PDA

View Full Version : LoS System Feedback



RedmondStache
March 16th, 2020, 12:26
I've run my past two weekly 5E games with FGU rather than FGC, and thus far I'm liking it quite a bit. It doesn't run quite as smoothly, but it's in beta and so I can look past that for now.

My players and I all agree that dynamic LoS is a fantastic feature that really adds to our game and is worth any beta-related hiccups.

That said, we've encountered some things that prevent us from fully enjoying it. I won't include lack of distance limits or light sources or any of that here, since I know at least some of those will be addressed.


1. The way tokens are only revealed if their center is within LoS leaves something to be desired. For medium and smaller creatures this is acceptable, but still not ideal, as all D&D systems I've played feature a cover system that allows for line of sight to creatures within a square even if you can only see a small part of that square. For large and larger creatures this means that characters can have LoS to entire squares of their space and they still wouldn't be displayed for that character.


An option to have tokens be simply masked by the fog of war, so that if any part of them is revealed then characters can see and target that visible part, might be ideal for my use case. At the very least, having tokens that take up multiple squares be revealed if the center of any one square they occupy is within LoS would be a great improvement.


2. Having token visibility tied to LoS doesn't seem to work for creatures that are hidden on the CT. I like when my players walk into a room or turn a corner and are surprised to suddenly realize what they're up against. Unfortunately, this isn't possible the way things are now. I like letting my players see what the initiative order is for creatures they know are in combat so they can plan out their turns and know when they might be able to duck out for a moment here or there, but there's currently no way to have a token automatically appear before revealing its CT entry, and this ruins some surprises, with me having to tell them to stop where they are or sometimes even to take back some of their movement so I can reveal something.


The fix for this one seems like it'd be a simple one: Let LoS visibility supersede CT visibility. Or, ideally for my particular use case, let LoS visibility determine CT visibility.


3. There's no option I know of to make tokens the GM moves respect walls. Sure, sometimes it's handy to be able to move things through walls. Maybe somebody teleported. Maybe they can phase through walls through some spell. But the single most common cause for me moving things through walls is that either FGU hiccuped and interpreted my one arrow key press as two, or that I wasn't as careful as I should have been when dragging a token to save time. When I'm moving NPCs, this is fine because it doesn't reveal anything to the players other than maybe that I made an oopsie. When I'm moving a PC token, on the other hand, both of these mistakes can reveal entire areas of the map that they shouldn't have been able to see, once again spoiling surprises.

A toggleable option to make the GM respect walls would be fantastic.


3a. I mentioned teleporting. That's a thing that can happen in games where magic is a thing, and it sure would be nice to have the ability to designate teleporters like we can doors. An interactable object that players could click to whisk their tokens away to another designated space would be delightful. This only gets a sub-heading, though, because it's not LoS-related except in that if I drag their token to another spot on the same map with LoS active, they get reveals along the way that they really shouldn't have. Though I think maybe re-dragging their token from the CT, rather than from the map itself, might avoid that issue? Haven't tested.


Again, my players and I all really like the LoS system and think it adds a great deal to our games even as-is. There are just a few ways it could be improved even further so that the reality aligns more with how we (or, in some cases, the game system) would expect or want things to function.

A few other miscellaneous wishes:

An option to disable token rotation, or at least make it require holding a key. Scroll wheel is too easy and too eager to rotate tokens when trying to zoom in or out.

My players can't see each other's pointers, though I can see all of theirs. We'd love a fix.

The "remove all pointers" feature doesn't seem to work. Removing pointers one-by-one can be cumbersome, especially since my players seem unable to clear their own.

I remember way back when in one of the fx layer preview videos, there were effects applied only to specific areas on the image. I want that, and was surprised to find it's not implemented.

Having an option to make certain tokens function like terrain (can see in, but not out) would be a neat feature to have for certain bulky creatures.

I don't know if it's a thing already or planned to be a thing in the future, but tokens that can function as doors and have different visual states for open/closed would be really cool to have.

Basically the ability to apply LoS definitions to NPC tokens in general would be kinda neat.

I'd love it if there was a section of the FGU support wiki that specifically looked at the parts of FGU that differed from FGC. As-is it's fine, but for people coming from FGC this would definitely reduce friction when it comes to "relearning" how to use FG, rather than needing to wade through all the things that are still the same.


None of these items on my wishlist is a dealbreaker; they're just things that would further improve my experience. FGU is already pretty great and I sincerely look forward to it only getting better from here.

