iPad App

[mattcolville]

What would an iPad App for FG2 be like?

I ask because I'm a video game developer by trade and just released my first iPhone game. So I have some experience with the iOS.

I also just ran my first real, non-experimental, encounter with 3 other players using FG2 and it went pretty well!

I also have an iPad. Many of my friends have iPads.

Talking about using FG2 as an in-person table-top substitute, everyone agreed that it's a good idea. The GM at a computer with a monitor. The players looking at another monitor or a projector or whatever. Doesn't matter. We all agreed it would be relatively easy for the GM to run the game in person using FG2 and a normal computer and somehow push the map out so all the players could see it.

What we couldn't really figure out was how to get the *players* playing. They each need their own computer in order to control and manipulate their characters.

The GM at a computer or laptop is no problem. We've done this and as long as the Tool is robust enough, it works just like a GM screen.

But each *player* with a laptop is prohibitive. They're too big, too unwieldy, not ergonomic enough for tabletop play.

But an iPad, on the other hand, is PERFECT.

So it seems to me, Step One is recognizing that the iPad App would be a client app, not a server. You wouldn't run the game from an iPad, you'd play from an iPad.

It would have to focus on what the player wants and needs. The player wants and needs to be able to manipulate his Token on the map. He needs to be able to grab his mans, and move him as he wants. That's non-negotiable.

But he doesn't actually need his character sheet. Or rather, he doesn't need his character's information preserved in Sheet Format. Like a separate document you look at, as it is currently.

You could, for instance, have the Map displayed on the iPad. Whatever the GM wants the players to see, the players see.

The player's character data, though, would all be displayed using UI elements. Imagine a row of color-coded squares along the bottom with the names of all his powers. Click on one, and it pops up, allowing you to read, attack, roll damage.

Name, alignment, stats across the top. Need to make a Strength test? Double tap, or tap-and-drag on "Strength."

Skills along the side, or maybe a little pop-out sidebar with skills, Same thing.

In other words take the relevant data from the character sheet and embed it into the ui around the edge of the screen.

Seems like it could work. The player doesn't need all the tools the GM needs. He doesn't even need to be able to make a dude, he can do that at home.

[Stuart]

There are two iPad apps out:
Battlemap (https://www.razeware.com/) is the more expensive of the two and has a fog-of-war effect and works nicely. I have used it in games with a palm-sized projector I bought.

RPG Cartographer (https://www.lvl99games.com/?page_id=519) is cheaper and has more tokens (made by Devinight) but has much less functionality and I found more difficult to use when creating maps.

[Moon Wizard]

Ever since the iPad came out, I have thought it would be a perfect tool for gaming. Alas, lack of time to split among all the projects has slowed down my ambitions.

One of the primary challenges is that FG is designed as a game system agnostic platform. This means that there is no "magic" implementation to convert character sheets (or other table objects) into iPad-friendly interface components. Each ruleset would require its own iPad-friendly character sheet definition. The question is whether each client on the iPad should be unique and thus deny any games not using ruleset X, or whether FG should allow ruleset developers to define iPad-friendly interface objects (like character sheets) that are handled by the iPad client. I'm leaning towards the former, since it does not require any changes to FG while the iPad version is fleshed out.

The network protocol for FG is not that complex, though you would need a way to maintain an in-memory tree-style database, and decide how to handle all the network events (dice, chat, etc.).

If anyone is interested in tackling this effort, please drop us a note at:
[email protected]

Cheers,
JPG

[StuartW]

There are iPad character sheets already out there, but not full-blown FG2-like clients.

[mattcolville]

Well, what the SmiteWorks people consider a feature is not necessarily a feature for the player.

The SmiteWorks folks naturally favor a general-application tool. One that can work with any system. But a given player doesn't need a tool that works with 20 different system if he only plays one.

Based on my time at WotC and the market data I saw, the overwhemling majority of people who self-identify as RPG players don't play more than one system.

So if I'm right and the proper design and breakdown would be; GM runs FG2 on his PC, players interface via iPads, then the players just need a version that works with the Ruleset they tend to use. No idea what the most popular ruleset is, but I suspect the best investment of development time would be D&D, either Pathfinder or 4E and my own inclination is to support the currently supported, D&D-branded version. Figure if you can't make a go of an app that supports actual D&D play, an app that supports Savage World or CoC would be less viable.

The trick to developing an App like this would *not* be "replicate FG2 on the iPad." You can do a lot of stuff in FG2, have a lot of stuff open. I think an iPad version would have to hew more closely toward the tactical side.

Being able to bring your iPad to the table, connect, see the Map the GM is using, move your dude around, have all the functionality of the JPG rulesset. Attack, damage, dice, would be huge. Might be a lot of work.

[drahkar]

Actually if you read Moon's post again you'll see that they are specifically leaning towards a single Ruleset/System per implementation of the application on the iPad.

I can see pros and cons to this situation. Not the least of which being that it works against anyone who isn't using a 'Primary' system like DnD. I would have to disagree with your view that the ability to use the application for any system is not considered a feature to the player. In reality, I firmly believe that this feature is one of the major reasons that FG2 is as popular as it is. The simple fact is, while I can agree with the market research that leans towards people tending to use only one system for the most part. (Most people don't want to have to memorize multiple systems) But the fact is, which system they favor can vary widely. The fact that there are major companies behind systems like Shadowrun, DnD, and the World of Darkness systems is proof of that.

It is my personal opinion that they would benefit greatly by making the iPad version capable of multiple Rulesets, even if it had to be one instance of the app per ruleset. Then have the construction of the iPad friendly version of the Ruleset fall on the heads of the developers of the Rulesets. That would make the most sense to me. Then Moon could focus on making the 3.5E and the 4E versions. But it doesn't mean you won't eventually see one for obscure community Ruleset. It just means someone has to commit the time.


Well, what the SmiteWorks people consider a feature is not necessarily a feature for the player.

