Updated Dynamic Lighting - Feedback Thread

Nicholas said:

.........

Hi Marcel -

What action, if any, did you take when this occurred? Did you scroll in and out and this happened, or move around the page? Or was it just like this when you turned on UDL?

I had played on this page with LDL previously.  But when I switched on the UDL, I didnt move or touch anything, other than turning on the UDL.  When I turn it off, the display is normal, and as soon as I turn it on, it comes back.

I did check out another page in the same game, and it appeared to work ok.

Just updated my DiA Campaign, and yup got the cone of vision bug.

In addition to all these other bugs, I cannot for the life of me figure out how to properly set up low light vision for Pathfinder. 

"Characters with low-light vision (elves, gnomes, and half-elves) can see objects twice as far away as the given radius. Double the effective radius of bright light, normal light, and dim light for such characters."

I cannot figure out a way for a static object such as a torch or campfire that is NOT the player and have the player properly see twice as far. I think it's supposed to be this multiplier thing in advanced but it 100% doesn't work.

Riolyne said:

In addition to all these other bugs, I cannot for the life of me figure out how to properly set up low light vision for Pathfinder. 

"Characters with low-light vision (elves, gnomes, and half-elves) can see objects twice as far away as the given radius. Double the effective radius of bright light, normal light, and dim light for such characters."

I cannot figure out a way for a static object such as a torch or campfire that is NOT the player and have the player properly see twice as far. I think it's supposed to be this multiplier thing in advanced but it 100% doesn't work.

This... and Roll20 indicates they reached "Feature Partity" with UDL. There is no low-light vision in UDL. Nor does the Advanced Settings > Light Multiplier extend the light sources from other sources for the token.

Sorry, I've already quit and jumped ship to Foundry VTT.
But in respect to the forum rules I'm not going to post a list of complaint and the why's and stuff, I'll just point at this forum-thread as not the reason, but the last straw reason.

I hope you manage to fix the things for those who are still staying with Roll20, best of luck.

Nicholas said:

Lady Saga said:

I have to chime in that the latest update has even affected me, who have NOT converted to UDL yet.

I have a couple of maps. Sure they do use a fair bit of Legacy DL for iron bars and stuff, so I'm not saying those maps are not resource heavy.

However.... before the UDL update, it worked like this:

1. Player launches game and enters semi empty loading page.
2. Memory usage increases a little bit, not strange at all. But then it stops, since nothing new is added/happening, etc.
3. Player is moved to resource heavier map.
4. Memory uses starts climbing. Also not weird at all.
5. Eventually, memory usage reaches the point it needs, and stabilizes at it's new higher memory usage, since the map uses more memory.
   Again nothing weird at all.
6. Player is moved to less heavy map, or back to semi empty loading page.
7. Memory use starts sinking since it doesn't use as much memory on that page.

So, that's nothing weird.

But then the recent UDL update came... which I have not converted to. I'm still on Legacy.
So how does the list above look like after that update? Should be similar no?

1. Player launches game and enters semi empty loading page.
2. Memory usage increases a little bit, not strange at all. But then it stops, since nothing new is added/happening, etc.
3. Player is moved to resource heavier map.
4. Memory uses starts climbing. Also not weird at all.
5. Memory is still climbing. It doesn't stabilize, it just keeps going until I move away from the map.
   And this is even if I just move the player there, and then the player doesn't do a single thing.
   Still climbing.
6. So I move the Player back to the semi empty loading page.
7. Memory use ... is not climbing anymore. But.. it's also not sinking. It stays at peak it had at the previous map.

And yes, the memory climb does not have a roof either.
When I opened a small map that did have a bit of DL, sure, but it was small, and the memory was climbing.
Eventually the memory would climb until I have no available memory left in the computer, where as Firefox completely grinds to a halt, and it takes about 20 minutes just to shut down because the entire system is halted, including the mouse being extremely laggy.

And this is without UDL, on maps that worked without issues before the UDL update.

Some kind of memory leak has most likely been introduced which just keeps eating more and more memory until you kill the process, because moving to a more lightweight map doesn't help, it will never ever sink again until you Exit Game.

Hey Lady Saga - 

Would you mind providing me a link to the game in which this occurred, please? I definitely want to further review this as soon as possible. Thanks for the report!

