Thread: Ridiculous slant against FG
May 19th, 2014, 20:09 #1
- Join Date
- May 2013
Ridiculous slant against FG
Eh, I'm at work and don't have time to respond to this guys cherry-picking.
May 19th, 2014, 22:33 #2
I don't know if I would call it cherry picking. He's just laying out what he likes about Roll20, and given what he's looking for in a VTT, I'd say all of his criticisms of FG have merit. Don't get me wrong, I love FG, but from what he is saying (and I've never used Roll20, only FG and MapTools a little) FG is definitely on the higher technical end of the scale. And that's ok for people who like more automation and functionality. Personally, I'm a software engineer so I'm not afraid to roll up my sleeves and try to make things work when necessary. But there are definitely times when I've wished that FG was a little more approachable, or been trying to do something with FG didn't quite work like I expected. My only complaint was on his point #1, and even then he conceded that he didn't know much about the FG community. I think the FG community is awesome, and I'll keep using FG.
It really comes down to this: If someone chooses a free option that does everything they want it to do, can you really fault them?
May 19th, 2014, 22:43 #3
Also, go back two posts to see his gripes about Roll20.
May 19th, 2014, 22:45 #4
Items 6 - 3 specifically bash FG.
Items 5 and 4 have merit before FG 3 came out. Now FG 3 combines these items into one on the CoreRPG abilities tab of the character sheet - freeform entry of abilities/skills/etc. and easy addition of dice and modifiers without having to code formulas.
Item 3 all depends on how you use Fantasy Grounds - if you don't want lots of stuff in FG don't put it in. Also, I don't think he grasps the fact that it is a freeform windows environment that allows people to close, minimise, move, resize the windows being shown.
And we all know the cost argument (item 6) will never be settled, no matter how many times it is debated.
Each to their own - VTTs are great in allowing people to play pen-and-paper RPGs and, just like GMs having their preferred RPG system, users will have their preferred VTT for all sorts of reasons. If users are happy with a certain level of functionality in a free application then that's great - I'm sure they'll have many hours of enjoyable VTT gaming.
We're going to continue to see Fantasy Grounds bashing - especially now that it is getting much exposure on Steam. FG's strengths are in its ongoing campaign management, character sheet oriented, many ruleset supporting, no further cost, free upgrade, great support, automation if you want it, environment. It doesn't have the visual bells and whistles (I mean in-game mapping, dynamic line-of-site/fog of war) that some other VTTs have - this (and the cost) will always be the main things people will use to throw mud at Fantasy Grounds.
Oh, and a lot of people will bash FG without ever giving it a go. But that is everywhere in all aspects of life, and very much in the RPG/gaming hobby.
FG Con 10Fantasy Grounds Online RPG Convention - April 7-9 2017
Register at www.fg-con.com for all the latest info.
Private Messages: My inbox is forever filling up with PMs. Please don't send me PMs unless they are actually private/personal messages. General FG questions should be asked in the forums - don't be afraid, the FG community don't bite and you're giving everyone the chance to respond and learn!
May 19th, 2014, 22:57 #5
I also think he's overselling point 6 a little bit. Calling $24, or even $40 for the full license, a "substantial outlay" is a little hyperbolic, and certainly subjective. I think the value you get in FG for a one-time $40 hit is phenomenal. When I think of substantial outlay, I think of everything I would have to acquire to effectively GM a real-life game: miniatures, battle mat, dice, rule books, etc. There you're talking a basically bottomless money sink if you let it.
May 19th, 2014, 23:07 #6
- Join Date
- Dec 2006
From my point of view, FG appeals to people that like playing tabletop roleplaying games.
Roll20 appeals to people that like looking things up in rules books and taking and hour to figure out if a prone attacker can thrust his longsword through an arrow slit at a paralyzed defender and what's the roll to hit.... or those that just hand-wave it all and aren't really playing 3.5, 4E, or Pathfinder and are just playing 'cops and robbers' online with all the ambiguity and contention that game of pure imagination always brought. (I shot you! did not! did too!)
Bottom line for me, however: Subscriptions have ZERO merit. NONE.
May 19th, 2014, 23:35 #7
- Join Date
- May 2013
In his own caption of one screenshot he includes the commentary "seems cluttered". As if he doesn't realize that images can be resized? Come now, this is intentional ignorance and is evident in the rest of his post.
May 20th, 2014, 00:14 #8
Fantasy Grounds is to VTT as Campaign Cartographer is to mapping tools. They have a steep learning curve, but if you are willing to learn the process, they can really shine. Roll20 is just "quicker, easier, more seductive." I really can't blame anyone for going to the dark side.
May 20th, 2014, 00:46 #9
- Join Date
- Jul 2010
- Vendsyssel (Denmark)
I unshamedly use Roll20. Why? Because I can't use playing cards when we play Falkenstein. But even then. Everything but the cards and what we do is in Fantasy Grounds. Because FG lets you manage a campaign better than anything else out there.
I guess what I am saying is: When do we get cards in FG???? *grins*
May 20th, 2014, 00:48 #10
If I'm not mistaken there are card mechanics in the Savage Worlds ruleset, or was that the Deadlands set. I remember somebody talking about it.Paul Grosse
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)