Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Sneak Peek At Ghosts of Saltmarsh Maps
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Tom B1" data-source="post: 7776290" data-attributes="member: 6879023"><p>I don't usually see a problem at the table, but then again the players often like to just roll a physical dice. We use voice for narrating, conversing, etc. The only typing needed is for private messages. </p><p></p><p>I'm also not saying I'm against 'the magic' in some VTT designs. </p><p></p><p>BUT, a) can't afford it (pretty much a deal breaker)</p><p> b) Integration is almost always to RAW and I can't think of a campaign I've run in my last 32 years of GMing (maybe some in the 6 years before that in B/E/X) or that didn't include additional rules so often I can't use a fully integrated product as well as I can use a less integrated one in support of my games</p><p> c) For some of the lesser supported games (Traveller for one, Spycraft/Stargate, others), there either isn't any support or there isn't complete support</p><p></p><p>Almost uniformly, as Rob Twohy explained, it takes a long time to add a new chunk of rules and associated information from a product. For homebrew, that can also be true. For me to duplicate the Player's Option version of 2E that we used to play with each cleric type or paladin type built as a separate class using Skills and Powers and then supporting the Channeling magic system... well, in most systems, that would be a crippling number of hours if the game could support it. </p><p></p><p>So, there are my three reasons for generally not being interested in closely integrated automation. I step too far off the reservation almost every time I run a game to be effectively supported by close integration to be more than a hindrance.</p><p></p><p>I'll throw in one bonus reason: </p><p> d) Players inevitably want to step off the railroad in ways that break or avoid key parts of the adventure or that would require new encounters be created on the fly. That happens so often with my players, a set piece 3 Act structure or a Railroad (common in D&D modules) would never work. I always end up having to ad hoc encounters (I can estimate and pre-prepare about 40% I think, but the other 60% are surprising in some respect). This is less true in a dungeon, but in outdoor adventures or city adventures or mysteries or chases or any number of other sorts of less railroad-ish structures, you get frequent non-standard. </p><p></p><p>My D&D worlds tend to be more sandbox with modules giving bases of operations and some dungeons, but a lot of the stuff between base and dungeon are usually ad hoc. City stuff is heavily ad hoc. And anything not driven by me (rather than players reacting, they are taking initiative) is ad hoc. I can usually know who some of the enemies/NPCs will be, but not where or how the encounters will occur. </p><p></p><p>So, VTT with tight integration isn't as great a benefit for me as it might be for a DM and players who just want to run dungeon delves or who want to follow railroads (however gentle) in module design. Sandbox style play is much less suited to integrated pre-made encounters.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tom B1, post: 7776290, member: 6879023"] I don't usually see a problem at the table, but then again the players often like to just roll a physical dice. We use voice for narrating, conversing, etc. The only typing needed is for private messages. I'm also not saying I'm against 'the magic' in some VTT designs. BUT, a) can't afford it (pretty much a deal breaker) b) Integration is almost always to RAW and I can't think of a campaign I've run in my last 32 years of GMing (maybe some in the 6 years before that in B/E/X) or that didn't include additional rules so often I can't use a fully integrated product as well as I can use a less integrated one in support of my games c) For some of the lesser supported games (Traveller for one, Spycraft/Stargate, others), there either isn't any support or there isn't complete support Almost uniformly, as Rob Twohy explained, it takes a long time to add a new chunk of rules and associated information from a product. For homebrew, that can also be true. For me to duplicate the Player's Option version of 2E that we used to play with each cleric type or paladin type built as a separate class using Skills and Powers and then supporting the Channeling magic system... well, in most systems, that would be a crippling number of hours if the game could support it. So, there are my three reasons for generally not being interested in closely integrated automation. I step too far off the reservation almost every time I run a game to be effectively supported by close integration to be more than a hindrance. I'll throw in one bonus reason: d) Players inevitably want to step off the railroad in ways that break or avoid key parts of the adventure or that would require new encounters be created on the fly. That happens so often with my players, a set piece 3 Act structure or a Railroad (common in D&D modules) would never work. I always end up having to ad hoc encounters (I can estimate and pre-prepare about 40% I think, but the other 60% are surprising in some respect). This is less true in a dungeon, but in outdoor adventures or city adventures or mysteries or chases or any number of other sorts of less railroad-ish structures, you get frequent non-standard. My D&D worlds tend to be more sandbox with modules giving bases of operations and some dungeons, but a lot of the stuff between base and dungeon are usually ad hoc. City stuff is heavily ad hoc. And anything not driven by me (rather than players reacting, they are taking initiative) is ad hoc. I can usually know who some of the enemies/NPCs will be, but not where or how the encounters will occur. So, VTT with tight integration isn't as great a benefit for me as it might be for a DM and players who just want to run dungeon delves or who want to follow railroads (however gentle) in module design. Sandbox style play is much less suited to integrated pre-made encounters. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Sneak Peek At Ghosts of Saltmarsh Maps
Top