This is why Jed highlights “for individual creators as well as the overall platform”.
Introducing the ability to move funds around without marketplace fee reduces friction for bad actors. We know you’re not a bad actor, but you’re asking for a system change that would affect all users, not just the good actors. As a platform we don’t get to move haphazardly here and need to navigate that very carefully. Thanks for your patience here.
Any response towards this as a suggestion?
If legacy roles are going to reach feature parity of legacy roles: will legacy roles be migrated into the new role system?
See Jed’s response here:
No plans to make a “changed signal” that can be listened to in-game at this time. Please file a separate feature request with your problem description on why you need change events for group members if this matters a lot to you.
Eventually, will this be combined into the groups on the group page and not the creator dashboard?
This is actually interesting and actually very helpful for roleplay groups that don’t want people to have the “Moderator” role publicly, but will still actually still appear on the player, so they can delegate permissions without having to do something hacky and all.
My only question is, when this is fully released, will there be an option to hide the roles to the public and only be used via API?
An example of this being used:
Let’s say X roleplay group has a moderation team, but let’s say it’s too unrealistic to add a “Moderators” role in the group, so we would have to use like datastores, external databases, or something to keep track of the moderators.
Unfortunately, it’s not even possible to change what experiences people can edit with this update, only with the old roles: this is a massive flaw with the update
Thanks for your question! All of these new roles will be private, unless you have permission to manage members of the Group. These new features are specifically for creators and community managers, rather than players, so there’s very little player-facing/public information.
So players cannot see this new roles and there no option do they see the roles like or a developer is a scripter or something with a sub role
I’d like to have sub roles like owner head Dev and developer with Raveneu acces and not too and that players in group see this roles so I only need the legacy Dev role I already used the new ones for partner and a sub role for Dev access @peraldon
Thank you for your response,
Ahh I see now, I would love it if it kind of moved it’s way in with legacy group roles and a separate setting for ease of access and visualable then having to access or modify the current roles on top of this role system.
I absolutely love the way Roblox is moving with this, and I feel like this could be something big for Roblox Groups that is a long time needed. Do you guys plan on opening up a private beta or public beta for the new system vs old system? I and many other roblox groups would love to interact with the Roblox Staff team to come up with new ideas, share our workflow, and give some insights on what we do that Roblox might not be aware of. (the main reason why I love them so much)
In our team, we lean heavily on the Community Feedback Program. Of course, feel free to put in feature requests here on the forum, and we’ll read it as well!
Is there some sort of ETA for being able to transfer robux to groups without fees?
Due to some work I do, I have a lot of robux on my account to the point the 30% reduction is enough that it negatively impacts me.
Also I don’t really understand how a bad actor could exploit this system. In my mind you could only transfer currency between groups you own and your account. For example, Group A is owned by player A and pays player B 100k robux. Player B owns group B so now he can transfer the 100k robux to group B allowing him to start development on his game by paying developers / commisions without him loosing 30k.
I don’t see how bad actors would exploit this system considering how scamming can happen with or without the 30% cut and if your account gets comprimised you can loose a lot more than just your robux.
Obviously I’m sure an exact ETA can’t be given but just considering whether this is something I can expect soon enough where I may want to wait on commissioning anyone.
No I don’t think you should wait before doing that, that doesn’t make sense. See Jed’s comment earlier in thread, it’s not on the roadmap currently.
Also I don’t really understand how a bad actor could exploit this system. [… proposed solution regarding owned groups …]
Yes we would need to do in-depth investigation into different solutions including the one you mentioned and see how that affects the threat model with several internal teams. This is why this is going to take time, as well as deciding priority and where to slot it in on the roadmap and then actually implementing it at scale.
Please do not expect this change to land any time soon for that reason. Thanks for your patience here.
The thing is though it would be Helpful for bigger teams if you have more then 1 Place and you can Choose 3 of 9 Builders / Model Makers for one area and so on and so fourth
It’s worth pointing out that users with this permission can remove (exiling from the group) members with the same legacy role and Creator Hub roles. Presumably the same is true for people with ‘higher’ roles (whether legacy or Creator Hub).
This is a little bit concerning to me, although the “add or remove group members” permission is not one I could see myself assigning via the Creator Hub anyway (the invites feature is not something I need). I’m not sure if this is intentional or an oversight, as it’s somewhat counter-intuitive and undocumented.
Will there be engine functions and public apis that can be used for the new roles?
So for example will it be possible to get the list of roles a person has in a group using GroupService?
Will the legacy get deprecated afterwards? Legacy’s is very easy to use, So i’d go off with the legacy group role instead
Bug! My team member had Edit Group Experience permission but could not upload any audio to the group. Giving them a legacy role with the same permission, however, worked.
You should instead of calling them “Legacy Roles” as seen here:
You should call them “Ranks” as they are seen on the group and they are already called “Rank” on the group homepage when you see what you are as seen here:
My suggestion: Call the new thing here “Roles” and call the “Legacy Roles” “Ranks” as they are not seen on the group (as of yet) and the “Ranks”/“Legacy Roles” are and it would make more sense because when i see those other ones are called “Legacy Roles” it looks as if they might get removed or something but that is just what i think when i see that.
I do not know the future plans for whatever is happening but i thought i would suggest this as I thought it would be a good one.
How would this exactly work within studio, mainly in scripts that use :GetRoleInGroup and :GetRankInGroup if there is the ability to assign multiple roles to a single player?