Zacchaeus
March 16th, 2020, 12:55
When moving a PC token holding down SHIFT whilst moving it won't reveal any part of the map between where you pick it up and where you drop it.

Dr0W
March 16th, 2020, 18:00
1 & 2 seem to be up to your personal tastes. While you're correct to claim that D&D behaves like that, other systems might not, so it's not fair that the LOS gets coded according to D&D rules where people might not use it. That said, after FGU is up and running, they could get those specific characteristics coded into D&D Ruleset, if possible.

I do agree with you on 2, I like it that way too but I know it's my personal opinion. My players and I also find it more immersive when I remove players from Party View so they can't even see where their friends are at. As a personal solution for that, I asked my players how often they use the CT and found out that many of them use really small screens and can't even fit a CT and the few ones that use it, said they can live without it. So I came up with an extension that completely removes the CT button for players. I still let them know about turn order, if they ask me.

pollux
March 16th, 2020, 20:00
Great report, lots of useful feedback.


Having token visibility tied to LoS doesn't seem to work for creatures that are hidden on the CT.... The fix for this one seems like it'd be a simple one: Let LoS visibility supersede CT visibility. Or, ideally for my particular use case, let LoS visibility determine CT visibility.

This doesn't sound like a great solution to me. LoS seems clearly NOT tied to token visibility in the general case. You might have a giant that you can pointpoint their location and creature type by the sound of their footsteps, and so "see" them through a wall. Or there might be an assassin hiding in the shadows within your LoS. If there's a change here, I feel like a 3-way toggle is the thing:


Force visibility on, irrespective of Fog of War (FoW) or Line of Sight (LoS).
Force visibility off, irrespective of FoW or LoS.
Determine visibility automatically, according to both FoW and LoS.


I think these guides make sense for tokens on the map, but I'm agnostic about extending them to the tracker entry. It's not like you forget that the goblin exists when he runs around the corner. But if it kept things clean, I'd be fine with CT entries disappearing in auto-mode.

Moon Wizard
March 16th, 2020, 20:22
Thanks for the feedback.

Some responses:

1. LoS visibliity of tokens based on size
As mentioned, this is somewhat subjective. I've added a feature request for later consideration to see what we can do.

2. CT visibility independent of token visibility
Same as 2, except different feature request. Also, changing this makes the interface even more fiddly, since GMs will need to be able to see and toggle two different visibility states.

3. GM LoS updates and movement
See Zacchaeus's answer for moving without updating LoS in the middle. Added a feature request for GM wall blocking movement option.

4A. Modifier Key for Token Rotation
I've thought about this a couple times myself. Added as another feature request.

4B. Players Unable to see Other Player Pointers
Players should be able to see all pointers. Filed as task FGU-958.

4C. Ability to Delete All Pointers
Using the "Delete All" Pointers menu option in the right click menu under Pointers, GM should be able to clear all pointers, and players should be able to clear all their own pointers. Also, whenever the GM hovers over any pointer, or the player hovers over their own pointer, there should be a radial menu option to "Delete This" pointer. Are you not seeing these?

4D. Constrained FX areas
This is already a feature request; but is not part of planned feature set right now. It requires a completely different FX layer implementation, and incurs a lot more performance as well.

4E. Token as LoS blocker
Added as feature request.

4F. Token as doors or multiple states
Not sure what the purpose of this feature is. I don't like to add features without a clearly defined purpose.

4G. Token LOS definitions
Same as 4F. Also, you can already double click to select an LOS shape/line in LOS editing mode, and move it as a single unit.

4H. FGC vs. FGU differences
I've passed on your feedback for a new wiki section to Doug to consider.

Regards,
JPG

RedmondStache
March 16th, 2020, 21:58
When moving a PC token holding down SHIFT whilst moving it won't reveal any part of the map between where you pick it up and where you drop it.

That definitely solves that particular problem. Thanks!



4C. Ability to Delete All Pointers
Using the "Delete All" Pointers menu option in the right click menu under Pointers, GM should be able to clear all pointers, and players should be able to clear all their own pointers. Also, whenever the GM hovers over any pointer, or the player hovers over their own pointer, there should be a radial menu option to "Delete This" pointer. Are you not seeing these?
"Delete All Pointers" is an option that exists, but as the GM it only seems to delete my pointers, and does nothing for my players' pointers. I've been using "Delete This Pointer" to get rid of the pointers my players have left on my screen once they're no longer useful to have around.
I'm not 100% sure how players are getting rid of their pointers on their screens, but I expect it's the good old-fashioned "click with both mouse buttons" method. It is possible that they're simply NOT deleting their pointers and leaving it as a task for me, so I'll have to ask for confirmation one way or the other at our next session.