The SmiteWorks folks naturally favor a general-application tool. One that can work with any system. But a given player doesn't need a tool that works with 20 different system if he only plays one.

Based on my time at WotC and the market data I saw, the overwhemling majority of people who self-identify as RPG players don't play more than one system.

So if I'm right and the proper design and breakdown would be; GM runs FG2 on his PC, players interface via iPads, then the players just need a version that works with the Ruleset they tend to use. No idea what the most popular ruleset is, but I suspect the best investment of development time would be D&D, either Pathfinder or 4E and my own inclination is to support the currently supported, D&D-branded version. Figure if you can't make a go of an app that supports actual D&D play, an app that supports Savage World or CoC would be less viable.

The trick to developing an App like this would *not* be "replicate FG2 on the iPad." You can do a lot of stuff in FG2, have a lot of stuff open. I think an iPad version would have to hew more closely toward the tactical side.

Being able to bring your iPad to the table, connect, see the Map the GM is using, move your dude around, have all the functionality of the JPG rulesset. Attack, damage, dice, would be huge. Might be a lot of work.

[DM_BK]

I have thought about this pretty heavily over the last few months. I even went so far as to packet capture the network activity, which as moon wizard said, its pretty basic.

I ultimately concluded it was doable but definitely a lot of work. I think the reasonable thing to shoot for would be just to do a character sheet companion product for iPad/Android. You can view and edit your character sheet but thats about the limit of it.

I mean otherwise we're talking about a product that would be close to the same level of effort it required to put Fantasy Grounds together in the first place. Likely more then one person can reasonably bang out in any reasonable amount of time. Which leads into the economics of such a project...which I don't think the sell through would be high enough to justify.

Maybe I'm wrong but I don't think so. Otherwise I'd love to see someone do this. As I said a character sheet only app would have value and is something reasonable to do and maybe in time it could be expanded to include more features.

Just my 2 cents.

[Slipshod]

Just use a tablet PC. It already runs windows, and you can get ones which use both fingers and stylus. Yes, it's more expensive than an iPad, but not by a huge amount when they're on sale (I've seen HP ones for around $800 before).

I used an old Lenovo tablet at work for about 3 years, and loved it. Especially the pressure-sensitive stylus and being able to completely ditch my notebook in favor of Microsoft OneNote.

[mattcolville]

Just use a tablet PC. It already runs windows, and you can get ones which use both fingers and stylus. Yes, it's more expensive than an iPad, but not by a huge amount when they're on sale (I've seen HP ones for around $800 before).

I used an old Lenovo tablet at work for about 3 years, and loved it. Especially the pressure-sensitive stylus and being able to completely ditch my notebook in favor of Microsoft OneNote.

That's a good point. I have an iPad and I'm an iOS developer, so I naturally went there, but it'd be way easier to drop $1000 on a tablet PC than have 5 guys spent 6 months developing an iPad client.

The problem, though, is that I think any random gaming group is approaching 1 iPad per player much, much, much faster than it's approaching 1 Tablet PC per player, naturally, without anyone deliberately buying one for FG2.

[Slipshod]

That's a good point. I have an iPad and I'm an iOS developer, so I naturally went there, but it'd be way easier to drop $1000 on a tablet PC than have 5 guys spent 6 months developing an iPad client.

The problem, though, is that I think any random gaming group is approaching 1 iPad per player much, much, much faster than it's approaching 1 Tablet PC per player, naturally, without anyone deliberately buying one for FG2.

I was more thinking about it for hotseat use (your turn, here's the battlemap), but you definitely have a point about geeks and their toys. Though nobody in my group has an iPad, nor really plans to get one. The one game we did in person had everyone and their laptops on the gaming table.... It's much easier to fit them all when you don't need a mat, dice, books, or character sheets. Much more dangerous with the beer though.

[SpudmanWP]

Can iPad create a Terminal Services link into a Windows box running FG2?

[Doswelk]

Logmein Ignition works, using right now to type this.

It works and is just about usable.

Costs £18 for the iPad app.

I suspect RDP might not work as i think directx is not supported.

[Dershem]

I do have an rdp client on mine that I use to log into my work computers, I haven't tried on my home with FG & Such.

[SpudmanWP]

I just tried it on my DroidX using Teamviewer (as both server and client) and is free to use (both Server and Client versions) in a non-commercial setting. They have Windows, Mac, Android, iPhone, and iPad versions.

https://www.teamviewer.com/en/index.aspx

It worked fine, but was a little slow due to both the the server & the client sharing the same wifi connection.

My setup was
Server --> wifi --> DSL --> Internet (Teamviewer servers) --> DSL --> wifi --> client

Teamviewer can be setup for a direct IP connection:
Server --> wifi --> Router --> wifi --> Client

This should improve connection somewhat.

Other VNC or RDP connections should work also (I will try WYSE Pocketcloud next).

----Update ---
RDP connections (like WYSE above) will not work. DirectX will not initialize. Because Teamviewer is VNC based, this is not a problem.

[Master]

Like has been previously mentioned using a VNC client to connect to your home compuer via a tablet works.

Im trying to get my hands on a Asus Transformer. I would love a FGII android ap but to be honest it works with VNC right now and you get the full FGII experience.

[phantomwhale]

I'd love to write up a SWEX version for the iPad, given some basic support framework library from Smiteworks to work on top of.

Ironically though, I can't afford an iPad right now though. So testing might be problematic...

[StuartW]

If you had a Mac and installed Xcode, you could test using the built-in emulator. That said, you'd still need to test on a physical device before publishing anything.

Stuart

[Doswelk]

If you had a Mac and installed Xcode, you could test using the built-in emulator. That said, you'd still need to test on a physical device before publishing anything.

Stuart

I've got the iPad so I can test :D

[tdewitt274]

If you had a Mac and installed Xcode, you could test using the built-in emulator. That said, you'd still need to test on a physical device before publishing anything.

