Forced zoom percentage and (inadvertently) Dynamic Lighting ideas

The problem is that I don't see any difference between the forcing of zoom and the forcing of focus. Both are ways by which the GM can control what appears on the player map and change it. The zoom seems to bother you and the focus not. For me, I don't see why a GM should be able to force the focus of the players without a player's opt out whilst forcing the zoom would need a player's opt out. I find it normal that the GM has as much options as possible. It is up to him to decide if, for setting a game as he sees it, he wants to force one option on the players or not (and in this regard, all options are forced on the players, there is no player opt out for dynamic lighting or fog of war or focus forcing or map scaling, for exemple). There is no reason why zoom should be a tabou visual effect that the players need to control lest neutrality is broken, whilst focus control by the GM wouldn't endanger the neutrality of Roll20. What visual effects a player should be allowed to control is a matter of personal preferences. And if there is a choice to be made that has an impact on the way the story plays, it should be left to the GM. The player can always choose another GM if he doesn't like the way one does organize the game.

Focus is temporary, GM focuses me over to a spot, I move the screen to whereever I want. One of the zoom options, the option I have a problem with, is NOT temporary. It is as if the GM is sitting on my side of the screen and telling me how I am allowed to look at my screen. As an example, it would be like the GM setting my brightness or colors. Again: temporary zoom = no problem. Permanent zoom control = a major problem. Summary: Focus and permanent Zoom control are not even in the same ballpark. - Gauss

Ok, it seems indeed that were are going round. Again: GM choice = no problem If you don't like what he choose, leave him. Summary: focus is moving the view of the player horizontally, zooming is moving the view of the player vertically. They could hardly be more akin to one another. And there is no reason one should be treated (or implemented) differently than the other.

Agreed, they should not be different from each other. IE: zoom is temporary just like focus is. After the GM focus+zooms you you can move your screen both vertically and horizontally. Anything else is NOT the same. - Gauss

They should be treated the same, indeed. Temporary or not is for the devs to decide (for myself, I would prefer temporary, but I could live with permanent).

And that summarizes our difference. I cannot live with permanent. I would be forced to stop using Roll20 if there was not an opt out for permanent. Anyhow I think this horse has been thoroughly pulped and is ready to be turned into glue. :) So...ever play Star Fleet Battles or Battletech? Hehehe. - Gauss

GM's have no need to alter my zoom level at all. Even if temporarily.

GM's have no need to alter my zoom level at all. Even if temporarily. So, if this feature is ever implemented, tell your GM that you'd rather they didn't use it, and if they insist on it, then play a different game.

They just don't need the damn option in the first place.

Your argumentation is becoming more and more sophisticated, Jonathan. It shall be difficult, but I am going to try to answer with the same kind of thoughtful reasoning. GM's have no need to alter my zoom level at all. Even if temporarily. They have a need. They just don't need the damn option in the first place. They do. And if I can add a subtle argumentation: because!

Jonathan the Black said, They just don't need the damn option in the first place. "They", "they" . . . the way you keep saying that, it seems like the GMs are going to abuse you, cheat you or harming your human rights --yes, I see this attitude as a weird overreaction--, when actually "they" --the game masters-- are the main ones responsible of the role playing game session in the first place. This should clear the whole thing: we are speaking here about role playing games, not board games that don't have a game master handling a story flow. Yes, I get you seem to be talking about a board game: right, Roll20 can handle board games as well. Then, for most board games, I agree that the use of the GM Zoom Control feature would be not only pointless but irritating in many cases. There is no problem, then. Good!

No, you don't. It's my computer, my browser, my monitor, my eyes. I zoom in and out all the time and don't need any GM preventing me from doing so. If you're so inept you can't figure out how to create a dungeon map that players can't cheat on just because they can change the level of zoom... you shouldn't be running a game in the first place.

No, you don't. It's my computer, my browser, my monitor, my eyes. And it is the GM's game. You seem to want to control not only your part, but everybody's life. I'll gladly accept it when you shall be master of the universe. Until then, I'll design my games as I want, use the features I want, and the players are perfectly free to come or go. ... you shouldn't be running a game in the first place. But I'll do it anyway. Even if I transgress Jonathan's laws by doing it. We are still waiting an argument from your part, Jonathan. A tantrum is generally not considered one above the age of five.

Not giving you the option to irritate users of Roll20 with the zoom level of the screen is not controlling everyone else's life. Exaggerate much? Pathological need to have restrictive control of options in the game that the GM doesn't need to have control over is your problem. Not mine. I don't give a damn what zoom level players are at. I would actually like to remove the option for the GM to center players view on a spot as well. Give the control back to the players. Back to the users, not the GM. Give the players an option to center their view on the GM's view. Or make it a pop up on the players side. The GM presses a button and players are presented with a little pop up notification that they can accept or decline if they don't want to have their view changed. Control over their browser and how they use Roll20 should always be done in favor of the players and giving players control over their experience while using Roll20.

