Story icons

[Myad]

Is there a way to edit story icons in the story tab?
instead of having diffrent colored tabs and symbolys id like to name them

[dulux-oz]

Type the name you want into the chat box and then drag the name onto the tab to name it - I cover this in my Tutorial Videos (below in my sig) :)

[healdhj]

Dulux,

I've watched the start of a few of the videos, but I tend to want to move faster... a big flaw of mine!

However, now seeing that a question I was searching for was already covered in said video... I'll take my lumps and go watch them again.

:(

[jajen2003]

I believe an option in the right-click radial would be the most sensible and logical way to change the names of those tabs.

It makes sense, at least to me.

Yes, I am aware of the Suggestion poll website that Moon Wizard runs. No, I'm not going to put it on there.

Changing the name of a tab via a right-click radial isn't a "feature request", it's so innately common sense that it should be in there already, logically. The rest of the interface deals with right-click radials to change and edit and access.

The fact that you can't simply do the same with the tabs seems like a lazy oversight. So I will not dignify it with a post of the Feature Suggestion website.

Just make it do what the rest of the program already does... RIGHT-CLICK radial.

Anything else is bad UI design. Don't make me think. Users are not developers or coders. Develop the interface for the user, the way the user would use it—not the way you THINK the user SHOULD use it. But in a way that makes logical sense to the user.

The user shouldn't go, "Hmm, that's weird. That rest of the program works like this, but this one thing is different." That is Ineffective Design.

The user should go, "Of course, that's how that works. The rest of the program works that way, so doing this makes perfects sense, since the rest of the program works that way."

Intuitive > Well this is the only way the code would work.

Users don't care about developer's problems. We just want stuff that works. Explaining how hard it is doesn't mean anything to us. We know how hard it is, that's what we pay for it. So we don't have to deal with the labor pains.

[Andraax]

Well, the "type into chat box and drag to destination" is used pretty extensively in FG, so it is intuitive for that program.

[Trenloe]

Yes, I am aware of the Suggestion poll website that Moon Wizard runs. No, I'm not going to put it on there.

Changing the name of a tab via a right-click radial isn't a "feature request", it's so innately common sense that it should be in there already, logically. The rest of the interface deals with right-click radials to change and edit and access.

The fact that you can't simply do the same with the tabs seems like a lazy oversight. So I will not dignify it with a post of the Feature Suggestion website.
Dude, I don't get this. You've just created a thread going on about you using a subscription supports FG and the ongoing development. But you won't use the recognised process of asking for something to be changed in the base product - because you think it is a lazy oversight and undignified to add it as a feature request?

There are technical reasons why the category icons text is added/changed the way it is - it is not a lazy oversight.

Please use the recognised process for asking for changes. You're supporting the FG developers financially as per your recent thread (that's fantastic, thanks very much), please also support them logistically by using the recognised change process and not making it harder for them to find (and track) this change request which is embedded within a post in the generic FG forum. Thanks.

[Moon Wizard]

Jajen2003,

We actually identified situations like these as an item to review for next version. I don't know how much of our thoughts will be incorporated into next big version, but we are taking opportunity to review many aspects.

The core issue is that the FG system was originally designed for every interface element and window to be provided by the ruleset. So, every ruleset would need to be updated to add dialogs like this. Also, the category controls were never built to be that customizable, and have not scaled as well as I would like to handle all the new DLC we have been able to offer.

We are specifically reviewing the previous design choice to not provide built-in simple dialogs to be used by ruleset and standard controls. The upside is that it becomes easier to solve these scenarios. The downside is that we have to build dialogs that are flexible enough to handle unknown use cases, and that they will not be able to be themed or customized.

On a similar related question everything front, we are also looking at whether to continue using category tabs at all, and whether to move to a folder/bag paradigm. The folder/bag paradigm is much easier for most users to understand (since they've been trained by the OS already), and it also allows for nesting and easier global search. On the down side, it requires a redesign of the list UI, considerations for backward compatibility, and changes to the database subsystem as well.

So, it's been noted. :)

Cheers,
JPG

[jajen2003]

Jajen2003,

We actually identified situations like these as an item to review for next version. I don't know how much of our thoughts will be incorporated into next big version, but we are taking opportunity to review many aspects.

The core issue is that the FG system was originally designed for every interface element and window to be provided by the ruleset. So, every ruleset would need to be updated to add dialogs like this. Also, the category controls were never built to be that customizable, and have not scaled as well as I would like to handle all the new DLC we have been able to offer.

We are specifically reviewing the previous design choice to not provide built-in simple dialogs to be used by ruleset and standard controls. The upside is that it becomes easier to solve these scenarios. The downside is that we have to build dialogs that are flexible enough to handle unknown use cases, and that they will not be able to be themed or customized.

On a similar related question everything front, we are also looking at whether to continue using category tabs at all, and whether to move to a folder/bag paradigm. The folder/bag paradigm is much easier for most users to understand (since they've been trained by the OS already), and it also allows for nesting and easier global search. On the down side, it requires a redesign of the list UI, considerations for backward compatibility, and changes to the database subsystem as well.

So, it's been noted. :)

Cheers,
JPG

Thank you for the response. At least it's on the radar and not buried in a bloated voting system.

[jajen2003]

Dude, I don't get this. You've just created a thread going on about you using a subscription supports FG and the ongoing development. But you won't use the recognised process of asking for something to be changed in the base product - because you think it is a lazy oversight and undignified to add it as a feature request?

There are technical reasons why the category icons text is added/changed the way it is - it is not a lazy oversight.

Please use the recognised process for asking for changes. You're supporting the FG developers financially as per your recent thread (that's fantastic, thanks very much), please also support them logistically by using the recognised change process and not making it harder for them to find (and track) this change request which is embedded within a post in the generic FG forum. Thanks.

The current feedback system is antiquated and bloated. I don't use it because I prefer not to. I find it to be ineffective.

Yes, I promote Fantasy Grounds as much as I can, but it doesn't mean I'm not highly critical of the program, it's developers and processes. I will continue to do both so long as I continue to pay SmiteWorks and use their software to play table top roleplaying games. :D

I am aware I'm not the easiest customer to deal with, but I do give back. I assist Doug from time to time with troubleshooting, bug reports and massive promotion on my end as a user. Not to mention financial support.

Bottom line, I am who I am. Take it or leave it. But I'm here so long as Doug keeps making Fantasy Grounds.

[Trenloe]

The current feedback system is antiquated and bloated. I don't use it because I prefer not to. I find it to be ineffective.
Depends how you define ineffective. The devs have stated on many occasions that the wishlist is their main method of tracking feature/change requests and prefer people to use it to collect requests all in one place, rather than search for random posts deep within threads that could easily be missed/forgotten.

This time you got lucky and MW noticed your post.

If you're happy to have your posts missed/forgotten then proceed using your own "system", and see how effective that is down the line...


Bottom line, I am who I am. Take it or leave it.
Fair enough. I'll live it, thanks.