D&D General Next Generation VTT

[Guest 6801328]

As an aside, a few years ago a friend and I got a prototype working for real dice (packed with electronics) that broadcast the result of a roll via bluetooth. We were anticipating being able to roll dice at home, and having the results show up in a VTT. (We gave up when we realized that the patents were already locked up.)

I do agree with the desire to support "plain" 2D maps with a hand-drawn (but nevertheless high-quality) look. However, I'd still want detailed minis on that plain maps.

And I also agree that highly detailed settings encourage more tactical rollplaying and less narrative roleplaying. But I think that's also true with anything that enhances the tactical game, whether that's elaborate tabletop set pieces, or really any map & minis (compared to theater of the mine), as well as more (rather than fewer) character options.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

And I also agree that highly detailed settings encourage more tactical rollplaying and less narrative roleplaying. But I think that's also true with anything that enhances the tactical game, whether that's elaborate tabletop set pieces, or really any map & minis (compared to theater of the mine), as well as more (rather than fewer) character options.

Yeah this is an interesting point.

It's true, but we practically did an accidental study on the differences in 2E/3E/4E, because sometimes we used minis/battlemaps/etc. and so on, and sometimes not. In my experience, which is purely anecdotal of course, the difference between Theatre of the Mind and a tabletop battlemap the DM draws on (i.e. a blank gridded Chessex battlemap or whatever), together with simple tokens, was very small. People still had to imagine virtually everything, and we still got really full role-playing and people not moving their counters constantly out of combat and stuff. Everything above that, the RP and imagination-engagement tended to drop off. Not steeply, but it did clearly drop off. Minis made people forget that the character (especially a monster or NPC) didn't actually look like that from the description. Descriptions of places at odds with what a detailed, colourful map showed, clearly lost out to the map, in that people would forget stuff not actually shown on the map.

I don't think that you need anything but a clear outline map and clearly marked tokens for a strong tactical game, though. In 4E we managed to combine a strong tactical game with strong RP, not because of the rules, particularly, but because we used a battlemap we drew on. TtoM tends to degrade the tactical game and only slightly increases RP engagement - it does however, in my experience, people try a bit more wild-and-wooly stuff in combat, which can be exciting, because everyone cares less about OAs and exact position and so on.

 

[Jd Smith1]

The feature I consider more desirable is: free.

Which is why I use MapTools.

Of course, we use it at a F-t-F game.

 

[Jd Smith1]

I have to agree. Much of what makes D&D interesting is creativity and personal interaction, which is very different than playing a video game. Both D&D and video games are fun to play but I am skeptical that D&D as a video game will ever be anything but a bad video game.

We have used a VTT at our weekly F-t_F game, using LAN, and it has increased the creativity and personal interaction, because now as the GM I'me not reciting blocks of descriptive text in the hope that five people all get the same image. Now they see the room exactly as it is; if they pass an observation roll, enemies pop up. Tension is built because things can literally appear before their eyes.

Tactics become critical, because the GM has been freed up from so much description and can manage the foes with a high degree of planning.

Teamwork and team values are genuinely rewarded.

And its not just for combat; I use it to pull up area maps so we can all look at the map while I indicate information they have obtained.

It has created a night-and-day improvement.

 

[Reynard]

The feature I consider more desirable is: free.

Which is why I use MapTools.

Of course, we use it at a F-t-F game.

I've poured a decent amount of money into Fantasy Grounds and I would still say it is worth the investment by a dollars spent to entertainment received metric. I don't particularly like having to buy things twice, but that's on me since I just prefer having a hard copy to peruse away from the VTT. One day WotC may realize their business won't instantly collapse by making PDFs available. But that's neither here nor there I guess.

My point is for me I prefer to pay for a worthy product that have a shoddy, incomplete or ad-laden free one.

 

[Mort]

* = Like heavily animated dice, for example, a flaming die that "explodes" if you roll a nat 20. Apparently it uses a physics simulation for the dice, too, rather than a conventional random number generator.

Roll20 has heavily animated dice and initially I thought they were pretty neat. Got quickly tired of them though, and turned them off. The animation was causing a distraction on the display, not to mention a noticeable lag.

