It’s the 1 year anniversary of when I started this thread. I’m shocked this basic feature every VTT has isn’t an option.
its as if they don’t want us to use physical miniatures any more.
A VTT blocking physical miniatures would be 'having the feature'. Not having the feature encourages people to not use the VTT and fall back to to those physical miniatures.
However, Hasbro doesn't make the physical miniatures (for what reason I don't know, as a company whose whole thing is plastic toys), so they don't have an incentive to encourage physical miniatures. They're super focused on the Sigil Dungeon Video Game.
That said, every in-built map has a grid on it, and you can put a grid on your image easily with dozens of tools before you upload it. So if there's not a grid on the map, it's because you didn't put one there.
Not sure if other books/maps are the same, but the grids on the maps in BG:DiA do not line up correctly in either Roll20 or Foundry, which leads me to believe that the maps and not the VTTs are the problem, at least in that case. I wonder, if that is true of the maps in other books, if that is something that has held up the grid development for Maps.
Roll20 and Foundry aren't the Maps VTT so their bugs aren't the issue here. When you add a map in, you can set those lines and if you do it correctly Maps will align. But the Maps VTT should both provide a "Add Grid where we expect" option, and a "Snap tokens to grid" option.
I'm well aware that Maps is a different VTT, thanks, but that wasn't my point. My point was that in at least a couple of cases with that particular book, the grid printed on the maps wasn't evenly spaced. I just confirmed it by looking at the map in Photoshop measuring by actual pixel distance. I also just tried it in Maps, where even if you do it correctly, token movement in Maps still doesn't line up correctly on the grid that is printed on the map.
It’s the 1 year anniversary of when I started this thread. I’m shocked this basic feature every VTT has isn’t an option.
its as if they don’t want us to use physical miniatures any more.
A VTT blocking physical miniatures would be 'having the feature'. Not having the feature encourages people to not use the VTT and fall back to to those physical miniatures.
However, Hasbro doesn't make the physical miniatures (for what reason I don't know, as a company whose whole thing is plastic toys), so they don't have an incentive to encourage physical miniatures. They're super focused on the Sigil Dungeon Video Game.
That said, every in-built map has a grid on it, and you can put a grid on your image easily with dozens of tools before you upload it. So if there's not a grid on the map, it's because you didn't put one there.
Not sure if other books/maps are the same, but the grids on the maps in BG:DiA do not line up correctly in either Roll20 or Foundry, which leads me to believe that the maps and not the VTTs are the problem, at least in that case. I wonder, if that is true of the maps in other books, if that is something that has held up the grid development for Maps.
Roll20 and Foundry aren't the Maps VTT so their bugs aren't the issue here. When you add a map in, you can set those lines and if you do it correctly Maps will align. But the Maps VTT should both provide a "Add Grid where we expect" option, and a "Snap tokens to grid" option.
I'm well aware that Maps is a different VTT, thanks, but that wasn't my point. My point was that in at least a couple of cases with that particular book, the grid printed on the maps wasn't evenly spaced. I just confirmed it by looking at the map in Photoshop measuring by actual pixel distance. I also just tried it in Maps, where even if you do it correctly, token movement in Maps still doesn't line up correctly on the grid that is printed on the map.
Just use the ruler option to measure movement and distance, Its a much more accurate representation of movement and distance, especially with area of effect spells.
it would be a nice convenient addition, but there's a ton of free photo/picture editing software out there that can do the same thing
Kind of missing the point...
No joke, every VTT app/software on the market offers a grid overlay option. Having to load each and every map you own and placing a permanent grid on the file is a massive waste of time and frankly, adding grids on top of 4k resolution video maps and then having to save a copy of that massive file just doubles the file size of my already 931GB map directory.
But they added "stickers" recently. I think its clear that the dev team is very disconnected on the basics that their players need for this VTT.
It’s the 1 year anniversary of when I started this thread. I’m shocked this basic feature every VTT has isn’t an option.
its as if they don’t want us to use physical miniatures any more.
A VTT blocking physical miniatures would be 'having the feature'. Not having the feature encourages people to not use the VTT and fall back to to those physical miniatures.