(. . .) His point is about self-determination in an area where a GM really does not NEED to control things (assuming zoom was properly fixed so that it is center zoom). Wait a moment, you mean that the GM really does not need it? . . . but as GM I need to be able to set zoom levels not just for me, but for my players too. After all I'm the main guy that is narrating the story (true, players are essential), and I often do that not only by means of text but also by means of images. The images that I, as the GM, arrange and share with my players are my business; they are the GM business indeed, in the same way than the game setting, the basic frame of the story plot, the visual kind of tokens we are going to use, the player permissions that I'm adding or removing from this or that game handout, or the decision of trigger the music or sounds of the Jukebox that I, as the GM, selected and placed for the game in the first place. Easily can be argued what in many situations, what my players "see" in their screens should match what I'm narrating to them; in these situations, it is they who don't need to control by themselves what I'm narrating to them . . . If they want to interact with the narration --and as GM, of course I want they do-- and the handouts accompanying it, OK then they can move the image and set their zoom levels after my use of the GM Zoom Control for them, at least if a "lock zoom/view" feature isn't in use --and all said, there are situations in which such thing can be useful as well. In any case, maps aside, they always can interact with the story by talking in character, by means of voice chat or text chat. Let's not forget that the true purpose of Roll20 is to be an online roleplaying app. This only would be different if the game is, instead, a board game. This applies even to RPGs with heavy board game elements like D&D3.5 or D&D4: it's still a RPG with a GM. Even in D&D, intertwined with a mostly pre-arranged sequence of combat encounters, there is often a story to handle too. In role playing games, handouts, narrative resources, or maps aren't owned by the players. They are just holding their character sheets along with a handful of notes. Sure, a map can be placed in the table, but the GM is the one who put it there in the first place --likely also the one that bought it or drawn it--, and he can remove it when he deems it's not needed anymore. No sensible player would "demand" the map for himself, prohibiting the GM of removing it for the necessity of focusing the game flow into other things. I mean, no sensible player is going to ask for "map rights" in a role playing game session against the GM will.

The GM is the guy that is directing the game session --in any case, this is true for most role playing games--, so let it show the image the he wants or needs for supporting the game flow and the narration. For that, he needs to complete the Shift+Ping horizontal feature with some kind of zoom control, that Patric C. properly described as its natural vertical complement. So, if we are talking about online role playing games, yes, GM Zoom Control is a needed feature. Personally, I'm used to it in other virtual tabletops and I was simply waiting for Roll20 to adding it. It only seems natural, a no-brainer. Now, the devs need backers and supporters for adding features quicker. I thought this was the reason why we haven't this feature right now. Honestly I never thought that the GM capability of setting zoom levels for his players could be disregarded (?) . . . As I said, I'm used to GM Zoom Control and if it wouldn't be included, that would be a big factor conditioning me to step back to the earlier VTT that I was using, despite all its drawbacks. Drawbacks that I'm hoping Roll20 will not have. I've using this kind of view-zoom control for players for years --since 2005 or 2006-- and it's a no-brainer. I never saw anyone protesting about it. Isn't even new for Virtual Tabletops focused into narration, and Roll20 claims that of itself. But let me stress this point: the map is just a game handout. It's not the "property" of the players; it's not automatically, nor by definition, the core of the very Virtual Tabletop nor the core of the role playing experience. Separate role playing games from board games, they are different things even if they share a number of elements. So, the GM can --and should-- handle this game handout without any constraint if that is going to improve communication with players or enhance the narrative flow. And properly used, it certainly does. And well, if I have a player that is suffering X eyesight problems, and both of us agree in playing a game together, I wouldn't do anything for annoying him/her, in the same way if I promise a Hard Sci Fi game setting I'm not going to throw goblins from Faerie and hobbits from the Shire into the story. Role playing activity is between friends, after all. So Gauss, your relentless protest against the possibility of a GM Zoom Control feature in Roll20 strikes me like protesting against the use of color in maps, tokens, or other handouts because someone can be colorblind: The one suffering colorblind very well can say that the use of certain colors, or any emphasis on colors for images or maps "isn't NEEDED", and also claim that nobody, not even the GM, should impose colors to anyone in a game. It's however easy to see that such posture wouldn't be reasonable nor objective, and exactly the same is happening here regarding the suggested feature for Zoom. This conversation initially started as a way to fix the shift+ping, player has to rezoom, GM has to shift+ping again issue. But from my pov it rapidly became a discussion on how the GM should have the ability to control the player's zoom levels I don't understand this affirmation. Clearly it tries to be a rejection and refutation of the GM Zoom Control feature request, but I don't see how. Also, this is about the third time in this thread that I'm answering to you that this conversation didn't start in the way you are saying: the GM Zoom Control feature request is there, in the first post, along with other points (You are right about fixing how zoom currently works, but merely fixing it has little to do with the point of Clinton D. and the requested feature). Maybe here is some confusion, but I don't understand where does it comes from. It's like you are saying that we shouldn't be speaking at all about the GM Zoom Control feature because "it appeared here in an accidental way" . . . I can't see how that could be a valid point. And as I already said too above, I was going to suggest the GM Zoom Control feature for myself, but Clinton D. ninja'd me. I wonder if you want me to start a new thread here for suggesting and discussing the GM Zoom Control feature? Would it make sense to start all over again? Be as it may, Gauss, I'm answering this to you without any ill intention. I simply disagree with your view. My purpose here is not to be rude or to merely discard what you think or see as legimitate concerns. They could be dispelled, though. Note: I am aware that it was not anyone's intent that it be not a limited use feature. My statement is that intent was not apparent until about 2/3rds of the way through this discussion. That is because some of us didn't think that entering in the specifics about the implementation of the suggestion were so important, specially when the essence of this discussion has been since the start: "I need this feature" vs. "I'd hate this feature, and I'll ban people using it if it's implemented, or even I will stop using this app if the devs finally include it." And for what is worth, I'm seconding all what Patric C. has been saying as well.

