D&D General Maps on D&DBeyond

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Amy Dallen is a sheer delight and frankly I wish my HR would hire her to record all their presentations. Her radiant positivity always makes me feel better about my day.

She is on a lot of episodes of Um, Actually and is 100% the same happy person there -- except when she gets a D&D question wrong and looks like she wants to die.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

There's a whiff of vapor around the 3D VTT today.

Is there though?

This video is from less than two weeks ago, for example:



This is from 5 months ago:



So I'm not really sure I buy "vapourware" about the 3D VTT. If you'd said that in, say, March, sure. But at the very least they have some kind of semi-functional product, which if the first video is correct, is considerably more developed than the 4E 3D VTT ever got to be.

Vapourware traditionally indicates a product that is purely talked about, or where only non-interactive demos are shown, and neither of those seems to be the case here.

I think the issue with 3D VTT isn't that it's vapourware, it's that it's unclear who the actual audience for it is. Ironically in direct contrast, Maps has a very obvious audience - DMs who use D&D Beyond, and who either use a VTT and aren't super-happy with it, or don't use a VTT (particularly because of how fiddly they are). I don't think Maps is even basically usable yet (it needs super-basics like drawing tools, but they're coming soon, supposedly), but at least the audience is clear.

It seems with the 3D VTT, WotC is simultaneously trying to maybe get groups who play offline or with other VTTs onboard with the 3D VTT, but also to maybe provide a platform where people who don't have existing D&D games can meet and up and play, all whilst encouraging the maximum possible spending on MTX bling, and I'm just not sure how cogent that vision is. I'm fairly confident that we will see a functioning 3D VTT, but whether it'll actually be worth using? Wholly separate question.

 

[Demetrios1453]

Yeah, okay, it's incredibly easy to use, at least as far as setting up an encounter goes. Stupidly easy, because, as stated, I'm technology stupid and I am having no trouble intuiting it.

Ummm....this is a pretty incredible feature to just get added to my subscription. DDB was already an incredible bargain.

I'm thinking the same thing. As I said, as long as you have a map (preferably, but not necessarily, one that has a grid), it takes just a few minutes to upload and set to the right scale. I played around with the fog of war feature, but I need to test it with my players, but it seems very easy too (although a square paint/erase function to get to corners the round one can't would be nice).

 

[Oofta]

Is there though?

This video is from less than two weeks ago, for example:



This is from 5 months ago:



So I'm not really sure I buy "vapourware" about the 3D VTT. If you'd said that in, say, March, sure. But at the very least they have some kind of semi-functional product, which if the first video is correct, is considerably more developed than the 4E 3D VTT ever got to be.

Vapourware traditionally indicates a product that is purely talked about, or where only non-interactive demos are shown, and neither of those seems to be the case here.

I think the issue with 3D VTT isn't that it's vapourware, it's that it's unclear who the actual audience for it is. Ironically in direct contrast, Maps has a very obvious audience - DMs who use D&D Beyond, and who either use a VTT and aren't super-happy with it, or don't use a VTT (particularly because of how fiddly they are). I don't think Maps is even basically usable yet (it needs super-basics like drawing tools, but they're coming soon, supposedly), but at least the audience is clear.

It seems with the 3D VTT, WotC is simultaneously trying to maybe get groups who play offline or with other VTTs onboard with the 3D VTT, but also to maybe provide a platform where people who don't have existing D&D games can meet and up and play, all whilst encouraging the maximum possible spending on MTX bling, and I'm just not sure how cogent that vision is. I'm fairly confident that we will see a functioning 3D VTT, but whether it'll actually be worth using? Wholly separate question.

I think there's a place for both "maps" and the 3D VTT. Maps is kind of like a gateway drug or for those that just want something simple. Kind of a bare minimum functional online mapping tool for those who don't want to spend hours learning how to use the current crop of tools and then hours prepping maps. Been there, done that. If Maps had been available during COVID when we were gaming online it would have been a godsend, even if I did get decent at Roll20.

The 3D VTT will be a step up visually from current VTTs (unless there's some I don't know about) and potentially easier to use. But it's kind of like how car companies have the run of the mill vehicles and the luxury brand. There's room for both if done well.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

That it's always been the plan doesn't make it a good plan or make them not competing products.

Yup. I've been at firms where competing products existed, and often technically, it was "the plan", because lines had been drawn in the sand at some meeting and "everyone agreed" that Product X was going to serve roles A, B and C, and Product Y was going serve roles D, E, F and G. But when things actually go live they tend to get messier because it turns out product X is drastically easier to use or Product Y is just so well-featured for role B, even at firms with very quality, highly-qualified people working at them. Even with the legal sector (not the software sector!), the absolute wars I've seen fought over control or primacy of software/tech are wild. I've seen super-senior people quit or even start rival companies over software territory scuffles.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

potentially easier to use

Whilst on reflection I generally agree with your sentiment, I have to say I'm very skeptical about whether, ultimately, a fully-featured 3D VTT could ever be easier to use from a DM's perspective than a really simplistic and accessible 2D VTT. I guess we'll see! Easier from a player's perspective, I suspect that could be doable.

