This post has been closed. You can still view previous posts, but you can't post any new replies.

"Foreground" Layer for mapping

While overall I find the mapping tools more than sufficient, I've found myself wishing for something extra. That extra is a layer above the token layer, visible to all, which cannot be interacted with, and allows interaction with the token layer through it.  The purpose of this layer would be to add things like: Shadows, Weather & Clouds, or perhaps elevated set pieces, via the use of images with transparency.  I believe it would add a lot of atmosphere to be able to have the rain pounding down above players heads, or to have clouds both above and beneath a battle aboard an airship.  It seems like it would not be terribly difficult to add such a layer, since the GM layer effectively works the same way, but is only visible to GMs. 
1541558155

Edited 1541558182
Yes, you and everyone else. Almost a THOUSAND people have used a vote to ask for this. Since 2014. It is the number one most popular request on Roll20. And Nolan T Jones, Co-founder and Managing Partner of Roll20, has basically said no: Nolan T. J.  said: Something we've talked about as a team a lot is adding one more layer that would be usable in any slot (map, token, etc). That said, we've got some brushing up on our Canvas coding skills to properly accomplish this, and we have other development goals ahead of someone being able to do that investigating. This was during his one and only appearance in the Suggestions forum, over a year ago. I'd say your vote would be better used in that thread, but I don't like to lie.
1541699074
Drespar
Roll20 Team
One of the largest roadblocks in the space has historically been developer bandwidth. As it stands, we have hired on a canvas specialist earlier this year so that we will be able to implement feature sets such as this in the future (many thanks to them for their help in the Measured Update !). As this is a very large request and requires a refactoring of the layering system in canvas this feature is still likely a fair ways out. Lastly, as this is a duplicate of the larger thread, I am going to close this in order to refund the votes. We encourage you to add your voice to the existing suggestion  so we can keep things tidy and consolidated when we start with more in-depth planning of this feature.