Special Announcement - Kickstarter

[LordEntrails]

If I get the newcomer - Ultimate on kickstarter, does that get me an ultimate key now, and then the FGU when it's available/beta?
No. Purchasing any level via the KS gets you no access to the current/classic (FGC) program.

What happens with a license you get from the KS is that sometime after the KS closes and following the fulfillment stage FGU Beta will become available. Probably sometime after July and before December. At that point you will get your FGU license key and access to download the Beta.

If you want to use FG now, then you can buy an ultimate FG license from the FG Store here, and then on the KS buy a Rookie - Ultimate. Or, you can subscribe to the Ultimate now, and then buy the KS Newcomer - Ultimate. There are other possibilities too, but those are the main ones.

[dulux-oz]

Instead of recording the # of successes/failures of a single die rolled a certain number of times, would it be possible to do it for a group of dice? In Gurps, we don't roll a d20, but roll 3d6 instead, and try to roll under a target number. Would it be possible to roll 3d6 a certain amount of times(say 12 times), and spit out the number of times the results were above/under a certain target (say 10)? Something like, 12x(3d6)s10?

For the record (and sorry for writing this late) I am continuing to work on the Universal Die Roller (part of the DORCore) and it can already do everything you (and others) have requested. This is still in per-release, obviously.

Also obviously, I need to get my hands on FGU to work out what Moon's already covered and what I have to add (if anything). My plan, depending upon both my own needs and the general desires of the Community, is to release the UDR for FGC - but again, only if people actually ask for it.

Cheers

[ddavison]

I am requesting feedback for a new tier and a modification/expansion to an existing tier.

1. Make a direct FGC Standard to FGU Ultimate tier for $100. No need to upgrade first and then back. No distinction from Rookie or Veteran.

2. Expand the Veteran Upgrade - Standard to also allow Lite license keys that were purchase before those were discontinued. The price would remain at $29 instead of $35 for a Newcomer.

Do those price points seem fair? Any concerns?

[Zacchaeus]

Both those sound good. The first one is much requested.

[Ampersandrew]

1. Seems very fair, given that taking an FGC Ultimate and then Rookie is about $160. You're giving up the ability to use FGC for $60.

2. Honestly, I thought you were already doing this.

[seycyrus]

... Any concerns?

Those seem to be good options. I only wonder if some folks will now be lowering their pledge from $135 to $100.

[ddavison]

Those seem to be good options. I only wonder if some folks will now be lowering their pledge from $135 to $100.

Probably some of that. I mostly want to make sure that I don't overlook some negative issue that some people might have.

[Zacchaeus]

Probably some of that. I mostly want to make sure that I don't overlook some negative issue that some people might have.
There’ll always be someone with a negative issue :)

[Ampersandrew]

Ther’ll always be someone with a negative issue ��

Haters gonna hate https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nfWlot6h_JM

[JohnD]

Probably some of that. I mostly want to make sure that I don't overlook some negative issue that some people might have.

The perpetually triggered and offended will always find something.

[damned]

The only negative might be for some people who already did the Standard to Ultimate upgrade of FGC this month so they could get the Rookie upgrade.
The price points are very fair.

[Ampersandrew]

The only negative might be for some people who already did the Standard to Ultimate upgrade of FGC this month so they could get the Rookie upgrade.
The price points are very fair.

Smiteworks do a 30 day money back thing. They might be annoyed 'til you tell them they can get their money back.

[Three of Swords]

I am requesting feedback for a new tier and a modification/expansion to an existing tier.

1. Make a direct FGC Standard to FGU Ultimate tier for $100. No need to upgrade first and then back. No distinction from Rookie or Veteran.



Doing #1 will probably get you an upgrade from me. My whole group has Standard edition copies, so as DM I don't really need Ultimate. But I've occasionally considered getting an Ultimate "just in case" always but shot it down as too expensive for a 'maybe scenario'.

This upgrade tier would probably convince me to upgrade. And I'm a newbie, so my pledge would go from $15 to $100 if it happens.

[Temmpest]

Doing #1 will probably get you an upgrade from me. My whole group has Standard edition copies, so as DM I don't really need Ultimate. But I've occasionally considered getting an Ultimate "just in case" always but shot it down as too expensive for a 'maybe scenario'.

This upgrade tier would probably convince me to upgrade. And I'm a newbie, so my pledge would go from $15 to $100 if it happens.

I doubt they will upend their Kickstarter for a select few, especially when it's doing so well right now. The good thing is that you don't really need Ultimate.

[Three of Swords]

I doubt they will upend their Kickstarter for a select few, especially when it's doing so well right now. The good thing is that you don't really need Ultimate.

Doug asked for input. It was his idea to include a new tier, not mine. I would never have asked for it.

Was just letting him know that it might get some people to upgrade to help make up for those that might drop their pledge because of the new theoretical tier.

[Achernar22]

So I just backed the $30 Rookie - Upgrade Ultimate. How quickly do we receive the subscription code (Steam) to update our FG to BETA?

[Trenloe]

So I just backed the $30 Rookie - Upgrade Ultimate. How quickly do we receive the subscription code (Steam) to update our FG to BETA?
See "What if I am a Steam Customer?" in post #1 of this thread.

For FG Unity (not Steam) the beta test version will be released later this year, after alpha testing is complete - there is no set date as yet, but it should be before the targeted release date of December.

[ddavison]

I just added this as a new tier.
FGC Standard to FGU Ultimate

[Achernar22]

Not a problem either way, very excited. But not sure if it was clear that the BETA will be released in December or if the 'official release of fantasy grounds unity' will be released in December. I see where it stated that Steam will release the same time as on the Fantasy Grounds website.

[Temmpest]

I just added this as a new tier.
FGC Standard to FGU Ultimate

Just another incredible example of how much Smiteworks cares about their customer base. They're the most responsive company I have ever had the pleasure of dealing with.

[ddavison]

Not a problem either way, very excited. But not sure if it was clear that the BETA will be released in December or if the 'official release of fantasy grounds unity' will be released in December. I see where it stated that Steam will release the same time as on the Fantasy Grounds website.

The official release is targeted for December. We don't have a fixed date for the Beta, but it will be some time before the official release. Only after it looks like there are no major issues being reported from the Beta will we do the official release.

[ddavison]

Also... if anyone upgraded their FG Classic license to Ultimate just to get the FGU Ultimate license, they can contact us ([email protected]) for a refund of that so they can back at the new tier level. The difference is that they will remain on the FGC Standard license until FGU releases.

[Achernar22]

Thank you for the quick response. I think the adversity in the maps (various weather effects, etc.) and line of site are game changers. Looks superb. Will definitely be using this online as well as in our face to face games. And props to you for adding in the latest kickstarter 'tier' to allow for the upgrade directly from standard to unity ultimate.

[YamaShintaku]

I just added this as a new tier.
FGC Standard to FGU Ultimate

Fantastic! Thank you for the obvious caring of your fan base and players! You guys ROCK!

[Zacchaeus]

Fantastic! Thank you for the obvious caring of your fan base and players! You guys ROCK!

Easy, now. Don't heap too much praise - Doug might release another dancing video if you do :)

[ddavison]

No more dancing. At my age, I'm likely to injure myself.

[anfiach]

Not only is FG awesome software, the SW team is second to none when it comes to community involvement and customer service.

[Bidmaron]

Here is a stretch goal that won’t threaten release: have extension updates automatically download like rulesets and modules!

[njohn858]

Have you considered a backer bundle tier of both FGC and FGU either Standard/Ultimate? Eg $45-50 for FGC&FGU Standard or $170-175 for FGC&FGU Ultimate? I understand the focus of the Kickstarter is Unity, but something like this might attract newcomers as it's a bit cheaper than buying FGC on their own then backing the Kickstarter.

[LordEntrails]

Here is a stretch goal that won’t threaten release: have extension updates automatically download like rulesets and modules!
I like this one too. I know their are numerous concerns, not the least of which is security, but I also know those issues are solvable.

I know such a system was spec'd at one point by a community dev, and I think Doug mentioned implementing this or something in FGU, but not sure when. But then again, my memory is not as good as Trenloe's :)

[ssj4megaman]

One thing that was talked about on a Friday FG video is the work needed to implement a co GM mode/build/addition and how to handle multiple people opening/editing the same files or sections withing FGU. This seems like a simple thing as far as permissions go. The person running the campaign (client considered running the game or gm-ing the game) always has priority and overwrite in every aspect. This would imply general game permissions are coded into FGU for access to certain area's of the game I.E. Map, specific modules, chat etc.

Now I am not talking about how much work it would take to code that in, but just the "True" GM always admin over the session like an Operating system.

[LordEntrails]

One thing that was talked about on a Friday FG video is the work needed to implement a co GM mode/build/addition and how to handle multiple people opening/editing the same files or sections withing FGU. This seems like a simple thing as far as permissions go. The person running the campaign (client considered running the game or gm-ing the game) always has priority and overwrite in every aspect. This would imply general game permissions are coded into FGU for access to certain area's of the game I.E. Map, specific modules, chat etc.

Now I am not talking about how much work it would take to code that in, but just the "True" GM always admin over the session like an Operating system.
Unfortunately, That not how operating systems handles file permissions. In an SQL or relational data base, it would be easy to do what you suggest, in FG which is effectively using a couple of text files as it's database, you have to deal with operating system file handling. So what FG would have to do is to create a set of function for the host (GM) to handle all file transactions (caches, staging areas, transaction logs, garbage collection, etc). Not impossible, just labor intensive and you would have to do extensive testing to make sure you never allow the file to become corrupted or commands lost.

[Saz]

Unfortunately, That not how operating systems handles file permissions. In an SQL or relational data base, it would be easy to do what you suggest, in FG which is effectively using a couple of text files as it's database, you have to deal with operating system file handling. So what FG would have to do is to create a set of function for the host (GM) to handle all file transactions (caches, staging areas, transaction logs, garbage collection, etc). Not impossible, just labor intensive and you would have to do extensive testing to make sure you never allow the file to become corrupted or commands lost.

And, of course, Smite Works is not a Google. They aren't big enough, nor do they dodge enough taxes to afford to do all that. ;)

[Valatar]

They're already rebuilding the engine anyways, there's no better time than now to implement that functionality. And it is vital functionality, given that their competition already supports that feature, and it's a common need for many gaming groups. Better to bite the bullet and get it in when the program's being overhauled than wait until it's done, then try to go back and stick it in in the future.

[Ampersandrew]

They're already rebuilding the engine anyways, there's no better time than now to implement that functionality. And it is vital functionality, given that their competition already supports that feature, and it's a common need for many gaming groups. Better to bite the bullet and get it in when the program's being overhauled than wait until it's done, then try to go back and stick it in in the future.

Except it's 90–95% done at this point. A lot of effort has been spent making sure that the new engine loads all the DLC that the last one could handle. It may have been better to add this as they worked, but as far as I know, that boat has sailed.

[Ckorik]

The ability to share a campaign between GM's is already supported - you just zip up the campaign directory at the end of a session and send it to the next guy - who unzips it - runs the session - and repeats.

That does require the GM's and players to have the right licenses - as you can't move the 'ultimate' license between seats. The licensing is fundamental to how the program runs - and honestly I can't see that changing at all.

[Muagen]

I don't see the necessity of a shared GM workspace **inside** the Fantasy Grounds client.
Doug mentioned potential companion apps in the FGUnity FAQ video--maybe a shared GM Drawing Board app, where a group could open and edit Story, etc. files could garner enough interest to merit development.

[Zacchaeus]

The ability to share a campaign between GM's is already supported - you just zip up the campaign directory at the end of a session and send it to the next guy - who unzips it - runs the session - and repeats.

That does require the GM's and players to have the right licenses - as you can't move the 'ultimate' license between seats. The licensing is fundamental to how the program runs - and honestly I can't see that changing at all.

I don't think the problem is sharing the campaign. What groups with rotating DM want is to just have one person buy a license and the DLC and everyone is able to share that license and DLC no matter who is hosting the game. Therefore 6 people buy one Ultimate License and one PHB instead of 6 Standard Licenses and 6 PHB's.

[Muagen]

There's no incentive for Smite Works to entertain that at all, is there?

[Trenloe]

Other than the architectural changes under the hood, there's also significant licensing issues for official products.

[Pantherin]

I don't think the problem is sharing the campaign. What groups with rotating DM want is to just have one person buy a license and the DLC and everyone is able to share that license and DLC no matter who is hosting the game. Therefore 6 people buy one Ultimate License and one PHB instead of 6 Standard Licenses and 6 PHB's.

