a question from a creator

hello all! a quick question for all you art pack lovers! I'm creating my second character pack and was wondering if there is a certain angle you guys prefer the characters to be posed at. I'll provide an example below (not my work, just examples) thanks everyone! if you want to check out my first pack you can find it here: <a href="https://marketplace.roll20.net/browse/set/1557/fan" rel="nofollow">https://marketplace.roll20.net/browse/set/1557/fan</a>...

I think the consensus is that there is no consensus. =) Different people prefer tokens at different angles, plus pog-style (portrait w/border) which you didn't include in your examples. If you're willing to put in the work for it, doing each angle for each character will satisfy everyone, but obviously that takes a lot more effort!

I dont like drawing top down tokens, thats why i did the "C" token, and i can add the portrait token mentioned by Brain easily. But yeah, I think every player likes different styles, as long as you stay with one of it, you`ll be fine (so they are compatible with each other).

Personally, I think the pog-style is my favorite, simply because it's so much easier to get a semblance of a single style across multiple artists, plus it's fairly easy to take any random image off the web and turn it into a pog.

A is best for me. I like the look like the little lead figures we used way back in the 70's.

Since you asked; I favor "A" style tokens. I have purchased "B" and "C" style tokens when I like the work and can use them. &nbsp;I have no use for the little circle things.

al e. said: A is best for me. I like the look like the little lead figures we used way back in the 70's. A big "me too" for precisely the same reasons. We have even played with photos of old minis taken from a top-down perspective.

Everyone has their preference and you will find a market for whichever angle you choose. I prefer A, top down, mostly because I bought all of Devin Night's stuff and want my other art to match. You could do all three! I think I have seen at least one creator try to do that, but that's a lot of work. By the way your first pack has very nice style, the outline on the orcs and ogres is a little heavy but I think you have pretty much found your artistic voice. I absolutely love the lizard folk.&nbsp; Nice stuff and good luck.

Hey A is from my new pack :)&nbsp; I prefer A, but also the circular bordered tokens, as long as its the same all throughout the campaign.

I personally prefer "A", but I've also purchased "B" style tokens if they're something I really want for my games. One thing about the "A" style: I personally don't like figures with overly-exaggerated action poses. They take up too much space and don't neatly fit into the Roll20 hex/grid space they occupy. I also don't like figures (any style) with a huge transparent "buffer" around the figure itself. Many, many tokens I've purchased on Roll20, I first open them in my own graphics software and trim off the excess transparent space, before re-saving them and then importing them into my games.

I've never really liked top-down tokens like A. I prefer a tilted angle like B or side views like C. To me those are the most expressive as you can see the face of the subject and there is more artistic freedom with how you pose them.

Brett E. said: I personally prefer "A", but I've also purchased "B" style tokens if they're something I really want for my games. One thing about the "A" style: I personally don't like figures with overly-exaggerated action poses. They take up too much space and don't neatly fit into the Roll20 hex/grid space they occupy. I also don't like figures (any style) with a huge transparent "buffer" around the figure itself. Many, many tokens I've purchased on Roll20, I first open them in my own graphics software and trim off the excess transparent space, before re-saving them and then importing them into my games. Not quite sure if I'm understanding correctly Brett. Are you saying there's a semi-transparent outline around the characters that bothers you? If the rest of the token background is truly transparent I'm not sure I understand what the issue is, as that's what tokens are supposed to be like?

@Zeshio I think he just means, if you make a figure with a transparent background, don't have a 10px gap all the way around, push the shadows and figure out towards the edge of the 'box'.

Andrew is correct, but I've purchased figures that don't even have a shadow that is pushing out the overall size of the token. Some simply have an enormous amount of transparent "buffer" around the figure. I don't know how else to describe it. I could provide examples, but I don't want to single anyone out because I really do enjoy purchasing and using Roll20 content creators' products and I appreciate their efforts.

Brett E. said: Andrew is correct, but I've purchased figures that don't even have a shadow that is pushing out the overall size of the token. Some simply have an enormous amount of transparent "buffer" around the figure. I don't know how else to describe it. I could provide examples, but I don't want to single anyone out because I really do enjoy purchasing and using Roll20 content creators' products and I appreciate their efforts. Makes sense, you're basically saying that they're not filling the token to the full grid space. I got it now, thanks!&nbsp;

Zeshio said: Makes sense, you're basically saying that they're not filling the token to the full grid space. I got it now, thanks!&nbsp; Really, it's more like the opposite. Since Roll20 anchors the token at the top left corner, if the token has a huge transparent buffer surrounding it, the figure itself might actually appear on a square/hex one or more spaces away. And even cross over the boundary of two spaces. This may not be an issue for some, or even most people. But I try to avoid it. My combats tend to be very tactical, so I like it to be clear which exact space a token occupies. It's also important when you're considering area-of-effect spells, and that sort of thing.

