What's Wrong with Virtual Tabletop Play?

[rvalle]

When I first started running WLD though Fantasy Grounds a year and a half ago, I did it because I had no other options. Our group had been gameless for years. Even when we had a regular game of once every two weeks I was only able to make about 1 game in 4 (3 kids, a long commute home from the game place, ect).

In chosing to game via a VT I did lose one one of our regular players. But, we gained two more. One a friend that moved out of state and another that was a new person picked up from MMOG's who is also out of state.

We now play once a week on Thursday nights and we have fun doing it. We use either Skype or Teamspeak as voice communication for both in character and out of character talking. Some of the in character talking or /emotes go into Fantasy Grounds. We laugh, roll 'dice' and move 'minis' around a map. All in all it's fun.

Would I rather play with this group face to face? Yeah, I would. But am I willing to give up this group (and lose 2 players) to place face to face instead? No way.

I fully plan on running WLD till they either get out at 20 or have a TPK at which point we'll talk about what to do. Then I'll either pick up an Adventure Path or maybe The Burning Sky and start over again.

P.s. One of the GREAT things about playing with a VT is being able to drop a map into the software and use it to move around on. No more waiting while someone maps out the hallways and room. Combined with Fog-of-War for masking the map and unmasking it as they move around is just great.

rv

 

[DonTadow]

And yet, should you or someone in your group of friends move away, you wouldn't try online gaming to stay in touch with them? To keep them in the game?



Completely agree. I really believe this is one major direction that RPG's are going to go. It makes too much sense as the interent becomes pervasive and gamers find their schedules more and more full. As real life takes hold.

I don't understand why people would look down on what is simply another option for friends and gaming groups to get together, socialize (and it is a social experience online), and play the games that we all love. More options are always better.

It's not that people look down on it, but it is not the same hobby. The biggest component to tabletop rollplaying is the tabletop. Though the world virtual tabletop has tabletop in it, it is really a computer monitor. A big part of the interaction is not there. Muds and chat places have existed for nearly as long as d and d, and I"M sure people enjoy those for alternatives or in addition to their tabletop hobby. But at the end of the day, its not the same. Its not that tabeltop is better than virtual, its that its the real thing.

For me d and d is a hobby, and if i have enough time to get together online for 3 hours, i have enough time to drive an hour and game in person for 2.

 

[sjmiller]

Late October to end of May. That's seven months plus a bit. Bi-weekly, you're looking at 15 sessions a year. To me, that's nowhere near enough gaming to scratch my itch.

I wouldn't mind playing more, but August and September are tied up with performing at the Minnesota Renaissance Festival (all the group members perform there) and June and July are for family vacations and general time spent outdoors. That takes up all the rest of the year. Sure, it may not seem like a lot of gaming time, but the quality far makes up for the quantity.

 

[sjmiller]

And yet, should you or someone in your group of friends move away, you wouldn't try online gaming to stay in touch with them? To keep them in the game?

I would keep in touch with them, but as I said, the expense of doing online gaming is, for me, prohibitive. If they are going to move away, and one played did after our first year, we had a spectacular sendoff for them and their character went off to do other things.

 

[Raloc]

So roleplaying isn't roleplaying unless you have a table? The snobbery expressed by some people in this thread is incredible.

 

[rvalle]

For those interested in giving it a try... there will be an Online Convention happening soon. A convention without the traveling or hotel rooms.

http://www.iconvention.org/

The rumor is that some of the software vendors will have trail versions of their VT software for use during the convention. If you are curious about how good, or bad, an online game is now is your chance to try it out.

rv

 

[Matchstick]

It's not that people look down on it, but it is not the same hobby. The biggest component to tabletop rollplaying is the tabletop. Though the world virtual tabletop has tabletop in it, it is really a computer monitor. A big part of the interaction is not there. Muds and chat places have existed for nearly as long as d and d, and I"M sure people enjoy those for alternatives or in addition to their tabletop hobby. But at the end of the day, its not the same. Its not that tabeltop is better than virtual, its that its the real thing.

For me d and d is a hobby, and if i have enough time to get together online for 3 hours, i have enough time to drive an hour and game in person for 2.

I would make such a drive as well, thus my expressed preference for actually sitting around a table with my friends.

But when real life spreads those friends across the country something has to give. I had to choose between finding a different "tabletop" or finding different friends. I chose to stick with my friends, and I don't regret it a bit.

I disagree that it's not the same hobby. The "interaction" I think you're referring to is something that isn't specific in any way to D&D or even RPG's. Sitting around a table or a room enjoying the company of your friends is something that doesn't require a game at all, but even if it did there are a plethora of card and board games available (in addition to RPG's) that would provide just as effective a backdrop to a night of social interaction as D&D. In fact, a card or board game might be even more effective, as they aren't played on a primarily vocal level as RPG's are, thus leaving more time for chatting.

From the other side, playing D&D as a hobby isn't something that requires non-gaming social interaction at all, it's perfectly valid for a group of people to show up at a table, sit down with a minimum of chatter, and play a focused game of D&D then leave when finished. Those people are certainly D&D hobbyists.

Interaction is certainly something that is a part of most people's D&D games, enough so that many would associate the two together. But it is hardly required to qualify as a D&D or RPG hobbyist.

Playing online eliminates some (not most, not all) of the social interaction you might have if playing in person, but again, that doesn't mean that online players are playing a different game or participating in a different hobby. It simply means that they are enjoying the same hobby through a different medium, like poker players playing online.

 

[Henry]

There's nothing wrong with it, and indeed I've done chat-gaming once or twice; however, I prefer live gaming as my first choice, and would be VERY disinterested if new versions of D&D stopped being available on paper, for instance. NWN2 holds NOTHING to a live session for me, complete with people, body language, shared snacks, OOC jokes, people oohing and aahing at new minis, and all the things you get at social events. While it does hold more "concentrated gaming" (itself a good thing), it's second place to what I get from the live tabletop.

 

[tzor]

Why the distaste for chat based games.

I think if you take the time to analyze the statements of those who hate chat based games they will generally break down to that of a lack of non verbal communication channels. Facial expressions, hand gesutres, body poitions, tone and texture of the voice. Hey what DM doesn't want to see their players nerviously fidget and sweat?

 

[sjmiller]

So roleplaying isn't roleplaying unless you have a table? The snobbery expressed by some people in this thread is incredible.

I pesonally am not saying this. I am saying that virtual gaming is a different type of gaming than face-to-face gaming.