I do not understand the intentions to purposely try to get around the licenses model. Smite Works has taken the time to develop a tool that we all can use, no matter where we are in the world. Why wouldn't the community want to pay for that service? It is not even that much money in the scheme of things. Honestly, if you take and apply a dollar value to the number of hours you spend in the VTT, it pays for itself in no time. When I see people complaining about the price, I scratch my head in confusion. Personally, I think their licensing price is very, very generous - for what they have given us, it is worth more. If all those who are complaining and attempting to get around the licensing model sat down and calculated how much money they have spent on games for a computer or console, that they have spent, and played (beat), and most likely are collecting dust on their shelves, that would be something to complain about.

This is a standard price on something that is yours, that you can use every weekend (in my case), without interruption, and anywhere you have a digital footprint. I have used mine in the middle of a combat zone on "down time". I play every weekend with friends I have met throughout the world.

To me, that is Priceless and worth every penny spent.

Which is my I am scratching my head at people who are complaining about the price or trying to share licenses?

If we do the math:

$1,000 (Kickstarter - What I chose to support - A high end choice) / 12 Months = $83.33 a month
$83.33 / 4 Weeks (Weekly login) = $20.83
$20.83 / 8 Hours (Game Session on Saturday) = $2.60

That means I am paying $2.60 an hour to play a game that I love, with friends I enjoying spending time with.

Once again, just an example of what I chose to support - at the high end - not pointing fingers, just using my own logic to find a reason for the complaints.

To me, it is well worth the $2.60 an hour.

If you want to do the math on the proposed pricing model - today, Smite Works is practically giving you an amazing tool for practically nothing.

I think they should charge us more, personally.

[Trenloe]

Everyone has different levels of expendable income that they can dedicate to the hobby. A lot of people also don't play every week. Or they've already spent money on a physical PHB, D&D Beyond, etc. and they struggle to justify buying the same again (potentially 6 times across a rotating group of players and GMs). It's an understandable "complaint" for some people. We're also in an environment of free or very inexpensive apps (that then hit you with adverts or micro transactions to make their money), where spending more than a couple of dollars for an "app" is against the norm. We know how advanced FG is, and the many thousands of hours that have gone into development, but people purchasing something for the first time and see the (potentially) high level of investment can seem off putting - especially if they're expecting a much less feature rich and in depth application than Fantasy Grounds actually is (based off experience of other apps/purchase models).

Hopefully most people will look past the initial costs and realise, if they're going to use FG for a while, that it's very worthwhile and will hopefully fit within their long term gaming budget. But there will always be some instances where it might not be financially viable (like the 6 player/GM rotating group mentioned) and they need to make the decision of whether the cost vs. advantages of FG is worthwhile for them.

[Pantherin]

Everyone has different levels of expendable income that they can dedicate to the hobby. A lot of people also don't play every week. Or they've already spent money on a physical PHB, D&D Beyond, etc. and they struggle to justify buying the same again (potentially 6 times across a rotating group of players and GMs). It's an understandable "complaint" for some people. We're also in an environment of free or very inexpensive apps (that then hit you with adverts or micro transactions to make their money), where spending more than a couple of dollars for an "app" is against the norm. We know how advanced FG is, and the many thousands of hours that have gone into development, but people purchasing something for the first time and see the (potentially) high level of investment can seem off putting - especially if they're expecting a much less feature rich and in depth application than Fantasy Grounds actually is (based off experience of other apps/purchase models).

Hopefully most people will look past the initial costs and realise, if they're going to use FG for a while, that it's very worthwhile and will hopefully fit within their long term gaming budget. But there will always be some instances where it might not be financially viable (like the 6 player/GM rotating group mentioned) and they need to make the decision of whether the cost vs. advantages of FG is worthwhile for them.

I see.

You bring up some valid points.

I guess I see things differently than most people.

I do see your point though - even if I don't agree.

Thanks for taking the time to respond.

[JohnD]

When I stopped tracking this my cost/hour using FG was just under $0.24. That's over 7+ years and around $1700 in licensing and DLC. Entirely worth it.

[Pantherin]

When I stopped tracking this my cost/hour using FG was just under $0.24. That's over 7+ years and around $1700 in licensing and DLC. Entirely worth it.

Exactly my point!

Thank you for re-enforcing it.

Practically nothing...

[Trenloe]

I see.

You bring up some valid points.

I guess I see things differently than most people.

I do see your point though - even if I don't agree.

Thanks for taking the time to respond.
To be completely clear - I 100% support SmiteWorks pricing and licensing model. I just think that we should not look at just our own situation and should try to see things from all angles. If someone says "to do what I want in Fantasy Grounds is too expensive for me and my group", all we can do is point out the average game costs over time and let them make their own decision as to what is too expensive for them or not. I don't have the right to judge what is "too expensive" for other people, only what is too expensive for me. It's perfectly within people's rights to ask for a change in the model to better fit their requirements - SmiteWorks can review that request and decide what they want/can do based off their licensing restrictions and long term vision. For example, the subscription license came along relatively recently due to people saying the cost of entry was "too expensive" and wanting alternatives.

[Nylanfs]

Also add on the issues of regional pricing and currency conversions...

[seycyrus]

This whole "shared gm license" is just a thinly veiled attempt to get something for nothing (or practically nothing). I'm not fooled, the folks proposing it aren't fooled, and I'm sure that SW isn't fooled.

What was once a hobby that was shared locally has now become a global, and that means that the potential for abuse increases proportionally. SW needs to take care that all of a sudden we don't have "GM swapping groups", that include GMs in the East Coast US, West Coast US, Brazil, Japan, Norway, Australia, Russia, etc. all "conveniently" only playing in their local time zone for the majority of the time (perhaps with a token login every blue moon).

Every dollar that SW loses to this sort of chicanery is a dollar that is not being spent on improving the experience for everyone else.

[Zacchaeus]

I think people are looking at that functionality (shared GMs) in Roll20 and saying we want this in FG as well.

But Trenloe is absolutely right; whatever we personally might think of the pricing it is not for us to judge whether that's affordable for others. And whilst there would be people who would abuse it if it were possible there are genuine groups out there that do rotate DMs on a regular basis and if they were doing so at the table top one copy of the PHB would be all they needed.

[LordEntrails]

Let's not getting into assigning or assuming motives of other people. That's a downward slope and all with little to no benefits.

[Ampersandrew]

This whole "shared gm license" is just a thinly veiled attempt to get something for nothing (or practically nothing). I'm not fooled, the folks proposing it aren't fooled, and I'm sure that SW isn't fooled.

Maybe. And for some, probably. But you can't say that everyone has that motivation.

Even if people asking for it don't have this motivation I suspect that what you're saying would actually happen, eventually.

Smiteworks don't seem to be working on this, I also suspect there are more than technical obstacles. This would probably be a bad idea.

I mostly run pathfinder, I have most of their hardbacks and all of their Adventure paths. Paizo's policy of giving the price of the pdf off the cost of an FG module means I don't even consider it to be them double dipping me on the cost. Someone has to input the data and I'm very happy to pay smiteworks to do it. People running other systems may have a different view.

[RoleforFun]

I advocate for a shared GM ability, largely because it emulates a real-world table where each person MAYBE has individual PHBs and shares everything else. I have the Ultimate plus all D&D official content. I want to DM for my group. I'm happy with those purchases, and don't regret a penny. I love DM'ing for my group.

Someone else in my group wants to DM a bit so I can have a short break and have fun with my friends as a player... But all they have is PHB and the adventure module. So now, we have the same exact people, at the same exact table, but my friends can't access the content I've bought because... well... I don't know why. So, I'm essentially stuck DM'ing in that position unless I want to get frustrated over the situation, or at least not doing something I could quite easily do in real life (share a book across the table as a player).

Yeah, I get it. People will abuse the system. There's no argument against that fact. There's also a whole lot of people out there that are simply trying to be reasonable and happen to have a different perspective than you. Please stop with this holier-than-thou, everyone is just trying to game the system nonsense. It's dismissive and disrespectful.

To the cost/hour analysis. Sure, in the long run it's cheap, but isn't it kinda ludicrous that someone with $1000 worth of books can't share his content with his table as a player, but he can as a DM? In order to take a break and let a friend run a one-shot or 3-4 session adventure, isn't it kinda silly to mandate that person buy all that content all over again when someone literally shared all of it as a DM just last week?

Of course, I'm completely willing to have it be strictly circumscribed to cases where all parties must be in the same table, all must stay online and connected to SW servers for the duration, only one instance of an account can be logged into SW servers and so on, to help prevent abuse.

TLDR: GM Swapping makes sense in a lot of ways, and just because you disagree doesn't mean you're morally better or that other people are just trying to cheat the system. Get off your high horses for a minute so we can see eye-to-eye and have a legitimate discussion.

[LordEntrails]

GM sharing has been discussed before, and SW has said they have looked at it. It's probably something they will continue to look at in the future as well. They discussed it in part on today's stream.

Right now it's not something feasible given the existing architecture and licensing agreements. It can be discussed all people want, but it's not going to happen anytime in the near future.

[seycyrus]

Let's not getting into assigning or assuming motives of other people. That's a downward slope and all with little to no benefits.

It raises the issue. An issue that the *small* minority with a legitimate need should recognize, and acknowledge. Something more than "Yeah, it'll happen, but I'll be saving 50 bucks - that's what's important."

It seems to me that the people that are accusing me of being holier-than-thou and all high and mighty are REALLY the ones that have a problem with others disagreeing with them.

[RoleforFun]

It raises the issue. An issue that the *small* minority with a legitimate need should recognize, and acknowledge. Something more than "Yeah, it'll happen, but I'll be saving 50 bucks - that's what's important."

It seems to me that the people that are accusing me of being holier-than-thou and all high and mighty are REALLY the ones that have a problem with others disagreeing with them.

Well I'd like to thank you very kindly for being the altruistic, upstanding individual that points it out to the misguided plebians. Obviously, as you point out, nobody who advocates for such a thing could possibly have considered that or they have and are obviously looking to cheat SW out of hard-earned dollars. (In case it isn't clear, that was satire meant to illustrate how ridiculous your assumptions are.)

Listen, you would have a point if, and only IF, it is assumed the people advocating for this type of functionality are against some form of comprehensive anti-piracy control measures being implemented. I have seen nothing to justify such an assumption, much less prove it. Instead, what you're doing is virtue signalling and denigrating other members of the community at the same time.

Disagreement is strongly encouraged, otherwise there's no way to make progress. Drawing negative assumptions about the motivations of people who disagree with you is toxic. I understand the point you're making, but you could have made the same exact point about the potential for piracy without assuming the character of those advocating against you. I'm simply quoting and describing your messages for the attitude they convey to the people you are essentially accusing of being dishonest criminals. If it makes you uncomfortable then perhaps you should adjust your tone or message.



GM sharing has been discussed before, and SW has said they have looked at it. It's probably something they will continue to look at in the future as well. They discussed it in part on today's stream.

Right now it's not something feasible given the existing architecture and licensing agreements. It can be discussed all people want, but it's not going to happen anytime in the near future.

Agreed entirely, which is why I stopped commenting about this months ago until someone decided to wholesale question the ethics of people that disagree with them. It's that kind of toxicity that damages a community, and I took personal affront to that insinuation as I do believe a shared GM license ability is not unreasonable, unethical, or unachievable in the long run. This same "point" comes up every time this gets suggested. It's irritating, disrespectful, and counter-productive to many members of the community, so I decided to try and nip it in the bud.

[RoleforFun]

Anyway, I think my involvement has gone on long enough. I've said what I needed to and we're detracting from the purpose of the thread. Have a good day everyone.

[Bonkon]

Good Day All :)
Just my 2 cp in the “sharing books across the table” argument. You can absolutely do this in face to face gaming utilizing FG just let whoever is going to DM use the computer.

So you are more paying for the access to play with others around the world versus those just in your immediate area. :)

[Trenloe]

Discussion is fine - as long as it's polite and civil. Please keep it so.

If people really want to illegally avoid the current licensing model and pay only once per group, they can do that right now (illegally). People asking for a more flexible licensing model for groups are asking for a legal way of playing and sharing the GM role and associated materials. Asking for such a change is not asking to get something for nothing/practically nothing or bordering on illegal activities, it is requesting a legal way to replicate what usually happens at the gaming table - sharing of materials during the game. Like I said earlier, it's fine to ask for new/changed functionality in FG - it's up to SmiteWorks to make the decision on if they want to implement it, what restrictions they place on it, how it impacts current licensing and publisher agreements, what it costs, etc..

[seycyrus]

We all know that FG is more than just a replication of "what happens at the gaming table". It is much more and it is the additional utility that warrants the extra cost. Yes, I am sure that potential for skullduggery exists now, but giving additional opportunities for such activity will only encourage it further.

[Trenloe]

We all know that FG is more than just a replication of "what happens at the gaming table". It is much more and it is the additional utility that warrants the extra cost. Yes, I am sure that potential for skullduggery exists now, but giving additional opportunities for such activity will only encourage it further.
I trust SmiteWorks (if they ever implemented this) to do it in a way that would make it similar to what we have now, or probably even more restricted. It's incredibly easy for "skullduggery" right now, so I highly doubt that SmiteWorks would implement something to make it even easier.