Stuart
The tough part would be the multi touch part. But they have that slate mouse that should handle that piece of it. But then I guess you have to communicate with other iPads as well....

[phantomwhale]

I'm a windows man ! Suspect the prospect of FGII development for iPad might tip me into saving up for one though. Must be some cheaper iPad 1's in the future, as the bleeding edge crowd chase the new one ;)

All of which misses the point that I can't say I relish the thought of my first foray into iPad development to be building a new client for FGII ! So some sort of initial development platform / low level library would help. Or a group effort to build one ?

[osarusan]

The iPad is the perfect gaming device. A FG client would be a godsend for it. Just think, you've got the potential for voice/video chat right there, built in. A good VTT like FG could roll a few other features together to make a killer tabletop app. You'd need a built-in PDF reader so you could load up for rulebooks/modules. You'd need a built-in dice roller (take a look at the Dicenomicon for an example of the *perfect* iOS dice roller) and then some way to load jpeg files for maps, a token set, and a character sheet viewer.

Fantasy Ground's best killer feature right now is the character sheet and would probably be the hardest thing to port over to an iOS system. I think it would be shame if it was nerfed for an iOS version and forced into a single ruleset. I'm not sure the logistics that would go into making the various modules and rulesets work on the iPad, but I think it would be worth the extra effort.

There are a lot of good web-based VTTs coming out recently that are not as good as FG, but could easily become as good some day. Having an iPad version (and being the first to do so) that works with any game system and integrates video and voice would probably secure Fantasy Grounds the lion's share of the market.

[damned]

isnt the screen too small? my laptop screen is much bigger than that and I am constantly juggling screens trying to find what I need...

[Moon Wizard]

Building an application for an iOS device would require a complete redesign of the interface.

I'm not even sure that it would make sense to build an iPhone version as it would be challenging to provide a useful interface that would provide enough information to actually make decisions without having to jump between several screens (character, map, combat tracker, chat, ...). There's just not enough screen real estate.

For the iPad, I'm a bit more optimistic; since the screen is large enough to provide more options for layout.

Cheers,
JPG

[VenomousFiligree]

I wouldn't want to use the iPad as a GM. Player yes, GM no.

[StuartW]

I think you'd be talking about a re-write, whichever route, as the DirectX codebase wouldn't easily lend itself to a port. Screen real estate is a limiting factor, but there are other differences too (there isn't a concept of mouse hover, for example, so any code which uses onhover would be tough to replicate).

Stuart

[Moon Wizard]

Just talking hypothetically, if I was going to start an iOS project for Fantasy Grounds, I would probably just build a ruleset-specific player client to sound out all the items that would need to be addressed with the network interaction. I'd start with dice, char sheet and chat; then, move to map and tokens.

Cheers,
JPG

[Zeus]

Supporting DirectX might be doable on iOS. I have been playing around with Unreal's UDK for the past few weeks and its built atop DirectX 9.0c and supports PC and iOS platforms. I made my first iPhone app the other day, nothing fancy, just a top down 2D render of the 3D maps I have created recently.

I agree with Stuart though, FGII's current user interface would require tweaking for multi-touch surface support in order for it to really be useful on devices like an iPad.

I also agree with JPG and think starting with client networking, dice roll functionality and perhaps a character sheet could be a good place to start. I can see a number of my group who have smaller screen real estate to work with, using an iPad as a companion device to their regular PC based FGII setup.

I am not convinced the iPad makes a good platform for the map and token play. You would probably end up spending more time switching between the views of maps, chartsheet and chatwindow than roleplaying.

[osarusan]

As it stands now, I would agree the FG UI isn't great for the iPad. But that's a problem that every app for the iPad has had to overcome. It wouldn't be impossible at all, it would just take some rethinking of the UI.

You could probably do well with a tabbed interface at the bottom, replacing the hotkey buttons. One tab for each player's character sheet, one tab for each open map or image, one tab for the rules library. Within each tab, replace the side menu with the important commands from the radial menus, like Enter Mask Mode, Add Token, Item and Spell libraries, etc. The most important thing is to accomplish each task with as few touches/gestures as possible. So the character sheet should be stored on one page, maybe 2 pages tops when you include inventory, and there should only be one item viewable at a time in order to maximize screen real estate and keep it visually clear.

It would take a bit of redesign, but its definitely doable. And if you can integrate the iPad's camera and mic you can have a built-in conferencing that would be a real killer feature for the app.

[Master]

I dont think an iOS ap will ever see the light of day but it seems feasible for Android.

[VenomousFiligree]

I dont think an iOS ap will ever see the light of day but it seems feasible for Android.
MurghBpurn wonders why that would be...

[ddavison]

I did just buy an iMac to start playing around with the dev environment for iPhone and iPad and to start testing Fantasy Grounds running on a Mac via Wine.

It may take a while to get up to speed with the language, but I do have some ideas on how it might work out.

[VenomousFiligree]

I did just buy an iMac to start playing around with the dev environment for iPhone and iPad and to start testing Fantasy Grounds running on a Mac via Wine.

It may take a while to get up to speed with the language, but I do have some ideas on how it might work out.
Good to hear :)

At least one VT has an iPad app out already so would be good to get FG there too.

[RiverRat]

That would be awesome. I been running FG on Crossover for Mac, for about a year and a half now. It's worked very well, with only minor hiccups here and there. I just bought an IPad 2 and would love to see something like FG on it. If you need and testers for either, let me know.

RR

[osarusan]

Sorry to resurrect an old thread here... I thought it might be better to continue this conversation than start up a new FG on the iPad thread...

So I was just browsing the app store and saw a new iPad app called iGM. If Fantasy Grounds is going to move onto the iPad (and I sure hope it is!) then definitely take a look at this app. It's not quite a VTT, but it is a great example of how game modules could work for FG, and hopefully bring some extra revenue to the product.

FG is a perfect app for the iPad. I would think people will want to use it in physical games as well as online games as the must-have gaming aid. There are a number of great gaming tools out there already -- the dicenomican, some really nice mapping tools, and a couple of fun sound libraries. But none of them combines all the features you'd want in a VTT. I hope Fantasy Grounds can come out with an iPad app that does that. *fingers crossed*

[damned]

but im just about to buy a shiny new android 3 tablet!

[Doswelk]

but im just about to buy a shiny new android 3 tablet!

In that case I have found this (https://www.splashtop.com/remote/availability?from=product)works on Android as well it would appear.

Splashtop remote is amazing! It works a treat on my ipad, I am able to watch films running on my desktop (at home) on my ipad at work (during my lunch break of course)

Sound (not that sound is needed for FGII) streams as well.

FGII runs rather well on it.

Weird thing is the PC client is much slower than the ipad client, I find the PC client too laggy!

Wish I hadn't spent the £18 on logmein now! ::(

[sturtus]

Most of the suggestions in this thread can be summed up as follows:

- running a thin-client on a tablet connected to a Windows PC running FG2 or
- writing a FG2 app for a tablet with all the functionality of FG2, requiring an interface redesign to accomodate for the touch interface and lack of screen real estate.

I'd like to suggest a third option that would enable the developers to not have to focus on learning iOS development yet still enable other devices to connect and interact in FG session. A web server component could be written for FG that would present FG events in HTML and Javascript (or other form or simple markup, like XML). These events could be presented to different clients using UI defined in CSS (or other style method) according to the client being used (Chrome, Safari, IE), and the user would be able to interact with the FG session from their interface. The FG host would accept requests via the web component, deliver to the FG application, the FG application would then apply the update, confirm and sync with the web server, and all the clients would get the update.

At the Smiteworks level, it would be a matter of adding a new web server layer. At the community level (or possibly the Smiteworks level), it would mean HTML5, iOS or Android apps that communicate with the server. Perhaps only allow the web server layer at the ultimate license level?

That's my contribution. Would love to see something!

[Valarian]

Personally, I'm looking at this for when my netbook gives up the ghost. A Tablet running Windows 7, hence will run FG2 ;)
Once Windows 8 comes out, the battery life should be even better.

Acer Iconia TAB W501 with docking station (https://www.acer.co.uk/ac/en/GB/content/series/iconia-tab-w)

[Moon Wizard]

Sturtus,

We have actually discussed that approach in other threads. The challenge with that approach is that it is essentially guaranteed to require a subscription payment requirement in order to pay for the server to host the games. All the computation and network requirements move to the server, which requires us to pay someone to host.

I'm not against it personally, since I have no problem paying for subscriptions of services that I use regularly. However, there are quite a few members of the community that are very opposed to a subscription model, which is why this option isn't discussed as much. Doug actually suggested a value-added online service model to open the door for that approach a couple years ago, but there was a lot of negative feedback.

At any rate, it is definitely something we have thought about.

Cheers,
JPG

[sturtus]

I think you misunderstood my suggestion, and re-reading my post I was pretty unclear. My apologies.

The FG host itself, the GM computer, would actually host a sandbox web server it would be running (see MAMP or WAMP for an example). That web server would "listen" to the FG installation running on the same computer, and mobile clients would connect to the web server, acting as an extra layer providing real-time access to FG. Tablets, maybe tiny iOS apps, and web clients would connect to the FG GM host on port 80 (or whatever) while traditional FG clients would run traditionally.

Basically by adding an extra web server component to the FG Ultimate License, the clients that connect simply need to be web browsers connecting over port 80 (or some custom port). This was inspired by Dicenomicon for iOS which allows you to connect to the iOS device's IP address and access Dicenomicon features and configure the app from a browser.

[Moon Wizard]

Ah, I see now.

We would still need to essentially build a component that would run one instance per client connection to simulate the desktop in order to provide state to the HTML5 layer and support the flexibility that ruleset creators have for making content today. I'm wondering if many desktop machines could handle that load as FG is written now. FG takes 300M-2G of memory per instance depending on the ruleset and module load.

One option would be to build a second API for writing the HTML/JavaScript interface, so that everything would be built using the available browser components. However, then ruleset creators would have double the work. Also, not sure how well 3D dice would work there.

My main concern is that any approach along these lines would need to be built from the ground up, in order to bake the mobile assumptions into the ruleset interface/API. We would essentially be starting from scratch. Not necessarily a bad idea, but might be hard to justify the expense in a niche market like ours.

I always thought that if we were to create an iPhone/iPad solution, it would need to address these exact issues anyway. It's something that Doug and I are debating heavily, and we hope that once we address some previous commitments later this year that we can explore further.

BTW, I love the discussion.

Regards,
JPG

[osarusan]

I like that idea a lot; making it easier for more ways to connect to a FG game is going to be essential this year. Have you guys seen the youtube videos for the Google+ hangouts VTT extension? That is going to bring some serious competition for all of the VTTs! One click install, free, easy to use, video chat included, accessible on almost any device...

FG has a lot more to offer than any other option at the moment, but that could change very quickly. Something like this would completely change the playing field.

[sturtus]

I like that idea a lot; making it easier for more ways to connect to a FG game is going to be essential this year. Have you guys seen the youtube videos for the Google+ hangouts VTT extension? That is going to bring some serious competition for all of the VTTs! One click install, free, easy to use, video chat included, accessible on almost any device...

FG has a lot more to offer than any other option at the moment, but that could change very quickly. Something like this would completely change the playing field.

This was the OTHER solution our group has discussed. Do you have a URL?

[sturtus]

Ah, I see now.

We would still need to essentially build a component that would run one instance per client connection to simulate the desktop in order to provide state to the HTML5 layer and support the flexibility that ruleset creators have for making content today. I'm wondering if many desktop machines could handle that load as FG is written now. FG takes 300M-2G of memory per instance depending on the ruleset and module load.