I do agree that Maps is quite exciting. I bounced off Roll 20 pretty hard myself, I'd honestly rather like, share my screen with MSPaint on it or something but this looks more like my speed (just a few more basic features needed - but all the ones I want are on their list!).

 

[Oofta]

Yup. I've been at firms where competing products existed, and often technically, it was "the plan", because lines had been drawn in the sand at some meeting and "everyone agreed" that Product X was going to serve roles A, B and C, and Product Y was going serve roles D, E, F and G. But when things actually go live they tend to get messier because it turns out product X is drastically easier to use or Product Y is just so well-featured for role B, even at firms with very quality, highly-qualified people working at them. Even with the legal sector (not the software sector!), the absolute wars I've seen fought over control or primacy of software/tech are wild. I've seen super-senior people quit or even start rival companies over software territory scuffles.

Software developers having different ideas of how to solve problems is just kind of par for the course. Put two software developers in a room and they'll likely come out with at least 3 different and completely valid solutions.

Whilst on reflection I generally agree with your sentiment, I have to say I'm very skeptical about whether, ultimately, a fully-featured 3D VTT could ever be easier to use from a DM's perspective than a really simplistic and accessible 2D VTT. I guess we'll see! Easier from a player's perspective, I suspect that could be doable.

I do agree that Maps is quite exciting. I bounced off Roll 20 pretty hard myself, I'd honestly rather like, share my screen with MSPaint on it or something but this looks more like my speed (just a few more basic features needed - but all the ones I want are on their list!).

Time will tell! Truth be told, for the most part I could have a dozen or so maps that would suit my personal needs because I do most exploration as ToTM. So if I could buy a predefined city block with buildings (interior and exterior) mapped out along with generic outdoor and cavern maps, maybe some temples where I could swap out some visuals I'd be all set.

My ideal tool would be something like a big Lego set where I just buy a prefabbed location but can then pull it apart and rebuild a bit as necessary. Ideally I'd have line of sight controlled simply by putting a wall "block" down without having to go through the hassle of drawing a wall and then going back through and implementing sight lines. There should just be "door" and "window" widgets I can throw in and use. It will never be as easy as Maps, but it could be far easier to use than what I've seen using the current crop of VTTs.

I vastly prefer playing in person, but if I had to do remote again? I'm with you. I'd drop Roll20 and use something more simplistic like Maps in a hot second. We'll see what happens, I'm certainly not going to hold my breath waiting for the perfect app.

 

[LordEntrails]

I wonder if this is what Mike Schley was hinting at earlier?

100% that is Mike's artwork being used. Not that his style isn't popular to mimic (and with CC3+ it's almost possible). But yea, that's his art.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Two separate products in the same space are technically rivals, even if everyone on each team loves each other.

No.

There is going to be some portion of the user base larger than zero that will opt to not use the 3D VTT because they're already paying for a master subscription and find the 2D VTT to be just fine for their purposes. That is absolutely competition.

My friend, we don’t even know how the 3dVtt will be gated. It may very well also use the master sub. That isn’t competition, it’s a product getting even better and broader in use cases.

That it's always been the plan doesn't make it a good plan or make them not competing products.

It does indicate that launching the alpha of one feature doesn’t indicate that the other will be vapor ware.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I think there's a place for both "maps" and the 3D VTT. Maps is kind of like a gateway drug or for those that just want something simple. Kind of a bare minimum functional online mapping tool for those who don't want to spend hours learning how to use the current crop of tools and then hours prepping maps. Been there, done that. If Maps had been available during COVID when we were gaming online it would have been a godsend, even if I did get decent at Roll20.

The 3D VTT will be a step up visually from current VTTs (unless there's some I don't know about) and potentially easier to use. But it's kind of like how car companies have the run of the mill vehicles and the luxury brand. There's room for both if done well.

Yep. Very few people see the Lexus product line as competing with the Toyota product line, either.

But the 3D and 2d solutions via DDB compliment eachother even more than that. I might build an immersive castle in 3D full of traps and dressing that can be opened and animated etc, with animated great weapon dragons or whatever, but I’m not gonna do all that for the 2 hour session we throw together in a Wednesday because our normal plans got canceled, I’m gonna throw a map on the 2d maps tool from our campaign and load everything up, be up and running in 10 minutes.