I am also experiencing the strange "limited cone of vision" in my game now. It started happening after the recent update to UDL and now my players are unable to see unless they rotate their tokens. Each token seems to have a different random angle. This is an issue that just started occurring in the past week and has basically made the new Dynamic Lighting completely unusable. I have simply turned on global illumination so my players can at least functionally play in the mean time.

I have tried deleting every other instance of player tokens and even made a new map to see if that would fix it but it does not.

So, we got the awaited response from the Roll20 team, and it doesn't mention dark vision at all? How overlapping dim light is now black isn't even worth mentioning?

Mind-boggling decision after mind-boggling decision by the devs at roll20...
No sane person would touch UDL for any serious campaign, this feature is _months_ (maybe longer?) away from being useful. 
Why do the devs push this down the throats of players making them frustrated?
Are they really so much out of touch from the player base?
Happy I stayed with LDL. 

Drespar said:

Let’s start with the top of our list.  Feature parity means we are at a stage where we are able to focus on improving the existing systems as opposed to bringing in additional/missing features.

Considering that people continually mention the lack of proper darkvision support in UDL... and no one from Roll20 ever comments on it... I'm starting to get the sinking feeling that what we're asking for is maybe not possible in UDL? Technologically speaking?

Which, if true, would be a sad fact of life... but I don't understand how roll20 can keep telling us they have feature parity now, when they absolutely do not.

To those who are getting characters with the cone of vision bug, it appears to be happening when there is an abundance of tokens on the map with lighting effects. The exact number, I'm not sure of. In my instance, I placed lanterns with 10 foot low light in the dungeon map below Vanthampur Villa, as the book states there are, and after placing about half of the entire map's worth, I went back to check with my player tokens to make sure everything was working. For the token I started with, everything was fine. For the new player tokens I dropped with Darkvision, they got the cone of vision bug.

It might work placing your player tokens in first, then adding the additional lighting, but I just spent 8 hours getting the map set up to have it not work and I'm too tired to put in a few more hours to test it.

Vince M. said:

Mind-boggling decision after mind-boggling decision by the devs at roll20...
No sane person would touch UDL for any serious campaign, this feature is _months_ (maybe longer?) away from being useful. 
Why do the devs push this down the throats of players making them frustrated?
Are they really so much out of touch from the player base?
Happy I stayed with LDL. 

Amen brother. I have a game I stupidly converted.....last week was so frustrating I very nearly rage quit. This last week has been spent transferring everything over to a new game that will not be converted until they force me to....and if it is anything like this release, I'm going back to the actual table.

Craig M. said:

Drespar said:

Let’s start with the top of our list.  Feature parity means we are at a stage where we are able to focus on improving the existing systems as opposed to bringing in additional/missing features.

Considering that people continually mention the lack of proper darkvision support in UDL... and no one from Roll20 ever comments on it... I'm starting to get the sinking feeling that what we're asking for is maybe not possible in UDL? Technologically speaking?

Which, if true, would be a sad fact of life... but I don't understand how roll20 can keep telling us they have feature parity now, when they absolutely do not.

I remember on the previous thread that has been canned, one of the posters actually wrote some WebGL code to demonstrate the method they are using for the blending and then posted an example of how to properly blend.  I commented to them that they should hire the guy since he has a better grasp on the topic.  So, based on his post, it is feasible.  I just think the Roll20 team doesn't have the technological know-how to do it.  I made the jump to foundry like several other users did and am never looking back!  I just come to the forums to watch the dumpster fire.

Bob P. said:

Craig M. said:

*snip*

I remember on the previous thread that has been canned, one of the posters actually wrote some WebGL code to demonstrate the method they are using for the blending and then posted an example of how to properly blend.  I commented to them that they should hire the guy since he has a better grasp on the topic.  So, based on his post, it is feasible.  I just think the Roll20 team doesn't have the technological know-how to do it.  I made the jump to foundry like several other users did and am never looking back!  I just come to the forums to watch the dumpster fire.

If you are referring to the following example: https://corybeams.com/le/examples/#interactive_lights

I posted it, but I did not write that. The example was solely included because it was a high-performing demo that demonstrated what additive color mixing of light should look like.

I am truly sorry to see you and others go.

