Question about GMing without voice chat

[Galdrin]

Looking for input on the topic of GMing without the possibility to use voice chat. Will this be a disruptive game or does it work fine even if a bit slow?

The reason I'm asking is because I have an ultimate license, a lot of adventure to create modules from (dnd 2, 3, 3.5,4 and preorders on all announced 5e stuff) and 3-4 hours each evening to create modules or to GM. The problem is that the time I have is while I'm sitting in my autistic sons room and try to get him to sleep :) and a lot of talking might work against me. I cam listen to voice chat but all players would need to wait for me to type answers on their questions.

So, any input from players or GM's that has run campaigns without voice?

[damned]

hey @tony.lindberg - there are some here who run the entire campaign using voice - some even for very similar reasons others because they get more immersed when typing than chatting. yes it slows things down but if everyone is typing actions etc everyones expectations are the same. some groups will allow you to listen on your headset and type your actions/responses but you need to make sure you keep up - sometimes things move ahead of you.
if you are going to GM just announce a game here specifying the setup and the text requirement and see what sort of response you get.

i have a beautiful autistic son - fortunately for me he is a very good sleeper :)

PS - you can email [email protected] and request a change of your forum username - you may prefer not to use your email address on every post.

[Starcrawler]

I'm currently running a campaign that doesn't use voice and honestly I wouldn't have it any other way, while voice for OOC does have its uses (And I have used voice for OOC in the past) and does speed things up a bit, but honestly I prefer pure text. Honestly there's no disruption with using pure text, it can go slow at times admitedly, but the pros to using text far outway the cons. So all in all, you should have no problems at all with a pure text based campaign, just make it clear to your players beforehand that it's pure text (As there are some who prefer voice over text) and you should have a good time :).

Although there is the flip side that text does add to your prep time, as with voice you can read directly from the module ect, whereas by text it's better to make story entries beforehand, but that's the only thing I forsee. Good luck with your campaign :).

[levinth]

I also prefer to run my games as text only - I'm not good at thinking quickly when I'm put on the spot, so I prefer the slower pace with text chat games. It gives me time to come up with more interesting responses to what the players do.

I've found that it takes a session or two for people to get used to the slow pace and not be "typing over each other", so to speak, but once everyone gets the rhythm of it, it's a very satisfying way to play. I've certainly never found it disruptive, my only advice is if you are GMing, be very careful not to ignore people, even if you just acknowledge they've said/ done something and will sort it out after you've done something else first... you kind of need to keep one eye on the chatlog all the time!

Anyway, best of luck with your game and getting your son to sleep... I hear that isn't easy at the best of times! :p

[Valarian]

The majority of my games have been using the text-chat in Fantasy Grounds. Things can move a little slower than normal, but I've found that the characterisation you get is a lot better than with voice. Far less of the talking in third person and "my character does ...". Make full use of the chat options to add emotion, in-character thinking, mood, and you get a lot out of text chat. In a 3 hour session, my players and I tend to churn out around 20 to 30 pages.

Some chat logs, if you wish to see examples of actual text-chat play.
Age of Arthur (Fate): https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B75Lr5C1Hpx3bm1oWlVHY1k2ZkU&usp=sharing
The One Ring: A Gathering Storm: https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B75Lr5C1Hpx3SVRia1AxeVpWUE0&usp=sharing
The One Ring (first campaign): https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B75Lr5C1Hpx3ZmYzYmJjNmEtMjcwOS00NmI zLWEzMzYtNDg0YTMyNDFlN2Yx&usp=sharing

[Galdrin]

Thanks all for the responce, sounds like it's doable with preparation time (which I have a lot of). Would you recomend Out of character chatting (toilet break and so on) in the FG client or should I use for example IRC for that (own server)?
Could voice chat between players potentially harm the game if I can't participate in it as a GM?

[Starcrawler]

Personally I would recommend that if you're going text as GM that you make the game text only (No voice even for players), that way you're all on the same footing, but that's just my opinion. Also just use the FG client for OOC chat is what I would recommend as well, keep it all in one place.

[bdf1992]

The biggest problem i have with voice is getting sidetracked or interrupted way to easy.

Usually text games are really fun and they do end up being a little slower but also more in depth.

[GunnarGreybeard]

All of the games I have run have been using text chat only and they do start off slow until you get a rhythm especially when you have players who do not know FG or the game system since they usually have a lot of questions in the first few sessions. For me, it makes the RP immersion that much better and you can control the pace. It also reduces the joking and such of players that may take the game off track, sometimes for extended periods.