4D. Constrained FX areas
This is already a feature request; but is not part of planned feature set right now. It requires a completely different FX layer implementation, and incurs a lot more performance as well.
Well, thankfully there's something of a workaround in the form of adding images with transparency on a layer above the FX layer. Maybe a way within FG to "cut out" portions of an image to place on another layer would be workable at some point in the future?


4F. Token as doors or multiple states
Not sure what the purpose of this feature is. I don't like to add features without a clearly defined purpose.
My line of thinking was just making it easy to tell at a glance if a door was open or closed, before even looking at LoS, and adding that little bit of visual flair of having the actual door on the map appear to be open when you open it, or closed if you close it. It's absolutely not necessary, but it could add that little touch of immersion.


4G. Token LOS definitions
Same as 4F. Also, you can already double click to select an LOS shape/line in LOS editing mode, and move it as a single unit.
This one was more a piggyback on 4E and 4F's ideas. Admittedly I have only the vaguest of ideas as to how setting a token to have wall properties would be of any real use. Having a token able to block LoS like terrain does is by far the most useful of the three things.


4H. FGC vs. FGU differences
I've passed on your feedback for a new wiki section to Doug to consider.

Thanks for that, and for the responses!

And I do get that numbers 1 and 2 were fairly subjective. I mean, ideally a D&D ruleset would have LoS drawn from the corners and faces of each square of a creature's space, rather than from the center, but I'm totally fine with LoS being drawn from the center as FGU has it now, especially since I'd imagine the current method is far less resource-intensive. Honestly my absolute biggest gripe is that if I drop a creature on the map and a character can draw LoS to 40% of its space, even if that encompasses seven entire squares of its space for a gargantuan creature, the thing is hidden, and my only choices are to reveal it to everyone or to just let it slide. That's something I can learn to live with, it's just not the way I personally would prefer things to work.

My ideal ring of visibility options might be a little something like this: Set always visible, Mask Sensitive visibility, Mask+CT Sensitive visibility, Include in Party Vision, Reset Fog of War, and Test Every Square or something similar to toggle for larger creatures whose spaces contain more than one square.

I understand that not everyone wants things the way I want them, and I wouldn't want existing features to be modified to the detriment of other users. I'm always a fan of toggleable options.

Edit: A screenshot illustrating an amusing hypothetical situation that the current LoS implementation for larger creatures allows: Creature B (off screen) can see 12/16 squares of Creature A's space, but since the center point is hidden, Creature A is hidden.
32171

The High Druid
March 16th, 2020, 23:05
4F. Token as doors or multiple states
Not sure what the purpose of this feature is. I don't like to add features without a clearly defined purpose.

There are some map-makers that do secret doors/traps/'other features that change states' as tiles or tokens that you can place over the map to reveal or hide as the case may be. I suppose there might(?) be cases where you want the players to be able to trigger these by "opening" them

Moon Wizard
March 17th, 2020, 03:58
For the Delete All Pointers, the GM Delete All should delete all pointers, including player pointers. I've filed task FGU-962 to look into that.

I appreciate the hypothetical situation graphic; and it highlights that it actually may want to be something we look at sooner than later.

Thanks again for all the detailed feedback.

Regards,
JPG

Neovirtus
April 9th, 2020, 17:16
I have to agree with #1 and #2 here. After playing as a PC (in 5E) using the LoS features for the first time this week, the incorrect method of determining LoS is a pretty big deal. The encounter we used was an in door environment with lots of corners and pillars, and more often than not creatures which should have been visible on the map (according to RAW) were not, and this makes targeting a LOT more difficult. I understand that converting from using the center of the token to any of the 4 corners may be resource intensive (though it seems ridiculous that this could be the case when our graphics cards handle 3D rendering and complex shadows in 3D environments, but I digress), and a big change, but I don't really see a way around it. Perhaps just allowing vision of a token even if you can't see it's center would be the easiest middle ground. At least that way a small post between you and a target doesn't make them invisible.

Neovirtus
April 9th, 2020, 17:19
Double post