Hello, I don't know why but on newly uploaded maps every token has its vision restricted to a 90 degree arc. Older maps are fine and sometimes the vision can correct itself by messing with the values to "reset" it. But sometimes a token refuses to be fixed and I'm left with a player stuck like this.

Hello!  I'm having a problem with explorer mode, mainly that its not leaving parts of the map revealed once the players have left the area.

Dynamic Lighting, Explorer Mode, and Update only on Drop are all active.  Explorable Darkness is also clicked in the hide/reaveal menu.

No one else seems to be having this problem, so I really don't know what to do about it.

EDIT EDIT:  
My maps that LDL with advanced fog of war are no longer working either >:(

This is a death dance. The sudden mass responses that are just "can you give me a link" are super weird and unprofessional. Why wouldn't you personally message people instead of flooding your own thread with a bunch of nothing.. potentially pushing back some of the more negative posts from view? Even the response from Drespar was kind of a lot of nothing. "Stay tuned for a fix" isn't saying anything at all. People's games are suffering while you all dilly dally. GM's are being forced to transfer games over or fiddle around for hours to figure out dumb fixes to dumb bugs (which YOU should be doing. We shouldn't have to be giving each other bug fixes). What's worse, people are even having to postpone/cancel their games because they don't have the time/technical savvy to fiddle around and fix it in time for their games. Not everyone is a power user that's always online and can fix things when they get BROKEN. People are actually paying for a product that is so busted when they login that they have to cancel the reason they are paying for the product in the first place. 

There is no world in which I'm paying for a product that I then have to help bug fix. We are all paying them to do their work for them right now. I applaud the kind souls that are giving such detailed accounts of the issues they are having in game, but I will not be one of them. As someone on this thread said earlier "No, I won't list my issues, assist with debugs, I will simply take my business elsewhere." Figure YOUR bugs out Roll20. Stop making your customers do it.

Doing a little bit of testing and it appears the whole "Low Light" system is not working effectively.

The Emit Light functionality seems to allow for a "Bright Light" v. "Low Light" differentiation (which implies it should work as per the D&D 5e rules, but just has not been applied to Dark Vision yet - or to global illumination).

If you look at the screenshots I took below, using the new Dark Vision with a black tint looks very close to the Emit Low Light view.

Unfortunately neither comes close to the original dim light effect (also below).

I don't think you can claim feature parity when the old Dim Light feature as vision cannot be reproduced.

Drespar said:

Hi everyone,

As mentioned previously, the purpose of this post is more to discuss the overarching concerns as opposed to each individual post. From the current and previous thread there are some common themes we would like to dive into:

• Feature parity
• Sunsetting
• Performance
• Bugs

Let’s start with the top of our list.  Feature parity means we are at a stage where we are able to focus on improving the existing systems as opposed to bringing in additional/missing features.

...Then why in the first place did you claim Feature Parity when that was never your goal? Updated Dynamic Lighting is nowhere a replacement or improvement over the current system. Considering every single post and announcement made a huge thing with feature parity going to be front and center it can easily feel you've duped your customers. The existing system has all the features for a clear reason, that being a wide breadth of functionality such as Dim-Light that 5e, Pathfinder, and other similar vision systems that as a reminder, make up a major part of your customers personal games on your census. Sure, the Updated Dynamic Lighting is "prettier" but functionality wise it's far behind the legacy to the point it's rolling back it's usefulness.

Secondly, the other issue is the conversion tool as well, you have a market place with many many maps with dynamic lighting, along with many many users who use it in existing games. The fact we need a conversion tool speaks to an issue that is missing functionality and unequal systems. The tool converts fairly poorly if there's multiple tokens on maps, it changes how lines are calculated on the vision layer, and physically changes the layout of the map should somebody have used extra thick lines just for GM visibility. There was absolutely nobody asking for different line thicknesses to block light differently, if there was it sure was buried deep in Suggestions and Ideas to the point it's not past the initial voting.

As a large number of players have said, this is not the stage to be improving systems, it's akin to putting muscle on a skeleton missing a spine and rib cage. Sure you'll get a body, but it's functions are highly marred to the point it horrible to work with as a GM and worse to work with as a Player when each movement you worry if the lighting will crash, you'll see through walls, or if you'll have no vision at all.

