How Do You Use FG (Voice or Chat)?

[GM_BZK]

Google+ has Hangout. I tried it yesterday for gaming and was blown away by it. Around the same time, I take the dive to try out Fantasy Grounds and see a whole lot of potential here as well. My first thought is combine them some way, but then it occurs to me that this may be a time when two great tastes DON'T necessarily go great together.

So I figured I should ask the FG community: How do you use Fantasy Grounds? Do you use it alone with chat, combine it with voice/video, or forgo the chat entirely, and most importantly, why? This is not versus thread; I'm just trying to weigh my options and I'm interested how more experienced FG gamers go about it.

[Leonal]

I have two small groups of 2-3 people and we use Skype for voice exclusively. Text is used for hidden messages either through FG or Skype.

[Moon Wizard]

We use ventrilo for our games, and the chat for whispers.

Cheers,
JPG

[GunnarGreybeard]

I have always used the FG text chat. I usually run games with only a few players and that format seems to be adequate.

[DarkStar]

Text chat for the in-game stuff, may use voice chat for OOC, questions, etc. I personally don't like to use voice chat during the game. It feels a bit like playing over a phone which takes away the atmosphere of the game from me.

[GM_BZK]

For the people who do use voice, have you considered full video? My brief experience with Hangout was that it recreated the tabletop experience very well. I could certainly see using that for most communications while having FG minimized, then turning to it how we may turn to the table (like referencing a tactical map or for dice rolls) then minimizing again. I ask because this is one of the uses I'm considering. Is there something I'm overlooking? My primary concern is bandwidth, but I really have no idea.

I imagine using purely FG chat could really enhance the immersive experience. Does voice -- even for ooc stuff -- detract from that? I'm very eager to give this a try, although perhaps most skeptical due to pacing. The group needs to know the expectations going in. This is probably best suited for less tactical games with not as much meta-game mechanics.

Ultimately, I suppose the thing to do is to try it out. I'm just trying to identify any pitfalls. I previously tried Battlegrounds (an older version) and it wasn't a good experience. I prepped everything, tried it locally, and everything seemed fine, but during the actual game, it was rife with technical issues. I understand there is a newer version now.

[Moon Wizard]

My original attempt at remote tabletop gaming was about 6-7 years ago. I was using another tabletop software at the time, and I tried both Yahoo and Skype video chat.

I ended up switching to voice chat after running into bandwidth issues running both Yahoo and Skype video chat. From my basic research at the time, my understanding was that having a 5 people all interconnecting over video chat was essentially killing bandwidth (4x upstream for your face, 4x downstream for each of their faces). I looked into a server-based video conference solution at the time, but they were all business-class and very expensive.

Now, we move forward in time. The bandwidth available to most homes is somewhat better, and the video applications are a little smarter. In addition to Google+ Hangouts being a centralized server video conference, I thought I remembered reading that they had special algorithms to focus the stream on whomever was talking and reduce frame rate on those not talking/moving. I was also thinking about trying a Google+ Hangout for my game, but we just when on break for my game until end of the summer.

Cheers,
JPG

[wbcreighton]

I imagine using purely FG chat could really enhance the immersive experience. Does voice -- even for ooc stuff -- detract from that?

We use Skype for OOC discussions etc. The sessions tend to be periods of quiet text roleplaying followed by OOC discussion. I think without voice for OOC stuff the game would really bog down. Having played years of play-by-post games, the speed of FG and chat is refreshing. I would guess that voice only would be that much faster, but faster can also make things more difficult for the GM.

[Leonal]

On video:
I haven't considered full video due to some connection problems between me and one of my players. Also it would be another part of my screen that I couldn't use for FG (on a 17 inch now as my 22 inch broke..)

In the future it might be worth looking into, but not something we have even mentioned in our groups at the moment.

[CAPryde]

My games always use voice for OOC, rules discussions, long explanations/descriptions, and screwing around. We use chat for in-char, whispers, describing most actions, and so forth. I have a Ventrilo server, so my games always use that.

[GM_BZK]

Thanks all for the feedback. I'm developing an idea for introducing FG to some players. :)

[ionofrao]

we have a DM and 5 players and we all use FG2 and team speak (a voice chat software similar to ventrillo) as I had an old team speak server setup from our days of using it for our world of warcraft guild a few years ago.

It works well, and to me it is more imersive as I am a bit of a ham as a gm and get into the roles of my npc's and would miss the chance to mock them and really rile them up before they smite my bad guys etc...

We use in game chat for whispers, or if I have a block of background OOC detail to impart from a module etc...

[krb243]

i run 4 games a week using FG and use skype for voice and FG chat to present text info to the players and whispers.