However, Hasbro doesn't make the physical miniatures (for what reason I don't know, as a company whose whole thing is plastic toys), so they don't have an incentive to encourage physical miniatures. They're super focused on the Sigil Dungeon Video Game.
That said, every in-built map has a grid on it, and you can put a grid on your image easily with dozens of tools before you upload it. So if there's not a grid on the map, it's because you didn't put one there.
Not sure if other books/maps are the same, but the grids on the maps in BG:DiA do not line up correctly in either Roll20 or Foundry, which leads me to believe that the maps and not the VTTs are the problem, at least in that case. I wonder, if that is true of the maps in other books, if that is something that has held up the grid development for Maps.
Roll20 and Foundry aren't the Maps VTT so their bugs aren't the issue here. When you add a map in, you can set those lines and if you do it correctly Maps will align. But the Maps VTT should both provide a "Add Grid where we expect" option, and a "Snap tokens to grid" option.
I'm well aware that Maps is a different VTT, thanks, but that wasn't my point. My point was that in at least a couple of cases with that particular book, the grid printed on the maps wasn't evenly spaced. I just confirmed it by looking at the map in Photoshop measuring by actual pixel distance. I also just tried it in Maps, where even if you do it correctly, token movement in Maps still doesn't line up correctly on the grid that is printed on the map.
Just use the ruler option to measure movement and distance, Its a much more accurate representation of movement and distance, especially with area of effect spells.
" Just use the ruler option to measure movement and distance, Its a much more accurate representation of movement and distance, especially with area of effect spells."
This is absurd and you clearly haven't thought through why the grid is needed for so many players like myself and my groups of players, much like the devs on this project don't get it:
So I've got my 6 players sitting around my VTT with their physical miniatures sitting on the map. They want to simply move 25 feet, or 5 squares. Instead of simply picking up the miniature and moving it 5 squares, the player asks me "hey DM, can you show me how far I CAN move?" DM: "Sure, this far" Player: "no, not that way, this way" DM: "oh this way?" "Player "close, just a little bit more this way"
Oh wow, what an "accurate representation of movement and distance," And to think!... what the player could have done in 1 to 2 seconds, we instead launched a 1 minute or 2 minute convo on how where we could move the mini.. One Player down! just 5 to go! Boy this is FUN.
It’s the 1 year anniversary of when I started this thread. I’m shocked this basic feature every VTT has isn’t an option.
its as if they don’t want us to use physical miniatures any more.
A VTT blocking physical miniatures would be 'having the feature'. Not having the feature encourages people to not use the VTT and fall back to to those physical miniatures.
However, Hasbro doesn't make the physical miniatures (for what reason I don't know, as a company whose whole thing is plastic toys), so they don't have an incentive to encourage physical miniatures. They're super focused on the Sigil Dungeon Video Game.
That said, every in-built map has a grid on it, and you can put a grid on your image easily with dozens of tools before you upload it. So if there's not a grid on the map, it's because you didn't put one there.
Not sure if other books/maps are the same, but the grids on the maps in BG:DiA do not line up correctly in either Roll20 or Foundry, which leads me to believe that the maps and not the VTTs are the problem, at least in that case. I wonder, if that is true of the maps in other books, if that is something that has held up the grid development for Maps.
Roll20 and Foundry aren't the Maps VTT so their bugs aren't the issue here. When you add a map in, you can set those lines and if you do it correctly Maps will align. But the Maps VTT should both provide a "Add Grid where we expect" option, and a "Snap tokens to grid" option.
I'm well aware that Maps is a different VTT, thanks, but that wasn't my point. My point was that in at least a couple of cases with that particular book, the grid printed on the maps wasn't evenly spaced. I just confirmed it by looking at the map in Photoshop measuring by actual pixel distance. I also just tried it in Maps, where even if you do it correctly, token movement in Maps still doesn't line up correctly on the grid that is printed on the map.
Just use the ruler option to measure movement and distance, Its a much more accurate representation of movement and distance, especially with area of effect spells.
" Just use the ruler option to measure movement and distance, Its a much more accurate representation of movement and distance, especially with area of effect spells."