[Kyler]

Not going to attribute motivation to anyone. Waste of time.

As I have noted, the SW FG product is worth the cost simply for ruleset integration reasons, automation of action, ability to connect to others across long distances, and most importantly the company's commitment to the community.

The only thing I would add is that there are unintended consequences of moving in the direction noted. Though I understand the wish, I can't say I agree because I also know what company's will do to account for it. I for one don't want to experience the ones I have thought of. I for one like owning what I buy. This is one reason I have given full support to SW and FG. The company and those running it are great. They actually do care about the hobby and you. Always be cautious of what you ask for.

[Kyler]

By the way, there are even more consequences. Now I can't stop thinking of how those would make me actually end up hating SW and this program

[Kyler]

Need to stop thinking about this. It will cause irritation. Let's get back to the great changes that are coming. :) ROFL!!!!

[LordEntrails]

Doug mentioned they are working on a $300k goal, but any thought on any goals based upon the number of backers?

Also, any hints if we might be able to see any previews or mentions during the D&D Live event?

[Trenloe]

By the way, there are even more consequences. Now I can't stop thinking of how those would make me actually end up hating SW and this program
Trust SmiteWorks - they've always been very customer centric and fair in what they do. If SmiteWorks ever decide to do anything like product sharing, I'm sure they'll take the current users and functionality into account. There's really no need to get worried or jump to conclusions about what/if might happen. Like I've said all along - it's fine for people to make requests for changes in functionality, it's up to SmiteWorks to make the decision on if they want to do that, or not - based off all sorts of factors. I personally think this is a pretty low requirement (i.e. not many people want it) and it probably won't be implemented (due to amount of work, publisher licensing, etc.). But it's still a valid request - just don't jump to conclusions about the motive/s behind the request or what draconian measures might result from implementing it! Move on... :)

[Moon Wizard]

We will be at the D&D Live event. Doug is in charge of and working on the information we plan on sharing.

We decided to provide the high-level summary of all improvements at the beginning of the KS, instead of dribbling them out. (image features, dice expressions, networking, etc.) So, mainly you would be hearing more detail about those features already shown, or perhaps new videos Doug has made.

Regards,
JPG

[Kyler]

Though I love you to death Trenloe, I have seen the result/consequences of too many things in life, associated with what people "want/think they need" in life, to simply ignore them. All of those have resulted in things I like less than the basis of the original request. On that note, I love this community and enjoy watching it grow.

[LordEntrails]

We will be at the D&D Live event. Doug is in charge of and working on the information we plan on sharing.

We decided to provide the high-level summary of all improvements at the beginning of the KS, instead of dribbling them out. (image features, dice expressions, networking, etc.) So, mainly you would be hearing more detail about those features already shown, or perhaps new videos Doug has made.

Regards,
JPG
More videos is always fun. I guess what I'm more hoping for is better exposure for FG. I didn't feel you guys got very much (any?) at the SoME.

[Nylanfs]

Pizza ordering button!

[iotech]

Pizza ordering button!

You're persistent. An admirable trait, to be sure. Of course, you know that you can easily implement this with FG Classic right now... DOE OLE and link to your favorite purveyor of Pie. Even better if said purveyor has a web API so you could truly order with a single click. I'm sure Dulux-Oz would approve of a DOE-dependent extension :)

[dulux-oz]

You're persistent. An admirable trait, to be sure. Of course, you know that you can easily implement this with FG Classic right now... DOE OLE and link to your favorite purveyor of Pie. Even better if said purveyor has a web API so you could truly order with a single click. I'm sure Dulux-Oz would approve of a DOE-dependent extension :)

Hmmmm, I just think I've got an idea for a new DOE...

[gaara6666]

Stretch goal #6?

[Zacchaeus]

Stretch goal #6?

It's a secret. A mystery gift :)

Or it could be they are still trying to work it out.

[gaara6666]

They are getting mathew mercer to do a voice intro for FG?

[Valatar]

It's irrelevant to wonder about peoples' thoughts or to speculate about their motives, there is a simple truth right now:

Real Life: GM drops $300 on books, hands books to player, player becomes GM.
Roll20, FG's primary competitor: GM drops $300 on books, promotes player to GM role, player becomes GM.
Fantasy Grounds: GM drops $150 on ultimate license, $300 on books, wants other player to become GM, oops, $450 more please.

[Egheal]

Edit : deleted because not clearly worded, sorry for that, but my point is :
It's a fact, Roll20 cost more than FG : https://youtu.be/1gHmxi4EydE

[Kanbie]

FG1 was circa 2004. FG2 was circa 2008. FG3 was circa 2013.

The coding has changed quite a bit over time. The biggest change was between FG1 and FG2 which broke everything; but before my time.

I started working on FG around 2008, and took over with Doug in 2010.

Cheers,
JPG

So is Fantasy Grounds Unity going to start at version 1, 2.7, or 4?
I am now dying to know :3

[LordEntrails]

Also be aware, on Roll20 you can only share your DLC in so many campaigns. i.e. a Free user on Roll20 can only use content they purchase in a single (one) campaign). A "Plua" suvscriber can share with 3 campaigns, and a "Pro" subscriber can share with 5 campaigns. So yes, the "buyer" can promote a player to GM, but depending upon their subscription level they can only do that so many times.

In FG you can share your content in as many campaigns as you host.

Apples and Oranges folks. For some use cases you can directly compare, but not for every use case.

[JennyRB]

It's irrelevant to wonder about peoples' thoughts or to speculate about their motives, there is a simple truth right now:

Real Life: GM drops $300 on books, hands books to player, player becomes GM.
Roll20, FG's primary competitor: GM drops $300 on books, promotes player to GM role, player becomes GM.
Fantasy Grounds: GM drops $150 on ultimate license, $300 on books, wants other player to become GM, oops, $450 more please.

Also this:
Real Life - Cost of paper (could go digital), snacks and soda for everyone. Miniatures (paper or real. could go digital), dice (could go digital), maps (paper tokens or advanced. could go digital.), and gas if you and others have to drive to the meeting place (bus can be cheaper, but only have a time frame).
Roll20 - Free, but limited space to work with. Subscription base. (snacks and soda for yourself)
Fantasy Grounds - Free, but for players. Subscription base, or pay once and free forever. (snacks and soda for yourself)

[gaara6666]

Also this:
Real Life - Cost of paper (could go digital), snacks and soda for everyone. Miniatures (paper or real. could go digital), dice (could go digital), maps (paper tokens or advanced. could go digital.), and gas if you and others have to drive to the meeting place (bus can be cheaper, but only have a time frame).
Roll20 - Free, but limited space to work with. Subscription base. (snacks and soda for yourself)
Fantasy Grounds - Free, but for players. Subscription base, or pay once and free forever. (snacks and soda for yourself)

Jenny is offering to buy us snacks and soda?!

[JennyRB]

Jenny is offering to buy us snacks and soda?!

Hahahahahahahahaha ... No just pointing out the expense parts between the 3.

[Pikup]

It's irrelevant to wonder about peoples' thoughts or to speculate about their motives, there is a simple truth right now:

Real Life: GM drops $300 on books, hands books to player, player becomes GM.
Roll20, FG's primary competitor: GM drops $300 on books, promotes player to GM role, player becomes GM.
Fantasy Grounds: GM drops $150 on ultimate license, $300 on books, wants other player to become GM, oops, $450 more please.

In the five years I subscribed to Roll20 to GM I spent $300 on subscriptions.... More on repurchasing the books I already owned. R20 can be less expensive but overall I have spent way less on FG.

Pikup

[Frankison]

I do like how everyone is in agreement that GMs tend to buy snacks and such. I don't know why this is, I'm guilty of it too, when I run my games I always make sure there are snacks and drinks for my players. Deep down I think the one not hosting should do this. Alas my desire to keep my players happy comes first I guess. VTT solves this to some degree though I do still miss my live games.

To the point of $300 for books this isn't very realistic. One pays that much because they choose to. But TBH each player if serious should have their own PHB so they can educate themselves on the rules on their own time, aside from that if you are new to running a game you should not be dropping $300 until you are comfortable and know its something you want to keep doing, and even then its not necessary. Depending on the game system you shouldn't be spending more than $80, hell with C&C you only need 2 books, the PHB and monster and treasures, you're looking at $10 for that system if you go with FG, about $40 for the hard cover books.

[JohnD]

People who have axes to grind usually resort to hyperbolic statements.

[StoryWeaver]

I had a few questions for Fantasy Grounds Friday regarding FGU if that's alright?
Wasn't entirely sure which thread was the most appropriate to get these questions forth for Fantasy Grounds Friday, but here goes.


1) Will you add API support to allow us to check for a wider variety of key combinations in our extensions to run a script? And could these be globally ran without activation from mouse pressing or some other form of interface activation?
For example Ctrl+[alphabetic letter] to activate a part of the script on press, or if Ctrl+[alphabetic letter] is held on mouse press.
Currently the API only registers buttons such as Ctrl, Shift, Alt etc. as far as I know. Which is limiting and can quickly lead to conflicts, and conflicts with other extensions.

2) As a related question, will there be more out-of-the-box global key commands? Such as pressing Ctrl+1 perhaps, to activate the link in the 1st spot on the action bar at the bottom in FG. Would these key combinations be customizable in the interface?

3) Will we be able to define an in-game distance based on number of pixels on different maps, so we can draw a line, or a number of lines, to find out the distance between point A and B on said maps? This would ideally include the option to set waypoints that could would tally up to a total distance.
An example of what I have in mind is what you'll find on Roll20 and probably the best version I've seen so far as is on the online Midgard campaign setting map (https://midgardmap.koboldpress.com/ , press the compass icon to the top right to test out.)

4) While I've created a currently non-released extension to manually update the FG complete background/backlay with an image, by changing the image file name in the code and a /reload in my games. Will we have an option to change the background inside FG, similar to what you can with the Decal switch extension that is currently available (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lznFKIFiM0), but to cover all the visible background without requiring a reload?


ps. By all means feel free to get in touch if you're interested in how I'm tackling range finding between tokens, with my Token Helper extension (as is used in my 5e Combat Enhancer), including for altitudes!
I may add some further menu selectable game system specific logic in a future iteration to tackle varied approaches to range finding after watching last weeks Fantasy Grounds Friday broadcast with John Gregory in it. :)

[wndrngdru]

I had a few questions for Fantasy Grounds Friday regarding FGU if that's alright?
2) As a related question, will there be more out-of-the-box global key commands? Such as pressing Ctrl+1 perhaps, to activate the link in the 1st spot on the action bar at the bottom in FG. Would these key combinations be customizable in the interface?


The Quickslots at the bottom already correspond with the function keys on the keyboard. F1 will activate the first slot, F2 the second, etc. The Ctrl-F#, Shift-F#, Alt-F# all work as well. (at least on a PC)

[Valatar]

5th edition Dungeons and Dragons, the most popular system on FG, costs $175 in books for the core set, and another $25-30 for an adventure, so $200-205 for the cost of entry on top of the FG license(s), so $355 for an ultimate DM, plus whatever token/map/miscellaneous stuff is purchased on the side. As soon as you want your buddy Caitlin to run the next adventure, every penny of that spent money may as well have been set on fire, because she has to repurchase every last piece of it.

If you're using the completely free kinda mediocre Roll20, she could use everything you purchased, subject to two limits: 5 players, and only one active campaign at a time. Which is no limitation at all if you're doing an average-sized group playing one game at a time, which is the case for a lot of gamers who have a weekly/monthly/whatever game.

If you want to host a bigger group or more simultaneous games, you have to be on the hook for their monthly subscription, so that does add up over time, but it'll take a long, long time to equal the $350+ that Caitlin has to shell out for her own license and modules. In fact, it will take seven YEARS of the Plus subscription on Roll20 before she's starting to be in a worse financial equivalence, meanwhile that same subscription comes with voice/video chat and tablet use that FG doesn't offer, as well as the lighting/LOS that FG won't have until Unity.

Meanwhile, as I mentioned, a one game at a time group is doing just fine with the free Roll20 and being able to swap GMs/share books however they please.

Not having that functionality is going to guarantee that FG is never going to supplant Roll20. Even discounting the people who will never spend money and just stick their own assets into Roll20 to muddle by, any gaming group who doesn't just have a dedicated forever GM is going to look at this and say, "Wait a minute, you mean we have to rebuy everything?" and that will be that.

[JohnD]

You don't "have to" re-buy everything. You can enter stuff manually as it's needed by your group. But you've been on the forums for 2.5 years now so you know that.

You also can choose to not jump in with the most expensive commodity... I know some people will be afraid to go outside what's big and popular or their comfort zone, but there are rulesets for which the outlay is considerably less.

