Fog of War?

[Sheogoroth]

New to the forums, haven't purchased FG yet.
I've been comparing like-systems before my and my group commit.
I was looking around to see if there was a function to restrict field of vision per player (for dungeons and the like), and I found an article from early 2016 that said that the feature had been demoed.
So my question is this: Has this been implemented yet and if not is there a release date?

[Beldak]

There is currently DM-controlled "fog of war" where you can reveal what parts of the map you want. The demo you saw is the future FG in development on the Unity engine that allows dynamic lighting/fog of war on a per-character basis

[Nylanfs]

The current FOG is not character dependent, it's party or nothing.

[LordEntrails]

And welcome to the Community!

We really do suggest you give FG a try. You can do an ultimate subscription for $10 for the first month to see if you like it. And if you don't like it Smiteworks will give you your money back; https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?34624-30-day-trial-for-subscriptions-replaced-with-30-day-money-back-guarantee

[Ken L]

He's referring to dynamic lighting, and no, FG doesn't have it currently. In terms of normal FOW, you need to unmask areas manually as your party explores them.

[Bizmal]

I've been looking for an answer to this dynamic lighting question. So much talk about future updates. Is this a soon thing or a years thing? Super curious as I can't decide between FG and roll20.

[celestian]

I've been looking for an answer to this dynamic lighting question. So much talk about future updates. Is this a soon thing or a years thing? Super curious as I can't decide between FG and roll20.

My humble opinion on the choice is do you want automation that makes running the game easier or better map tools. FG will give you much better tools for automation and running the game than Roll20. Roll20's map tools are going to outshine FG's certainly with dynamic lighting and fog of war as well as LoS.

I'd suggest trying the monthly "standard" subscription and see if you like FG. Same with Roll20. Both are fairly inexpensive. Both have some hurdles to make with UI but find what fits your needs.

As to FGU (FantasyGrounds Unity) they've not made any announcements on release dates.

[JohnD]

celestian hits the nail on the head. Do you want a program that will light up your map or do you want tools and functionality that make every single other aspect of running a game better?

[LordEntrails]

Welcome to the forums Bizmal :)

[Full Bleed]

I've been looking for an answer to this dynamic lighting question. So much talk about future updates. Is this a soon thing or a years thing? Super curious as I can't decide between FG and roll20.
No one can tell you how long it will be for Fantasy Ground Unity (which will have dynamic lighting) to come out. Which does, in and of itself, kinda answer your question: It's not a "soon thing".

That said, if I was making my decision on which VTT to use because dynamic lighting was the number one thing on my list, I wouldn't be looking at Roll20--I'd be looking at Maptool (which has lights, sight, and auras.)

However, I concur with the others above--if you're looking for polished commercial rulesets and game management features built-in, and you can wait for dynamic lighting, you need look no further than the current FG.

[MarianDz]

Welcome "Sheogoroth" and "Bizmal" :)

[Hurske]

I think another thing you have to look at, is how often would It be used.

Granted, lighting is very neat, but unless your running a dungeon craw hack session only. The amount of time you would be using lighting would be minimal compared to everything else in a session.

Fantasy grounds has the the focus on running the game in a fantastic fashion, than just being something pretty to look at.

[LordEntrails]

Since we are talking about this, I've always wondered, how much effort and knowledge does it take to make a image mask so that dynamic lighting works? Or do the implementations on other platforms not account for pillars, walls, etc?

[Lexfire]

I would find adding a circle and cone tool useful for unmasking - only having square and shift draw option for unmask is limiting. Drawing a circle 20' radius or cone on a player would give more options.

[pindercarl]

Since we are talking about this, I've always wondered, how much effort and knowledge does it take to make a image mask so that dynamic lighting works? Or do the implementations on other platforms not account for pillars, walls, etc?

Line-of-sight (LOS) first requires occluders to be defined. These are typically done as line segments since the calculations for LOS require the occluders to be linear segments. (While it is possible to do per-pixel LOS calculations, this is more involved and I'm not aware of any VTT that does so.) Using an origin point and a set of occluders, a polygon of potentially visible area can be calculated. The potentially visible area can be further restricted, e.g by a maximum distance, or field of view, to determine the visible area.

The fog-of-war (FOW) is the accumulation of the LOS results. There are any number of ways this can be stored. In Maptools, the FOW simply subtracts the LOS from the FOW on token drop. From what I can tell, Maptools stores this vectors (or something equivalent). This ensures that the FOW is accurate since there is no loss of data. In the recently added "advanced FOW" for Roll20, the FOW is stored as revealed grid squares. If the LOS crosses the center point of a grid square, this grid square is marked as revealed. This is a lossy method and results in inaccuracies. If an occluder is located within a grid square and the center of the grid square is seen, then entire grid cell is revealed. For example, if a door is not on a grid line, then the area behind the door is shown. Similarly, if the player "sees" some of a cell, but not the center, then the cell is not revealed in the FOW.

