D&D General Next Generation VTT

[DarrenShard]

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.

That can definitely be the case, but there are lots of in between cases. Moving around a dungeon means that you want to know what halls you are going down and where you have been, even though combat or other encounters are interspersed through the dungeon. Cities also can have a similar model. Moving through the countyside seems to be the biggest place where the map isn't very interesting in between.

 

[Reynard]

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.

I struggle with this a lot with FG largely because there are not currently good drawing tools available to whip stuff up on the fly (although the new Unity version is getting there). That's probably the biggest change VTTs have had on my GMing: for the first time ever, I am consistently running prepared modules because running 5E off the cuff on FG is much harder for me than in person at the table with a dry erase grid and some markers.

 

[Guest 6801328]

I struggle with this a lot with FG largely because there are not currently good drawing tools available to whip stuff up on the fly (although the new Unity version is getting there). That's probably the biggest change VTTs have had on my GMing: for the first time ever, I am consistently running prepared modules because running 5E off the cuff on FG is much harder for me than in person at the table with a dry erase grid and some markers.

Agreed. The prepared adventures suddenly have a lot more appeal. My group started running TftYP when lockdown started. (And having a blast.)

 

[Greenstone.Walker]

• A toolkit for creating/editing dungeons. (This is probably the hardest part of the whole thing.)

That's the top of my list. I want the digital tool to be as quick at creating encounters as I am with markers and a battlemap. Digitiser tablet and pen support is also pretty high on the list.

It would be great if a tool supported modular dungeons (like the sort of pieces DM Scotty creates with his 2.5D dungeons). I've spent a lot of time and effort printing and cutting out modular pieces from Heroic Maps. If they were available in the VTT, that would be really, really useful.

 

[DarrenShard]

I struggle with this a lot with FG largely because there are not currently good drawing tools available to whip stuff up on the fly (although the new Unity version is getting there). That's probably the biggest change VTTs have had on my GMing: for the first time ever, I am consistently running prepared modules because running 5E off the cuff on FG is much harder for me than in person at the table with a dry erase grid and some markers.

Making your own content either by whipping it up on the fly or preparing it before is always a challenge with maps. Tools for creating maps are hard to build and hard to use. It is amazing how hard it is to get something that is as quick as sketching on a mat, whiteboard or sheet of paper. I do wonder if the answer for digital tools is to make it easy for people to share maps that they make. Lots of people like to make maps and sharing is fun. Still need tools to make it easy to find and integrate a map quickly.

 

[Jd Smith1]

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.

There you're mistaken, IMO.

Being able to navigate through the larger map creates actual suspense; the players have no idea where the enemy is, or might pop out; or where traps lie. Formation and teamwork becomes all-important as they move to keep the soft targets covered, and retaining readiness for an attack. We've spent an entire five-hour session in tactical mode, each player moving his pogs in turn, commiserating, speculating, with fights and ambushes springing up, the party recovering, and moving on (or getting hit by creatures investigating the noise).

You can tell an entirely different story with a VTT, and most importantly, the players will experience it together, with the same image, and watch as events are dictated by their actions and decisions.

Using a high-def high quality map means the players literally see the dungeon clutter for themselves, the moss, puddled water, and cracking stone, leaving the GM free to comment on sounds and smells, while giving much more on-the-spot thought to the party's choices and decisions.

It's the difference between stick drawings and art by Larry Elmore.

 

[Reynard]

Making your own content either by whipping it up on the fly or preparing it before is always a challenge with maps. Tools for creating maps are hard to build and hard to use. It is amazing how hard it is to get something that is as quick as sketching on a mat, whiteboard or sheet of paper. I do wonder if the answer for digital tools is to make it easy for people to share maps that they make. Lots of people like to make maps and sharing is fun. Still need tools to make it easy to find and integrate a map quickly.

I have bought and or swiped hundreds of maps for FG and the problem remains. Trying to fit a pre rendered map into whatever tomfoolery led to needing to roll initiative is much more of a pain than just drawing the thing in my head in a couple minutes.

The other thing FG specifically does not do well (and again Unity seems to have solved this a little) is allow big enough maps for your long range abilities to matter (whether attacks, fast movement or whatever).

I'm not bagging on FG. It has allowed me to play a lot more than I would otherwise, and has allowed me to play higher level games that would be too much trouble without all the automation, but I'm a gamer so I am never happy.

 

[Guest 6801328]

but I'm a gamer so I am never happy.

Aye, there’s the rub.

 

[DarrenShard]

I struggle with this a lot with FG largely because there are not currently good drawing tools available to whip stuff up on the fly (although the new Unity version is getting there). That's probably the biggest change VTTs have had on my GMing: for the first time ever, I am consistently running prepared modules because running 5E off the cuff on FG is much harder for me than in person at the table with a dry erase grid and some markers.

I am curious about your experiences doing the in between of a fully prepared campaign and just running something on the fly. Do you do much whipping up your own content preparing for a session? Is it just too much work to prep? Poor tools? Can't find good maps to download and integrate?

 

[MostlyHarmless42]

Honestly? I've still been finding myself going back to Maptools once the quarantine hit. It's incredibly fiddly and basically demands you learn some basics of macro scripting if you want all the bells and whistles it has to offer, but it's price tag cannot be beat. Though it helps I own physical copies of the books.

What I'd forsee as the future for VTT is most likely VR simulators like Tabletop VR, particularly if their design goal is to emulate the experience of actually sitting at the table. The main hurdle such things have is frankly just the high cost of entry. Most people cannot afford the setup required to adequately run a VR experience, at least currently, and the technology is still not quite refined enough for there to be a focus on driving down the costs enough for this barrier to be lowered yet. There have been a few recent great games developed for PS4 VR and Occulus Rift, but it's still the core problem.