A Btw: Nice style&nbsp;

Brett E. said: Zeshio said: Makes sense, you're basically saying that they're not filling the token to the full grid space. I got it now, thanks!&nbsp; Really, it's more like the opposite. Since Roll20 anchors the token at the top left corner, if the token has a huge transparent buffer surrounding it, the figure itself might actually appear on a square/hex one or more spaces away. And even cross over the boundary of two spaces. This may not be an issue for some, or even most people. But I try to avoid it. My combats tend to be very tactical, so I like it to be clear which exact space a token occupies. It's also important when you're considering area-of-effect spells, and that sort of thing. These sound like the same thing. If you resized the token to fit one grid unit, then it would appear unusually small?

pale81 said: A Btw: Nice style&nbsp; Thanks Pale81, keithcurtis said: Brett E. said: Zeshio said: Makes sense, you're basically saying that they're not filling the token to the full grid space. I got it now, thanks!&nbsp; Really, it's more like the opposite. Since Roll20 anchors the token at the top left corner, if the token has a huge transparent buffer surrounding it, the figure itself might actually appear on a square/hex one or more spaces away. And even cross over the boundary of two spaces. This may not be an issue for some, or even most people. But I try to avoid it. My combats tend to be very tactical, so I like it to be clear which exact space a token occupies. It's also important when you're considering area-of-effect spells, and that sort of thing. These sound like the same thing. If you resized the token to fit one grid unit, then it would appear unusually small? Yea thats hard. Also for a token makers perspective. Especially when a token is carrying a big weapon for example. The token will either be very small, or not grid accurate. It would be great if we were able to change the grid spot and/or snapping location within Roll20.

keithcurtis said: These sound like the same thing. If you resized the token to fit one grid unit, then it would appear unusually small? Right, that would be another effect. As I mentioned earlier, I am typically able to overcome this by using my own software to trim away the excess transparency, so that the token itself fits more neatly into its assigned space. It's an extra step, but not a big deal in the grand scheme of things.

Personally, I prefer the top-down view, as in A. In my current campain, all tokens are top-down. I run a previous campain with tokens in the C style, but it found it harder to find tokens that all had the same look and feel, and I hated mixing different styles.&nbsp;

Shameless plug! We have a slack channel where we discuss this sort of stuff all day long! Feel free to come join us if you have at least one pack on the marketplace. Just PM pretty much any creator in this thread.

Jan L. said: pale81 said: A Btw: Nice style&nbsp; Thanks Pale81, keithcurtis said: Brett E. said: Zeshio said: Makes sense, you're basically saying that they're not filling the token to the full grid space. I got it now, thanks!&nbsp; Really, it's more like the opposite. Since Roll20 anchors the token at the top left corner, if the token has a huge transparent buffer surrounding it, the figure itself might actually appear on a square/hex one or more spaces away. And even cross over the boundary of two spaces. This may not be an issue for some, or even most people. But I try to avoid it. My combats tend to be very tactical, so I like it to be clear which exact space a token occupies. It's also important when you're considering area-of-effect spells, and that sort of thing. These sound like the same thing. If you resized the token to fit one grid unit, then it would appear unusually small? Yea thats hard. Also for a token makers perspective. Especially when a token is carrying a big weapon for example. The token will either be very small, or not grid accurate. It would be great if we were able to change the grid spot and/or snapping location within Roll20. i think we really need too see some examples &nbsp;for &nbsp;clarity. if you want to &nbsp;use my &nbsp;tokens feel free. Even if &nbsp;you have to make a fake, &nbsp;re-sized &nbsp;copies to illustrate your point. i am very interested in this from &nbsp;a creators point of view. i would like to &nbsp;avoid any &nbsp;annoyances in my work. and, it sounds like &nbsp;you are &nbsp;saying &nbsp;this is pretty common. thanks everyone for all the great feedback i really appreciate &nbsp;it. &nbsp;it seems &nbsp;like 'A' style is the most popular but it sounds like that might change if there was a more even representation of the different styles? i hadn't even considered the pog styles i think i will include some of those in my next pack as well. thanks again everybody!

Ed S. said: Everyone has their preference and you will find a market for whichever angle you choose. I prefer A, top down, mostly because I bought all of Devin Night's stuff and want my other art to match. You could do all three! I think I have seen at least one creator try to do that, but that's a lot of work. By the way your first pack has very nice style, the outline on the orcs and ogres is a little heavy but I think you have pretty much found your artistic voice. I absolutely love the lizard folk.&nbsp; Nice stuff and good luck. thanks so much! i foresee more lizard folk in the future :D