Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Steel_Wind" data-source="post: 8910464" data-attributes="member: 20741">TO quote what Foundry VTT had to say about this specific topic:<h4>&quot;Thou shalt not animate</h4>The perplexing focus on animation of spell effects is an absurd heuristic as the primary example of what makes a virtual tabletop different from a video game. If differentiating between a VTT and a video game is essential (we contend it is not), there are far more cogent classifiers to use. Are the actions of both player and non-player characters controlled by a human? Does the game experience provide a framework for collaborative storytelling? Can the gamemaster invent new rules on the fly? Surely virtual tabletops and video games alike may both have animation present in the way they communicate information visually to users.Even if a focus on &quot;animation&quot; is removed, it is concerning that Wizards of the Coast would choose which software features are appropriate for a virtual tabletop to implement and which are not.<h4>Be good, but not too good</h4>Under this policy, virtual tabletops should only replicate (but not improve upon) the experience of sitting around a physical table. This myopic perspective neglects that modern VTT software augments the experience of traditional play by heightening the quality of experience for players at the table, regardless of whether the game is played in-person or remotely. For many gamers virtual tabletop software is an integral part of the TTRPG experience and not just a fallback option when a traditional mode of play is unavailable. We would have expected a team who are &quot;gamers and big fans of VTTs&quot; to understand this.Dissecting the clumsy wording of this policy is ultimately a distraction from a more fundamental question. Is it right for an open gaming license to restrict product formats at all? If a goal of the OGL 1.2 license is to foster creativity and further grow the profile of D&amp;D as a game and as a brand, its authors are misled in attempts to suppress technological innovation that can enrich the quality of play or empower storytellers to deliver immersive experiences.&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Steel_Wind, post: 8910464, member: 20741"] TO quote what Foundry VTT had to say about this specific topic: [HEADING=3]"Thou shalt not animate[/HEADING] The perplexing focus on animation of spell effects is an absurd heuristic as the primary example of what makes a virtual tabletop different from a video game. If differentiating between a VTT and a video game is essential (we contend it is not), there are far more cogent classifiers to use. Are the actions of both player and non-player characters controlled by a human? Does the game experience provide a framework for collaborative storytelling? Can the gamemaster invent new rules on the fly? Surely virtual tabletops and video games alike may both have animation present in the way they communicate information visually to users. Even if a focus on "animation" is removed, it is concerning that Wizards of the Coast would choose which software features are appropriate for a virtual tabletop to implement and which are not. [HEADING=3]Be good, but not too good[/HEADING] Under this policy, virtual tabletops should only replicate (but not improve upon) the experience of sitting around a physical table. This myopic perspective neglects that modern VTT software augments the experience of traditional play by heightening the quality of experience for players at the table, regardless of whether the game is played in-person or remotely. For many gamers virtual tabletop software [I]is an integral part of the TTRPG experience[/I] and not just a fallback option when a traditional mode of play is unavailable. We would have expected a team who are "gamers and big fans of VTTs" to understand this. Dissecting the clumsy wording of this policy is ultimately a distraction from a more fundamental question. Is it right for an open gaming license to restrict product formats at all? If a goal of the OGL 1.2 license is to foster creativity and further grow the profile of D&D as a game and as a brand, its authors are misled in attempts to suppress technological innovation that can enrich the quality of play or empower storytellers to deliver immersive experiences." [/QUOTE]

Verification