This 3rd party comparison is a couple years old, but more or less still valid I suspect.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gHmxi4EydE

[BadByBirth]

The logic behind is that the 1-time licenses are a replacement for a monthly subscription that costs $10 per month. The longer you've had that and not paid a subscription, the more monetary value you've received from the license. New customers are likely to face buyers regret if they just bought 10 days ago. We are giving them a very steep discount that means they get more value from their original purchase. We are just being overly friendly and extending that even further all the way back to 2018. They can have owned it for nearly 17 months ($170 worth of subscription value savings) and they only have to pay $30 (the equivalent of 3 months). Beyond that, people get multiple years worth of savings but are only asked to pay the equivalent of $60 (6-months worth of subscriptions) to transfer that same savings to the newest version of the software. Meanwhile, it's an optional upgrade that doesn't invalidate their old version.

We had one customer arguing endlessly over it for a license he bought in 2011 (8 years worth is $960 worth of savings in monthly subscription fees and he thought it was unfair that we want to charge him $60 for access to the new platform.

If it doesn't make sense to you, then simply don't back the KS or upgrade to FGU. FGC will continue to work fine for you and you can go on about your business.


Hi Doug,

I must state I disagree with the logic.
If you buy a house over renting you don't state that after x years of buying it, you are living in it rent free.
They are different products and different services.
Comparing them like this is treating those who bought a 1-time fee like 2nd class citizens.
If you don't want people paying a 1-time fee for your product, don't offer the option, or don't 'punish' them for doing so when they do.
I know software development costs time and money (I was a developer myself at some point in my career), and you need to fund it.
I get you are creating a product which has value.
I don't get why when someone bought it should matter.

Another point I feel conflicted about is this:

"FGC will continue to work fine for you and you can go on about your business."
Q. Will the current version of Fantasy Grounds still be available after Unity is released?
A. Yes. But not necessarily indefinitely
This reads to me like all effort will go into FGU, FGC will just be expected to keep on working, but don't expect any more updates on it.
And after a couple of ??? we'll pull the plug out of it anyway...

That being said, it doesn't really matter since your prices are set and mind is made up.
I however won't be upgrading to the FGU version since I think $60 on top of the $110 Ultimate + $200 worth of content is more than I'm willing to spend.

Good luck with FGU, hope it turns out well.

[Frankison]

Starting with 5E is free with your standard license. License holders get 5E and many other SRD's for free, and there are a ton of modules that complete these for various rulesets, also free thanks to this great community, that is enough for a starting DM. The core books total if you buy all 3 (PHB, DMG, MM) is only $90 not $170, DMs can buy the core bundle sure but its not necessary for play, also there are a bunch of adventures under $10 if someone is willing to go 3rd party. One can go to sites like DMs guild that has plenty of adventures for very low prices to include AL content that has already been converted to FG modules.

Its important to separate out need vs would like. Sure its nice to have the bundle, but if someone hasn't DMed before why are they going to dump a ton of money? I would highly suggest to a new DM to run a few one shots using only the SRD data so they don't have to memorize a ton of rules especially with something like 5E or pathfinder that uses feats. Keep things manageable and invest over time if you really enjoy it. I can't tell people what to do but that would be my advice if I was going to assist one of my players into DMing.

There are charts that compare the differences between leading VTT systems already so I don't feel the need to go into that.

[Temmpest]

Hi Doug,

I must state I disagree with the logic.
If you buy a house over renting you don't state that after x years of buying it, you are living in it rent free.
They are different products and different services.
Comparing them like this is treating those who bought a 1-time fee like 2nd class citizens.
If you don't want people paying a 1-time fee for your product, don't offer the option, or don't 'punish' them for doing so when they do.
I know software development costs time and money (I was a developer myself at some point in my career), and you need to fund it.
I get you are creating a product which has value.
I don't get why when someone bought it should matter.

Another point I feel conflicted about is this:

"FGC will continue to work fine for you and you can go on about your business."
Q. Will the current version of Fantasy Grounds still be available after Unity is released?
A. Yes. But not necessarily indefinitely
This reads to me like all effort will go into FGU, FGC will just be expected to keep on working, but don't expect any more updates on it.
And after a couple of ??? we'll pull the plug out of it anyway...

That being said, it doesn't really matter since your prices are set and mind is made up.
I however won't be upgrading to the FGU version since I think $60 on top of the $110 Ultimate + $200 worth of content is more than I'm willing to spend.

Good luck with FGU, hope it turns out well.

It will. Thanks.

[StoryWeaver]

The Quickslots at the bottom already correspond with the function keys on the keyboard. F1 will activate the first slot, F2 the second, etc. The Ctrl-F#, Shift-F#, Alt-F# all work as well. (at least on a PC)

Thank you wndrngdru, I learn something new all the time about FG. :)

[Zacchaeus]

Thank you wndrngdru, I learn something new all the time about FG. :)
I assumed you knew this but it was something else that you were looking for. My first though was well that’ll conflict with the fkeys but he must know what he’s on about :)

[StoryWeaver]

You'd think right *laughs*! Of all the knowledge I've accumulated about FG since starting to run, create modules and and write extensions for it, that was not one of them. Must have slipped right past me. :D

Luckily we have such a great community here, that someone is bound to know and better still willing to share to help out.

[Hawkward]

In the future, could line of sight mechanics/layers be used for difficult terrain and modifying movement speed? Could it be used for partial cover (AC bonus) calculations?

[seycyrus]

In the future, could line of sight mechanics/layers be used for difficult terrain and modifying movement speed? Could it be used for partial cover (AC bonus) calculations?

Not all rulesets use "AC".

[LordEntrails]

In the future, could line of sight mechanics/layers be used for difficult terrain and modifying movement speed? Could it be used for partial cover (AC bonus) calculations?
Its possible. There was some discussion on parts of this already. Currently FG doesn't restrict movement based on movement speed, so the ruleset would have to start tracking that first, before terrain could start impacting that. Partial cover is something that could also be done, but IMO its unlikely because again it is going to be ruleset specific and FG would also have to calculate the sight line between the source, target and cover to see if the cover is in the way. Not something technically impossible, just something that would cause many people heartache because of the various ways to interpret such rules.

BUT, all that said, if you want to see something like this, it's always best to check the Wishlist and then add the suggestion there. If lots of people want something, then SW will give it more weight and consideration. https://fg2app.idea.informer.com (https://fg2app.idea.informer.com/)

[Zacchaeus]

In the future, could line of sight mechanics/layers be used for difficult terrain and modifying movement speed? Could it be used for partial cover (AC bonus) calculations?

Welcome to FG.

This kind of thing would need to be done for each ruleset so it isn't something that will be part of the initial version of Unity at least since rulesets won't be changing (much) at this stage. As others have noted each ruleset is different so it's not something that could be generally programmed into the FG client itself.

[Ampersandrew]

I must state I disagree with the logic.
If you buy a house over renting you don't state that after x years of buying it, you are living in it rent free.
They are different products and different services.

Pretty much everybody I know who has bought or is thinking of buying tells me they were fed up paying
someone else's mortgage and having little to show for it, they'd rather pay their own.
No harm, but these are exactly the same service—somewhere to live.



Comparing them like this is treating those who bought a 1-time fee like 2nd class citizens.
If you don't want people paying a 1-time fee for your product, don't offer the option, or don't 'punish' them for doing so when they do.
I know software development costs time and money (I was a developer myself at some point in my career), and you need to fund it.
I get you are creating a product which has value.
I don't get why when someone bought it should matter.


I really wish more companies would "punish me" with massive discounts. Seriously 60%. I laughed when I
saw how little they were planning to charge for this. I was chuffed (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/chuffed)



That being said, it doesn't really matter since your prices are set and mind is made up.
I however won't be upgrading to the FGU version since I think $60 on top of the $110 Ultimate + $200 worth of content is more than I'm willing to spend.

Good luck with FGU, hope it turns out well.

I'll admit, I don't understand the willingness to throw away a $200 investment in content. Maybe you feel entitled to the 80% they're offering others. Since you have a $200 investment I assume that means you've been using the software you paid $110 for.

One other point, I don't understand how you think they're punishing people for buying the license. Since you're saying it's going to cost you $60 that means you've had the software since at least December 2017

December 2017 - December 2019 (projected release date) 25 months.
25 x 10 subscription = $250
Oh noes they've totally ripped you off by forcing you to pay $110 dollars
for using the software for 25 months instead of $250.

I see you joined the forums in April 2017. That means the difference in Veteran and Rookie $30 is for 10 months of using the software. About $3 a month.

If you'd subscribed in April and bought the following January you'd have been $70 out of pocket. I don't see why you think you're getting shafted here.

Obviously, this a matter for you and your wallet.

[DwightLee]

I have been playing on a subscription for a year now ( $10 ) a month

Kickstarted for $139 for Ultimate Licence ( was going to full purchase FG anyway eventually )

quite happy, I dont feel cheated at all and looking forward to the beta :)

[anfiach]

The sheer amount of entitlement some people feel just leaves me baffled. How many 60% discounts has Microsoft given you when you purchased a new version of Windows?

[Ampersandrew]

None, but they did give me the last edition gratis ...

[dungeonguru]

The sheer amount of entitlement some people feel just leaves me baffled. How many 60% discounts has Microsoft given you when you purchased a new version of Windows?

Actually it's more like the office model. I don't buy into the Office 365 model where it's an endless subscription so I paid an unholy amount of money for Office 2000 a long time ago, it functioned fine for a long time but Microsoft didn't give me any discount when I upgraded to Office 2013 even though I was LOYAL (alright, I skipped a few upgrades and dabbled with Open Office). Plus Microsoft REMOVED functionality from excel, so I lost functions in the end. Still ate the new purchase cost because it was the only way Office would work right on my newer system and the wife demanded we have Office, just like she has at work...

FG/Doug and crew are doing an excellent job trying to be fair where they haven't charged for any upgrades in the past. It's wonderful that the allow a DM to purchase an Ultimate license and the offer *free* access to the players. Not many other software companies hand out free clients that allow you access to whatever the DM decides to share from his library of modules. Plus, there's going to be new functionality. Even if I didn't qualify for the newbie discount I've found it would be worth the cost to me for a full price purchase based on what we're getting from the Unity engine, and definitely for the kickstarter goal resources for backing.

[anfiach]

None, but they did give me the last edition gratis ...

Well, when nobody wants to buy your product you get desperate lol.

[DwightLee]

Anfiach, That is exactly how I see it, but keep quiet so as to not cause a riot.

[Ampersandrew]

Well, when nobody wants to buy your product you get desperate lol.

Well that's just silly. Lots of people bought every edition of Windows, lots of IT managers won't have anything else.

I have no idea what their business model was, but it certainly wasn't no-one buys the new edition of Windows.

[rhammer2]

They wanted to simplify their updates and program compatibilities, so they moved everyone from Win7 and later to Win10.
But this is way off topic...

- Robert

[anfiach]

Well that's just silly. Lots of people bought every edition of Windows, lots of IT managers won't have anything else.

I have no idea what their business model was, but it certainly wasn't no-one buys the new edition of Windows.

I forgive you for not paying attention to that whole fiasco. Regardless, my point was made and you weren't disagreeing with me on that.

So,....is it December yet?

[DwightLee]

I worked IR all my life

Anfiach is correct

[lochost]

Just a hint about cover, half cover etc. Some say it's ruleset specific. I don't see it that way : a cover or a half cover is just what it is. Now each ruleset handles it differently. Why not add the "cover thing" and then let the rulesets makers choose to handle it or not ? (I'm not sure I make myself perfectly clear).

[Zacchaeus]

Just a hint about cover, half cover etc. Some say it's ruleset specific. I don't see it that way : a cover or a half cover is just what it is. Now each ruleset handles it differently. Why not add the "cover thing" and then let the rulesets makers choose to handle it or not ? (I'm not sure I make myself perfectly clear).

You have made yourself clear; but it is a ruleset specific thing. It is in the rulesets that things like the penalty or advantage for cover are handled, and if it becomes a thing then it will be a thing in the rulesets which makes it possible.

[Trenloe]

Just a hint about cover, half cover etc. Some say it's ruleset specific. I don't see it that way : a cover or a half cover is just what it is. Now each ruleset handles it differently. Why not add the "cover thing" and then let the rulesets makers choose to handle it or not ? (I'm not sure I make myself perfectly clear).
The basics of cover are in theory ruleset agnostic, but just look at different RPG systems - for example: draw a line from one corner to any of the corners on the target creature; or draw the line from the middle of one square to the middle of another, or from one corner to one corner, or... etc., etc.. So, I don't see how "cover" itself can be added to a base (CoreRPG) system - as there are too many different ways of working out cover, because it can be so different, there really isn't much that can be programmed into base FGU - other than a basic handler function, like getObstructionsOnThisVector(startX, startY, endX, endY) but then the RPG system would have to work out how to call that, how many times to call it, and how to interpret the "obstruction" data returned.

