D&D (2024) I am highly skeptical of the Unreal VTT

[Azzy]

Hasbro buying HeroForge is something they have the money to do and which would be a huge power move.

One which I hope doesn't happen. HeroForge aims to do more than just fantasy miniatures.

It'd also enable them to make miniatures available for all of their monsters and NPCs the same day as their books go on sale, which would be a very big deal for folks who use them, and they could integrate that with their VTT and just export those modified STL files (I assume) directly to that instead.

The STLs themselves wouldn't be useful (it doesn't retain color), but HF does offer a digital file that would probably be useful (it can be used in Tabletop Simulator) assuming the D&D VTT allow for importing that file type.

 

[Hussar]

In fact, it's even better than that @Hussar. If you decide to buy just some pieces of the book, it discounts the remainder of the book. The most you will ever pay is full price, even if you just buy it piecemeal, as it will eventually scale the rest of the book down to next to nothing, at which point, it's cheapest to just buy the remainder as one package.

Ahh, I didn't realize D&D Beyond does that. Fantasty Grounds, to it's credit, uses the same policy.

So, again, since no one is doing micro transactions now, why do people think this is suddenly going to change? WotC has spent the last ten years building up some amazing levels of customer satisfaction after having some abysmal years with 4e. People generally trust WotC, I think. I mean, I used to see "money grab" being aimed at WotC all the time before, but, haven't really seen that in years. Even the current kerfuffle about Spelljammer is more about the new format resulting in less actual material, not so much a "Well, they're just screwing the customer" vibe.

 

[payn]

Ahh, I didn't realize D&D Beyond does that. Fantasty Grounds, to it's credit, uses the same policy.

So, again, since no one is doing micro transactions now, why do people think this is suddenly going to change? WotC has spent the last ten years building up some amazing levels of customer satisfaction after having some abysmal years with 4e. People generally trust WotC, I think. I mean, I used to see "money grab" being aimed at WotC all the time before, but, haven't really seen that in years. Even the current kerfuffle about Spelljammer is more about the new format resulting in less actual material, not so much a "Well, they're just screwing the customer" vibe.

I’m curious too. The vtt would have to be amazeballs for me to pitch in. I can just put in the time on my cheap vtts

 

[Hussar]

I'm not sure how that refutes my point. Yes, hero forge has a wide variety of options to fiddle with. It doesn't guarantee that someone is going to be able to represent their character -- a problem they don't have on a basic whiteboard with a token that just says "B" or whatever.

But, a "B" doesn't really represent their character either. It's just a marker. And, let's be honest here, do you really think that the WotC VTT won't support 2d, top down token views? Of course they will. The whole point of a VTT is to make it as simple as possible to get new users onto the system, and then offer options once people get comfortable doing things.

After all, you don't have to use Line of Sight - that's an optional add on in Roll 20, or just don't bother with it in Fantasy Grounds. OTOH, if you want to use it, like I do, then it's there to be used. The same is going to be true for 3d environments. Yeah, I'm not going to futz about trying to build things in 3d if it takes hours of labour. Just not going to happen. But, if they sell the next adventure module in the VTT, with the option of buying the deluxe 3d version, with all the maps properly done by professional artists? Oh yeah, I'd seriously consider forking over for that.

Then again, currently, WotC maps are very, very simple. I love @Dyson Logos, I really do. But, on a virtual tabletop, those line art maps don't look very good. Which might not be a consideration for some people. That's fine. It is for me. I make and use pretty maps in my game. It's one of the main draws for using a VTT. If you're all about theater of the mind, why wouldn't someone use Zoom and a dice bot? You've got a built in whiteboard and every drawing tool you could need. Can share files. And very reliable.

There are a ton of basic VTT's that do basically just a chat module paired with a whiteboard and a die roller. WotC isn't really aiming for that market though I think. They're aiming for people like me who want a full bells and whistles VTT that actually works all the time with D&D. I'd be begging them to take my money at that point.

 

[Charlaquin]

How many micro transactions are there in the MTG online game? Massively popular platform that’s been running for years. But for some reason people need to think that WotC is going to do a 180 on their behaviour? Why?

In the ancient MTG online? Very few. But in the much more recent MTG Arena? It’s infamous for its predatory economy.

 

[Hussar]

I’m curious too. The vtt would have to be amazeballs for me to pitch in. I can just put in the time on my cheap vtts

Yeah. I get that. Hell, I certainly do it. I'm currently doing up the Cloister of Saint Ramedar (now how's that for a Forgotten Realms call back?) for my Candlekeep game. And, being 100% perfectly fair, to it's credit, Fantasy Grounds is FANTASTIC for this sort of thing. On the DM's end, it couldn't possibly be any easier. Stocking encounters, placing and planning, doing different versions of critters, pre-planning all sorts of stuff. Fantasy Grounds does make it super, super easy to do. To the point where I'm pretty sure I can create a dungeon faster in Fantasy Grounds than I could on paper.

My beefs with FG have nothing to do with the DM's side of things and everything to do on the user side during play.

 

[Reynard]

But, a "B" doesn't really represent their character either. It's just a marker.

My point is that "just a marker" is better as it relates to envisioning the character because it isn't trying but failing to depict it. Similarly, some lines on a whiteboard grid are better than not quite right tiles for depicting the battlefield.

 

[Thomas Shey]

My point is that "just a marker" is better as it relates to envisioning the character because it isn't trying but failing to depict it. Similarly, some lines on a whiteboard grid are better than not quite right tiles for depicting the battlefield.

I think there's some middle ground here. Personally "close enough" is better than "some lines on a whiteboard grid" to me; its less jarring (and honestly, as a GM I rarely have something super-specific that the map needs to do that I can't do with some decent tile sets.)

 

[Hussar]

My point is that "just a marker" is better as it relates to envisioning the character because it isn't trying but failing to depict it. Similarly, some lines on a whiteboard grid are better than not quite right tiles for depicting the battlefield.

Better for you maybe. I play in a game that does mostly theater of the mind and I run one that very much doesn't. I know that I certainly much prefer a game where, if I'm going to be staring at a computer screen for three hours, I would much, much prefer something a little nicer to look at than some lines on a whiteboard and letter tokens.

It's all down to preference. I don't run theater of the mind and have pretty much not done so since 2e. I have the computer right there. It seems rather a waste to not take advantage of the things that having a computer allows.

But, again, all this is very much in the air. Do you honestly think that the WotC VTT won't support whiteboard and letter tokens?

About the only thing I would find to be a non-starter would be if I was not allowed to use my own map images. Other than that? Yeah, they're going to do it right.

 

[Reynard]

.But, again, all this is very much in the air. Do you honestly think that the WotC VTT won't support whiteboard and letter tokens?

In my experience the more graphically intensive the VTT, the less friendly it is to whiteboard and tokens. FG is okay for tokens, for example, but is just terrible at whiteboard.