One option would be to build a second API for writing the HTML/JavaScript interface, so that everything would be built using the available browser components. However, then ruleset creators would have double the work. Also, not sure how well 3D dice would work there.

My main concern is that any approach along these lines would need to be built from the ground up, in order to bake the mobile assumptions into the ruleset interface/API. We would essentially be starting from scratch. Not necessarily a bad idea, but might be hard to justify the expense in a niche market like ours.

I always thought that if we were to create an iPhone/iPad solution, it would need to address these exact issues anyway. It's something that Doug and I are debating heavily, and we hope that once we address some previous commitments later this year that we can explore further.

BTW, I love the discussion.

Regards,
JPG

I love the discussion as well :) After three and a half years of VT usage starting with MapTool and moving to FG, our group loves to talk about the potential of the medium and where we think it's going. FG is a great product NOW, but with the quickly changing OS and hardware landscape, what COULD it look like? There were elements of MapTool that we miss in FG and things we LOVE about FG that no other VT offers. Our dream VT is a web standards based VT that runs on any platform, mixes the best of MapTool with the best of FG, hence my great interest in this iPad thread as it's such a fantastic piece of hardware.

If something has to be developed for a web server to happen, let it be a dedicated server. The clients could download and cache custom rulesets, extensions, campaign files, and modules in HTML5 local storage, while HTML5, client side javascript, and CSS processing could handle all the interface drawing. Traditional FG clients can connect, and GM role could be assigned to a specific login. The dedicated server does all the heavy lifting and state control.

Couldn't a dedicated server be written to use existing rulesets and APIs?

My lack of experience in app development is really showing, but I have to say many excellent websites have more complex sync and state issues than FG with FAR more concurrent connections. Today's entry level systems can easily tackle hundreds of http requests in Apache, right?

We're talking about a new product for sure, and I'm butting my nose into what little I know about Smiteworks, but I think if traditional FG and new mobile web clients could connect to your product at the same time, you'd increase market share. You'd certainly sell more ultimate licenses (I'd buy it).

[sturtus]

Have you guys seen the youtube videos for the Google+ hangouts VTT extension?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNjcVhyvp-c

[madman]

Not all that exciting IMHO. It's got a long way to go before I would replace FG or anything else.


Chris

[damned]

might not be great yet - but it will improve in leaps and bounds...

[Moon Wizard]

I think Joshuha is doing an excellent job exploring the boundaries of what the Google APIs can offer. I'm excited to see what he can do.

Sturtus, what are some of the things you liked about MapTools that are not on FG?

I definitely think that the web service from a local machine (or hosted service) is probably the best long term solution. Plus, it is essentially a iPad/iPhone solution as well, since a lot of the functionality is punted back to the server. However, that also means that you couldn't host a game via iPad/iPhone without a dedicated app, which implies a machine running the service elsewhere.

Regards,
JPG

[Griogre]

The biggest obstacle I see on the web service idea, once you get past the requirement of the server hardware, is the up bandwidth of the person running this app. I don't see home non commercial ISP accounts having anything like the bandwidth it would require for a such a thin client and if your customers can't run the app it doesn't matter how good it is.

[sturtus]

The biggest obstacle I see on the web service idea, once you get past the requirement of the server hardware, is the up bandwidth of the person running this app. I don't see home non commercial ISP accounts having anything like the bandwidth it would require for a such a thin client and if your customers can't run the app it doesn't matter how good it is.

I see your point if one were to host this on an ISP. However, I'm not suggesting that at all. The GM would continue to host exactly as they do today, from their home, and the home PC, running the dedicated server, would act as the server. It's not that far-fetched to say that home connections have plenty of bandwidth. After all, bandwidth would barely exceed what hosting a FG game currently requires with the full FG client. A dedicated web server would increase the amount of calls to populate clients with the necessary data to run a web client, but not by much. And since this isn't technically a thin client, just a bunch of HTML5 and javascript, the client systems do the heavy lifting in code..

An initial server contact would populate and cache the browser with necessary modules, images, etc. much like FG does now. Apache, with only a handful of concurrent connections, is not that processor intensive. The math in FG hardly stresses modern CPUs. Moder GPUs are capable of handling pretty much all the 2D data the game throws at them. Javascript engines are optimized in modern browsers to make it quite quick. I don't see bandwidth or CPU usage as being an issue at all. If a PC can run Icewind Dale, Neverwinter Nights, or even Quake it should be able to fly past Fantasy Grounds, even in web form. I was hosting a dedicated Unreal Tournament server on my home computer ten years ago with friends connecting to me over DSL.

[sturtus]

might not be great yet - but it will improve in leaps and bounds...

It has potential, and it's an excellent proof of concept.

[sturtus]

Sturtus, what are some of the things you liked about MapTools that are not on FG?

Thanks for asking!

FG is the perfect tool for the GM that wants to create or purchase, and then run modules. I can prepare all of my material way ahead of time, distribute to players, and run the game very well with what I managed to prepare. When the game takes an unexpected turn (which games really ought to do if you have really creative players and everybody is contributing to the story the group is telling in their campaign), the DM has to shift gears quickly in a tactics based RPG like 4e with a visual medium like FG.

For that, MapTool's free-drawing tools are GREAT! A full canvas of colors is available with the ability to snap to grids when drawing, choose patterns as brush or shape fills, change line fill depth and use patterns as line fills, has multiple layers, and tokens and tiles can be laid down neatly and orderly with a simple MSDraw style whiteboard. With THAT tool, when players decide that they will set up an ambush at a defensive spot of their choosing, I can very quickly sketch out the area, drop in tokens, and be on my way. Improvisation requires quick sketch work like an old battle mat. FG's drawing tool is a simple black line that frankly has some performance issues.