IRL I love taking a big wad of dice and rolling, both because it's fun and because of the often hilarious looks on players faces when you grab a ton of dice. But IRL I have a nice rolling box off to the side that doesn't interfere with anything else, not so much on the VTT.

 

[Guest 6801328]

Thinking through this some more, and reflecting on some of the posts, I don't think what I personally want is full 3D terrain. I'd want beautiful maps that enhance the game, but still take a backseat to the actual gameplay. (It reminds me of how architects say it's hard to design a museum that is itself a work of art, but that doesn't distract attention from the exhibitions.) Here's what I'm thinking:

• I'd love maps rendered to look like pen & ink on parchment, all beautifully cross-hatched, etc. Maybe a different color "ink" to represent water, or fire, etc, and maybe different textures for different floor types (dirt, flagstone, leafy forest floor, etc.). But these wouldn't be static images; they would be rendered from more simple/abstract floorplans, easily sketched and modified.
• The more advanced dynamic lighting I discussed earlier, that conveys the sense that you can't see behind the pillar, but without the stark black and white boundaries of roll20.
• The maps might also be animated in subtle ways, when the focus is on the map. E.g., a door would still swing open, maybe with a sound effect. Or the DM might "fade in" a secret door when it's discovered.
• On top of that, the "minis" would be fully customizable (c.f. Hero Forge) and rendered in 3D. I think both players and DM would enjoy tweaking and refining their minis. I'd also love some animations, when walking, or just breathing and shifting stance realistically when standing there.
• To get the full effect of the minis, you would still want to be able to move your camera around, so that you're not always looking straight down.

 

[Jd Smith1]

My point is for me I prefer to pay for a worthy product that have a shoddy, incomplete or ad-laden free one.

I prefer a product that isn't shoddy, incomplete or ad-laden.

Which is why I use MapTools. I've tried Fantasy ground, and it has a lower performance level and a higher time investment by the GM (for less returns).

 

[DarrenShard]

Yeah this is an interesting point.

It's true, but we practically did an accidental study on the differences in 2E/3E/4E, because sometimes we used minis/battlemaps/etc. and so on, and sometimes not. In my experience, which is purely anecdotal of course, the difference between Theatre of the Mind and a tabletop battlemap the DM draws on (i.e. a blank gridded Chessex battlemap or whatever), together with simple tokens, was very small. People still had to imagine virtually everything, and we still got really full role-playing and people not moving their counters constantly out of combat and stuff. Everything above that, the RP and imagination-engagement tended to drop off. Not steeply, but it did clearly drop off. Minis made people forget that the character (especially a monster or NPC) didn't actually look like that from the description. Descriptions of places at odds with what a detailed, colourful map showed, clearly lost out to the map, in that people would forget stuff not actually shown on the map.

I don't think that you need anything but a clear outline map and clearly marked tokens for a strong tactical game, though. In 4E we managed to combine a strong tactical game with strong RP, not because of the rules, particularly, but because we used a battlemap we drew on. TtoM tends to degrade the tactical game and only slightly increases RP engagement - it does however, in my experience, people try a bit more wild-and-wooly stuff in combat, which can be exciting, because everyone cares less about OAs and exact position and so on.

There definitely is a balance to figure out between technology helping the game to play more smoothly and becoming a distraction. Fog/dynamic lighting along with token placement is a good example. There a lots of times where the locations of players is just not that important, moving around the countryside or along halls between encounters in a dungeon. If you have to be very pedantic about where to place the tokens in these cases then you lose focus on the story progression. Dynamic fog, while it looks cool, encourages you to twiddle with tokens though to expose what's next. If you are playing remote it also makes the play more disconnected since there isn't a shared player experience about what you can see. This is why we have focused on making fog easy and a shared experience along with making it easy to jump tokens between encounters. Check out Shard Tabletop.

 

[Guest 6801328]

There a lots of times where the locations of players is just not that important, moving around the countryside or along halls between encounters in a dungeon.

I was just thinking about this. I think in many cases I would only want the map for the combats, with something more abstract/evocative in between.

Which is really the same way we tend to use battlemats at our table. All TotM until initiative gets rolled.