[lostsanityreturned]

The basics of cover are in theory ruleset agnostic, but just look at different RPG systems - for example: draw a line from one corner to any of the corners on the target creature; or draw the line from the middle of one square to the middle of another, or from one corner to one corner, or... etc., etc.. So, I don't see how "cover" itself can be added to a base (CoreRPG) system - as there are too many different ways of working out cover, because it can be so different, there really isn't much that can be programmed into base FGU - other than a basic handler function, like getObstructionsOnThisVector(startX, starty, endX, endy) but then the RPG system would have to work out how to call that, how many times to call it, and how to interpret the "obstruction" data returned.

And this becomes even more complex when handling different degrees of cover as well as elevation on what is a 2D map.

I would love to automate cover, but as is I also cannot see any feasible way to building it into fantasygrounds currently.

[lochost]

Thanks for your answers mates !

I understand the problem better now !

Cheers !

[mattekure]

With Unity will it be possible to add additional image types for tokens (perhaps not on initial release, but eventually)? Specifically WEBM/VP8 which would allow for animated tokens. I know Unity supports both of them across Win/Mac/Linux platforms.

[VenomousFiligree]

With Unity will it be possible to add additional image types for tokens (perhaps not on initial release, but eventually)? Specifically WEBM/VP8 which would allow for animated tokens. I know Unity supports both of them across Win/Mac/Linux platforms.

After someone mentioned Devin Night's new animated tokens in the KS chat I took a look and they look great!

So yes please to webm tokens!

[skj310]

Hello FGU

I believe this has been discussed before but am having a horrible time finding the answer in the forum. Regarding the layers for lighting and FOW, will there be a quicker way to add those layers other than plotting lines around walls and obstacles? Where I am coming from? I thought I remember hearing mentioned that perhaps a person might use GIMP or photoshop to create a layer for walls and thereby avoid or significantly quicken the process of plotting points? Simply put will there be any super fast easier way, other than plotting points? I've a massive amount of battlemaps and thinking of the effort involved ... so am just wanting to know what to expect in terms of options when it comes to battelmaps that are not part of modules/adventures from the FG store?

[LordEntrails]

Hello FGU

I believe this has been discussed before but am having a horrible time finding the answer in the forum. Regarding the layers for lighting and FOW, will there be a quicker way to add those layers other than plotting lines around walls and obstacles? Where I am coming from? I thought I remember hearing mentioned that perhaps a person might use GIMP or photoshop to create a layer for walls and thereby avoid or significantly quicken the process of plotting points? Simply put will there be any super fast easier way, other than plotting points? I've a massive amount of battlemaps and thinking of the effort involved ... so am just wanting to know what to expect in terms of options when it comes to battelmaps that are not part of modules/adventures from the FG store?
I have the same gut feel about this as you do. And I asked a week or so ago on the FG Friday stream. Doug's response was that they had looked at some mask or alpha channel options early on, but found that it was easier to create the LOS blockers in FGU with the line segments etc.

I too find that hard to believe because I know how easy it would be for me to make a mask image in CC3+ and GIMP for my maps, but at this point I have to trust that SW has done their hoemwork on this topic. At least for now.

[ddavison]

You can still use GIMP to make a mask image and then drag it over top. When I look at LOS for walls, I actually wanted part of the wall to be shown instead of right at the edge. For this reason, you shrink in the mask some. This works great for larger, thicker sections. The problem is that if you have a mix of thin walls and thick walls, the thin walls can become shrunk into non-existence. That and other issues meant to reduce polygon sizes for the final outcome ended up leading me to believe that it was just faster doing it within FGU. Your experience might be different, so we will most likely leave it in for you to experiment with during the beta.

[LordEntrails]

You can still use GIMP to make a mask image and then drag it over top. When I look at LOS for walls, I actually wanted part of the wall to be shown instead of right at the edge. For this reason, you shrink in the mask some. This works great for larger, thicker sections. The problem is that if you have a mix of thin walls and thick walls, the thin walls can become shrunk into non-existence. That and other issues meant to reduce polygon sizes for the final outcome ended up leading me to believe that it was just faster doing it within FGU. Your experience might be different, so we will most likely leave it in for you to experiment with during the beta.
Thanks Doug.
So the method I make dungeon maps in CC3+ includes what is called a wall/floor mask. It covers half the thickness of the walls and duplicates the background. By doing so it makes the dungeon look sunken into the background.

But, from a FGU perspective, it provides a layer/sheet that would work perfect as a mask. It will allow half the wall to be shown and then block out behind that.

Look at ~2 minutes and then again at ~13 minutes in this video and you can see the difference, and what the wall/floor mask does. https://chronicles-of-arn.net/pf_maps_etc/examples_tips_etc/tutorials/CC3Plus_Wall_Mask_SS4.mp4

Here's another look at just the mask itself; https://youtu.be/cTmiOuLi11Y?t=214

[ddavison]

The masks that we support will need to be solid with a transparent background. The solid portion gets turned into polygons which block all LOS past the edge. If your mask is drawn right at the edge (like it appears to do with the CC3 trace tool), then the player won't get to see any part of the actual wall. Their vision will stop immediately at the wall edge. That typically does not look good, which is why I would collapse this in a bit within Photoshop whenever I created a mask. If you have a sample image and mask that you'd like to try, you can attach them here and I can show you what that looks like in FGU when using just the mask. We are traveling this week (tomorrow), so I may not get around to it until I get back next week -- Tuesday or beyond.

Of note, the sort of clicking around he did on the further inset portion is pretty similar to what I do within FGU.

[LordEntrails]

Thanks Doug. I get the clicking around is not much different, but to have to do it twice would be a bummer :) So, when I do the mask, I actually use the alignment tools (snap to grid or snap to entity) so my mask entity falls exactly on the wall node, but since the wall has a thickness, the mask only covers half the width of the wall. So in that case, then the LOS would reveal part of the wall, as desired.

Thanks, and no rush on the demo video, won't matter to me until the beta is available :) And if it helps, I can provide you a map and a mask to go with it if you want.

[Trenloe]

And if it helps, I can provide you a map and a mask to go with it if you want.
I think this would be useful so that others can see how this would work.

[LordEntrails]

I think this would be useful so that others can see how this would work.
I can do that, and put together instructions on how to make it.

Doug, would a full blackout mask or just a "region" of darkness be preferred? I usually do full blackout, but as you can see in those videos, many others just do a region or variable thickness type of block out.

[Moon Wizard]

Doug and I were still debating whether we would leave this auto-LOS generation via mask in, because it didn't perform as good as we wanted. You ended up having to spend a good chunk of time "cleaning" up the things that didn't work as you expected (thin walls, jagged portions, etc.); and an alpha mask only lets you create full blockers (not doors nor terrain), so you had to define and add those in as well.

As Doug mentioned, he can run a sample map you define through the process to give an idea of where it is. You should pick a map with some complexity. Thin/thick walls, doors, secret doors, debris, etc. While we could potentially spend time refining the algorithm, there's only so much you can do that will work in general on every map type.

Regards,
JPG

[LordEntrails]

Understood Moon. Would this map (first post) be adequate? https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?38853-Lord-Entrail-s-Maps

Maybe if I put some terrain and a secret door ont his one? https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?38853-Lord-Entrail-s-Maps&p=343485&viewfull=1#post343485

[skj310]

Doug and I were still debating whether we would leave this auto-LOS generation via mask in, because it didn't perform as good as we wanted. You ended up having to spend a good chunk of time "cleaning" up the things that didn't work as you expected (thin walls, jagged portions, etc.); and an alpha mask only lets you create full blockers (not doors nor terrain), so you had to define and add those in as well.

As Doug mentioned, he can run a sample map you define through the process to give an idea of where it is. You should pick a map with some complexity. Thin/thick walls, doors, secret doors, debris, etc. While we could potentially spend time refining the algorithm, there's only so much you can do that will work in general on every map type.

Regards,
JPG

super thankful this conversation is being had and anxious to see these demos. so thank you for taking the time.

[Moon Wizard]

Most of the team will be attending the D&D Live stream event this weekend and swamped answering support in the evening, so you might want to ping us again after the event on this one.

The map you posted should be interesting to try, since it has thin walls in the buildings outside, and thick walls inside. There are no doors (secret or otherwise) inside the mined area, but it should be an interesting test. I will say that your map is pretty "clean" relative to how noisy and complex some of the maps can get. (see the Wizards adventures)

Regards,
JPG

[lostsanityreturned]

The masks that we support will need to be solid with a transparent background. The solid portion gets turned into polygons which block all LOS past the edge. If your mask is drawn right at the edge (like it appears to do with the CC3 trace tool), then the player won't get to see any part of the actual wall. Their vision will stop immediately at the wall edge. That typically does not look good, which is why I would collapse this in a bit within Photoshop whenever I created a mask. If you have a sample image and mask that you'd like to try, you can attach them here and I can show you what that looks like in FGU when using just the mask. We are traveling this week (tomorrow), so I may not get around to it until I get back next week -- Tuesday or beyond.

Of note, the sort of clicking around he did on the further inset portion is pretty similar to what I do within FGU.

I am glad that this is still being included. I entirely disagree with your statement that it doesn't look as good being at the edge. When I used dynamic lighting in Roll20 I used to always black out the walls for D&D maps anyway and loved the appearance.

It is really quite easy to black out textured wall sections in photoshop. And when I am making my own maps I can just turn off layers and have a fully functional mask and mostly complete LoS map ready to go. (exceptions being terrain and door elements, but that is easy enough to touch up in fantasygrounds)

[Zacchaeus]

Thanks Doug.
So the method I make dungeon maps in CC3+ includes what is called a wall/floor mask. It covers half the thickness of the walls and duplicates the background. By doing so it makes the dungeon look sunken into the background.

But, from a FGU perspective, it provides a layer/sheet that would work perfect as a mask. It will allow half the wall to be shown and then block out behind that.

So are you saying that when you export your file from CC3+ as a jpg that the mask information is still somewhere in that file?

[mattekure]

So are you saying that when you export your file from CC3+ as a jpg that the mask information is still somewhere in that file?

Exporting from CC3+ you would just create it as a sheet, then export the map, hide everything but the sheet, and reexport that sheet.

[dendarii]

I bought FG Standard in 2017, and upgraded to Ultimate in 2018. Should I pledge Rookie or Veteran Ultimate?

Thanks.

[Ampersandrew]

I bought FG Standard in 2017, and upgraded to Ultimate in 2018. Should I pledge Rookie or Veteran Ultimate?

Thanks.

Your Ultimate license is from 2018, you are a Rookie.

[dendarii]

Thanks.

[LordEntrails]

So are you saying that when you export your file from CC3+ as a jpg that the mask information is still somewhere in that file?
As Matt said, the mask is on its own sheet (what is akin to a layer in other graphic programs). It is then very easy to take on export of just that sheet into GIMP and turn it all black (or alpha, or any other type the mask file needs to be).

[Zacchaeus]

As Matt said, the mask is on its own sheet (what is akin to a layer in other graphic programs). It is then very easy to take on export of just that sheet into GIMP and turn it all black (or alpha, or any other type the mask file needs to be).

I'm still not understanding how this black thing creates LOS in Fantasy Grounds and somehow merges in with the rest of the map.

[mattekure]

I'm still not understanding how this black thing creates LOS in Fantasy Grounds and somehow merges in with the rest of the map.

The way it works in other programs is that the masking image is added as a layer (it has to be the same dimensions as the underlying map image), typically not visible to the players. The program looks at the mask image and every pixel that is black will block vision calculation, each pixel that is transparent will allow vision. This is a way of having an image to represent the walls that the application can use to calculate where vision should penetrate. For map makers, it can often be very easy to quickly create the mask as they already have the walls defined on a layer. It can be copied and turned black, and just have that layer saved.

[Zacchaeus]

So we are assuming then that Unity will allow the import of map layers and not just the whole map, like now.

[mattekure]

Well, doug indicated that they had tested this functionality, it exists now within Unity. the question is whether or not it will stay until release. Personally I'd like to have a chance to test it out and see if it works well.

[mattekure]

Also, this isnt the same thing as multiple map layers. the Masking layer would be a special layer just for the calculation of vision blocking. They have a layer like that now that you draw the blocking lines on. thats what was shown in the video demo. This is just an alternative with its own benefits/drawbacks.

[LordEntrails]

Mr. Z, you know how currently the GM mask is actually a separate image in the campaign directory? And that as the GM reveals portions of the map it edits that image and send the update to the players? The LOS mask file is almost the same thing as that.

[Zacchaeus]

Mr. Z, you know how currently the GM mask is actually a separate image in the campaign directory? And that as the GM reveals portions of the map it edits that image and send the update to the players? The LOS mask file is almost the same thing as that.

