Project Sigil Sigil, WotC 3D vtt game automation no more?

[Dire Bare]

Yeah Automation is not going away.

It's not going away, no. Nor should it.

It's about . . . what is the right amount of automation? And of course, the line is in a different place for everybody. But WotC is finding that perhaps less is more . . .

I want to be able to cast a spell from the D&D books and have the effect automatically fill the appropriate amount of squares on the map for one thing . . .

 

[SteveC]

It sounds like they are having problems with the automation, which isn't surprising. If the goal of this project is to make this the default style of play for the game, you're going to need them.

If you compare this to Foundry, which has very strong automation in D&D (and near 100% automation in PF2) there really is no comparison. I get how a lot of experienced players and DMs are interested in a very bare-bones VTT but for new people? Help them play the game and automate things.

I obviously have no idea what the final product is going to look like but this isn't a good look (in my opinion) for the flagship product of this edition.

 

[Mort]

Master Tier subscribers have access to WAY more stuff in the alpha. This is definitely an attempt to get more MT subs out there long term.

I just want 3d maps pre made (and easy to make easy ones), integration with dndbeyond (whatever I own there is usable or just happens in the VTT), and a good turn tracker. Some cool animations would be nice. But I want to apply my own damage and "hits", but that's a discussion that will drive this off topic....

I'd be good with very little 3d, other than minis and a few walls/doors/props. I don't need full 3d.

The tool is pretty decent as is, but not close. It sounds like the Feb update will be quite nice.

And you get ALL of that (minus the 3d) with Maps!

I'm in the Project Sigil Beta too and, every time I boot it up, I play around with it for a bit -and just go back to Maps.

Right now, Sigil is really pretty, but it's clunky, IMO has a huge learning curve and I could barely see running a test encounter in it much less an adventure.

 

[Zaukrie]

It sounds like they are having problems with the automation, which isn't surprising. If the goal of this project is to make this the default style of play for the game, you're going to need them.

If you compare this to Foundry, which has very strong automation in D&D (and near 100% automation in PF2) there really is no comparison. I get how a lot of experienced players and DMs are interested in a very bare-bones VTT but for new people? Help them play the game and automate things.

I obviously have no idea what the final product is going to look like but this isn't a good look (in my opinion) for the flagship product of this edition.

It's alpha. What are you expecting?

And DND isn't close to automated in foundry without lots of modules you need to configure

 

[Zaukrie]

And you get ALL of that (minus the 3d) with Maps!

I'm in the Project Sigil Beta too and, every time I boot it up, I play around with it for a bit -and just go back to Maps.

Right now, Sigil is really pretty, but it's clunky, IMO has a huge learning curve and I could barely see running a test encounter in it much less an adventure.

Yes. And?

I agree with you assessment of sigil right now. I haven't even tried much, as it's complex.

 

[Mort]

Yes. And?

I agree with you assessment of sigil right now. I haven't even tried much, as it's complex.

Just that Sigil is going to have to get MUCH easier to use at some point - I'm sure WoTC is not going for a product that only the most hardcore users will use.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Just that Sigil is going to have to get MUCH easier to use at some point - I'm sure WoTC is not going for a product that only the most hardcore users will use.

I will point out here that this particular issue has killed countless software projects.

I.e. "We can make a tool that's powerful enough to be worth using, but we can't make it sufficiently usable to a non-hardcore user".

One of the products we use at work, it's incredible but is stuck in that trap, design-wise. It's very powerful, but they've been trying to make it more accessible for years, and just have never succeeded in finding a way to do that which isn't just limiting functionality pretty hard, which then begs the question, why even use this particular product? So despite first-mover advantage, it remains less popular than it should be.

I'd personally suggest all the tools I'm aware of which are analogous to (but admittedly not the same as) the 3D VTT are fairly challenging to use.

None of this is to say they shouldn't try. They should.

But you might need some kind of truly novel thought or approach in terms of UI in order to make this genuinely accessible.

It's alpha. What are you expecting?

The problem is, if something is hard-to-use in alpha, it's often because, fundamentally, the developers don't have any big ideas on how to make it easier to use. Not always. Some software does genuinely become much easier to use as it goes on - but my personal experience (which is just that and nothing more), is that the opposite is more often true. Alpha is not feature-complete, generally, and doesn't have the detailed/fiddly features that might be added later on, to meet requirements, so if it's already hard-to-use, you can't necessarily expect that to vastly improve. The UI will probably get refined, but refining a UI won't make "clunky" or "hard-to-use" into "accessible" or "friendly", it'll just make it slightly less painful.

 

[Mort]

I will point out here that this particular issue has killed countless software projects.

I.e. "We can make a tool that's powerful enough to be worth using, but we can't make it sufficiently usable to a non-hardcore user".

One of the products we use at work, it's incredible but is stuck in that trap, design-wise. It's very powerful, but they've been trying to make it more accessible for years, and just have never succeeded in finding a way to do that which isn't just limiting functionality pretty hard, which then begs the question, why even use this particular product? So despite first-mover advantage, it remains less popular than it should be.

Yeah, The main software we use at work costs about 4-5 TIMES (per year) that of it's competitors. The competing products we have tried are easily as or more powerful and can accomplish as much or more than the one we use.

BUT the one we use is just that much more user friendly to the point that no one is willing to switch, even at a substantial savings. From what I've seen, we are not alone, and the software we use has a majority of the market share (at least in my area) despite being MUCH more expensive. Ease of use counts for A LOT.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Yeah, The main software we use at work costs about 4-5 TIMES (per year) that of it's competitors. The competing products we have tried are easily as or more powerful and can accomplish as much or more than the one we use.

BUT the one we use is just that much more user friendly to the point that no one is willing to switch, even at a substantial savings. From what I've seen, we are not alone, and the software we use has a majority of the market share (at least in my area) despite being MUCH more expensive. Ease of use counts for A LOT.

Yeah we're kind of in a flipped situation - we use the most expensive (albeit more like 2x than 4x more) and most powerful tool, but if it wasn't for the fact that we use the powerful stuff only it can do (and that competitors keep saying they will add, but not doing so), we'd have gone to one of the cheaper and easier-to-use competitors, particularly because it's so much easier to find people who are familiar with them.

 

[Zaukrie]

Can't report on the new version, as it is under maintenance, for a long time now. Pretty bad timing on their part.