This is absurd and you clearly haven't thought through why the grid is needed for so many players like myself and my groups of players, much like the devs on this project don't get it:
So I've got my 6 players sitting around my VTT with their physical miniatures sitting on the map. They want to simply move 25 feet, or 5 squares. Instead of simply picking up the miniature and moving it 5 squares, the player asks me "hey DM, can you show me how far I CAN move?" DM: "Sure, this far" Player: "no, not that way, this way" DM: "oh this way?" "Player "close, just a little bit more this way"
Oh wow, what an "accurate representation of movement and distance," And to think!... what the player could have done in 1 to 2 seconds, we instead launched a 1 minute or 2 minute convo on how where we could move the mini.. One Player down! just 5 to go! Boy this is FUN.
I get your frustration with the lack of what seems to be a necessary feature for you, but you can set the permissions to allow players to use the ruler feature on their own. Then, instead of asking you how far they can move, they can just measure if themselves real quick.
A petition carries no legal binding. While it can raise awareness and demonstrate community interest, it is unlikely to be the deciding factor unless it is supported by significant, sustained feedback through official channels such as the in-app feedback portal. Developers are more likely to prioritize features based on the volume and consistency of feedback received directly through these channels.
At this point, a thread in the Feedback forums would probably be the best bet. (I searched and didn't see one, but I might have missed it.)
No, it wouldn't
Feedback for maps should go through the feedback survey within maps itself (accessible via the grey tab on the right of the screen). The devs and mods have been very emphatic about the fact the team doesn't gather Maps feedback through the forums
At this point, a thread in the Feedback forums would probably be the best bet. (I searched and didn't see one, but I might have missed it.)
No, it wouldn't
Feedback for maps should go through the feedback survey within maps itself (accessible via the grey tab on the right of the screen). The devs and mods have been very emphatic about the fact the team doesn't gather Maps feedback through the forums
While I agree with you, and have seen a number of things implemented from suggestions I (and I expect many others others) made, it really feels like you're tossing it into a black hole with that form. The big change I saw from feedback, the Encounter Difficulty was wrong, I made feedback in the survey pointing to a thread here, because you can't explain things in a tiny box.
It’s the 1 year anniversary of when I started this thread. I’m shocked this basic feature every VTT has isn’t an option.
its as if they don’t want us to use physical miniatures any more.
A VTT blocking physical miniatures would be 'having the feature'. Not having the feature encourages people to not use the VTT and fall back to to those physical miniatures.
However, Hasbro doesn't make the physical miniatures (for what reason I don't know, as a company whose whole thing is plastic toys), so they don't have an incentive to encourage physical miniatures. They're super focused on the Sigil Dungeon Video Game.
That said, every in-built map has a grid on it, and you can put a grid on your image easily with dozens of tools before you upload it. So if there's not a grid on the map, it's because you didn't put one there.
Not sure if other books/maps are the same, but the grids on the maps in BG:DiA do not line up correctly in either Roll20 or Foundry, which leads me to believe that the maps and not the VTTs are the problem, at least in that case. I wonder, if that is true of the maps in other books, if that is something that has held up the grid development for Maps.
Roll20 and Foundry aren't the Maps VTT so their bugs aren't the issue here. When you add a map in, you can set those lines and if you do it correctly Maps will align. But the Maps VTT should both provide a "Add Grid where we expect" option, and a "Snap tokens to grid" option.
I'm well aware that Maps is a different VTT, thanks, but that wasn't my point. My point was that in at least a couple of cases with that particular book, the grid printed on the maps wasn't evenly spaced. I just confirmed it by looking at the map in Photoshop measuring by actual pixel distance. I also just tried it in Maps, where even if you do it correctly, token movement in Maps still doesn't line up correctly on the grid that is printed on the map.
Tons of their maps across almost all their books aren't correctly gridded. Ive imported from tons of adventures into foundry and almost all of distort over a distance. Super annoying. My guess is they draw the map, then add a grid overlay to fit the map, not be an accurate grid, so if they shave a few pixels here, add a few thee so it lines up better with walls etc they do it. I get the logic, but I'd prefer the reverse, put the grid down and make the wall a few pixels to the left instead.
At this point, a thread in the Feedback forums would probably be the best bet. (I searched and didn't see one, but I might have missed it.)
