GiGs said: Keith, the list of methods you list are interesting, but there's a couple I find questionable. "to reference a value there for something that does not display on the character sheet": I might not be the usual user here, but if I ever wanted that, I'd use Inspect element or look at github. Searching the attributes list for a stat, especially one you don't know the name of, seems like a painful experience and I cant imagine many people do that. Some very complicated formulas can reference undisplayed attributes. I can't remember any off the top of my head, but something like some of the more obscure class abilities like Reliable Talent might do this. "or to find out what an attribute's range is" - how do you do this via the attributes tab? Example, to find out if a binary value a sheet is looking for is "1", "on", "On", or "true". Sheet authors, particularly on long, group projects like the D&D 5th Edition by Roll20 Sheet are not always consistent. "to change a stuck or damaged value to what it is intended to be" - this is the one that caught my eye, because it's the one I would strongly recommend no one ever do. It's probably not true any more, but there was a time where if you manually altered a stat on the attributes list, it could become disconnected from the attribute on the sheet. By doing this, you could introduce corruption in journal, and those two stats would never again related to each other. I would always advise against fiddling with stat values there that also exist on the character sheet.(This also makes me wonder how you are determining a stat's value is not what it's intended to be - if it's through looking at the attributes tab, you should be very wary of that.) The classic example here would be toggling a value on the charactermancer flags to unstick a character. For such practice, I would recommend working on a copy, at any rate. "even to discover the name of an attribute for the purposes of a macro" - many sheets now sensibly show that in the title attribute, and you can find it out by the inspect element or looking at github. And many do not. I would also suggest that the Inspector is far more inscrutable and daunting for the casual user to employ, if they even know it exists. The Attributes tab is evident. I do think if that part of the sheet continues to exist, it should be reworked to better present the information it contains (make it searchable, at least). As it exists, it's an eyesore at best, and there should be better ways to get the information you want. It is searchable, using Cmd/Ctrl-F. In short, just because some tables have a behavior issue, or dislike the Atrtributes tab for whatever reason, is no reason to remove it for everyone, particularly those who do find it useful. Just don't use it. And I will silently cry if someone suggests "put it on a toggle", which seems to be everyone's fall back suggestion to any interface question lately.

Sorry folks. The tone of my last two posts might have come of as harsh or judgy. Not my intent, just writing in a hurry.

keithcurtis said: In short, just because some tables have a behavior issue, or dislike the Atrtributes tab for whatever reason, is no reason to remove it for everyone, particularly those who do find it useful. Just don't use it. And I will silently cry if someone suggests "put it on a toggle", which seems to be everyone's fall back suggestion to any interface question lately. Despite my earlier comments, I do kind of agree with you here. But I kind of despise the current format, and see it cause more problems than it solves for most users. i wish it existed in a better presented form, and I do think most people are better served by completely ignoring it. I think the best use of it is for people who want to create their own custom stats that aren't included in a character sheet (or aren't using a character sheet at all). Regarding searchable: I know it can be searched by CTRL+F, but its not exactly a pleasant experience or easy experience (and you have to know what you're searching for - it doesnt help to find an attribute you don't know the name of). Your other points are largely things I have no experience of. I think neither of us are average users, so it's good to see other viewpoints, especially that of someone who does find value in that section

keithcurtis said: Sorry folks. The tone of my last two posts might have come of as harsh or judgy. Not my intent, just writing in a hurry. I know you not specifically addressing me here, but I didn't take your comments that way. Being passionate in favour of features you find useful is totally understandable.

