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

[MonsterEnvy]

OK

But a gibbering mouther isn’t an iteration of a red dragon which isn’t an iteration of a unicorn which isn’t an iteration of a xorn.

Each will need at least a single custom sculpt.

I dunno if that matters if they are included or not.

I was talking about each individual monster. So if you use a Skeleton, there will be several different skeletons to use rather than just one model.

From the sound of the video as well, the Player character models will be customizable.

 

[darjr]

Never mind. You make a good point I’ll leave it at that.

 

[Bravesteel25]

Honestly, my potato of a netbook that I received from my MBA program has a hard enough time keeping things straight in Roll20, so I highly doubt it would handle a 3D VTT very well. That being said, if the VTT runs well I may be convinced to use it if my friends wanted to.

We don't play 5E much at all, so I can't say I'm really in the target audience, especially since I work in IT so the last thing I want to do in my leisure time is deal with electronics and screens.

 

[Zaukrie]

As I think about it, I wonder if selling a Monster Manual really makes sense on a VTT, at least as the primary way to get monster tokens to dms.

It seems more logical to focus on making dming subscription-based: you pay your $15 a month or so and get access to the entire "DM Toolkit (tm)" which includes most monster tokens, basic maps, etc. Enough to run a game. You can also buy complete modules and special tokens for extra money, if you like, but the sub should be all you need to feel fully empowered as a dm. That means ways to add homebrew as well.

Most importantly, there should be a way for players to contribute, as part of their own subscriptions. So if each of your 5 players puts in an extra $3 a month, you get the toolkit for free.

There might be a way to buy the MM for lifetime access, but then you'd need to buy each new MM package (and other sets like a book of magic items) as they come out. The subscription would just be all the non-exclusive monsters (exclusives mostly being named npcs from adventures)

I'd bet good money it is a subscription.....which I pay for now on DnDBeyond, as do most of my players (since they play in more than 1 campaign). Subs are the real key to predictable money, which is what the markets want. Predictable income.

 

[Malmuria]

I don't use dnd beyond, but from what I understand they use a combination of a subscription and a la carte pricing model.

In terms of how they might proceed in the future, I think if you purchase the MM on dndbeyond, and get the 3d models if you pay the vtt subscription, I don't consider that getting the 3d models for free; you are getting them for the price of the subscription. To maximize revenue those subscriptions would be tiered: a basic subscription gives you access to the vtt plus the option of adding monster models a la carte, a more premium subscription gives you all the models for products purchased on dndbeyond, etc.

 

[MNblockhead]

Heh.

None of us are students and we’re also in our 40’s. But thanks for the condescension.

Like I said, if you need three monitors to run your game, that’s far, far too much for anything I’d be interested in.

It isn't a matter of NEEDING, but it sure is nice. I like to have at least two screens. One for the VTT and one for rules. Normally I'm running from work accommodations so I'm pretty much stuck with a TV connected to my laptop by HDMI. But if I was running games from a home office, I would use a third for additional reference material or popping out controls or charactersheets into their own windows to keep the view of the "table" cleaner. Players have less need for more than one screen, but I could see even them wanting to have one screen dedicated to the battlemap and the other for their character sheet and reference material.

 

[MNblockhead]

(Deleted - accidental double post)

 

[Malmuria]

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

 

[MonsterEnvy]

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

I don’t know I think we have to actually see more before assuming it sucks like this video does.

 

[Malmuria]

I don’t know I think we have to actually see more before assuming it sucks like this video does.

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.

 

[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.