No, it wouldn't
Feedback for maps should go through the feedback survey within maps itself (accessible via the grey tab on the right of the screen). The devs and mods have been very emphatic about the fact the team doesn't gather Maps feedback through the forums
Well, the issue of not having grid options have been posted about here for almost a year and a half and people are still posting about it, so either people aren't aware they should submit the issue there, or it's not being addressed. I think it's understandable that folks would post/comment in other places in the hopes of raising awareness or getting someone's attention, however unlikely.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'm well aware that Maps is a different VTT, thanks, but that wasn't my point. My point was that in at least a couple of cases with that particular book, the grid printed on the maps wasn't evenly spaced. I just confirmed it by looking at the map in Photoshop measuring by actual pixel distance. I also just tried it in Maps, where even if you do it correctly, token movement in Maps still doesn't line up correctly on the grid that is printed on the map.
Just use the ruler option to measure movement and distance, Its a much more accurate representation of movement and distance, especially with area of effect spells.
I have little doubt that we'll get gridlines eventually.
it is the superior way
it would be a nice convenient addition, but there's a ton of free photo/picture editing software out there that can do the same thing
Kind of missing the point...
No joke, every VTT app/software on the market offers a grid overlay option. Having to load each and every map you own and placing a permanent grid on the file is a massive waste of time and frankly, adding grids on top of 4k resolution video maps and then having to save a copy of that massive file just doubles the file size of my already 931GB map directory.
But they added "stickers" recently. I think its clear that the dev team is very disconnected on the basics that their players need for this VTT.
" Just use the ruler option to measure movement and distance, Its a much more accurate representation of movement and distance, especially with area of effect spells."
This is absurd and you clearly haven't thought through why the grid is needed for so many players like myself and my groups of players, much like the devs on this project don't get it:
So I've got my 6 players sitting around my VTT with their physical miniatures sitting on the map. They want to simply move 25 feet, or 5 squares. Instead of simply picking up the miniature and moving it 5 squares, the player asks me "hey DM, can you show me how far I CAN move?" DM: "Sure, this far" Player: "no, not that way, this way" DM: "oh this way?" "Player "close, just a little bit more this way"
Oh wow, what an "accurate representation of movement and distance," And to think!... what the player could have done in 1 to 2 seconds, we instead launched a 1 minute or 2 minute convo on how where we could move the mini.. One Player down! just 5 to go! Boy this is FUN.
I wonder if a petition would work at this point?
I get your frustration with the lack of what seems to be a necessary feature for you, but you can set the permissions to allow players to use the ruler feature on their own. Then, instead of asking you how far they can move, they can just measure if themselves real quick.
A petition carries no legal binding. While it can raise awareness and demonstrate community interest, it is unlikely to be the deciding factor unless it is supported by significant, sustained feedback through official channels such as the in-app feedback portal. Developers are more likely to prioritize features based on the volume and consistency of feedback received directly through these channels.
Except no one has a means to do this at the table. They all have physical dice, physical miniatures and even printed out character sheets.
At this point, a thread in the Feedback forums would probably be the best bet. (I searched and didn't see one, but I might have missed it.)
Create a map with a grid.....tokens just don't snap is all
No, it wouldn't
Feedback for maps should go through the feedback survey within maps itself (accessible via the grey tab on the right of the screen). The devs and mods have been very emphatic about the fact the team doesn't gather Maps feedback through the forums
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
While I agree with you, and have seen a number of things implemented from suggestions I (and I expect many others others) made, it really feels like you're tossing it into a black hole with that form. The big change I saw from feedback, the Encounter Difficulty was wrong, I made feedback in the survey pointing to a thread here, because you can't explain things in a tiny box.
Tons of their maps across almost all their books aren't correctly gridded. Ive imported from tons of adventures into foundry and almost all of distort over a distance. Super annoying. My guess is they draw the map, then add a grid overlay to fit the map, not be an accurate grid, so if they shave a few pixels here, add a few thee so it lines up better with walls etc they do it. I get the logic, but I'd prefer the reverse, put the grid down and make the wall a few pixels to the left instead.
Well, the issue of not having grid options have been posted about here for almost a year and a half and people are still posting about it, so either people aren't aware they should submit the issue there, or it's not being addressed. I think it's understandable that folks would post/comment in other places in the hopes of raising awareness or getting someone's attention, however unlikely.