A format change is interesting. Did you have any ideas along those lines? What might make it more useful or less dangerous, maybe?

keithcurtis said: A format change is interesting. Did you have any ideas along those lines? What might make it more useful or less dangerous, maybe? I hadnt thought about it, except that I'd like the custom stats you create a separate frame from the "list of stats that exist on the sheet". A single frame to show all the stats in a giant list is a bit of a pain. Thinking about it though: As it stands right now, the big list of attributes is in order of creation date (without taking default values into account). I'd prefer them to have a different order that is preserved between sheet reopenings, so you could drag the stats whose values you want easy access to to the top and know they will still be there next time you open the sheet (or order by different schemes, like alphabetical naming). I'd like the order to represent the way they appear on the sheet, but that would probably require more work for sheet authors (extra element tags, or div-like groups to order sets of stats in). Maybe being able to group them in multiple columns - that single list as mentioned is a pain. But then you'd have to figure out how separate stats into seperate columns. Maybe done by the GM on a campaign level (if they choose to) so there is a consistent sheme between sheets in the same game. But whatever is done, I do think that custom stats (stats that don't exist in a sheet) should be a seperate section, a separate column. When people create custom stats in a big character sheet, it's often a lot of scrolling to find those stats, and that might be the only stats in the list the user is bothered by. Anyway, I'm open to suggestions here. I think there's a lot of scope for improvement here. On the topic of less dangerous: hiding the ability to edit those stats behind a toggle, which you may find infuriating here. But I'd be happy with something you toggle once per sheet or per session - a separate toggle per stat would be too much of a pain.

For use case, I regularly reference the attributes when writing macros.  For example, sometimes using a character button, then clicking on the chat and then hitting the up arrow does not supply me with the template they used, it supplies me with an attribute call.  So, to find out what is going on I go to the source, the attributes and find out what the template is and what they did. Then I use that as the basis of the macro I want to design.  Re: toggle, there should be an 'editing' toggle for things that would break a character sheet...ie attributes. It is too easy to accidently delete an attribute with a mis-click. 

Personally, not having the attributes list would be a nightmare for me when it came to writing a macro. Take the D&D 5E Sheet by Roll20, which I don't believe is on Github, although I'm only very lightly acquainted with Github as I'm no programmer.  In a macro I want to reference the Strength Modifier, if the attribute list wasn't there, how would i know what to enter to get the correct number, it could be: @{strength_mod} (which I know from experience it is), but it could also be @{strength-mod} @{strength_modifier} or @{strength-modifier} all of which are reasonable options and formats that crop up else where. I find it really frustrating when I come across attributes that should be listed in my mind but aren't.  On the D&D 5E sheet you can added extra rows of resources, for Arrow, Crossbow bolts or anything else.  These can obviously be accessed as some of the APIs use them, but there is no easy way for me to know what to put in a macro to reference them.  On a different character sheet the WFRP 4E one by Cubicle 7 there are skills where you can add a specialisation, but as far as I can see no way to include that specialisation in a macro as there is no attribute that can be used to call the number. For people who understand programming and for character sheets on Github then I can understand that going to the source code is probably the best option, but for people like myself, that Attributes list is invaluable, and I could only wish it were more complete.

I could live with a lock/unlock button at the top of the list, similar to that on character sheets. My objection to toggles in general is that they: Stifle innovation and change, always allowing a back door (that must continue to be supported) to features that the developers obviously feel are outmoded. Produce a non-uniform interface, making it difficult to on-board new users. Make diagnosing issues more difficult, since it is often one more thing that must be checked. A very broad example of this could be DL vs Legacy DL. Every DL issue must be prefaced by the question "which are you using?". *  I understand the special circumstances here, but proliferation of toggles pollutes the entire interface with this issue. Give undue weight to a vocal few who just don't like any interface change.  To be clear, I am talking about interface toggles, not a toggle that might turn on or off a feature on a sheet. It can be a gray area, but I prefer fewer variations in basic function and believe it leads to a healthier, more agile development environment. Even in the case of the lock icon I suggested above, this will almost certainly lead to users asking "Why can't I change such and such a value on the attributes tab?" to which we other users must answer, "Did you unlock it?", followed by an explanation of why it is set up this way. And of course, such a lock button would be hated by folks who don't use character sheets, since now there is an impediment to them accessing a basic feature of the interface. * Thank goodness this is finally diminished to almost never is someone using Legacy.

keithcurtis said: And of course, such a lock button would be hated by folks who don't use character sheets, since now there is an impediment to them accessing a basic feature of the interface. This part of it wouldn't necessarily be this way. The lock button might only appear when a character sheet is present. I mentioned having configurable stat columns earlier - I'm imagining you dragging a stat from one column to another, and it getting the settings applied to that column. You could have one column that isn't editable, you can only view values. And another column that is editable, you can change stats. Maybe this would be setting you assign at the top of each column, even.

