Let Constraints accept Vector3s in place of Attachments

As a Roblox developer, it is currently too hard to attach a Constraint to a static location in the world. The current process for doing something like this is as follows:

  • Create new part
  • Make part transparent
  • Disable CanCollide
  • Anchor part
  • Add Attachment
  • Link Constraint to Attachment

This is a huge pain to do over and over again, and is a major turnoff to using constraints overall. Ideally, anything that accepts an Attachment should also accept a Vector3 to avoid needless parts cluttering the workspace. A new workflow could look like this:

  • Set Constraint’s attachment point to a Vector3

Isn’t that a much more elegant way to use constraints? If Roblox is able to address this issue and streamline their use, I would be much more inclined to use constraints.

14 Likes

To avoid creating a part entirely, I use workspace.Terrain and parent the attachment within it, followed by assigning the attachment’s WorldPosition from there. Though this method doesn’t allow for you to neatly assort attachments in folders or any other non BasePart instance. :frowning:

4 Likes

What type of Constraint are you trying to set up? If you are creating multiple versions of the same item why not make one, then use Ctrl D to duplicate it?
Or just have one Anchored Part at the center of your place and put all your Attachments on it at whatever location you want in the world. Same as linking them all to the Terrain as @ChipioIndustries said.
Normally I use Constraints for items like moving doors or on vehicles with moving parts, so the Constraint is attached to a couple of parts anyway.