5/5/2023 0 Comments Light bugz target![]() ![]() ![]() Either one causes at least a 100% increase in GM hassle. If this were implemented, every attack (for example) would require either a second script run by the GM for the needed info, or for the GM to have to find this info in another manner. Not me, as my system relies heavily on a single player-generated macro to display a large amount of GM-only information. I'm sure this would be useful in some cases for some people. The result is that all my macros, which include a GM whisper showing the target's AC value, would lose that ability. Which would mean that for every attack roll, the GM would have to manually determine that value themselves - the players could not in any way call that value up for the GM, even in a GM-only 'whisper'. ![]() Which implies to me that a player would be unable to use any function that attempted to call a GM-only value. anything that started with an underscore could not be targeted by players who don't control that token. Perhaps it could be at the GM's discretion. If not, the GM could enact whatever anti-cheating rule he had in place - warning, booting, etc. With this, the GM would be able to see whether it was a legitimate use of the function. Some other possible fixes: GM sees all whispers GM gets an alert whenever is implemented which includes the player name and the command string. I didn't realize this had been discussed before. But yes, I do wonder what would happen with character sheets. Does that still seem like a good fix for this to you guys? I like that idea. call it "_AC" instead of "AC") and anything that started with an underscore could not be targeted by players who don't control that token. The last time we discussed this I think we were coming down on doing something like you could prefix a variable with an underscore (e.g. But I can see how this is to some degree a special case. And we've said in the past that our stance on that is "Roll20 does not prevent cheating," just like a physical tabletop doesn't. To some degree this is like "lifting up the paper when the GM leaves the room" - it's cheating, plain and simple. I think the main concern was that you could use in a whisper and whisper the stats to yourself (so the GM wouldn't know you were doing it). said: We have thought about blocking this before. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |