Fantasy Grounds has some competition...

[osarusan]

https://www.d20pro.com

I just saw this earlier today. Wow.

It's definitely not as polished as FG. There's no 3d dice, the character sheets are kind of ugly, and the window graphics aren't nearly as pretty as FG. But those mapping tools look pretty sweet.

I don't think it quite meets up to Fantasy Grounds' quality just yet, but in time I could see this posing a real threat, especially with maps like that. It's cheaper than FG too, at $10/$30 for the lite/full licenses.

[Griogre]

This has been around a while - I played in a demo game with it about 2-3 iCons ago. Its was good but was strictly limited to d20 because it resolves everything automatically. I think it's a better than Klooge for d20 - which is similar. I think the playing experience is good but I was doubtful of the amount of effort required for the DM to input things.

[drahkar]

Personally I don't really see this as a major competition to FG2. Its been around a long time and it hasn't gotten much more polished than what you see. Added to the fact that it is 100% limited to d20 based systems. Well. Its just not something I foresee being a major competitor anytime soon.

[osarusan]

Interesting. I had just heard of it today but its been around for a while. Perhaps you're right and its no threat at all. :-)

That's good news for Fantasy Grounds, of course, but I do think it would be a good idea to look at the successful parts of other VTTs to seek to improve Fantasy Grounds.

[Valarian]

I think the possible threats come from the applications like iTabletop, though EpicTable could also be a contender. I don't like the iTabletop model though (runs off a server) and I think there could be definite copyright issues with the model used (uploading PDFs to their server for sharing with players). I like the webcam and voice communication concept though. I'd like to see that option incorporated in to FGII, possibly as an optional add-on (if that's possible?).

[Lysander]

If it don't play Savage Worlds, I ain't interested...
:D

[ddavison]

We do keep an eye on the competition and I thought D20Pro looked pretty good. It is doubtful we will be able to make FG better than all the competition in every aspect. We strive to make it better in as many as aspects as we can, though. One major feature I think is important is getting official relationships with publishers so we can provide legally downloadable modules and support files for popular systems. To do that, you have to have an architecture to support that and you need to be willing to invest the time to establish those relationships.

[osarusan]

Official support is definitely a big deal! Thank you for working on that. :) That kind of support definitely makes FG stand out against the other tables in my book, and I've really enjoyed the Iron Heroes and Chaosium modules I've downloaded that cam with lots of support for FG.

While these other VTTs have really flashy videos and sites, I think of the big limitations they have is universal in all VTTs -- the fact that none of these beautiful, fancy battle maps are easy and quick to make. They look awesome on the screen once they're done, but actually inputting them into the program involves copying, pasting, editing in Photoshop/Gimp, attaching a grid and scaling it to the right size, resizing the tokens to fit the grid, importing all the characters/NPCs/monsters and their stats into the map and battle tracker... and so on. It's quite time consuming.

It sounds like getting the official relationships with publishers is pretty key to that aspect of the game, so hopefully that will help FG keep the edge over the competition.

[Demogorgon]

If FG2 wants to keep up with the competition they are going to have to really work on the Map and the chat window. At the moment the map is far too 'clunky' and lacks a lot of features. I really expected more from a DirectX app.

To be honest when I see the map features of that d20pro system, I almost want to go there and use it.

[osarusan]

Well I definitely agree that FG has to do some extra work on the map and chat features. But FG's character sheet is pretty awesome, and it looks a lot nice than d20pro's. I guess it depends on what features you use most. I find myself using the sheets and combat tracker in FG every single time, but shying away from the map except for very important battles -- precisely for that reason; it takes so much time to set up and is not so easy to manipulate that it's more trouble than it's worth to use it for minor confrontations.

On the other hand, I doubt that setting up a map is really *that* much easier on d20 pro, though I haven't tried it out yet.

[Jharii]

I would just be happier being able to make the maps wider/taller so they fill up the entire screen. I don't know what the "Expand Map" functionality even does, as every time I use it, FG crashes.

FoW would be nice, too.

[Demogorgon]

Well I definitely agree that FG has to do some extra work on the map and chat features. But FG's character sheet is pretty awesome, and it looks a lot nice than d20pro's. I guess it depends on what features you use most. I find myself using the sheets and combat tracker in FG every single time, but shying away from the map except for very important battles -- precisely for that reason; it takes so much time to set up and is not so easy to manipulate that it's more trouble than it's worth to use it for minor confrontations.

On the other hand, I doubt that setting up a map is really *that* much easier on d20 pro, though I haven't tried it out yet.

The setup of the map for me isn't the problem. The map should allow the player to scroll, rotate, and zoom in/out. It should be very smooth and quick just like most DirectX games. I would really like to see the kind of scrolling that your typical rts has. A simple dungeon tile engine would go along way as well.

I do agree that the character sheets and combat tracker are great and I would miss that if I tried to use another system.

[Valarian]

Personally I like the character sheet and chat focus of FGII. Too many VTTs are map based and have little other funtionality. They're great for roll-play, not so good for role-play. FGII has the right focus for role-play.

[ddavison]

We definitely have plans to improve upon the map functionality. It may never fully do maps to the level of the VTTs which focus on that primarily, but I think we can strike a good balance between functionality and ease and play.

[Fenloh]

I like FG as it is, and even if some Map features in other VTTs are "Bigger and Better", FG does not really lack many more functions for the maps.

I try to look at new VTTs all the time, and none is so complete and has so many possibilites then FG. It takes a bit time, but you can create almost anything that helps you in dming the game or play it for that matter.

Do not only look at the VTT itself, but also at the great community and also the programmers/developers, who are doing a great job.

Fenloh

[Valarian]

My personal preference for FGII would be to see more and more rules systems covered. The big pull for FGII is the publisher buy-in. FGII covers a large number already. With more material, especially the official adventures, FGII has something the others don't. This isn't to say I wouldn't like to see improvements in the interface. However, I think only iTabletop and, perhaps, Battlegrounds rivals FGII in this area currently. I'd like to see a voice and webcam option for FGII. I'd like to see true fog-of-war (dynamic) masking of maps. However they're future developments, maybe even enough change to the underlying code to be FG3 type stuff. The product I see is still, in my opinion, the best on the market - especially for the way I want to play and run games.

[osarusan]

We definitely have plans to improve upon the map functionality. It may never fully do maps to the level of the VTTs which focus on that primarily, but I think we can strike a good balance between functionality and ease and play.

I didn't mean to crap all over Fantasy Ground's map features, I just think it could some improvement is all. :p So with that in mind, let me just point out what would make me LOVE to FG maps. It's not about MORE features, its about improving the existing features and making them more usable. For me, a few minor tweaks would make a HUGE difference.

For one, I don't like the radial menu on the maps... frankly it's too much clicking and sliding, and when I have a number of windows and am switch back and forth between a PDF with a module in it and my music server and skype, etc etc, I don't want to have to be bothered with extra mouse clicks and movements, let alone remembering exactly where in each radial submenu the specific option I want is... A couple of unobtrusive icons along the bottom or top of the map window would completely solve that problem! (My players also often forget how to use the arrows/drawing features and so I have to talk them through it -- forgive us, we're getting old!)

Drawing mode is decent, but I'd like the option at the very least to vary line thickness. Support for wacom pressure would be wonderful, but not necessary for me -- I just need to be able to make thick lines at times, because the tiny 1 pixel wide line is sometimes impossible to read on a dark or a busy map.

The grid is great when it works, but it's so hard to get it exactly right to line up with a map that has a pre-drawn grid. Once I lay down the grid I'd like the ability to drag and adjust it rather than having to delete it and start over.

Mask mode: I really wish there was on option to re-mask certain areas instead of having to delete the mask and start all over again with it. That would simplify it so much when there's a complex dungeon to unmask.