Another benefit is the text chat log gets generated so you can read back through it between sessions and see what happened and even edit it and post it on a website for others to read through like an ongoing storybook.

[seycyrus]

I have a specific question to those who use a lot of type during their sessions. Do you all use a system that indicates to the players the amount of damage that a monster has taken, even if only in some qualitative sense (bleeding, heavily bleeding, etc)?

I like the idea of using a lot of text, but I find that it slows me down a bit to have to unique responses for every exchange of blows. The quality of the descriptions tend to degrade over the course of the evening. Eventually, voice descriptions start making their way back into the sessions.

For Example,

DM(text): "Your sword cuts deep across the Gnoll's upper thigh, he stumbles trying to regain his balance."

DM(text): "You stab at his hand and feel the penetration, but the Orc ignores the pain, and swings his axe."

(later)

DM(text): "Orc 1 says 'ouch', orc 2 says 'Yeow!', Orc 3 says 'Ouch Ouch' "

(later)

Dm (voice, taking 1 second): "You bash the Ogre across the face with a mighty 'THWACK'! It howls in great pain and appears to be stunned."

How do you text-only guys handle this?

[Blahness98]

The games I run are text only. I believe that it allows for greater immersion as that way the young elf maiden you just saved doesn't sound like a trucker from New Jersey. Voice is useful for quick games, like PFS games, but if you really want to get into a game, text is a great way to do it.

I have played in a few games where the GM used text for in character stuff and voice for OOC stuff. But that usually changes to voice being used more and more and text less. It then becomes a voice only game. But to each their own..

[dr_venture]

Hey Galdrin, I have been running text-only campaigns for a few years now. It's definitely slower to my mind, but the benefits make it worth it. I would likely use a VoIP option if I ran a game with my decades-long gaming buddies, as the event would be as much social as gaming, and we have a shorthand that would be easier over VoIP. But it's text-only otherwise.

I like the history that the chat log gives you at the end of each session. I'm a coding kind of guy, so I wrote a script that cleans up the chat log that FG generates, and I post them to the web for reference. Here's one from my Castles & Crusades game - I just picked a random log that has exposition and a little combat. As you can see, FG does all the work in informing players of who attacked who, and how much damage was done, if any (assuming someone somewhere took some damage in teh log - I haven't checked). You can browse through and see what one of our sessions looks like:

https://rpg.castlecorps.com/FG_chat_logs/greyhawk-FGgroup/2014_01_31.html

The log has all of the chit chat snipped off the front of the session. I always try to start the log with a brief summary of the last session (usually just the summary I posted with the previous session's chat log) as an indication that the game is now started, and a place to start the current session's log.

Here's one from my old west campaign (also using Castles & Crusades):

https://rpg.castlecorps.com/FG_chat_logs/OW-Thur/2013-08-09.html

The main problem I find is that since I'm GMing, I have a lot of work to do just putzing around in FG, so I have to be careful to go back and look for stuff in the chat log that I missed while I was busy doing other stuff.

[bdf1992]

If you really want to write up a few templates that you can use.

I mean you know what weapons your players are using and you know what they are fighting so it can't be that hard to imagine what they might do.

Otherwise save that big descriptions for bigger moments :)

[Irondrake]

My group is used to text based role-playing and find it to be very immersive, I don't think we would change over to voice for any reason.

[GunnarGreybeard]

I am surprised by the number of people that appear to be using text only chat. I was under the impression, from seeing other threads, that it was something that was pretty rare. I guess not.

[damned]

heres a thought i had whilst reading this thread...
ive always had 2 tables for Critical Hit and Critical Miss - I just have 6 entries in each (and I chose a d6 in homage to this fantastic video/song https://vimeo.com/23248158) so its nice and easy... players get to roll their own critical hit/miss in my Castles&Crusades campaign...
anyway - back on track - for attack descriptions you could do something like this -
create a new table Sword Strike and any other common weapons your party use and add 6-20 descriptions and then drag the dice to your hotkeys and then you can throw out a random description at a single mouse click...
https://www.fg-con.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/hotkey-desc.jpg
https://www.fg-con.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/sword-strike.jpg
Ive exported the tables as a module.
If this is of any value perhaps others (particularly you CnC GMs) might like to add additional tables and share back?
The descriptions were quick and off the top of my head - Im sure we can come up with better ones...
Tables.mod (https://www.dropbox.com/s/olrjwh1zcisur2i/Tables.mod)

[Nylanfs]

There's some pretty awesome descriptions in Dragonwing's Torn Asunder book

[Eru the One]

I prefer text for RP and other character related actions (emote, mood, etc.). Voice is so much better for discussing a rules question or a quick OOC comment/question.

