D&D General Do you want a 3D vtt?

[Haplo781]

Yes but I exclusively play 4e so

 

[Ondath]

I am really big on improvisation, and I really can't see how a 3D VTT can accomodate that playstyle. I feel like it'd force every DM to be a level designer, and I feel like that's one step too far. Even Foundry VTT feels a bit too much sometimes with dynamic lighting (which requires me to put walls, light sources, doors, windows etc.) and automation (automating spells so they immediately ask for saves, associating specific animations with specific spells, making it so casting a summon spell immediately creates a token for the desired creature etc.), and that's only a 2D VTT. I can't imagine needing to do the same with a 3D VTT.

 

[Zaukrie]

Interesting videos about some of the potential problems with a 3d VTT (mostly technological requirements and difficulty of prep)

Everything is bad gets eyeballs.

 

[Zaukrie]

I am really big on improvisation, and I really can't see how a 3D VTT can accomodate that playstyle. I feel like it'd force every DM to be a level designer, and I feel like that's one step too far. Even Foundry VTT feels a bit too much sometimes with dynamic lighting (which requires me to put walls, light sources, doors, windows etc.) and automation (automating spells so they immediately ask for saves, associating specific animations with specific spells, making it so casting a summon spell immediately creates a token for the desired creature etc.), and that's only a 2D VTT. I can't imagine needing to do the same with a 3D VTT.

You don't need to use dynamic lighting. I improv constantly on VTTs. If you use paper maps, how is that different than a VTT? It isn't.

 

[Hussar]

There’s also the point that after a fairly short time it’s pretty easy to amass a fair library of generic maps that already have all that stuff prepped. So sure you need to do a bit of prep at some point but afterwards you have a bunch of maps you can repurpose time and again.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

Well some people will like it automatically because it will have wotc branding on it. Anyway the actual video is about the technological challenges of making a 3d vtt which are significant.

It depends. Depending on the resources being used and they are used for it can be easier than a 2d tabletop.

 

[MonsterEnvy]

I am really big on improvisation, and I really can't see how a 3D VTT can accomodate that playstyle. I feel like it'd force every DM to be a level designer, and I feel like that's one step too far. Even Foundry VTT feels a bit too much sometimes with dynamic lighting (which requires me to put walls, light sources, doors, windows etc.) and automation (automating spells so they immediately ask for saves, associating specific animations with specific spells, making it so casting a summon spell immediately creates a token for the desired creature etc.), and that's only a 2D VTT. I can't imagine needing to do the same with a 3D VTT.

Well there is a good chance all of that stuff will be taken care of for you cause this new one is only going to support D&D.

 

[Oofta]

There’s also the point that after a fairly short time it’s pretty easy to amass a fair library of generic maps that already have all that stuff prepped. So sure you need to do a bit of prep at some point but afterwards you have a bunch of maps you can repurpose time and again.

That's pretty much what I did when I was using a VTT. I generally do exploration with TotM anyway, it's not until the PCs were in a battle location that I had to use a map. It might take a moment to drop on the correct icons, but that's it. As long as there's a way to organize the maps it's fine.

 

[darjr]

use paper? just drop on icons? then why even use a 3d vtt?

 

[Oofta]

Interesting videos about some of the potential problems with a 3d VTT (mostly technological requirements and difficulty of prep)

Gee, more "it's the worst thing ever" clickbait.

Maybe it will suck, maybe it will be great. Hopefully I'll never have to use it, but if I do I'll make the call when it's something other than vaporware.