Right, that's the conclusion I finally came too. It hadn't occurred to me at all. I was trying to figure out how a jpg file had layers :)

[Valatar]

So, fun question I don't think has been asked, does functionality exist to have LOS auto-created with brushes? As in, if I draw a wall, can I tell FG to automatically have the drawn wall block LOS without me having to go back in and do it manually? If I have a crate brush and click a pile of crates in a room, will they block LOS?

[Zacchaeus]

So, fun question I don't think has been asked, does functionality exist to have LOS auto-created with brushes? As in, if I draw a wall, can I tell FG to automatically have the drawn wall block LOS without me having to go back in and do it manually? If I have a crate brush and click a pile of crates in a room, will they block LOS?

I think that will depend on the assets you are using. If they are set up as LOS blokers then yes otherwse no.

[Bidmaron]

I think he is saying he is doing the map in FGU using the built in mapping

[LordEntrails]

I think he is saying he is doing the map in FGU using the built in mapping
Yep, Doug mentioned that the FGU provided tiles will have built in LOS. But, I do not know if the FGU brushes (i.e. the brushes or symbols used to build walls, etc) will or not. That's something I haven't heard discussed before.

[Zacchaeus]

I believe that the FG tools will have sight blockers build in. But imported assets may not, assuming you can import such assets of course.

[Valatar]

There should, I would hope, be a way to assign LOS blocking to your own map brushes so you only have to do it once per item and let it auto-calculate from there onward. That way you can add your pillar/statue/whatever, set it up so the program knows it can't be seen through, and click them down onto the map as needed when making a room.

[Darce]

Just got my computer back up and running after 5 weeks. Had to reinstall everything. Nice surprise to see FGU is a go! I haven't had time to read all the threads. I was wondering will windows allow LOS in a modern or futuristic setting (or heck a fantasy setting with stained glass)? Just thinking of the possibilities. What if the window curtained. Will LOS only show a shadow. Could add to the suspense of a scene.

[LordEntrails]

Just got my computer back up and running after 5 weeks. Had to reinstall everything. Nice surprise to see FGU is a go! I haven't had time to read all the threads. I was wondering will windows allow LOS in a modern or futuristic setting (or heck a fantasy setting with stained glass)? Just thinking of the possibilities. What if the window curtained. Will LOS only show a shadow. Could add to the suspense of a scene.
Don't know what you mean by "window" But check out the videos linked from the KS campaign description. It should answer most of what you wan to know.

[Darce]

Thank you for repling LordEntrails, my LOS question is refering to windows on buildings. I've seen the KickStart videos and did not notice the LOS effects working through windows. Examples would be; a group of PC's are in a room with a window, will LOS allow them to see the beasty outside coming for them, except the Gnome who stands shorter than the windows height off the floor? Or a PC is searching a belltower in Ravenloft and a shadow passes by out side a staindglass window? Which could cause an immediate fear check. Mind you, I have not had time to experiment with FGC as I just bought it a few weeks before my HD boot sector went belly up. :p

[seycyrus]

To me, this seems to bring up an infinite number of variables. How far away is the gnome from the desk (and how tall is it), that partially blocks the window. What if he is crouching versus standing? What if the guy he is looking for is in a depression, and is crouching?

We could do this all day.

There comes a time when a DM has to do his job, and make decisions. The capability that the videos showcase is wonderful as it is.

[LordEntrails]

Thank you for repling LordEntrails, my LOS question is refering to windows on buildings. I've seen the KickStart videos and did not notice the LOS effects working through windows. Examples would be; a group of PC's are in a room with a window, will LOS allow them to see the beasty outside coming for them, except the Gnome who stands shorter than the windows height off the floor? Or a PC is searching a belltower in Ravenloft and a shadow passes by out side a staindglass window? Which could cause an immediate fear check. Mind you, I have not had time to experiment with FGC as I just bought it a few weeks before my HD boot sector went belly up. :p
Height of obstacles has been discussed, and its not something on the road map. Way too many variables. But, I would handle a window like a door is handled in teh videos, just open it when you want to allow sight through the window. Then you can see through it. The blockers don't control movement anyway, so you have to use the visuals of the map to control where you can move anyway.

[Davinci522]

Thank you for repling LordEntrails, my LOS question is refering to windows on buildings. I've seen the KickStart videos and did not notice the LOS effects working through windows. Examples would be; a group of PC's are in a room with a window, will LOS allow them to see the beasty outside coming for them, except the Gnome who stands shorter than the windows height off the floor? Or a PC is searching a belltower in Ravenloft and a shadow passes by out side a staindglass window? Which could cause an immediate fear check. Mind you, I have not had time to experiment with FGC as I just bought it a few weeks before my HD boot sector went belly up. :p

I believe the most recent video about LOS has a section where he talks about characters looking through an arrow slit (basically a window) and that the easiest way they could do it is make it a manual option to either allow or block vision through it. So if the window is higher they can see it’s a window but not beyond but if they climb up to it then the DM can allow their vision to see through it.

[TrentLane]

All the things shown in the Kickstarter are already great. One thing I really want as dualscreen user is the ability to have more control over the "image as background" function.
Like the option to snap the map to the left side and define how big the map is in the background.

[Lexfire]

Post #746

Looking pretty good with 14 days

KS close out including last day flurry guess - 6,325 backers at $380k - hope I am on the low side

[Egheal]

The kicktrack projection give a low at 390 000 and high at 499 000. With the boost of the D&D live "The Descent" starting today i think they can break the 500 000 $ wall (and therefore hire somebody to strengthen the developper team ? ;)).

[Threnode]

Missed the rookie ultimate upgrade price by a few days lol. No regrets though, would of payed double for the use I've had out of FG so far. Keep up the good work.

[Darce]

I just did the Rookie Upgrade - Ultimate to bring the total to $317,862 and 5,549 backers.

[Nylanfs]

Ahem (https://www.fantasygrounds.com/store/product.php?id=SWK03UPGRADE&key=21aa39afdd9f436fb93a873254ca861c7cc908a9) or ahem (https://store.steampowered.com/app/300870/Fantasy_Grounds__Ultimate_Upgrade/), 25% off

[iotech]

So... there is a sale on.
Currently, I am on the Subscription for Ultimate and have been since the beginning of time (feels like it anyway).
I pledged at $135 USD for Newcomer Ultimate for FGU. This includes no FGC license.

If I understand this correctly, I could buy FGC Ultimate right now for $82.50 on sale, then change my pledge for FGU to Rookie Ultimate for $30... thus spending less money overall ($112.50) AND end up with BOTH FGC and FGU. Which, also by my calculations, is VERY generous of SW to run a sale right now.

Anyone see fault in this logic? Is my understanding good?

[iotech]

Ah, it seems I may have been mistaken... the link the Nylanfs posted is for the UPGRADE price.

So, my path would look like...
Buy Standard (on sale for $30 right now)
Upgrade this to FGC Ultimate for $82.50
Then pledge $30 for FGU Ultimate.
Total spent is ~$142.50... slightly more than my current pledge, but I get license for BOTH FGC and FGU.

Have I got this right now?

(Edit: When I checked, the Standard was on sale, but Ultimate was not. Now it shows Ultimate as on sale for $111. Less than $2 difference between that and going Standard>Ultimate Upgrade. Pulled the trigger on this, all is well.)

[damned]

Ah, it seems I may have been mistaken... the link the Nylanfs posted is for the UPGRADE price.

So, my path would look like...
Buy Standard (on sale for $30 right now)
Upgrade this to FGC Ultimate for $82.50
Then pledge $30 for FGU Ultimate.
Total spent is ~$142.50... slightly more than my current pledge, but I get license for BOTH FGC and FGU.

Have I got this right now?

(Edit: When I checked, the Standard was on sale, but Ultimate was not. Now it shows Ultimate as on sale for $111. Less than $2 difference between that and going Standard>Ultimate Upgrade. Pulled the trigger on this, all is well.)

It looks about right...

[Sorrior]

So here is my question..I plan to buy the standard version of the game and get a rookie to ultimate upgrade(i figure i can just sub for a few months or upgrade to ultimate when i have more money). I also plan to give an extra 160 for the pathfinder bundle and i am curious how that works as in will i be getting the bundle as a bonus once the kickstarter is done orr do i get it when FGU comes out orr does i get it right away? And how will you know i have pledged extra just for this bundle?

[Zacchaeus]

Hi Sorrior welcome to FG.

Once the KS finishes you will get sent a backer kit which will ask you for details of what you pledged. Once that has all been filled in and sent back to Smiteworks things will get sorted out (also the payments etc have to be cleared as well which will take a few days).

Once all that is done you will be able to access the Pathfinder material.

[LordEntrails]

The masks that we support will need to be solid with a transparent background. The solid portion gets turned into polygons which block all LOS past the edge. ..., so I may not get around to it until I get back next week -- Tuesday or beyond.


As Doug mentioned, he can run a sample map you define through the process to give an idea of where it is. You should pick a map with some complexity. Thin/thick walls, doors, secret doors, debris, etc. While we could potentially spend time refining the algorithm, there's only so much you can do that will work in general on every map type.
I've sent Support an email with the image and mask image. Note, the mask image is a jpg, it just occurred to me re-reading this you needed an alpha transparency with it, which I didn't define (though would have been easy had I remembered to do it). If its not something that you can do quickly, let me know and I will resend it.

Curious as to how much cleanup might be needed, if the mask for the walls is too thin (too few pixels) or the image otherwise needs cleanup or different specs etc, let me know, probably easy to do during creation and export.

Thanks for taking a second look at this, I'm sure their is just more than me that appreciates it.

[notrealdan]

For the LoS in FGU, there are two types of LoS blockers, walls and terrain, as shown in the FGU videos. For the image+mask method, would we have to create two masks? One for walls and another for terrain? Or would we create one mask for all and still need to go into FGU and do some cleanup (specifying which areas are which type of blocker, add doors, etc.)?

[LordEntrails]

For the LoS in FGU, there are two types of LoS blockers, walls and terrain, as shown in the FGU videos. For the image+mask method, would we have to create two masks? One for walls and another for terrain? Or would we create one mask for all and still need to go into FGU and do some cleanup (specifying which areas are which type of blocker, add doors, etc.)?
Good question. I assume the mask only does blockers, but terrain and door type elements 'could' be done with the mask image using different colors or specific RGB values (i.e. black for blocker, red for terrain, and three shades of blue for the different door types).

But, I think the first part is getting the mask import to work without having to clean up. From what Moon has said, the initial tests they did importing a mask required lots of cleanup afterwards, it became just easier to do everything in FGU. The mask idea will only be reasonable if the mask import is "clean" And that's something that hasn't been successful yet.

[notrealdan]

Good question. I assume the mask only does blockers, but terrain and door type elements 'could' be done with the mask image using different colors or specific RGB values (i.e. black for blocker, red for terrain, and three shades of blue for the different door types).

But, I think the first part is getting the mask import to work without having to clean up. From what Moon has said, the initial tests they did importing a mask required lots of cleanup afterwards, it became just easier to do everything in FGU. The mask idea will only be reasonable if the mask import is "clean" And that's something that hasn't been successful yet.

Thanks, and I totally agree with the "one step at a time" approach.

Is a mask method like this something that would generally only be useful if you created the map in something like Photoshop or GIMP (or insert your favorite robust tool here) in the first place? Is it made easier because you may have all the walls already together in a layer (or grouped somehow, not a Photoshop/GIMP expert...)? For those of us without those kinds of skills (perhaps the majority) and are mostly using flat jpg maps found online, would a mask method be more difficult and not worth it, and we'd be better off using tools within FGU?

I do back some Patreons that provide fantastic maps, and some of them offer the Photoshop files also, often for a higher price. I'm wondering if those files would be more useful for this kind of work than just the jpg files.

And trying to wrap my head around it, since I haven't seen this done before. Thanks!

[Trenloe]

For those of us without those kinds of skills (perhaps the majority) and are mostly using flat jpg maps found online, would a mask method be more difficult and not worth it, and we'd be better off using tools within FGU?
The mask method would be more difficult unless the image was very simple. You essentially be making a mask outside of FGU, which process would be very similar to what you'd do defining blockers in FGU. Then you'd import and have to do all the checking/cleanup.

[Moon Wizard]

Plus, in addition to the mask having to be created in a separate app, saved off, imported, and cleaned up; we also have to consider whether it makes sense to add even more options to UI as well as testing and maintaining an additional capability only used by a small subset of users. It’s not that it isn’t an interesting approach; but we want to weigh everything not just “features”.

Regards,
JPG

[LordEntrails]

Lots to consider :)

Yes the mask image approach would generally only be for those who make their own maps, or have access to the native files used to make the image. The advantage is that often when making maps, Something akin to the mask is already part of the map making process. With CC3+, this is a sheet (think layer) that is used to give dungeon maps a depth feel (or a Walls sheet all wall entities are on). Depending upon the cartographers method, it might be something they create in Photoshop etc as well.

