When you set the default token of a character in the journal, that token field "represents character" should be set automatically. That would be more straightforward and remove the unnecessary back and forth trip from the character in the journal and token on the map. Creating mook/templates is straightforward then : - You choose an image and drag it on the map as a new token. - You create the mook in the journal, define the default token and set the character sheet properties and abilities.
If I had votes I would be voting for this: and as soon as I DO have votes I WILL be voting for this.
Any news about this feature? It's kind of a hassle when you have a big amount of players and you have to drag all of them to the map and go to each token's configuration to assign control to the specific player. edit: I'm an idiot... ignore me
Agreed, the current UX connection between tokens and characters is nonintuitive
I've been using Roll20 for 2 years now and I always assumed this was a bug. After learning it was just designed that way, I would really like to see some better indication of what it takes to update creatures in journal entries. As it stands, deleting the token picture and "use this token to represent this character" doesn't clearly convey the full manner of player permissions, shown nameplates, bars, etc. If there was an "update character" button, I feel like that would be far more user friendly.
I think it might be nice if the token on the character journal entry could be selected directly, the way a token on the VTT is selected, and adjusted in situ, rather than needing to pull it out on to the VTT, adjust it, then do the delete-add cycle again. I feel like that would address all the issues.
I'm actually in agreement to this idea. Just bringing the idea back to the forefront of the forums again.
Yes please, it is uncomfortable to assign all the time.
An upvote from me. This would be nice convience to have.
This already exists, though its not exactly intuitive. When you set a default token to a character sheet, it saves it exactly as is at the moment its set as default . So, to create a token that is linked to a character sheet, you have to drop the token onto the board, go into its properties and set the "represents field" setting, link the bubbles/bars as necessary... and THEN set it as the default token on the character. Then it will keep all its settings and linkages when you drag the character out onto the board. Set up the token first; then set it as the default. If you do it the other way around, it won't work. They do it that way on purpose, because if they didn't... if the "represents" field were set automatically... mooks wouldn't work. Mook tokens can't "represent" a character. All the mooks linked to the same character sheet would end up sharing health and other variable stats, which isn't desirable most of the time.
You can definitely set mook tokens to represent a character sheet; it's the easiest way for mooks to have attack, saving throw, skill, etc., macros. You do not link their hit points/health to the sheet though, for the reason you point out.
Oh yeah... you're right. That is more precise. You shouldn't link variable stats, like health. It can "represent" the character sheet to get access to its static stuff. Anyway, the point is that what the OP wants, he can already do... its just not intuitive that you have to set up the token first with everything you want attached to it, including setting the represents field, and then save it to the character.
The OP knows he can do it already: That would be more straightforward and remove the unnecessary back and forth trip from the character in the journal and token on the map.
I am against this just because of the options on the token need to be set anyways, and so this would lead to more errors than the time it would save. For example when i select a token to represent a character, i have to go in and edit the name down usually if it is long. I need to select "has sight". I need to set up vision ranges for some, leave blank for others. Im also a little fuzzy on how this might affect inanimate objects and tokens used purely for light sources. I cant think of an issue off the top of my head but my spider sense is tingling. I just prefer it the way it is currently. Anything that encourages not editing the token the instant you assign it to me seems skirting a line.
I don't see that it makes any sense to have a token be the default for a character and the token doesn't represent that character. At least it should be the default. Then you are free to change the rest as you want :)
There is a way that this can already be achieved. If you set the image as the character's avatar , without a default token. This image becomes the token when you drag it to the tabletop. This token, is set to have the represents field populated to the correct character.
Kyle G. said: There is a way that this can already be achieved. If you set the image as the character's avatar , without a default token. This image becomes the token when you drag it to the tabletop. This token, is set to have the represents field populated to the correct character. Hi Kyle. I know about that feature, and this is cool, but I usually use different images for the avatar and the token. So this doesn't make life any easier for most of my characters.