MapTool's masking, light management, and layer tools, mixed with line of sight are great visual tools for the GM to use in tactics and exploration phases. Kobolds that hop in and out of dark squares literally disappear if the torches the PC's tokens are carrying do not cross that square. If we were playing "theater of the mind" D&D, it wouldn't be a big deal to describe, but once you've gone VT, there's a level of expectation. A fight we did in an abandoned mine with many twists and turns and backdoors was a three hour mousehunt trying to keep light sources ready. Great time, and I would be challenged to reproduce that in FG at the speed MapTool did it. FG's masking tool is also limited.

I highly recommend giving MapTool's drawing, layers, line of sight, and masking tools a try for inspiration.

[dplehwalder]

I would like to see an ipad app,even if all it did was display the combat tracker.

[shakespear]

1. I would love to see an ipad ap.

2. The whole reason why I bought Fantasy Grounds was I found about 1 out of 10 people could even learn to work maptools. I could never get it to work. FG is much more user friendly.

[Dakadin]

I just tested this and thought I would share my results since it might be of interest to those wanting to use a tablet with FG. I setup RDP on my desktop then downloaded an RDP application to my Android phone. I started up FG on the desktop then used RDP to connect to my desktop.

It actually worked really well besides the limitations caused by the resolution of my phone like the chat window. Other than that I was able to do just about everything else.

I am sure it would work much better with a regular tablet. I know it isn't ideal but it is a workable solution if you aren't using your PC for anything else and you are comfortable setting it up.

I hope this is helpful. :D

[Nazareth]

I think an iPad app that introduces basic functionality to enable a hybrid game set up would work and generate more interest. The type of game where the players are physically together. DM uses the computer for campaign info as usual. The players use the iPad to see images the DM shares and can see their character sheets. In person players will often use miniatures for combat on an actual table. Players might use electronic dice but many would probably use real dice as well. Just having the ability for a DM to share images to iPads as well as players being able to see their character sheets make this viable. As-is, I see many players using D&D Beyond just for accessing their character sheets while we play in person. FG Unity could do this. Once a mechanism for sharing images to iPad is developed, that mechanism could be used to allow the DM to even share text if given the ability to capture FG windows to an image and then sharing that.
Please consider this idea. It saddens me that I have bought into FG so much only to see the other systems slowly pushing it to obscurity.

[LordEntrails]

I think an iPad app that introduces basic functionality to enable a hybrid game set up would work and generate more interest. The type of game where the players are physically together. DM uses the computer for campaign info as usual. The players use the iPad to see images the DM shares and can see their character sheets. In person players will often use miniatures for combat on an actual table. Players might use electronic dice but many would probably use real dice as well. Just having the ability for a DM to share images to iPads as well as players being able to see their character sheets make this viable. As-is, I see many players using D&D Beyond just for accessing their character sheets while we play in person. FG Unity could do this. Once a mechanism for sharing images to iPad is developed, that mechanism could be used to allow the DM to even share text if given the ability to capture FG windows to an image and then sharing that.
Please consider this idea. It saddens me that I have bought into FG so much only to see the other systems slowly pushing it to obscurity.
Not quite 10 years dead :)

Anyway, you can see related requests on the wish list. You are welcome to vote for them here;
https://fgapp.idea.informer.com/proj/?ia=135376
https://fgapp.idea.informer.com/proj/?ia=136559
https://fgapp.idea.informer.com/proj/?ia=136869

[father0fnine]

It's interesting to see where this thread started and where the ideas... haven't gone. None of the informer.com polls quite satisfy what I've been searching the FG website to find. The biggest blockage I have to getting anybody I game with to use FG is the fact that they'd all have to bring computers. We like to game face-to-face (now mask to mask but you get the idea). FG would be an ideal way to cut down on a lot of the tedium of RPGing. It would also keep us "socially distant" without being socially isolated. As it stands, we generally creep back to should-to-shoulder because nobody likes to move to the map, move a character, and then move away. If the players could bring the portable device of their choice, I think FG would take off. Each session, we get people suggesting that we used another product that is web based in such a way that it will work across most mobile platforms now. If I hadn't already invested in FGU Pro, I'd probably be swayed. As Omicron seems to be rearing it's ugly head and taking us back to early 2020 days... the need for smaller form player devices is increasing.

If there is poll that specifically asks for iOS/Android device support, please direct me to add my votes. It's the only way I can keep using FG.

D

[LordEntrails]

If there is poll that specifically asks for iOS/Android device support, please direct me to add my votes. It's the only way I can keep using FG.
https://fgapp.idea.informer.com/proj/?ia=135376

Though as discussed in this thread, implementing such is a major project and not something quickly done.

[father0fnine]

https://fgapp.idea.informer.com/proj/?ia=135376

Though as discussed in this thread, implementing such is a major project and not something quickly done.

Oh, I get that. I almost through my hat in when I saw early on the "if anybody has interest in tackling..." except for two things. That post was almost 11 years old and all my experience is coding for PC and Linux. Once I saw how old the posts where, I jumped to the end to read the end of the story to see if there was any movement. Alas, I love the changes that came out in Unity but, to date, it's just me playing around in the software without any players. (or GM-and-party. I'm not picky.)

D

P.S. That poll seems to be asking for a remote way to access the reference material, not actually move player tokens, view active GM maps, etc.

[Laerun]

The screen real-estate and interaction with the maps and such would be difficult to see and control. Even a smaller laptop with a 14-15" screen is very challenging. The UI would have to be adapted to work well on 3rd party apps, and might not be ideal for targeting, and for other functions. The need is apparent but the adaptation of dev time may not be quite in the cards yet.

[LordEntrails]

If that idea does not capture what you want, you can add your own that more closely details what you are hoping for.

[The High Druid]

If the players could bring the portable device of their choice, I think FG would take off. Each session, we get people suggesting that we used another product that is web based in such a way that it will work across most mobile platforms now. If I hadn't already invested in FGU Pro, I'd probably be swayed. As Omicron seems to be rearing it's ugly head and taking us back to early 2020 days... the need for smaller form player devices is increasing.

This wouldn't necessarily solve your problems. If you switched to one of the web-based platforms like Roll20 or Astral, and you're all on the local wifi, you'll all be trying to download the same data at the same time using the same connection. You may well end up getting bandwidth issues, especially if you have a large or animated map. You'll find plenty of discussions about performance on the Foundry reddit as well which mention bandwidth being a factor at least for remote games.

[Zarestia]

It's interesting to see where this thread started and where the ideas... haven't gone. None of the informer.com polls quite satisfy what I've been searching the FG website to find. The biggest blockage I have to getting anybody I game with to use FG is the fact that they'd all have to bring computers. We like to game face-to-face (now mask to mask but you get the idea). FG would be an ideal way to cut down on a lot of the tedium of RPGing. It would also keep us "socially distant" without being socially isolated. As it stands, we generally creep back to should-to-shoulder because nobody likes to move to the map, move a character, and then move away. If the players could bring the portable device of their choice, I think FG would take off. Each session, we get people suggesting that we used another product that is web based in such a way that it will work across most mobile platforms now. If I hadn't already invested in FGU Pro, I'd probably be swayed. As Omicron seems to be rearing it's ugly head and taking us back to early 2020 days... the need for smaller form player devices is increasing.

If there is poll that specifically asks for iOS/Android device support, please direct me to add my votes. It's the only way I can keep using FG.

D

Here's a bit older thread discussing how people use FG for face-to-face play. You might get some ideas there which could work for you and your group.
https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?25600-Using-FG-at-the-tabletop

[Mytherus]

That’s a “neat” thought but with a small dev team and a lengthy “wanted features” list on top of the standard bug fix and maintenance tasks how would smite works have dev time or resources for an iPad app?

How many FGU users want this for a feature more than just “eh, if it existed I’d try it”?

[sturtus]

It's a business decision, not a technical decision. I think it can be assumed that FG users would not be interested in an iPad app, but building a tablet version would be an investment to capture new users and customers in order to increase profit margins. It's a business growth consideration. The technical hurdles and investment costs come after the business audience/growth research. If the profits exceed the technical costs to produce a client-only tablet MVP (no gamemaster), it's obviously a good investment. Otherwise, it's not. If, after market research, it's found that there is demand for an iPad app and it's still not something the business wants to pursue, that's up to the business owners to decide if they want their product to work on iPads or not. Sometimes a business just doesn't want to do something and that's fine. But to say this is too technically difficult is not really the issue.

[damned]

It's a business decision, not a technical decision. I think it can be assumed that FG users would not be interested in an iPad app, but building a tablet version would be an investment to capture new users and customers in order to increase profit margins. It's a business growth consideration. The technical hurdles and investment costs come after the business audience/growth research. If the profits exceed the technical costs to produce a client-only tablet MVP (no gamemaster), it's obviously a good investment. Otherwise, it's not. If, after market research, it's found that there is demand for an iPad app and it's still not something the business wants to pursue, that's up to the business owners to decide if they want their product to work on iPads or not. Sometimes a business just doesn't want to do something and that's fine. But to say this is too technically difficult is not really the issue.

That may be true in a a very simplified binary world.
There are many other areas that could or would impact this also.
For example if the UI were to change because of the iPads inability to nicely deal with a right click how does that affect the user experience of everyone else that has learnt how to work with right click? User acceptance is a huge factor in the success of changes.
Or if the display on an iPad is considerably different because of the limitations of its physical size and the iPad user gets the ability to use the program but the experience is so different and potentially underwhelming that it actually hurts the products overall perception.
Or if the changes required to support the app on iOS also require changes to the DLC there is then flow on work required by the third parties that develop the DLC and the potential challenges in getting them on board.

[sturtus]

All of those concerns are totally valid. The touch UI would be a really big obstacle and require a lot of design and user testing. Still, Without the investment into research and testing, who is to say?

[Marquis_de_Taigeis]

if using any operating system tablet, i would suggest your looking at very limited functionality, possibly being able to read a reference book in prep for running a game, or maybe looking at a character sheet.

use of battle maps / actually in game GMing / building and designing modules - homebrew would not be really functionable on a tablet

i have tried using an iPad through steams remote play, but size of screen was very non user friendly.

[damned]

I think that any tablet app would need to support

Full Character Sheet
Full Player Map access/use
Combat Tracker
Full Campaign Tools access

I think without those features it would be very limited.
I think map combat on a 10" screen and touch controls on busy character sheets are big impediments and probably require some out of box thinking to achieve.

[sturtus]

I think being GM in FG on a tablet would be a nightmare.

[JohnD]

I think being GM in FG on a tablet would be a nightmare.

Using a 14" laptop screen certainly is.

[Sulimo]

I know it sounds like a great idea, but I personally would not hold my breath for an iOS/iPadOS version.

Apple imposes very strict limitations on what they allow in their store (Google does as well, but side-loading is possible with Android).

Look at the hoops Microsoft was going to jump through before they abandoned xCloud (https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2020/08/apple-wont-let-stadia-or-xcloud-into-ios-citing-app-store-guidelines/) on iOS/iPadOS. Of course, Google tried with Stadia as well, but got nowhere just like Microsoft.

Microsoft tried to compromise with Apple (https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2021/12/microsoft-pushed-apple-for-compromise-to-get-game-pass-on-the-app-store/), but ultimately, Apple would not agree to the compromise.

This was Microsoft, a huge player in gaming and computing (they keep trading places with Apple as to who is the larger company), and they could not get Apple to change their policies. I seriously doubt that FG in any form other than minimal reader will be in the future unless Apple changes their tune.


For any Game (and make no mistake, Apple will consider FG a game), SmiteWorks will need to submit each and every DLC (something like 2000 now) to Apple for separate approval to the App Store, it's what they wanted Microsoft and Google to do. xCloud and Stadia were just streaming games (like streaming a movie or show on Netflix), not actually installing anything. FG will be trying to install Rulesets and potentially extensions.

