Jeff Dee said,
(. . .) I'm not happy with round tokens because they don't indicate facing,
Your token design looks good to me. Allow me, however, some comments about this subject:
A Facing capability for round portrait-style tokens has been requested many times here in the Roll20 forums. To my mind, finally implementing it is all what is needed for handling these tokens properly. It might be a matter of just waiting a bit more.
Of course if you want to try a new approach for tokens that is fine, but I think it's not so good if the necessity for that new approach is due to the lack of a very common VTT feature in Roll20.
For instance, this is one of the ways OpenRPG handles it:
Ajax's suggestion is good, but the way I see it, is useful for making facing clearer for top-down tokens --it wouldn't work for me for round portrait-style tokens since you still need to rotate them . . . When a VTT is not covering facing here, placing a sort of "facing indicator" (a mark, coloured point or a small arrow) in the very image of the token, in practice more often than not results into a visual mess:
Time ago I had to start using top down tokens because the particular VTT that I was using lacked (and lacks) of enough active development, and besides (despite claiming to be more or less system agnostic) it was "married" with the d20 ruleset, which, as Jonathan the Black is saying (even if he's speaking of D&D 4e), is a rule system that don't care about facing at all! :)