Speaking of bugs! Why has crashing lighting become the norm? Should there not be a fail safe that turns the map completely black rather than expose it to Players? This was not as prominent a concern in LDL so is there a higher system requirement or not? This has been asked plainly several times without a proper answer and a fine answer would easily net you more people who can test on usable systems. Though... again there is nothing stopping the R20 team from deliberately limiting ram in say a virtual machine rather than using top of the line that may ignore the end-users typical hardware/software limitations.

I do appreciate that performance and bugs were formally addressed but, at the rate this is happening it feels there is no QA department nor bug testing team to be found. It's been several months since this was rolled out to the majority of users, and the major issues still lie present. (Vision cones messing up, users converting to the new system and breaking their games without full understanding, how awful tokens look when light areas are combined and sharpened, performance being abysmal on maps any bigger than 25x25 which is a tiny map) Has there been any proper talk of potentially pulling this off the market and testing internally rather than relying on user reports? We've given plenty of bug reports and given the persistence of these bugs many look to be built into how lighting itself is calculated and how it's handled on multiple tokens. Users can't deep dive into the code willy-nilly to point out where it occurs, we can only point out the issue so many times before it becomes exhausting.

Given the lack of Dev response to this issue, I am getting close to my end here. I don't know if I can in good faith continue to support a service that is so fundamentally flawed for much longer. This is VERY VERY frustrating.

This is my first comment on a Roll20 forum and it's mostly because I'm a new subscriber for the plus service. I got my subscription specifically to use dynamic lighting and I'm coming across several bugs. The main frustration is with night vision where I have seen the characters' view turn into squished triangles like others in these forums have mentioned. Although I'm not here to threaten to quit my subscription, it is disheartening that a virtual tabletop I've used for years with a free account is doing seemingly little to help the community that pays for the service.

With that out of the way, I just wanted to point out an observation I had that might prove useful for someone working on that night vision issue. It seems to be tied to low light on the map. When applying lighting to map assets, I attempted to give them only low light and found they produced those weird triangles, but if I gave the same assets bright light and turned OFF the low light, the triangles disappeared. So from my side of things at least, it seems like the bright light is working just fine, and that low light is where the issue lies.

The strange thing about this, though, is it doesn't start that way. Only after adding multiple light sources or maybe multiple lines on the dynamic lighting layer do I see these weird cones projecting from map assets. I hope this helps narrow down the root cause of the issue!

-UPDATE-

I figured something new out. The map I'm using cannot allow for more than 8 assets that project light without creating the cone effect or this other weird effect with a half-circle shadow on the bottom of the asset. This ALSO applies to character tokens, meaning if you have more than 8 assets or character tokens combined on the same map you'll start getting an issue. The half-circle seems to be tied to the bright light while the triangle/cones seem to be tied to low light exclusively. Oddly enough, there seems to be a number difference between character and asset totals. There can be up to 9 characters (no lights, just night vision) before you get a cone on the 10th character token.

Here's another shot to show what characters would see with that limit in place. In this example, the character is 'carrying a torch' and does not have night vision activated.

The Devilish DM said:

This is a death dance. The sudden mass responses that are just "can you give me a link" are super weird and unprofessional. Why wouldn't you personally message people instead of flooding your own thread with a bunch of nothing.. potentially pushing back some of the more negative posts from view? Even the response from Drespar was kind of a lot of nothing. "Stay tuned for a fix" isn't saying anything at all. People's games are suffering while you all dilly dally. GM's are being forced to transfer games over or fiddle around for hours to figure out dumb fixes to dumb bugs (which YOU should be doing. We shouldn't have to be giving each other bug fixes). What's worse, people are even having to postpone/cancel their games because they don't have the time/technical savvy to fiddle around and fix it in time for their games. Not everyone is a power user that's always online and can fix things when they get BROKEN. People are actually paying for a product that is so busted when they login that they have to cancel the reason they are paying for the product in the first place. 

There is no world in which I'm paying for a product that I then have to help bug fix. We are all paying them to do their work for them right now. I applaud the kind souls that are giving such detailed accounts of the issues they are having in game, but I will not be one of them. As someone on this thread said earlier "No, I won't list my issues, assist with debugs, I will simply take my business elsewhere." Figure YOUR bugs out Roll20. Stop making your customers do it.