As to the question about walls and pillars, it is the definition of the occluders that determines the LOS. These definitions are orthogonal to the underlying image and do need to correlate. If you add occluders to a part of the map representing the pillars, then those pillars would affect LOS. Hope that helps, or at least doesn't add to the confusion.

[Zacchaeus]

Line-of-sight (LOS) first requires occluders to be defined.

I'm glad this isn't my job :)

[JohnD]

Sounds like a lot of work for relatively little benefit from a GM's perspective. Mine at least. I'd rather be generating content or playing than fiddling with this.

[LordEntrails]

Thanks Carl.

So it sounds like making the occluders is like making a simplified map on top of the image. So it takes at least a measurable amount of time to define. I think sometimes that effort gets lost by some and that was part of the reason I was asking.

[pindercarl]

Thanks Carl.

So it sounds like making the occluders is like making a simplified map on top of the image. So it takes at least a measurable amount of time to define. I think sometimes that effort gets lost by some and that was part of the reason I was asking.

It was more of an overview of how LOS and FOW interoperate. The difficulty in adding the occluder data to a map comes down to the tools available. There are multiple options being developed for FGU, so hopefully we'll find solutions that work well for the end-user. Like most features, LOS and FOW are "your mileage may vary" additions to a VTT. I suspect the biggest bang-for-the-buck most users will find will be in the modules for licensed content.

[steff]

I ran two campaigns in Roll 20 for Pathfinder. I ran Reign of Winter for about 8 months or so then I ran Age of Worms for about 4 months. Now I run Rise of the Runelords and Curse of the Crimson Throne while playing in Strange Aeons on FG and, from a DM perspective, it isn't even close. FG by a landslide.

Roll20 is MUCH more labor intensive to set up. Everything is a damn macro you have to write. You import the maps and then spend an inordinate amount of time setting them up. The LOS thing is a huge hassle because you have to draw in every wall, door, window, etc. And this is in addition to all of the monsters and such which you have to enter all of the stats for. No dragging and dropping monsters in. It does not have access to the rulesets either so anything you want in the game you have to put in there. It's almost not worth it by the time you are set up.

Once you play the game, it is pretty cool to have dynamic lighting, and they also have some graphical spell effects tool like breath weapons and fireballs but honestly, if FG wanted to be more competitive, give the gm better tools for managing the mask and it would be just as good. One thing you can do in Roll20 is you can set small mask areas. you don't have to mask the whole map and then carve out chunks. if you would do irregular shaped masks and add/subtract areas for view with different shapes, it would be just as functional. (Of course I say this as the guy that does not have to write the software but that is why I buy the ultimate license.)

If you aren't sure, try them both but I'm telling you FG blows away Roll20 in terms of ease of use and a much better GUI.

Just one mans opinion.

[steff]

OH.. another thing. I could never keep a group together on Roll20. I don't know what it is but for some reason I spent half my life recruiting people to be in my campaign. Maybe I am a sh*tty dm but I haven't ran into that problem on FG.

Must be something in the water I guess....

For those that have not seen it here is the FG unity video that is on youtube. Also, the developers do answer some questions in the forums concerning schedule and pricing and such.

https://youtu.be/qVppbivpWS0

[Andraax]

You can add small areas to the mask by holding Ctrl while drawing (blocks normally, or also in combination with Shift for irregular areas). While the entire mask appears by default, it's a quick draw of a large block from one corner to the opposite corner to remove the entire mask, then you can draw in smaller areas.

[Azlath]

Hi everyone, new to the Forums. And to FG!
I would like to know if there is a way to change the color of the mask... I would like a darker color.

Thanks!

[Zacchaeus]

Hi Azlath, welcome to FG.

Try this extension (https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?22989-Change-Mask-color-from-white-to&p=197605&viewfull=1#post197605).

[Azlath]

Thanks Zacchaeus, I'll try it tonight!

[damned]

There is a newer one that uses the 5e frames...
Somewhere - by Nickademus I think...

[Mirloc]

I'll add my 2 cents here as well.

I had a long-term group who met in person for several years. I initially used Maptools on a TV behind me so the players had their battle-map there. (Saved on carting a huge box of miniatures and map tiles.) Maptools maps were dead easy to create - they allow adding pieces similar in nature to map-making software like Tiled and the like. After setting up the map, and placing the NPCs came the FoW masking which I spent nearly as much time on FoW as I did on making the map, placing the traps/NPCs and writing the adventure notes.

Switching to FG was the best decision I've ever made. Seriously, losing FoW just means that I don't make huge maps, but rather I allow the players to make their own, just like in the old days before the map tiles. One of the better tools out there for this is Drawpile (https://drawpile.net/). So the players make the maps, I just have to lay out maps where combat is going to occur and overland maps so they know where they are going. The ability to have the virtual dice, character sheets up and available, notes and the like are what make FG the better VTT in my opinion.

I tried Roll20 a couple of times (my son is a huge supporter of it - me not so much) but the steep curve to knock out a week's adventure just seems like such work and I already own 2 ultimate licenses so... :)