So, from that perspective, it doesn't matter how simple or complex the map is, an element or set of entities that are already existing can be used to make the mask. Something that I did in my sample image while riding in a car today in about 10 minutes. And that's never having done the process before. With macros and a previous experience, it's something that might take me 1-3 minutes at most once the "process" is known (might even go so far as to say it might get as simple as activating a macro, making two mouse clicks, and then entering an image file name).

Now, who does this help? Well, folks like me who create 3rd party content for FG who make our own maps. And it might help folks like AAW, Frog God, etc if their cartographers do similar. But it might help even in the conversion of official content as well. Some of the WotC artists also use wall masks and compatible applications. If SW can give them six simple steps to create the mask in their native application (that's how many steps it took me without macros in CC3+), it might be something the cartographer would be willing to do.

But, SmiteWorks has to make sure it makes sense. They had tried it before but I'm not sure how they got the mask image and they said it required substantial cleanup. I'm hoping the process I used, and the quality of the mask image it generated, overcomes those quality issues. Hopefully, we shall see.

[Pantherin]

I would like to preface this with I have no experience with programming and have no clue how difficult it would be to make something like the following;

I was playing ESO this weekend after a long session of FG Saturday group and I was wondering how difficult it would be to create a platform like ESO with that 1st person or over the shoulder game experience? I would love to have that type of experience and view while running through a dungeon and activating powers on my character sheet.

I am in no way complaining about what we have.

I am very thankful for FG maps, tokens, powers, books - everything.

I have no idea what it would take to make an ESO like experience in FG, but the thoughts did cross my mind while playing ESO.

I am really surprised some of the big game name brands have not created that experience for players in the RP community, maybe there is not enough of a player base for it to economical?

I know I would invest in a project like that in a heartbeat.

[JohnD]

I would like to preface this with I have no experience with programming and have no clue how difficult it would be to make something like the following;

I was playing ESO this weekend after a long session of FG Saturday group and I was wondering how difficult it would be to create a platform like ESO with that 1st person or over the shoulder game experience? I would love to have that type of experience and view while running through a dungeon and activating powers on my character sheet.

I am in no way complaining about what we have.

I am very thankful for FG maps, tokens, powers, books - everything.

I have no idea what it would take to make an ESO like experience in FG, but the thoughts did cross my mind while playing ESO.

I am really surprised some of the big game name brands have not created that experience for players in the RP community, maybe there is not enough of a player base for it to economical?

I know I would invest in a project like that in a heartbeat.

Perhaps you missed the Neverwinter Nights and Neverwinter Nights 2 games?

[Pantherin]

Perhaps you missed the Neverwinter Nights and Neverwinter Nights 2 games?

I did not miss them, they just didn't leave a lasting impression nor was it in line with what I am envisioning.

I played them, just do not remember being an FG type experience.

Perhaps I should log back in, and see what I missed...

[Valatar]

NWN had scripting that allowed for a person to build a campaign, build environments and NPCs/monsters/etc. So yeah, some people did use it as a pseudo-VTT. The trick is that making it work basically required one be a coder since even something as basic as opening a door needed to be scripted, the out of the box tools were sparse to the point of being useless to anyone without a technical background. So technically it can do what you're asking for, but the work involved would make it fairly unfeasible for the average DM. Divinity: Original Sin 2 also had what it called GM Mode, and was somewhat user-friendlier than NWN. It may be a better option for that sort of 3D VTT experience.

[Pantherin]

NWN had scripting that allowed for a person to build a campaign, build environments and NPCs/monsters/etc. So yeah, some people did use it as a pseudo-VTT. The trick is that making it work basically required one be a coder since even something as basic as opening a door needed to be scripted, the out of the box tools were sparse to the point of being useless to anyone without a technical background. So technically it can do what you're asking for, but the work involved would make it fairly unfeasible for the average DM. Divinity: Original Sin 2 also had what it called GM Mode, and was somewhat user-friendlier than NWN. It may be a better option for that sort of 3D VTT experience.

Thanks for the additional information.

I never tried the Divinity line...I may look on Steam and see if it is a viable option.

[Trenloe]

I have no idea what it would take to make an ESO like experience in FG...
Investigate how many thousands of hours of development time ESO spent on their 3D engine, graphical assets, effect generation, etc., etc. and you'll get an idea of how much work this type of thing takes.

[Valatar]

To be fair, Smiteworks did buy a company that had shown 3D dungeons in a VTT, so it's not unreasonable for a person to inquire after 3D dungeons in FG. The only thing preventing me from being all hype about 3D dungeons is the thought of how much of a hassle it'd be to get good models for furniture/monsters/NPCs/etc. It's much easier to make a good-looking 2D map.

[JohnD]

Well I used NWN and NWN 2 for about 9 years total to run online campaigns so it most certainly is/was possible.

[Bidmaron]

And why aren’t you still using it?

[Ampersandrew]

And why aren’t you still using it?

Presumably because Fantasy Grounds is a better fit for what he's doing.

[Valatar]

Like I said, everything in NWN requires scripting. Which results in a videogame-like end result that's really impressive and all, but is a ton of work. You can throw together a map and encounter in FG in a couple minutes and just wing it for any details that arise, the two aren't nearly comparable. If you're trying to do a weekly game in NWN's engine, you'd better not have a day job.

[JohnD]

Presumably because Fantasy Grounds is a better fit for what he's doing.

Spot on, it was too much of a time sink after a while. I wanted to play not build levels.

[Sorrior]

Hi Sorrior welcome to FG.

Once the KS finishes you will get sent a backer kit which will ask you for details of what you pledged. Once that has all been filled in and sent back to Smiteworks things will get sorted out (also the payments etc have to be cleared as well which will take a few days).

Once all that is done you will be able to access the Pathfinder material.

Thanks alot for the reply and that definitely helped me make up my mind and have purchased fantasy grounds with plans to donate the weekend.

[Pantherin]

Investigate how many thousands of hours of development time ESO spent on their 3D engine, graphical assets, effect generation, etc., etc. and you'll get an idea of how much work this type of thing takes.

Noted.

Thanks for giving the tools to be more informed on the processes.

[Pantherin]

To be fair, Smiteworks did buy a company that had shown 3D dungeons in a VTT, so it's not unreasonable for a person to inquire after 3D dungeons in FG. The only thing preventing me from being all hype about 3D dungeons is the thought of how much of a hassle it'd be to get good models for furniture/monsters/NPCs/etc. It's much easier to make a good-looking 2D map.

Yep.

I don't think it is an unreasonable request or expectation in the future depending on the requirements.

JohnD said it takes a lot of work in some platforms to do the scripting...if there was a 3D map builder for GMs, that would be awesome.

We all know it is possible from the various games we play.

As a life-long gamer, I would appreciate a product like that.

[Pantherin]

Spot on, it was too much of a time sink after a while. I wanted to play not build levels.

Completely understandable.

[Pantherin]

Like I said, everything in NWN requires scripting. Which results in a videogame-like end result that's really impressive and all, but is a ton of work. You can throw together a map and encounter in FG in a couple minutes and just wing it for any details that arise, the two aren't nearly comparable. If you're trying to do a weekly game in NWN's engine, you'd better not have a day job.

Yep.

I was envisioning a 3D map generator like experience, that would take a lot less work on the GMs part.

Maybe even use existing maps as a basis to generate a 3D model to start with.

Like I said before, I am a keyboard visionary with zero experience in what it takes - a Dreamer.

[Pantherin]

Investigate how many thousands of hours of development time ESO spent on their 3D engine, graphical assets, effect generation, etc., etc. and you'll get an idea of how much work this type of thing takes.

I was not able to find too many details...but I did find it was in development 7 years before it was released.

That was enough to give me a big picture of what it took.

It was released in 2012, I remember because I am a founding member of its release and have followed them all these years off and on.

Yep.

I see your point.

Still doesn't stifle what the heart wants...

[seycyrus]

I don't work for SW.

I'm going to go on the record and state that I think it is unreasonable to expect SW to be pushing towards some sort of holodeck experience.

That would be a video game. What sets an RPG apart from a cRPG is the freedom that interacting with a live person as a DM gives the players and the open world that results from this freedom.

To expect the richness of a traditional RPG and the visual experience of an automated 3d video game is asking too much.

[Pantherin]

I don't work for SW.

I'm going to go on the record and state that I think it is unreasonable to expect SW to be pushing towards some sort of holodeck experience.

That would be a video game. What sets an RPG apart from a cRPG is the freedom that interacting with a live person as a DM gives the players and the open world that results from this freedom.

To expect the richness of a traditional RPG and the visual experience of an automated 3d video game is asking too much.

I respect your opinion.

However, I do not understand your reasoning.

It would be a video game experience, yes, but that is exactly what FG is doing now, providing us a virtual tabletop experience.

I believe having the experience of walking up to a door, not seeing a full map, not knowing what is behind that door, the experience of going through that door - would provide a different experience than masking the map so no one can see.

Add dim lighting or complete darkness as you walk through the door - until your mage or priest summons a source of light or someone lights a torch - that would be a different experience.

I do not believe it would take away from the gaming experience, I believe it would enhance the experience.

That is just my opinion though - worth about as much as the words on this page.

[Honken]

I was not able to find too many details...but I did find it was in development 7 years before it was released.

That was enough to give me a big picture of what it took.

It was released in 2012, I remember because I am a founding member of its release and have followed them all these years off and on.


Wikipedia states that ZeniMax had 250 employees 2012.

Just some info...
/H

[Pantherin]

The wikipedia states that ZeniMax had 250 employees 2012.

Just some info...
/H

I saw that as well, just didn't want to use that as a source, as it is not a reliable research source.

Yes, 250 versus 5 is a huge gap in productivity.

I definitely see the data to support the point being made.

[JohnD]

From personal experience, one thing about using a 3d environment is the amount of time you spend realizing that environment.

In FG now the DM can provide a descriptive paragraph or simply go with an ad hoc description of what's important to set the scene.

In a 3d environment, you have to show everything. That means a pile of crates can't just be described it has to be shown. Ultimately that's what players will expect.

I had this driven home when I was using NWN 2. I built a sewer adventure area that took me in excess of 48 hours from start to finish. My players breezed through it in just 45 minutes. That's when I stopped using those programs and started looking for something better which led me to FG.

[Zacchaeus]

I had this driven home when I was using NWN 2. I built a sewer adventure area that took me in excess of 48 hours from start to finish. My players breezed through it in just 45 minutes. That's when I stopped using those programs and started looking for something better which led me to FG.

Indeed. I released a couple of modules for NWM; took me the best part of 18 months (evenings and weekends). If you ignored the side quests the main quest took about 6 hours to complete. I never actually played the game - I only created a couple of adventures and you could do some powerful stuff with the scripting. But it would never do as a VTT unless the adventure was prepared by someone else and you could just run it. And I'm not sure that I would want to run a game like that anyway; takes too much away from the imagination as noted above. You can't just describe the pile of crates they have to be there.

[Pantherin]

From personal experience, one thing about using a 3d environment is the amount of time you spend realizing that environment.

In FG now the DM can provide a descriptive paragraph or simply go with an ad hoc description of what's important to set the scene.

In a 3d environment, you have to show everything. That means a pile of crates can't just be described it has to be shown. Ultimately that's what players will expect.

I had this driven home when I was using NWN 2. I built a sewer adventure area that took me in excess of 48 hours from start to finish. My players breezed through it in just 45 minutes. That's when I stopped using those programs and started looking for something better which led me to FG.

Yep, I can see how that would be exhausting and frustrating.

48 Hours does not equal 45 mins in any way shape or form...but I do admire your dedication and devotion to the players.

A good GM is hard to find and when you do find one, you never want to let go - I have a few in my life, that have stopped running games due to the amount of work it takes - they have jobs and families.

I completely understand, but I do miss being at their table (virtual or real).

I do get it, but it doesn't make the heart stop wanting that enhanced 3D gaming experience.

[StoryWeaver]

I prefer googling some nice battlemaps or photoshop some myself, then leave the rest to my descriptions as a GM during the running of the game.

For myself, though it's a nice concept and all to have 3D maps, currently I can foresee a number of issues with trying to use 3D maps instead of 2D ones for combat.
Just a few to spring to mind in a couple of minutes:

* Cost in time for preparation. A 5-10 minute job, becomes hours.
* Lack of available content, such as maps and tokens.
* Cost due to lack of content, having to buy 3D modules in place of tokens. As opposed to the vast quantity already available for 2D or ease of creating new 2D tokens with a picture and Photoshop.
* Incompatibility with monster manuals as all only come with 2D digital art to turn into tokens. Thus again, lack of content.
* Lock in with vendors of 3D modules as you either can't make your own, or doing so would take hours for each token.

The list goes on. Maybe sometime in the far off future we'll have something like that which is viable, but for now I see to many obstacles to make it a beneficial solution as far as my GM style and preparation goes.

ps. I know there is currently a new VTT being designed that offers just this, you could google to find it I'm sure. But while it looks nice and all, it has all the issues above and it's a simple dice roller thing more or less. Doesn't even compare to FG at the most basic level in functionality.