**applause**

Right now, the only reason I'm still with Roll20 is sunk cost. I've spent a lot of money on sourcebooks, token sets, adventures, and other products from the marketplace. I've sunk an enormous amount of time and energy into building a workable DM environment for myself. My players, after two years, seem to be comfortable. But now, with UDL being forced down our throats, I am, in turn, being forced (seriously! does anyone think existing Roll20 customers WANT to leave Roll20 for another platform? it's a huge headache) to consider other options.

Roll20 team, a free piece of advice: put UDL back into development, keep Legacy for now, and LISTEN TO YOUR CUSTOMERS. You are not listening, you are only pretending to listen. And it is going to cost you business in a big way if you don't change how you do things.

Started seeing some strange issues with UDL over the last few days, effectively rendering it unusable until fixed.

• Both Use Case Scenarios tested on Chrome and Firefox.
• Seems to affect all tokens both fresh and on older maps from several weeks ago.

#1: "Beams" of limited vision when Limited Vision is not enabled

Fresh token dragged from the asset list. Default settings except vision = ON, Night Vision = 30ft. Beams rotate with token. Also seeing a "cone vision" as others have mentioned on older maps with both new and tokens that were there pre-update.

#2: Flat edge on front of Bright Light

Fresh token dragged from the asset list. Default Settings except Night Vision = ON, Bright Light = 30ft. The "flat edge" follows the "front" of the token as you rotate it.

The coning issue, circle artifacts on bright light and nightvision not working all appear to happen when there a large number of tokens on a map that produce light/night-vision (regardless of what layer those tokens are on). In my testing on a blank page once I had over 30 tokens on a map I got the lighting issues: circles on bright light and night vision not working from the 31st and then cones (with nightvision reworking in a cone) from the 32nd token. It occurs on the most recently placed tokens starting from the 31st one you placed - As we most often add in our player tokens last they are therefore most likely to be affected.

If you delete a token, then all of the tokens move down the order and so the 31st now the 30th is no longer affected etc. The issue is page based and so there are no issues on pages where you have less than 30 light emitting tokens (hence why some people have had no issues.

Page size/dynamic lighting lines also appear to be interacting with this - as on large maps (with a lot of dynamic lighting lines etc.) this number is often lower at around the 28th token. I also could not always recreate the nightvision not working on the 31st token - as with the photo.

Jay R. said:

The Devilish DM said:

This is a death dance. The sudden mass responses that are just "can you give me a link" are super weird and unprofessional. Why wouldn't you personally message people instead of flooding your own thread with a bunch of nothing.. potentially pushing back some of the more negative posts from view? Even the response from Drespar was kind of a lot of nothing. "Stay tuned for a fix" isn't saying anything at all. People's games are suffering while you all dilly dally. GM's are being forced to transfer games over or fiddle around for hours to figure out dumb fixes to dumb bugs (which YOU should be doing. We shouldn't have to be giving each other bug fixes). What's worse, people are even having to postpone/cancel their games because they don't have the time/technical savvy to fiddle around and fix it in time for their games. Not everyone is a power user that's always online and can fix things when they get BROKEN. People are actually paying for a product that is so busted when they login that they have to cancel the reason they are paying for the product in the first place. 

There is no world in which I'm paying for a product that I then have to help bug fix. We are all paying them to do their work for them right now. I applaud the kind souls that are giving such detailed accounts of the issues they are having in game, but I will not be one of them. As someone on this thread said earlier "No, I won't list my issues, assist with debugs, I will simply take my business elsewhere." Figure YOUR bugs out Roll20. Stop making your customers do it.

**applause**

Right now, the only reason I'm still with Roll20 is sunk cost. I've spent a lot of money on sourcebooks, token sets, adventures, and other products from the marketplace. I've sunk an enormous amount of time and energy into building a workable DM environment for myself. My players, after two years, seem to be comfortable. But now, with UDL being forced down our throats, I am, in turn, being forced (seriously! does anyone think existing Roll20 customers WANT to leave Roll20 for another platform? it's a huge headache) to consider other options.

Roll20 team, a free piece of advice: put UDL back into development, keep Legacy for now, and LISTEN TO YOUR CUSTOMERS. You are not listening, you are only pretending to listen. And it is going to cost you business in a big way if you don't change how you do things.

I don't know what system you run, but Foundry was worth it for me and I recommend you take a good look at it. You might be surprised.