[GM_BZK]

I just ran a test using Skype for technical issues (it was the first time running so we used it a little bit to get over the slight learning curve) but otherwise used the chat box for everything. It was a Call of Cthulhu game and I for one felt the slower pace increased the immersive quality. I am very excited about the gaming potential here. :)

[adminwheel3]

We do a lot of roleplaying, so we've found its better for folks that the in character stuff is in the chat log.

We use vent for OOC and combat discussions, and I use the vent private channels when I need to have a conversation with a player and relay a lot of information that the other players aren't privy to.

Lastly I used Skype to stream music to everyone, which has helped the mood and setting quite a bit.

[GM_BZK]

Yeah, last night I tried a game for a couple of hours as opposed to just a test like I ran previously. There was some question at first of the pacing with purely text, but as the game progressed, I think it fell into a groove. Like adminwheel3 points out, it's better for in character roleplay.

So, as I see it, there are three (possibly four) ways to run FG alongside Skype/Vent/Teamspeak:

Verbally with FG serving as the Tabletop: In this setup, the chat box is really just a dice tray, with the rest of FG being used for maps and character sheets. I'm also very interested in trying this with Google Hangout, although it would probably require a more theater-of-the-mind kind of game like classic D&D or BRP. I figure I'd split my screen in half with FG taking one side and Hangout occupying the other. FG would be for the dice and character sheet.

Equal chat and verbal communication: Whether you reserve the chat window for just OOC or just IC, it is one of two ways to communicate. This seems to be the most popular option and a reasonable compromise between speed and roleplay.

Mostly chat with verbal for special circumstance: This is what I ran last night and for me; it enhanced the roleplay greatly. It also moves slow. As the GM, I appreciated the time to think more about what to do next.

So far, my FGII experience has been favorable. I see using it a lot more, and in different ways for different games. :)

[Casimir]

I'm involved in 3 games at the moment - 2 CoC games and 1 Warhammer game. The Warhammer game (in which I'm a player) we do through Skype, and reference FGII for maps, actual in character RP situations, dice rolls, etc. The other two games (where I'm the Keeper) we do completely via chat within FGII itself.

In my experience so far, both have their merits.

The CoC games are great because it involves you more into the immersive roleplay experience - the only drawback is that communication takes a bit longer, so the game takes longer than a Skype game does because everything is typed.

The Warhammer game is also great for the opposite reasons - the play is a bit more casual than my CoC games, but the Skype interactions make gameplay a lot quicker. While not necessarily as immersive RP-wise as the CoC games, the game itself isn't tailored to a lot of more hardcore RP anyway, so it works fine. Also the voice communications allow for all of us to interact directly to one another more than via chat, so it's almost the same as a face to face game.

[thrylax]

In the games I have run, we found it best to use chat for everything dealing with in game actions, such as PC's speaking to NPC's and descriptions, etc. We also use Ventrillo for all OOC conversations and rules discussion, etc. We have tried other variations, but this setup seems the best way for us at least.

[osarusan]

We used to use Skype together with FG. Recently we switched over to using Google+ hangout together with FG. G+ is great because 1) if someone drops they can easily join back in, 2) you can see each other. I can even see the youtube sharing options being useful at times.

I have to say that with a few plugins, the Google+ hangout could be a serious contender for competition with Fantasy Grounds. I hope FG doesn't get left behind in the dust...

[demonsbane]

I wouldn't play via G+ Hangouts; not my style, and for us an immersive interface such as the one of Fantasy Grounds is the best. Also we like the Text Chat along with the FG capabilities in this area, and audio is left just for OOC talk.

[Mirloc]

Odd, I use in-game chat almost exclusively for OOC, and Ventrillo for all of the game-related speaking and descriptions and sounds. (I made the mistake a couple years ago of using audio to augment a run-through of War of the Dead, and I'll be damned if the players didn't love it. I don't use mood music, just sounds. So rather than the "The door creaks open" kinds of things I have a creaking door sound played. It's fun, and I have to say a quite enjoyable way to add to the gaming experience.

[Art Wendorf]

Currently my group has elected to go with Chat only, which is very cool with me. That is how I advertised the game. Plus that pause during typing allows me to fiddle and figure things out with Fantasy Ground to which I am a new GM.

Later on, maybe months or a year down the road, I plan on starting a Star Wars: Edge of the Empire or Savage Worlds edition Star Frontiers. When I do that, I'll probably just use the Teamspeak server that Fantasy Grounds has so graciously given us access to. But even then, I'm not sure to what extent I'll use it. I'd like to stream sounds/background stuff through it and use the voice for OOC conversations while keeping the Chat Window for IC coms. For a very simple reason, it's really, really nice to be able to scroll back up (both as a player and GM) to see and remember just what the heck is and has happened! ;)