Project Sigil Project Sigil Updates: D&D's 3d Virtual Tabletop

Project Sigil is the upcoming 3D VTT from WotC. From various Gen Con reports --

• Creative Mode lets you prep on the fly or modify pre-made content
• Assets from Baldur's Gate 3 are included, such as the characters as digital miniatures
• Minis have multiple poses but are not animated
• Spells are animated though
• Uses Unreal Engine 5 (or 4, I've seen different reports)
• Launch on PC, mobiles and consoles later
• Closed Beta this fall--sign up here
• DDB subscribers will have greater access

This is the 'creative mode' toolbox, apparently!​

 

[Parmandur]

Why are people saying it doesn't then?

Bit of an equivocation on what we mean by "integration", I think. The platform allows for Beyind stuff to be imported, and has trsckers and templates that can be used to figure out radishes and HP and such, but it is not an enforced, automated rules adjudicator.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Taking time to map things out is no different from any other VTT.

I mean, 3D mapping, even with like fixed floor heights and stuff, and a lot of nice pre-built stuff is hugely more effort than other approaches to mapping, particularly those where you can just have essentially an image with a grid on it. So it is different to other VTTs, both in terms of time required, and fundamental approach. It also requires a far more intensive engine and better developed tools and UI from the VTT itself (which it seems like it probably has, at least).

The one benefit is that some people find it a lot more naturalistic to use 3D maps and really get them. Also if you can share maps with other players for free, that'd be potentially huge, but I don't know if they're doing that - you'd hope so given how Beyond operates. That way a small number of ultra-productive mappers who enjoy it can benefit an entire community, most of whom will be less competent and less enthusiastic. If WotC get in the way too much there they'll be shooting themselves in the foot, even if they mean well. Be interesting to see what they choose to do.

Bit of an equivocation on what we mean by "integration", I think. The platform allows for Beyind stuff to be imported, and has trsckers and templates that can be used to figure out radishes and HP and such, but it is not an enforced, automated rules adjudicator.

Ok so it DOESN'T have direct rules integration. It has indirect rules usage like most VTTs. That's fine with me, but it's not what early info about the 3D VTT said - they wanted it to be more direct, which I admit I was skeptical of. I think in the short-term/near-future this approach is definitely smarter if they want to start out by getting people who play using other VTTs and people who play offline (but do play regularly) to play.

This is kind of a good sign a lot of ways in the sense that it would mean that they weren't trying to like, replace D&D, but rather just add to it. A lot of their earlier talk did sound like they wanted to have not just a VTT, but like, something they could essentially have auto-DM adventures for people (even before AI became a huge buzzword), almost, and that's probably still a longer-term goal (though we shall see if it's obtainable), but it seems like they just want to make a very strong VTT for now.

 

[Parmandur]

Why are people saying it doesn't then?

Knowing that you are not fond of long videos, still this run-down of what Sigil does from a demo in December by an anti-WltC skeptic is interesting: he went in expecting it to be a video game-y, hyper-automated rules engine, not flexible digital minis and models:

We Played The D&D VTT! We Give Our Impressions and Answer Your Questions!

We sat with Chris Cao and Kale Stutzman from Wizards of the Coast and played with the Dungeons & Dragons VTT for several hours. We will give our impressions ...

www.youtube.com

 

[Ruin Explorer]

he went in expecting it to be a video game-y, hyper-automated rules engine

Yeah that was the impression WotC gave with their early talk and even the March 2023 "demo" seemed like it was trying to be that, but it seems like they've changed direction significantly to just a very fancy VTT, which is good.

 

[Oofta]

I mean, 3D mapping, even with like fixed floor heights and stuff, and a lot of nice pre-built stuff is hugely more effort than other approaches to mapping, particularly those where you can just have essentially an image with a grid on it. So it is different to other VTTs, both in terms of time required, and fundamental approach. It also requires a far more intensive engine and better developed tools and UI from the VTT itself (which it seems like it probably has, at least).

The one benefit is that some people find it a lot more naturalistic to use 3D maps and really get them. Also if you can share maps with other players for free, that'd be potentially huge, but I don't know if they're doing that - you'd hope so given how Beyond operates. That way a small number of ultra-productive mappers who enjoy it can benefit an entire community, most of whom will be less competent and less enthusiastic. If WotC get in the way too much there they'll be shooting themselves in the foot, even if they mean well. Be interesting to see what they choose to do.