Tokens at the moment are still a major pain when they come in different sizes. Perhaps when laying a token on the map it should default itself to a 1x1 square on the grid rather than using its pixel size. I have some beautiful tokens, but there's nothing more frustrating than trying to lay down 24 skeletons on the map and then manually having to resize each and every one of them before combat can resume. (What's more, the combat track never seems to remember what scale I last sized the tokens too, so I have to re-do it every single time. Terribly frustrating!)

One more thing which would be SUPER awesome would be some kind of "line of sight" mode, which could allow you to designate "walls" and such on maps that block line of site. Sort of like an advanced mask mode, the player characters could only see the map in a certain radius around their character, and anything blocked by walls or distance would fade out. Obviously this is a lot more advanced and I wouldn't expect it to be done easily (which is why I include it at the end as more of a wish than anything else).

Anyway, other than the last little wish of an idea, I don't think those first few suggestions are too much to hope for in a somewhat near-future release of FG. Except for those few points, the program makes my internet game so incredibly easy to run and I've never once wished I was using a different program.

[Leonal]

Mask mode: I really wish there was on option to re-mask certain areas instead of having to delete the mask and start all over again with it. That would simplify it so much when there's a complex dungeon to unmask.


You can already do this by holding ctrl while in mask mode to cover up areas. (The line should switch to blue while drawing instead of red).

By looking at the 2.7 test notes this will be improved even further it seems.

[Moon Wizard]

Osarusan,

Several of the items you mentioned will be improved with 2.7.
* Individual token scaling is allowed, and remembered between sessions. Also, it is tied to the CT in the 4E ruleset.
* Toolbar added to images for changing modes (mask, draw, erase), editing grid (shift, increase/decrease) and mass targeting (allies, non-allies, clear).
* Mask mode defaults to box selection.

Also, you can create pointers very quickly be holding the left and right mouse buttons together. Use the modifier keys for non-arrow pointers.

Line of sight is an interesting idea, and has been discussed many times on the forums. The problem is that line of sight requires a lot of extra setup for the gamemaster to apply the "walls" to the map image. Another idea I like involves a double mask layer (basically a mask and a fog of war), but then you would need to implement lighting and various sight types. All the ideas are quite complex to manage, but I'm always looking for ideas on how to make it simpler to setup and use.

Cheers,
JPG

[osarusan]

You can already do this by holding ctrl while in mask mode to cover up areas. (The line should switch to blue while drawing instead of red).

By looking at the 2.7 test notes this will be improved even further it seems.

Awesome!!

Thanks for pointing this out to me, Leonal!

[osarusan]

Osarusan,

Several of the items you mentioned will be improved with 2.7.
* Individual token scaling is allowed, and remembered between sessions. Also, it is tied to the CT in the 4E ruleset.
* Toolbar added to images for changing modes (mask, draw, erase), editing grid (shift, increase/decrease) and mass targeting (allies, non-allies, clear).
* Mask mode defaults to box selection.

Also, you can create pointers very quickly be holding the left and right mouse buttons together. Use the modifier keys for non-arrow pointers.

That sounds great. I'm looking forward to the update! I've known about the L-R-mouse clicks using the modifier keys but I always seem to forget which one does which and end up having to try 3 times to get something right! :hurt: d'oh


Line of sight is an interesting idea, and has been discussed many times on the forums. The problem is that line of sight requires a lot of extra setup for the gamemaster to apply the "walls" to the map image. Another idea I like involves a double mask layer (basically a mask and a fog of war), but then you would need to implement lighting and various sight types. All the ideas are quite complex to manage, but I'm always looking for ideas on how to make it simpler to setup and use.

Cheers,
JPG

Yeah, I can definitely see how that would take extra set up, but the double mask layer could definitely make it work. There would definitely have to be some kind of distance slider or light/fog as well as adjustments for Darkvision, LL vision, and so on. But I know my players would go gaga if that ever became possible.

Thanks a lot for the reply! I'm glad to hear those things are being worked on! :)

[Leonal]

Awesome!!

Thanks for pointing this out to me, Leonal!

どう致しまして~
You're welcome^^

I'm glad they added this feature a while a go. :)