[gaara6666]

Well and I think the big part of it too is going to be internet connection. Do you go from brokering the connection to having an online server mediating it? Then you have to ask how people with poor net connections on their own are going to handle it.

[MarianDz]

Please knows somebody how many players connections at once FG allows?
I meand how many computers in same time could join session without having lag or freeze problems, is it somehow limited?

[LordEntrails]

Please knows somebody how many players connections at once FG allows?
I meand how many computers in same time could join session without having lag or freeze problems, is it somehow limited?
Sure it's limited. Not by the software but by some sort of technical limitation. A lot of it is going to depending upon the hosting computer's hardware and O/S and then bandwidth. So, lag is going to be close to linear to the number of clients. If you ignore lag, I suspect a practical limit is going to be somewhere around 30-40 cleints before you get too much contention.

Note, I would expect lag with 30-40 clients to be unplayable. But, you would expect a relatively stable connection.

[damned]

Its limited but not by an application or code limit.
There will be a performance hit at some point.
There are too many variables to tell you when that will be.

[lostsanityreturned]

Please knows somebody how many players connections at once FG allows?
I meand how many computers in same time could join session without having lag or freeze problems, is it somehow limited?

I have gone up to 8 players on the current fantasygrounds with Australian internet, I am sure it can do more than that.

I don't think latency issues will crop up to any real degree, being a client server system that plays a turn based game. Even 1000ms lag would be fairly tollerable for the players getting it imo.

Transfer speeds were a pain when I was using ADSL2+ and having to upload 100mb files to each player during the first session. But that is a thing of the past for me now and had next to zero impact during a game.

[MarianDz]

I got idea create "live sesions". Understand one session/map for DM + 2 or 3 players as (heroes); and another 5 - 6 peoples could plays as monsters (DM share sheets with them). This way monsters could interoperate better. Sometime DM can forgot utilise some special ability and this way every player do maximum how to survive, kill or be killed. THis way monsters could comunicate their own language over chat for example goblinish, koboldish, etc... and on attack can use bows, melee attack or their combinations. All they interactions will be better planed and coordinated. Use terrain protection, cover self, hit and run, count with advantage or disadvantage, etc ... as real players do. Hidden players will wait for their interaction when LOS uncovered them, hide when want to be hidden, utilise this way moment of surprise "ambush!". But its only idea ... which may have big bugs.

From time to time is good invite in game for example live NPC Dwarves which can comunicate with heroes not through DM's mouths. But real heroes which can plays their role.

[lostsanityreturned]

The only issue with that plan is players cannot move "enemy" tokens and can only move allied tokens. You could make all npcs allies but then you lose the colour coding on the battlemap and in the combat tracker.

Other than that (and having to share the npc sheets) I don't think it would be too much of an issue.

Oh invited players would need to be rolling from npc sheets directly so they wouldn't have effects applied on them, not hard to do manually (I mean people do it with ye olde pen and paper play ;) ) but I like automating as much as I can as a GM. I pride myself in having very short combat rounds.

[gaara6666]

Woot another stretch goal down

[PXGDAD]

I've not used FG for quite time due to work. I bought via Steam & joined a couple of campaigns and had great fun.
However, I'm now looking at backing the KS & have a couple of questions:-

How can I tell if it was pre 2018 that I bought it & how can I tell if I have standard or ultimate?

Cheers

[PXGDAD]

OK answered the 1st one myself by seeing I joined forum back in 2017 :)

[LordEntrails]

I've not used FG for quite time due to work. I bought via Steam & joined a couple of campaigns and had great fun.
However, I'm now looking at backing the KS & have a couple of questions:-

How can I tell if it was pre 2018 that I bought it & how can I tell if I have standard or ultimate?

Cheers
Go into Steam and check your order history.

[PXGDAD]

Excellent - thanks

[twseifert]

I've not used FG for quite time due to work. I bought via Steam & joined a couple of campaigns and had great fun.
However, I'm now looking at backing the KS & have a couple of questions:-

How can I tell if it was pre 2018 that I bought it & how can I tell if I have standard or ultimate?

Cheers
On the Fantasy Grounds launcher, where you select to join game etc... in the upper right corner it shows the version #. It it also say Ultimate, you have an Ultimate license. Other it us a Standard. I am not sure if it says Demo if that is what you are using.

[StoryWeaver]

I was wondering, will we get a minimize option in FGU? So you can minimize FGU down to the taskbar.

[Bidmaron]

I'd bet not. It's multi-platform, and unless FGU has some kind of universal support for Mac's sidebar-thingy, and I have no idea what Linux has, I don't see them coding something for Windows-only.

[Trenloe]

I was wondering, will we get a minimize option in FGU? So you can minimize FGU down to the taskbar.
I would guess it'll be part of the standard window (not Windows) functionality. The reason FG Classic doesn’t do that is because the 3D engine could raise errors if minimized.

[StoryWeaver]

That would be nice indeed. :) *fingers crossed*
Figured as FGU will be wrapped within the unity window, it might come as default.

Quite handy for when you want to leave the server up and running for longer periods to allow players to log in at will, or if you're working on something and want to get the window out of the way properly.

[Egheal]

A little suggestion : is it possible to implement a dice score counter for each player ? In order to have a graph of all the rolls from the session or, ideally, the campaign ? Would love to see how many 1's and 20's i rolled, and my average of the session. Perhaps an extension is already doing that ?

[rob2e]

A little suggestion : is it possible to implement a dice score counter for each player ? In order to have a graph of all the rolls from the session or, ideally, the campaign ? Would love to see how many 1's and 20's i rolled, and my average of the session. Perhaps an extension is already doing that ?

Doug Davison did write a program that would crawl and mine the campaign chat and spit out many stats. It was never released publically, we tested it in our games, it was pretty cool. Who had the most crits, who did the most damage, who did this, who had that...

He intended (intends?) to make that a thing, but with Unity development, that took a back burner.

We may see that come 'round again.

[Zacchaeus]

Doug Davison did write a program that would crawl and mine the campaign chat and spit out many stats. It was never released publically, we tested it in our games, it was pretty cool. Who had the most crits, who did the most damage, who did this, who had that...

He intended (intends?) to make that a thing, but with Unity development, that took a back burner.

We may see that come 'round again.

https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?37768-Campaign-Game-Statistics

[Egheal]

Nice, such a feature could be a great 450 000 $ stretch goal... just saying ;-)

[rob2e]

Nice, such a feature could be a great 450 000 $ stretch goal... just saying ;-)

Agreed!

[Kanbie]

I cannot wait for the [Fx] properties on Maps, being able to animate moving stars and the ociasional comet against a space background in Starfinder is going to be twisted.

And if I can't move stars against the background of space at least I can make it rain! :bandit:

[kevdog45]

I am literally going to be like two hours to late to get my 30 dollar pledge for Unity in. It says like 48 hours from now and I get paid around two pm on the 30th. Ugh. Is there a way to extend this somehow?

[Trenloe]

I am literally going to be like two hours to late to get my 30 dollar pledge for Unity in. It says like 48 hours from now and I get paid around two pm on the 30th. Ugh. Is there a way to extend this somehow?
Kickstarter will take the payment from your payment method within a few hours of the end of the Kickstarter. So, it *may* be the time you need. However, if it's a credit card you're using, and the payment fails - you'll be given the opportunity to retry or supply another payment method. You'll have up to 2 weeks to arrange for a payment that succeeds.

Hope the above is useful info and applies to your situation.

[Nylanfs]

As long as it isn't currently overdrawn, you can re-enter the info after and it will go through.

[Plaindog]

I have a question about Dropbox and Unity. I would love to place my campaign database on Dropbox. There are some problems with this now. Will unity allow us to do this?

[Zacchaeus]

I have a question about Dropbox and Unity. I would love to place my campaign database on Dropbox. There are some problems with this now. Will unity allow us to do this?

You can do this now and I doubt Unity will be any different. What is not advised is that you sync Dropbox or any other cloud storage since this can cause corrupted campaign files. Just make sure that you switch off syncing when you are using FG; or better do it manually.

[PietDeBacker]

I tried to pay, but my card was declined. The help of Kickstarter was not really a help. Nice, I will miss the pledge, because the payment of Kickstarter sucks.

[ddavison]

I tried to pay, but my card was declined. The help of Kickstarter was not really a help. Nice, I will miss the pledge, because the payment of Kickstarter sucks.

I would suggest contacting the number on the back of your credit card and then let them know that the transaction should be approved. Then re-try the pledge within Kickstarter. If it is declined, it is being declined from the side of your credit card company. They try to protect us from "potential fraud" but often go too far. I routinely have legitimate purchases that get denied by my CC companies.

[PietDeBacker]

There's no number on the back of the card. The banks are closed for 5 days.

[ddavison]

It may differ by country, but every credit card in the United States has a phone # on the back for customer support. You may need to look them up through some other method if it is not provided or use an alternate credit card.

[impureascetic]

Just backed with my Ultimate License upgrade. Very excited.

How difficult will it be to add our own VFX? I code by trade, have a lot of experience in After Effects/C4D, and I know my way around Unity. Will making new animation effects be as simple as loading a looping webm/mp4 or, more likely, a Unity animated texture into the appropriate folder with the right technical boxes checked, or will it have to be something more like a module or extension that makes exceptions in the client?

If this isn't in the cards, could you go into some detail as to why not and if it's something you can see coming into the product down the line? Would we have to pay for such a product?

When I asked along these lines in 2017, you said, "we will probably ship with some and provide more as available add-ons as time goes on," which sounds ominously like it's something we would have to pay for.

Along the same lines in 2018, when I asked if end users/modders could use animated texture from Unity on an ad hoc basis, you said, "We generally prefer to roll out features in a controlled fashion at first and then we eventually circle back to see if these are features that we can expand to user modifications and creations. This allows us to make any necessary changes for performance and to ensure that we are 100% satisfied with the underlying mechanisms after they've seen interaction with a larger user base."

These are fair, cautious answers. As someone who is dying to place customized moving water around a ship map, or fires dispersed throughout a cave, this is still the main question in my mind. You already have my money, and I'm confident I'll love FGU as much as I've loved the current software, but with FGU so close to release, can you provide a more substantive answer?

[PietDeBacker]

My card is totale blocked now, yeah!

[kevdog45]

I used my paypal debit card. It will decline but later today my other card will have money on it and I will pay then. Thanks for the advice. I really didn't want to miss the deadline and I had good reason not to pay last check, needed to eat.

[Xemit]

So we've passed unlock goal #12 and we still have an hour to go. What's the next unlock? ;)

[LordEntrails]

So we've passed unlock goal #12 and we still have an hour to go. What's the next unlock? ;)
Order Pizza and Beer button!

[ddavison]

Thanks everyone! It was a great experience.

[iotech]

Thanks everyone! It was a great experience.

Doug, if you ever wondered whether or not we REALLY love your little project, well... now you know. Congrats!

[chumbly]

They are collecting I just got charged

[Kanbie]

Order Pizza and Beer button!

I have to be over 21 to use Fantasy Grounds?

[chumbly]

I have to be over 21 to use Fantasy Grounds?

Demand a pizza and root beer button!!!;)

[ppostel]

I missed the Kickstarter by one hour. Is there any way at all I can still pledge?

[LordEntrails]

I missed the Kickstarter by one hour. Is there any way at all I can still pledge?
*shrugs* I doubt it, but reach out to SW directly at [email protected] and ask.

[JohnD]

I missed the Kickstarter by one hour. Is there any way at all I can still pledge?

The answer is typically no.

[tlavalle]

when can we access the beta?

[LordEntrails]

when can we access the beta?
Sometime after the Alpha and before public release.

Public release is schedule for December. Alpha release is unknown, maybe later July.

You will get an email when you can access it.

[Ampersandrew]

I have to be over 21 to use Fantasy Grounds?

That would very much depend what country you're in.

[Three of Swords]

Out of curiosity, is FGU more efficient than FGC regarding load times? Should be an easy test since we're supposed to be able to copy a campaign from FGC to FGU.

[Moon Wizard]

It depends. I would expect it to be slower during alpha and possibly beta.

Also, it loads a list of all assets on your machine (that are set up in the right locations); instead of just “loaded” modules. So, you will have a lot more assets that need to be identified on load; but they are loaded on demand in FGU. (Ie identified on load; but only loaded when viewed/used)

Regards,
JPG

[damned]

Out of curiosity, is FGU more efficient than FGC regarding load times? Should be an easy test since we're supposed to be able to copy a campaign from FGC to FGU.

If you have to transmit 300mb of files to 6 players the laws of physics still apply.
Some things cannot be changed.

[LordNova2]

So is it post #1000 or the 1,000th replay that is the lucky winner?