Maybe, maybe not. It depends on how it works. If I can have set pieces and can just plunk down buildings for my city street, add street lamps or torches, maybe toss in a cart or 3? That could be a lot faster than drawing lines, setting up line of sight, setting up doors etc.. It could take me an hour or more to set up more complex settings in Roll20, depending on how it works it might take minutes in Sigil. Or it could be worse ... we don't know.

Which is the problem I see. A lot of people are making broad claims as fact when it's just speculation.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

If I can have set pieces and can just plunk down buildings for my city street, add street lamps or torches, maybe toss in a cart or 3? That could be a lot faster than drawing lines, setting up line of sight, setting up doors etc.. It could take me an hour or more to set up more complex settings in Roll20, depending on how it works it might take minutes in Sigil.

Have you used tools like this before, like NWN/NWN2? What you're describing in pretty much all previous tools took closer to multiple hours than minutes. There are just so many more steps than you're listing. It's not like setting up a tabletop with 3D terrain, which seems to be what you're envisioning.

So I don't think it's quite as speculative as you're suggesting!

In fact, I'd go as far as to say that, if they've really cut the mapping down to like, literally less than 1/10th of the time it takes in stuff like NWN, that would be not just an iterative improvement, but truly revolutionary. It would be astonishing. I mean, that alone would make this a huge seller! I kind of hope that's the case. But really, it would be huge, amazing. And you'd need a ton of stuff people have tried to develop before with limited success or none to be 100% successful. Not impossible, but it would be amazing.

The UI particularly would have to be soooooooo good and sooooooo different. I'd love to see it.

 

[Oofta]

Have you used tools like this before, like NWN/NWN2? What you're describing in pretty much all previous tools took closer to multiple hours than minutes. There are just so many more steps than you're listing. It's not like setting up a tabletop with 3D terrain, which seems to be what you're envisioning.

So I don't think it's quite as speculative as you're suggesting!

In fact, I'd go as far as to say that, if they've really cut the mapping down to like, literally less than 1/10th of the time it takes in stuff like NWN, that would be not just an iterative improvement, but truly revolutionary. It would be astonishing. I mean, that alone would make this a huge seller! I kind of hope that's the case. But really, it would be huge, amazing. And you'd need a ton of stuff people have tried to develop before with limited success or none to be 100% successful. Not impossible, but it would be amazing.

You're assuming that building maps is similar to games from 20 years ago using tools for a video game which has completely different requirements. I don't know how easy or difficult it will be to do anything with Sigil and neither do you.

 

[WisdomOfWombats]

If it doesn't allow some form of asset import to cover custom or non-MM monsters, I suspect this will be DOA.

If they were really smart, they'd be working with Wizkids to have all the digital miniature models for D&D ready to put into this thing - or as close to all as they could.

If they were really smart, they'd be working with Hero Forge.

By this I mean: I would love to build a custom character in Hero Forge and then be able to import it into Project Sigil. Take a reasonable amout of money to enable this, and I would pay. About the same amount I'd pay for getting the STL file.

 

[Parmandur]

Have you used tools like this before, like NWN/NWN2? What you're describing in pretty much all previous tools took closer to multiple hours than minutes. There are just so many more steps than you're listing. It's not like setting up a tabletop with 3D terrain, which seems to be what you're envisioning.

So I don't think it's quite as speculative as you're suggesting!

In fact, I'd go as far as to say that, if they've really cut the mapping down to like, literally less than 1/10th of the time it takes in stuff like NWN, that would be not just an iterative improvement, but truly revolutionary. It would be astonishing. I mean, that alone would make this a huge seller! I kind of hope that's the case. But really, it would be huge, amazing. And you'd need a ton of stuff people have tried to develop before with limited success or none to be 100% successful. Not impossible, but it would be amazing.

The UI particularly would have to be soooooooo good and sooooooo different. I'd love to see it.

That is, in fact, what the Roll for Combat crew reported in December. Said it was like digital LEGO.

 

[mamba]

I spoke about examples of low hanging fruit that are completely unaddressed yes, but .. "We have literally been told zero details about how or if this will support the GM" doesn't say what support specifically, it points to the empty void. You assumed and once again inserted your assumption into the statement.

no, I did not insert an assumption into my statement, I clarified that my statement should not be taken as one

I stand by what I said, us not having heard about it is not the same as it not being supported. It being supported is pretty far down the line of important features, so if it ends up missing, I very much doubt that it is a death knell. Unless you have more than a lack of information, I do not think there is more to say on this