[Blacky]

So, any input from players or GM's that has run campaigns without voice?
Several gaming group do this, either fully text mode or partial text mode.

Personally I don't like it, but some prefers it (albeit usually with a reason, like irl issues, being shy, having some kind of speech impediment, and such although almost none of these text player will give you the true reason why they don't use microphones).

The main biggest challenge is spelling. Sadly nowadays a lot of people can't spell if their life depended on it, and a lot of people don't even try. To the point where a sentence can't be read without an aspirin. We all do some mistakes here and there, but at some point that's just ridiculous. And can destroy any kind of atmosphere. And FG doesn't have spellcheck :(

The second issue is speed. Audio gaming on virtual tabletop is slower than on a regular tabletop (but it's usually alleviated with time spent gaming with the same group, and on some cases can be faster than old school gaming because of ruleset automation and whispers. But text mode is far far slower. People will need to type fast (as in anything slower than a professional secretary will get me spending my gaming session on Youtube at the very least, but that's just me) and type good (see above). Not a lot of people can do this.

The last issue comes from the first two. It can be hard to get people to stick to their characters, being engaging for several hours, etc. But when half the group can't read what the other half if typing, and when you spend 90% of your time waiting on people to type something… well let's say it's not for everyone.

On the bright side you won't have to deal with people having loud spouse-childs-pets and such in the background.

[JohnD]

One reason against it is your DM... typing 60 WPM for 4 hours straight is a pain in the balls. Not something I'd be open to.

[Griogre]

It's not just the DM, the typed conversation will move a the speed of the slowest typist. There are also issues with the DM can have a hard time keeping up with multiple conversations or with just replying if all the players type at once.

All that said, it is viable to play a type only game and many do. I think the most important thing to make sure in such a game is to make sure to advertise the game that way so your players self select into the game knowing its type only.

[Valarian]

There are also issues with the DM can have a hard time keeping up with multiple conversations or with just replying if all the players type at once.
The same problem exists in a VOIP game, if the players start talking over each other and the GM. At least in a typed game, you have the chat log to refer to.

[Zeus]

Its been interesting reading the mix of use cases presented in this thread. Personally, I use a mixture of voice and chat in my games - when using voice though I insist my players adopt a 'character voice'. Unless they use the 'character voice' in voice comms, I assume its OOC. I like using reserving the chat window for narrative (which I also read out aloud again in voice of the NPC), DM2P whispers and of course turn/combat info.

[damned]

*when* I have time i like to get my room/location descriptions and important dialogues typed up in FG. especially if there is something *important* in there (and again especially if the players dont yet know its important) as they can go back and refer to it when something tugs at their memory :)
i still narrate or embellish the description verbally as well.

[Ienai]

Several gaming group do this, either fully text mode or partial text mode.

Personally I don't like it, but some prefers it (albeit usually with a reason, like irl issues, being shy, having some kind of speech impediment, and such although almost none of these text player will give you the true reason why they don't use microphones).

The main biggest challenge is spelling. Sadly nowadays a lot of people can't spell if their life depended on it, and a lot of people don't even try. To the point where a sentence can't be read without an aspirin. We all do some mistakes here and there, but at some point that's just ridiculous. And can destroy any kind of atmosphere. And FG doesn't have spellcheck :(

The second issue is speed. Audio gaming on virtual tabletop is slower than on a regular tabletop (but it's usually alleviated with time spent gaming with the same group, and on some cases can be faster than old school gaming because of ruleset automation and whispers. But text mode is far far slower. People will need to type fast (as in anything slower than a professional secretary will get me spending my gaming session on Youtube at the very least, but that's just me) and type good (see above). Not a lot of people can do this.

The last issue comes from the first two. It can be hard to get people to stick to their characters, being engaging for several hours, etc. But when half the group can't read what the other half if typing, and when you spend 90% of your time waiting on people to type something… well let's say it's not for everyone.

On the bright side you won't have to deal with people having loud spouse-childs-pets and such in the background.



Something you should keep in mind as well is that this is an excellent way to help people reignite their imaginations and improved upon their spelling and grammar.

