I know it has been awhile but just in case you have yet to decide here is my two cents.
First, let me say that I appreciate that you have taken the time to post this. Though without trying to be defensive or protective, but I think you have made some unfair, uncommon experiences or misleading statements that you make.
I think everyone deserves a fair shake, so hopefully you can provide constructive feedback on my questions.
Fantasy Grounds
For starters, you will most certainly need some sort of manual or guide for this software as it is not user friendly or intuitive to use. Because of that there is a greater learning curve than that of Roll20. FG has a number of fantastic video tutorials on youtube, but those are from users not the company which is not the greatest for customer service. The tutorial built into FG is also out of date.
I always find comments about the difference in learning curves interesting. I have come to the conclusion that it depends more upon the person that the software. I found myself unable to intuitively understand Roll20. Whereas FG, the basic of it, I never had a problem with. Never needed to read the manual or watch a video. It does seem that more people may find the Roll20 UI easier to learn than the FG one, but it is dependent upon the user (and, based upon my experience teaching other software programs, the users expectations and attitude).
There is a lack of consistency throughout the modules. An example is that the drag and drop races for PHB show all the fluff text for that race, but the ones in the SCAG don't and some aren't drag and drop at all.
This was recently discussed on the FG forums (
here). And the technical and legal reasons why where also mentioned. So, maybe this could be done, but probably not given the licensing requirements from WotC. I would be surprised if Roll20 had this capability, and if not, then it's not particularly fair to complain about something like this. Plus the fact that comes dow to the desire to have a link to
Everything from an official product, i.e. WOTC, is read only. That means all the maps and images in the DMG are all read only so you can't save the state if you try to use it in a game or set a grid to it making it pointless to own.
This was recently identified by a user on the forums, and has already been slated to be fixed in the next update. See
here. So it seems to me like FG is exceptionally responsive to user reports and errata. My understanding is the Roll20 is not (and often doesn't even disposition such issues.)
Some minor things with FG make it annoying like a lot of misspellings and grammar errors.
Again, if these are reported, they are fixed in the next update. So, if you have found any such discrepencies, all you have to do is report them and they will be fixed.
For the MM some of the tokens are just a letter rather than a picture of the monster. Also all the monsters are in the NPC tab or folder all the time making it a resource hog. It would have been better for them to leave it as it was before they updated to version 3.2 which was each monster could be drag and dropped from the MM into that folder. This can become an issue since the memory allocation is topped at 2gb. This is the same problem with the DMG and all its maps and images for magic items and the like.
If there is a picture of the creature in the MM, then it has a picture token for it. If there is no picture for it in the MM, then where is the picture supposed to come from? Again, any missing pictures just have to be reported (though I doubt there are any currently) and they will be fixed promptly.
The NPC tab/list (and all the other lists) can use the groups and filters to restrict the list to what you want to display. It actually has all of the capabilities of version 3.2 tabs, and a lot more as well. Plus, it also allows for architecture changes that are required for the Unity version.
Your statement about resource issues is extremely misleading if not simple wrong. First, the number of NPCs in the list does not affect memory usage. Second, if you are running on a 32-bit operating system, then EVERY application on that computer, is limited to about 2GB. If you are on a 64-bit OS, then the limit is somewhere over 3GB. Something I've never hit myself.
The map interface is not intuitive at all and most of the software is not what I would call user friendly. Map doesn't have layers and no text can be added to the map. You can get an extension for it but the features, mask (fog) & navigation, still only apply to the bottom layer making it not very useful. You can only change tokens to a different layer by deleting and re-adding them.
Again, the UI intuitiveness is a user/person specific thing. I've never had a problem understanding how to use it, neither have my players.
Correct that you have to load an extension for having map layers. But again, it's never been a usability issue for me. But I understand that for some people it certainly is. (And it is a valuable issue to identify for those comparing the two.)
Customer service or support is crap and is usually very ambiguous with responses, although some members on the forum can be very helpful. When questioned with a mistake or inconsistency, they treat you like a troll instead of a curious customer. I have no respect for anyone that blows off users direct questions.
This comment I find disturbing, because it is certainly vastly different than what I have experienced.
I have found customer service to be exceptional on the few occasions I have reached out to them. The community support has also been exceptional, the community prides itself on being helpful and open. And the few times I've seen a post that was not, other members quickly jumped in to correct the situation. That doesn't mean that people are always given the answer they are hoping for, but even obvious trolls have been treated as if they were not.
Perhaps you could link to an example? I'm sure the FG community would want to address such an occurrence.
In general I won't comment on this, because after trying Roll20 for a couple of weeks I decided on FG, so you obviously are a better authority than myself on it.
The customer service/support team is amazing. I have emailed or posted on the forums many times and have always gotten a quick and, more importantly, helpful answer. They admitted if they didn't know something and found someone that did. I had a data loss issue and, although the data couldn't be retrieved, they found a problem with their backup scripts and were honest about it being their screw up. I have the utmost respect for them admitting their mistake and they fixed it within a matter of days with no problems since.
This is what I would hope to hear about any customer service group. Apparently our experiences are vastly different though. Because with the three questions I asked them I received no response for 2 of them. The other I was told to read the website, and then no response when I stated I had and still had questions.
Hopefully I cleared up one or two things for you, and as I stated, would appreciate links to any inappropriate community responses on the FG forums.