Speaking of extensions, those would probably never be allowed, since they change the underlying code. Apple would never allow a 3rd party dev make changes to a different 3rd party application.



If anything appears for iOS/iPadOS, I would expect it to be some kind of web based workaround, like what Microsoft and Amazon are doing (https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2020/10/report-xbox-game-streaming-will-land-on-ios-in-2021-using-web-workaround/).

[damned]

Ooooooff. I never even got that far with my thinking.

If the DLC and Extensions are loading from the Host not from the iPad client then this might not be an issue?

[Sulimo]

Ooooooff. I never even got that far with my thinking.

If the DLC and Extensions are loading from the Host not from the iPad client then this might not be an issue?

I don't know, I think that's a long shot, the player clients still load the extension(s)/modules as part of the connection though. For example, your Investigator and Dear Diary are meant to be used by the players, so they have to load on the player side. I suspect most extensions are at least partially player side enhancements. Then there are the community rulesets, which also make changes to the way the base application works.

If all of that is not disclosed up front, Apple will kill the app as soon as it realizes what is happening (they did that to Epic over Fortnite).

Just getting a regular app published is really difficult (ask me how I know*, and that was before Apple's more recent crackdowns).

I think it will be far simpler to do some kind of web based app, especially given the troubles Microsoft and Google encountered.

I am happy to be wrong, but watching Apple's behavior over the past couple of years leaves me skeptical.



*I was not even involved with the app Development side, just assisting with the publishing piece, we never did get it published, too many hurdles. It was finally decided to not waste any more time on an app 1) would only be used by a handful of users, and 2) that could be replicated on Windows, where it was far easier to deploy.

[Valyar]

Good luck playing or running game on Tablet. Unless you have super superficial system and light character sheet, everything else is going to suffer.

I have tried to use Roll20 and Foundry. Roll20 is sad experience, including drawing tools, unless you have biggest iPad and it still sucks because it is just more real estate, which is not enough. Foundry is disaster even when you enable the experimental webkits - their framework is so heavy that manages to reduce the iPad Pro M1 to a crawl and you have to drop every possible quality.

The only useful app for tablet is the latest Roll20, which allows you to manage the char sheet and roll, you still need some screen though for the above mentioned reasons. Fantasy Grounds and the way it is developed as desktop application will require much more work to do, as it is not just some web connection to open a window.

[DM_BK]

This thread is 11 years old and still no progress here :(

A char sheet, chat output, maybe the combat tracker/die rolling would be awesome..... its 2022, it's time.

[damned]

This thread is 11 years old and still no progress here :(

A char sheet, chat output, maybe the combat tracker/die rolling would be awesome..... its 2022, it's time.

I think a read on the likely licensing challenges in the last 2 pages might be worth your while.
If Microsoft and Google cant get a gaming platform on to the App Store then SmiteWorks dont stand a lot of chance.

[DM_BK]

I read it and I understand the issues...and would say maybe those issues could cause a problem. Depends on how the app tied into the client and what all it did.

Roll20 was able to release an app to the Apple store so I have faith FG can do the same.

[LordEntrails]

I read it and I understand the issues...and would say maybe those issues could cause a problem. Depends on how the app tied into the client and what all it did.

Roll20 was able to release an app to the Apple store so I have faith FG can do the same.
Rll20 and FG have a completely different architecture. All Rll20 had to (effectively) do is to make an app that would display a webpage in a particular way. i.e. a lot like a web browser.

FG is a client-server architecture, and the client updates and downloads data from multiple locations, the FG servers and the host server. This architecture could also be used for an application that would allow for other applications to be downloaded and installed inside the FG "environment". Effectively this would allow an application wit architecture like FGs to become its own store front and bypass the Apple Store. Something Apple does not allow.

Sure, FG could change its entire architecture to have a different one for a iPad application, but that would be a project on the scale of FGU, and the return on such is unlikely to warrant thousands of hours of developer time to achieve.

But, maybe something can happen. As always, the best way for the community to let SmiteWorks now what the community wants is to vote for the idea on the wish list.

[DM_BK]

Have the host client transmit certain details to a central server - connect the app to the central server. Most every problem with Apple solved instantly. Feel like we've discussed this path before, in the past.

I don't even need to see the code to declare it would be a modest undertaking, almost everything is likely already there just needing a little refactoring (based on current application behavior). Setting up the services, infrastructure, and apps being the larger side of the resource requirements and even those aren't a particularly large undertaking these days - everyone's doing things like this (it's just data at the end of the day), in every industry.

This is also an opportunity for SW... current business model likely can't (or shouldn't) support the costs of these expanded features. Good opportunity to make more money with a modest subscription service. Being a business and all...I'd drop everything else I was doing to pick up an extra revenue stream.

Does SW have the right skill sets to implement this successfully? That I couldn't answer but if no one has any mobile app experience and/or limited cloud experience it's going to take longer and be riskier, but it isn't 1000s of hours of work.

[bmartin1086]

Thank you, High Templar, and everyone else. I appreciate the insights.

Would FGU lend itself to two open browser windows on the same cpu for different accounts on the same session? Or can two players share the same account access to the same game session?

Brad

[LordEntrails]

Thank you, High Templar, and everyone else. I appreciate the insights.

Would FGU lend itself to two open browser windows on the same cpu for different accounts on the same session? Or can two players share the same account access to the same game session?

Brad

FG doesn't use a browser. But, you can start a second (or more) instance of FG on the same computer. But, they all need to use the same user login and license. This works great for a second instance to either simulate a player view, or to show a player view on a second monitor etc.

Not sure what your use case or desire is, but it would probably be best to start a new thread so we don't confuse the discussion in this thread.

[Nazareth]

I don't disagree with you fatherofnine. I also have the full package but have yet to use it. I ended up buying the D&D Beyond products for that purpose. Works well for just the scenario you mentioned.