Well, kinda — depending on where that ‘other field’ is located.
If it’s in the target table¹ you can create a formula field that performs some level of pre-filtering and then do a rollup or lookup against it. For instance, say you want to return the value of {Field 1}, but only in cases where {Field 2} contains a value. You could create a formula field, {Field 3}, with the formula IF({Field 2},{Field 1}), and then perform your lookup or rollup on {Field 3}.
Similarly, if the other field is located in the current table, you probably can create an aggregation formula that would allow a selective rollup of values. That’s a little less certain, though, as aggregation formulas are currently an un[der]documented feature of rollup fields — but one, I am told, almost certainly to be maintained as Airtable progresses.²
Neither of those approaches, obviously, gives you what you were initially seeking — namely, a way to ‘step’ through a progression of linked records — but possibly one will fill the business operational need you hoped to address through that linked-record chain.
- We really need a common vocabulary describing aspects of Airtable design. For my part, I use ‘drill through’ to describe the action of selecting a value in a linked-record field and having the referenced record open in Airtable’s ‘expanded record’ view. (I hope what I mean by ‘referenced record’ is clear from context.) The table from which a lookup or rollup field draws its values I call the ‘target’ table; I’m not really satisfied by that term, but there are problems with the alternatives I’ve considered, ‘destination’ or ‘remote.’
- I find I rarely use lookup fields any more, as I can [seemingly] accomplish the same thing with a rollup field with an aggregation formula of just the keyword
values. That way, if I need to add more processing to the field, I can simply modify the aggregation formula instead of having to change the field type.