Jonathan the Black said, Pathological need to have restrictive control of options in the game that the GM doesn't need to have control over is your problem. Not mine. Really, what are you talking about? Very, very weird.

You do NOT need control over players zoom level. Period. Not now, not ever and as I have said, I don't agree that you should be able to change their view at all without their permission. Anytime the GM wants to change something like zoom or view... should be something the player can choose to accept or decline at the time via a pop up window or something.

"Period" again? Sorry Jonathan, but things don't work in that way . . .

I would actually like to remove the option for the GM to center players view on a spot as well. Seemingly your purpose here is to sabotage Roll20!

The more GM control is added, the less useful the tool becomes to the players. The more freedom of control that is taken away from the players, the useful it becomes to the players. Enforcing zoom levels and all kinds of shit like that just makes it a web page the player looks at and does not interact with. You could easily just send them the picture in an email or a link to a web page in a chat room. Greater freedom for interacting with the tool helps keep the players engaged in the game. Forcing them to sit and stare at the same image with no ability to interact is just dumb and bad for the tool.

I would actually like to remove the option for the GM to center players view on a spot as well. Seemingly your purpose here is to sabotage Roll20! Far from it. I'm here to protect it from craptastic suggestions that hinder players ability to control their own experience using the Roll20.

As you say, Jonathan, "Whatever". See you around my friend.

Ah that is an argument. So, you decide what are the needs of all the GMs all over the world. Because that's the only explanation you have ever used "GMs don't need to...". May I say why you should decide what I need or not? Particularly when my needs and choices in my games wouldn't have any bearing on what you play. If the option to control the zoom was to appear, it wouldn't have any place in your game if you did't wanted it. Don't like it? Don't use it. But maybe your will to meddle with other peoples games (and the way they play) is because you want to Give the control back to the players. Back to the users, not the GM. So I take it. You are the Robin Hood of RPGs. That's why you want to decide what happens in every games, not only yours. You are going to free the poor players from oppressive GMs who would keep them in the shackles of zoom fixing. Hollywood should make an epic out of it.

Such an option is clearly divisive so there's no reason to include it to begin with. Players can keep using Roll20 the way they want to and control freak GM's can take their xanax.

You do NOT need control over players zoom level. Period. You do NOT decide other peoples needs for them. Not mines anyway. Oops, I almost forgot: period!

Such an option is clearly divisive so there's no reason to include it to begin with. As the division seems to be between yourself and the rest of world, I think that the best way to settle it would be making a feature request and count votes for or against it?

You do NOT decide other peoples needs for them. Not mines anyway. Nor do you, hence why you should not be given the option to decide for players what zoom level they need to be at. Thank you for agreeing with me finally that locking in zoom levels is a bad thing.

I am the GM, I set the game for what shall give the best result as I see fit. Players can decide if they like it or not and act accordingly. for agreeing with me finally that locking in zoom levels is a bad thing. You have gained one level Jonathan. You were deciding what I needed or not for the games I am mastering, now you try to speak in my place. Do you want my chair?