Issue with Night Vision and the Tint color.  Character 1 can see character 2's night vision tint (arrow).  Running as GM and hitting Ctrl+L to look through character 1's view on a converted map.  Don't know if the player sees it or just me testing it.

Titus said:

Do does the fact you're no longer bringing in missing features means we’ll never see the dim light Darkvision/bright crossover with other dim light since it is not there already?...

that does seem to be what their reply implies... :I

Nathan K. said:
I don't know what system you run, but Foundry was worth it for me and I recommend you take a good look at it. You might be surprised.

Foundry is not an option for everyone. I have several players who can only use a web based app. Downloading software is not possible for everyone.

Paul N. said:

Nathan K. said:
I don't know what system you run, but Foundry was worth it for me and I recommend you take a good look at it. You might be surprised.

Foundry is not an option for everyone. I have several players who can only use a web based app. Downloading software is not possible for everyone.

Only the GM downloads the application; other players access it via a browser.

Farling said:

Paul N. said:

Nathan K. said:
I don't know what system you run, but Foundry was worth it for me and I recommend you take a good look at it. You might be surprised.

Foundry is not an option for everyone. I have several players who can only use a web based app. Downloading software is not possible for everyone.

Only the GM downloads the application; other players access it via a browser.

And, in the case of the DM, His access can be via the web as well.  You should really look into it.  I jumped and am happy I did.  Plus, much better DL options that actually work.

Bob P. said:

Farling said:

Paul N. said:

Nathan K. said:
I don't know what system you run, but Foundry was worth it for me and I recommend you take a good look at it. You might be surprised.

Foundry is not an option for everyone. I have several players who can only use a web based app. Downloading software is not possible for everyone.

Only the GM downloads the application; other players access it via a browser.

And, in the case of the DM, His access can be via the web as well.  You should really look into it.  I jumped and am happy I did.  Plus, much better DL options that actually work.

Can we buy and use Official D&D Adventures on Foundry ???

Ian C. said:

I’m usually lurking... but my UDL works perfectly every time I’ve used it for my sessions.  Is it possible that some of these issues are stemming from updating from LDL?  I never used LDL and didn’t convert anything as I’ve been using UDL from day one.  It had a few sight glitches when it started a few weeks ago and it is still a bit of a memory hog (I run it off a MS Surface Go and a Brave Browser) but it’s been flawless for me.  I’m not sure what else I could possibly be doing (I’m not doing anything advanced) because this feature has been a staple for my games for a while now and it’s awesome.

Edit: For the record, I download maps and draw the Lighting lines myself using the regular-size polygon tool, if that helps.

Let me know if you want me to test something on my end I’d love to help.  

You may be on to something.  I never used LDL, but I've created a bunch of new maps using the new DL system.  Just ran a game last week for 7 people on a variety of systems and everything worked really well.  I think there was one issue where moving two tokens at a time caused the entire map to reveal for a moment, but nobody experienced any of the problems with cones, black boxes, etc.

I will say when I was playing around on my own before the game, I did see the cone effect on a token with nightvision on a very large map with about 20 static light sources placed around.  However, after deleting the token and recreating it, it seems to be working ok.

Riolyne said:

In addition to all these other bugs, I cannot for the life of me figure out how to properly set up low light vision for Pathfinder. 

"Characters with low-light vision (elves, gnomes, and half-elves) can see objects twice as far away as the given radius. Double the effective radius of bright light, normal light, and dim light for such characters."

I cannot figure out a way for a static object such as a torch or campfire that is NOT the player and have the player properly see twice as far. I think it's supposed to be this multiplier thing in advanced but it 100% doesn't work.

It absolutely works for me.  Set the multiplier to 200% for the character with low-light vision.

Another issue when converting Dead in Thay.  All NPC tokens have vision cone when none is selected.  Only so many have it until I turn off that token's UDL then others replace it, like their is a cap of some type.  Also, the vision cones overlap things on the GM layer and obscures them (see arrow).

Al Pacino said:

Can we buy and use Official D&D Adventures on Foundry ???

Not legally. They have no licensing agreement with WotC, and the Terms and Conditions of Roll20, D&DBeyond and Fantasy Grounds all have wording to the effect that the purchase on their platform does not allow export into other applications.