You know how "Abilities" are on the same tab as "Attributes"? You (the GM) could make 1 or several Abilities there, and title them things like: Players Do Not Look 👀 This Tab not allowed ❌ Please click Character Sheet tab ✓ Looking at Attributes is not allowed ✪

Lol, Gold. I'd regard that as clutter of the Abilities frame and the first thing I'd do as a player would be delete them all. Also creating them all for each PC would be a chore for the GM :)

I would like for GMs to be able to create attributes that the players are not be able to see.  This could take the form of a corruption value, madness/insanity, Light/Dark points, or any other number of values that a GM might want to track for a specific campaign.  Those values could then be referenced (and hidden) from players in rolls. Saying "Just tell the players not to look there" is not a realistic solution for a professional-quality game. -Adam

Isn't that what the GM note section is for?  Things you don't want your players to see. Or are you needing to access fields for macros or something?

Adam Caramon said: Saying "Just tell the players not to look there" is not a realistic solution for a professional-quality game. I'd say that it's perfectly fine to do that. You have to assume that players can know everything about a game that the GM knows, except for what the GM personally created and added to the game. Anything published can be acquired by the players as well as the GM. At some point, you just have to trust the players, and remember TTRPGs are not video games.

GiGs said: Adam Caramon said: Saying "Just tell the players not to look there" is not a realistic solution for a professional-quality game. I'd say that it's perfectly fine to do that. You have to assume that players can know everything about a game that the GM knows, except for what the GM personally created and added to the game. Anything published can be acquired by the players as well as the GM. At some point, you just have to trust the players, and remember TTRPGs are not video games. It can be perfectly fine for you and your games.  I, and I imagine many others, would prefer GM's having the ability to hide certain attributes. IME trusting players is the default solution when a better solution does not exist.  It may work fine, especially for groups of all friends that have been playing together for years. For other types of games (pick-up games, professional games, etc.) where you may be joining a campaign and not know any of the other players, not needing to trust them because the system enforces compliance with the rules goes a long way to building trust in the game/GM. I'm not sure how the video games comment was helpful.  I'm presuming this is intended as an underhanded insult of some kind? -Adam

Adam Caramon said: I'm not sure how the video games comment was helpful.  I'm presuming this is intended as an underhanded insult of some kind? It may have been. Honestly, it kind of slipped in as an afterthought.

Hi Adam, I am curious, where would you draw a line on controlling potential player sabotage or unintentional chaos? Yes, you could hide the Attributes tab, but there is still considerable mayhem that can be accomplished by editing abilities, the character sheet, rude postings to chat or even the drawing tools. Where is the line of physical vs social constraint drawn?

keithcurtis said: Hi Adam, I am curious, where would you draw a line on controlling potential player sabotage or unintentional chaos? Yes, you could hide the Attributes tab, but there is still considerable mayhem that can be accomplished by editing abilities, the character sheet, rude postings to chat or even the drawing tools. Where is the line of physical vs social constraint drawn? My personal preference would be for Roll20 to put as much control into the GM's hands as possible.  Each GM runs their games how they choose, and players choose to participate in a particular GM's game or not. In a perfect world, each attribute could be individually hidden, or perhaps there is a section for "hidden attributes" that only the GM can see.  The GM could then move attributes into that section that they wish to be hidden. As for some of the other items that you mention, Roll20 could certainly provide tools to the GM to prevent/monitor each of these issues.  As one example, a character sheet audit log of changes (i.e., when the change was made, who made it, old value versus new value,) would be valuable. To me the question is less "should Roll20 do this?" and more "what should Roll20 be working on next?"  I.E., if Roll20 had unlimited resources to work on developments, would I want them to provide GMs tools to better manage their games/players?  Yes. -Adam