Roll20 didn't have macro buttons or its "dice rolling dialog" to start with; the devs just built in a system very similar to MapTool's roll commands (in fact, the command was /roll). After my first use of it I (and others) suggested clickable buttons to roll dice, and I advocated for a dialog to do some dice rolling (and save what you set up as a macro, if you like). They did eventually implement it and it's very robust.Jagged wrote:Agreed. I would consider "Ease of Use" to be one of the killer features. Maptool has a significant hurdle for the first time user that makes quickly jumping in, difficult and daunting. As long as that is true, Maptool will lose potential users to the competition.
Its funny you mentioned an obvious place to roll dice. I never considered that an issue, but I can see how a new could think differently.
Interestingly, a lot of recommendations for features early on seemed to be for things that MapTool did (it was common to see "I suggest Feature X, similar to how MapTool handles it"). So people wanted quite a few of the things that MT does, but I guess they also wanted better ease of use, easier connectivity, what have you. It also suggests that a lot of MT users went over to check out Roll20. There was, however, a fairly strong contingent against high-complexity scripting. At this point, it's at the level of basic variables connected to token stats, but beyond that I think nobody really wants it to go. Perhaps their API will be the tool for people who really want to do funky stuff.
The other thing that surprised me in its effectiveness was visual dice, which both Roll20 and FGII have (FGII is like the grandaddy of virtual dice you can throw around). I mean, you'd think they're no big deal, because what matters is the result in chat, right? But having visual "virtual dice" roll across the screen actually lends something to the experience. It's...I don't know, nice. Cool. Kind of exciting.