To all, please don't say that it can be done in such-and-such a way or that you disagree with the policy. Of course it can be done with some work or the right tools to convert anything to anything. And opinion of the law or a contract has no bearing. The wording is there.

Sewer Crew Gaming said:

Titus said:

Do does the fact you're no longer bringing in missing features means we’ll never see the dim light Darkvision/bright crossover with other dim light since it is not there already?...

that does seem to be what their reply implies... :I

Dozens of threads and posts have been made by customers about the missing full Darkvision feature, since at least a month. The only official answer is "we'll no longer bringing in missing features".

Even though their official answer isn't really directly about darkvision, I guess we can know what it implies. Otherwise, i don't see why they would not answering all the customers questions about it.

"Full" darkvision, like we the one we had in legacy, and that is necessary for D&D 5th edition, will be lost with UDL. We have to deal with it now...

keithcurtis said:

Al Pacino said:

Can we buy and use Official D&D Adventures on Foundry ???

Not legally. They have no licensing agreement with WotC, and the Terms and Conditions of Roll20, D&DBeyond and Fantasy Grounds all have wording to the effect that the purchase on their platform does not allow export into other applications.

To all, please don't say that it can be done in such-and-such a way or that you disagree with the policy. Of course it can be done with some work or the right tools to convert anything to anything. And opinion of the law or a contract has no bearing. The wording is there.

Shrug their platform functions.

Not debating that. Just answering the question.

BTW, for people set on set on using UDL in the interim, I've just been setting my darkvision characters to emit dim light until the bug is fixed as a stopgap. In fact, I have API support and tokenmod macros for setting torches and turning them off, etc. I have a "Bugged Darkvision" macro that sets a dim light radius as a stop gap darkivision and I've given access to my darkvision players. Sure, everyone can see it, so I can't set it up so that only those players see what this fake darkvision reveals, but it gets us by in the interim. I usually turn off darkvision when darkvision characters carry light sources because I always rule the light sources screw up their darkvision, so I have the whole thing macroed.

Jay R. said:

The Devilish DM said:

This is a death dance. The sudden mass responses that are just "can you give me a link" are super weird and unprofessional. Why wouldn't you personally message people instead of flooding your own thread with a bunch of nothing.. potentially pushing back some of the more negative posts from view? Even the response from Drespar was kind of a lot of nothing. "Stay tuned for a fix" isn't saying anything at all. People's games are suffering while you all dilly dally. GM's are being forced to transfer games over or fiddle around for hours to figure out dumb fixes to dumb bugs (which YOU should be doing. We shouldn't have to be giving each other bug fixes). What's worse, people are even having to postpone/cancel their games because they don't have the time/technical savvy to fiddle around and fix it in time for their games. Not everyone is a power user that's always online and can fix things when they get BROKEN. People are actually paying for a product that is so busted when they login that they have to cancel the reason they are paying for the product in the first place. 

There is no world in which I'm paying for a product that I then have to help bug fix. We are all paying them to do their work for them right now. I applaud the kind souls that are giving such detailed accounts of the issues they are having in game, but I will not be one of them. As someone on this thread said earlier "No, I won't list my issues, assist with debugs, I will simply take my business elsewhere." Figure YOUR bugs out Roll20. Stop making your customers do it.

**applause**

Right now, the only reason I'm still with Roll20 is sunk cost. I've spent a lot of money on sourcebooks, token sets, adventures, and other products from the marketplace. I've sunk an enormous amount of time and energy into building a workable DM environment for myself. My players, after two years, seem to be comfortable. But now, with UDL being forced down our throats, I am, in turn, being forced (seriously! does anyone think existing Roll20 customers WANT to leave Roll20 for another platform? it's a huge headache) to consider other options.

Roll20 team, a free piece of advice: put UDL back into development, keep Legacy for now, and LISTEN TO YOUR CUSTOMERS. You are not listening, you are only pretending to listen. And it is going to cost you business in a big way if you don't change how you do things.

This mirrors my own feelings. I don't want to switch platforms, but I am forced to consider if that is what I'm going to have to do, to maintain smooth operations if they push through this change. I use roll20 for my full-time job. I spend at least 40 hours a week on this platform, I've sunk a huge amount of money and time into my games to make them fun for my players, and this brain-dead refusal to engage with user concerns about UDL throws all of that into question.

kreppulun said:

Issue with Night Vision and the Tint color.  Character 1 can see character 2's night vision tint (arrow).  Running as GM and hitting Ctrl+L to look through character 1's view on a converted map.  Don't know if the player sees it or just me testing it.

Ctrl-L doesn't work properly with UDL.

Sewer Crew Gaming said:

Jay R. said:

The Devilish DM said:

This is a death dance. The sudden mass responses that are just "can you give me a link" are super weird and unprofessional. Why wouldn't you personally message people instead of flooding your own thread with a bunch of nothing.. potentially pushing back some of the more negative posts from view? Even the response from Drespar was kind of a lot of nothing. "Stay tuned for a fix" isn't saying anything at all. People's games are suffering while you all dilly dally. GM's are being forced to transfer games over or fiddle around for hours to figure out dumb fixes to dumb bugs (which YOU should be doing. We shouldn't have to be giving each other bug fixes). What's worse, people are even having to postpone/cancel their games because they don't have the time/technical savvy to fiddle around and fix it in time for their games. Not everyone is a power user that's always online and can fix things when they get BROKEN. People are actually paying for a product that is so busted when they login that they have to cancel the reason they are paying for the product in the first place. 

There is no world in which I'm paying for a product that I then have to help bug fix. We are all paying them to do their work for them right now. I applaud the kind souls that are giving such detailed accounts of the issues they are having in game, but I will not be one of them. As someone on this thread said earlier "No, I won't list my issues, assist with debugs, I will simply take my business elsewhere." Figure YOUR bugs out Roll20. Stop making your customers do it.

**applause**

Right now, the only reason I'm still with Roll20 is sunk cost. I've spent a lot of money on sourcebooks, token sets, adventures, and other products from the marketplace. I've sunk an enormous amount of time and energy into building a workable DM environment for myself. My players, after two years, seem to be comfortable. But now, with UDL being forced down our throats, I am, in turn, being forced (seriously! does anyone think existing Roll20 customers WANT to leave Roll20 for another platform? it's a huge headache) to consider other options.

Roll20 team, a free piece of advice: put UDL back into development, keep Legacy for now, and LISTEN TO YOUR CUSTOMERS. You are not listening, you are only pretending to listen. And it is going to cost you business in a big way if you don't change how you do things.

This mirrors my own feelings. I don't want to switch platforms, but I am forced to consider if that is what I'm going to have to do, to maintain smooth operations if they push through this change. I use roll20 for my full-time job. I spend at least 40 hours a week on this platform, I've sunk a huge amount of money and time into my games to make them fun for my players, and this brain-dead refusal to engage with user concerns about UDL throws all of that into question.

Agreed. I've spent a lot of time and money on Roll20 for my campaign. But this issue is causing a lot of frustration for my players and me. Some of my players are talking about switching to a different platform, instead of continuing to use Roll20, because of the UDL bugs.

Is there a way to revert back to Legacy until the bugs are fixed? 

TheHypocriticalTroll said:

Is there a way to revert back to Legacy until the bugs are fixed? 

Turn off UDL options and turn on LDL options?

I am getting the vision "cone" as well...it's crazy that you have allowed it to progress...You are losing the good will of your base, and with the relative inexpense and better stability, support, development and interaction between the Foundry team and this one, I am thinking this will be my last month here.  The lag issues and freezes notwithstanding, you are forcing people to migrate to a DL system that is unusable...The "cone' issue has been being brough up for months with no fix and very little communication updating the community on what steps are being taken to fix it...it is completely unprofessional and you will lose business due to it...Sad decline of a company....Foundry has all the clasees, archetypes, items, feats, spells etc...for pathfinder and this company hasn't even caughtup with what was released nearly 10 years ago...

On the previous thread:

Kenton said:

There is no "update only on drop" option.  Fixed June 30

Where exactly is this? I cannot find it anywhere.

Nyss said:

On the previous thread:

Kenton said:

There is no "update only on drop" option.  Fixed June 30

Where exactly is this? I cannot find it anywhere.

On the map options > dynamic lighting (updated) > 4th option down (it's a switch for on and off, default is off).

Aside from player visions overlapping causing initiative tracking yellow boxes and GM layer items to disappear, I've actually thoroughly enjoyed UDL thus far.

https://i.imgur.com/jGYh7TA.png

I see no 4th option?