[Zeus]

One thing I'd like to potentially see moving forward is the ability for FG to leverage Dictation input, with PTT voice comms captured as text and presented in the chat log. That would be a nice way for the GM to overcome the typing overhead in an all chat only game.

As an example of how easy it is to use in practice (and how good the quality can be), I used dictation features in OS X Mavericks to create this Post. No typing involved bar a couple of spelling corrections.

[saithan]

I currently use dragon speech, I seem to really work well in fantasy grounds. I can go from dictating this message here and dictating to fantasy grounds almost seamlessly.
I do notice however some limitations when trying to dictate story entries. All in all it works quite well.

[Blacky]

Arf'

Why not directly do vocal gaming then?

[brochr]

Galdrin

A couple of thoughts on this. I both play and DM in chat only environments, for the same reason as you - it's quieter.

As a DM I found:

- preparation is everything. In my story entries I have a bunch of NPC 'speech bubbles' ready. I might not use them exactly but editing text is faster than typing new
- move long winded, out of action stuff offline if possible such as overnight camps, shopping and selling etc. you can do this by email or BB
- have rules around player action order even when out of combat rounds. Makes it easier to keep up.
- rule that OOC chat is done in OOC chat mode. You can ignore it then

As a player

- as with round the table, if it isn't my move I spend time planning my move. I like the gradual pace
- chat only is difficult for quickly explaining how to use FG features. Voice is much faster
- it works best when things are structured - running encounters, clear direction within party.
- party consensus for a choice of action can be hard to get. This leads to stop start/ dead end actions

It does reduce the social interaction side of gaming. If you are playing primarily for the game experience, thus isn't a biggie. If you are playing for social reasons it's not as good as round the table or voice.

All the best

Toph

[saithan]

Why not directly do vocal gaming then?

I do run my games over skype. but I have a friend that is impaired. while I have no issue with text games I myself prefer voice.

[Irondrake]

I prepare my material ahead of time, if not everything I need, at least encounters, descriptions and treasure entries. I can wing it if need be on descriptions as well, but I try to keep some notes on hand to minimize that. The game tends to flow just fine for my players most of the time.

[Galdrin]

Thanks Toph,

Valuable feedback and it's in the direction I have been thinking. I understand chat only is less social and that's bad, but there is no option for me to use voice most of the time. I'll probably be trying a game where players can use voice for OOC if they wish for the social part but enforce typed text for PC actions.

Worth a try, I'm not ready to abandon Fantasy Grounds just because it's impossible for me to use voice but then again I'm not prepared to make the gaming sessions into "computer games"


Galdrin

A couple of thoughts on this. I both play and DM in chat only environments, for the same reason as you - it's quieter.

As a DM I found:

- preparation is everything. In my story entries I have a bunch of NPC 'speech bubbles' ready. I might not use them exactly but editing text is faster than typing new
- move long winded, out of action stuff offline if possible such as overnight camps, shopping and selling etc. you can do this by email or BB
- have rules around player action order even when out of combat rounds. Makes it easier to keep up.
- rule that OOC chat is done in OOC chat mode. You can ignore it then

As a player

- as with round the table, if it isn't my move I spend time planning my move. I like the gradual pace
- chat only is difficult for quickly explaining how to use FG features. Voice is much faster
- it works best when things are structured - running encounters, clear direction within party.
- party consensus for a choice of action can be hard to get. This leads to stop start/ dead end actions

It does reduce the social interaction side of gaming. If you are playing primarily for the game experience, thus isn't a biggie. If you are playing for social reasons it's not as good as round the table or voice.

All the best

Toph

[brochr]

I'll probably be trying a game where players can use voice for OOC if they wish for the social part but enforce typed text for PC actions.

We played a game last night with exactly these rules. I muted my mic and took off the headphones to concentrate on the chat screen. The chat play was much richer than in face to face sessions. I also suspect they used TS to share my "whispers" and decide on actions without alerting the 'monsters'. Very clever!

I did a rough calc - about 15% of my stuff was straight drop, 25% edited and drop, 15% long ad lib story, the remainder simple responses to player actions/questions

The family slept through it undisturbed!


Worth a try, I'm not ready to abandon Fantasy Grounds just because it's impossible for me to use voice but then again I'm not prepared to make the gaming sessions into "computer games"

More than worth a try! It is quite rewarding. One thing I am watching is what Doug does with Obsidian Portal as this style of gaming will probably lead to better adventure log entries if it is automated from the chat log.

Happy gaming!