Doesn't matter if you're the GM or not. As you said, "You do not decide other peoples needs for them." Those are your words. Thus... ... you do not decide what zoom level players in your game need to be at. ... you do not decide what part of the map they need to be looking at. Again, your words. I'm just repeating your argument against deciding what other peoples needs are.

Well, it's pretty evident that you are very aware of what "quoting out of context" means.

It's not quoting out of context. It's the same thing. He claims that I'm not allowed to decide what other peoples needs are, but then it's suddenly ok for him to decide what other peoples needs are? Whatever...

You are disingenuous. You were speaking about GMs You do NOT need control over players zoom level. Period. I answered that, whatever you can think, you don't decide their needs (GM's) for them. And you answer by speaking about players, which is not the same thing. Try to pay attention... But you had understood, of course, you are just playing with words. What a GM can decide or not and what is acceptable or not by the players is something between them. A tacit agreement that is not the matter of this discussion. ... you do not decide what part of the map they need to be looking at. Do you want also the focus tool taken out?

You simply can't say... "You don't get to decide what my needs are." ...and then turn around and say, "I want to decide what my player needs to see." Hypocrite.

Jonathan, your opinion is hardly agreeable, but very easy to see here. At this point, I think this discussion is becoming increasingly senseless with each post.

... you do not decide what part of the map they need to be looking at. Do you want also the focus tool taken out? I think it should be optional. Give the players a pop up window that says the GM would like to center the view on another part of the map and include accept / decline buttons for the player.

Hypocrite. That, in my humble opinion, is going a little too far.

Then don't be a hypocrite and say one thing and then turn around and say the opposite. You simply cannot say that I can't decide what the needs of others are and then turn around and say that you want to decide what the needs of others are. It doesn't matter if they're in your game or not. Changing the view of other people using Roll20 against their will is a bad thing and should not be implemented as it has been suggested. It should always be at the players option.

Then don't be a hypocrite and say one thing and then turn around and say the opposite. You are disingenuous. You were speaking about GMs You do NOT need control over players zoom level. Period. I answered that, whatever you can think, you don't decide their needs (GM's) for them. And you answer by speaking about players, which is not the same thing. Try to pay attention... But you had understood, of course, you are just playing with words. What a GM can decide or not and what is acceptable or not by the players is something between them. A tacit agreement that is not the matter of this discussion. ... you do not decide what part of the map they need to be looking at. Do you want also the focus tool taken out?

It doesn't matter if you're the GM or the player. You don't decide what others needs are.

Yeah... no. The GM doesn't need... My computer. My view. My control. GM doesn't need ... GM's have no need to alter... and others... Can I sense a subtle change here?

Just simplifying the argument down to its basic point. You don't want me deciding what you need and I don't want you deciding what I need. Thus, this absoballylutely craptastic idea for zoom locking, if ever implemented, should be 100% optional for players. No GM should be allowed to control other users view.

No GM should be allowed to control other users view. No player has to play with a GM using a control the player doesn't like. And a GM should be free to set, as he wishes, a game that he has prepared to the best of his abilities, with the tools he thinks are necessary to make a good show.

No.

Yes.

Alright, since an impassioned plea in favor of player control and less GM restrictions didn't work on the heartless GM's... here's the technological big guns, which you can't refute... which I was too lazy to do earlier. <a href="http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_resolution_higher.asp" rel="nofollow">http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_resolution_higher.asp</a> Most common resolutions as of Jan 2012 were 1366x768, 1280x1024, 1280x800, taking in a total of 40.9%. However, it should be noted that there is also 13% out there still using 1024x768 for their resolution, bringing the total to 53.9% of those browsing the web. I did three resolutions: 1920x1080, 1360x768, and 1024x768. This is just one small room and in the course of running this dungeon... the players went back and forth between this room and the next. Locking zoom and view would have made it a nightmare for players. Roll20 does not work like a viewport where it scales everything you see to fit in a smaller area on someone else's monitor. 1 pixel is 1 pixel regardless of the resolution and Roll20 works in pixels. Don't mess with my zoom. :P

This doesn't even take into account the resolution of tablets and smartphones.

Thank you for doing that experiment Johnathan, the differing resolutions was my concern as well.

No problem. I do a lot of web design as a hobby... so it comes second nature to me when thinking in terms of resolution and such. :)

Locking zoom and view would have made it a nightmare for players. We are not speaking about locking, but about a feature that would do on zoom what forcing focus does on position. From the screenshots you made, I think it would work perfectly for what I have in mind: showing details or the big picture, depending on what I am speaking about. It wouldn't give the same result on every display, but the general result (focusing on details or generic view) would be there. You have made clear that you wouldn't use it in your game. Fine. Now, why shouldn't I have it for mine, which would not affect your games at all?