Why no 3D?

[Frunobulax]

Fantasy Grounds is super cool in terms of rules and dice, no doubt about that. But, let's face it - you can add all the dynamic lighting and colors you want, but it still looks terrible compared to so many other things - because it's still 100% 2D. I mean, yeah, at least it looks better than Roll20, but so does any teenager's web site. Looking better than Roll20 is a pretty low bar.

I don't follow every announcement from Smiteworks, so maybe they have addressed this or have it on a roadmap somewhere, but as a backer of FG Unity, I know I didn't see it addressed anywhere in all the lists of upcoming improvements or roadmaps at the time I pledged. I remember being highly disappointed that it didn't even appear to be anywhere on the radar. Whether that's changed, I don't know.

In 1998 - 22 years ago! - the game Baldur's Gate was released for desktop computers. It was one of the very first CRPGs to use an isometric "2.5D" perspective. You couldn't rotate the camera, but at least it looked 3D from the default angle. And since then there have been hundreds of CRPGs that are in 3D. Diablo, Pillars of Eternity, Divinity, etc, just to name a very few. "But those are huge triple-A games", you're saying. "Those games have million-dollar budgets and huge resources that Smiteworks doesn't have." Well, I can point to dozens of small, indy games that are done by just one or two people that have at least simple 3D graphics - even if they aren't animated.

I was watching a random video on Youtube the other day and came across the screenshot I attached below. I don't even know the name of the game, and the art and models are pretty simple. But they're still far ahead of FG. They show that it's hardly impossible for a small indy team to at least have some basic 3D.

You might think "Who cares? It's just eye candy!" Well, no, not really. We play RPGS because they're fun. We like to pretend. And anything that adds to that atmosphere makes the game better. It's called immersion. There's a reason people turn down the lights and put on candles. There's a reason FG has themes and fonts. There's a reason people put on music or use Syrinscape. Because anything that helps us pretend to be other people in other places doing cool stuff is a good thing.

And of course the visual sense is probably the most primary at all. When I'm fighting a dragon, it's pretty lame to just see it as a 2D circle that happens to have a bigger diameter than my character's little 2D circle. It's not scary or intimidating or anything. I want to see it towering over my little dude! Look at the image I put below. It's not super fancy. It's not high res. The models may not even be animated. But it gives you a sense of the atmosphere and the scale and position of things. But it looks a hundred times better than the current FG.

Now, I know that Smiteworks is not a huge company. I know there isn't a big pile of money hanging around to spend on modelers, animators, and extra programmers. But it doesn't have to go from 2D to 4K realtime ray-traced overnight or anything. I would be happy with just a basic start. And, happily - finally! - the game is on the Unity engine which happens to handle 3D internally quite easily - even with physics support! (can you say "knockback", anyone? "Fireball explosions"?).

So the engine can now handle it. And there are a lot of folks out there with Unity experience. The only possible issue might be obtaining or developing a library of licensed 3D models, animations, and special effects. But even that doesn't have to be a big deal. There are lots of ways of obtaining them, and again, it doesn't have to happen all at once. Of course Smiteworks could make some themselves (maybe just one guy doing the most-common models like player classes, Orcs, furniture, etc). There are also libraries of pre-made models and textures that can be purchased. There are a whole slew of free, no-license-needed models out there in copyleft-land. And of course, players and users of FG could make and submit their own - subject, of course, to an approval process, or maybe only use them locally.

At any rate, I'm a huge fan of FG and Smiteworks and this is not at all intended to be a screed or complaint. All I'm saying is "I'm a customer and a backer and it makes me sad that apparently there are no plans to take the game into 3D. Well, now there is the easy capability do so so - when can we expect it to start happening? It doesn't all have to happen at once." Seriously, I'd be happy at first with just static, unanimated models that move like chess pieces. There's so much that could be done with FG. Of course Smiteworks wants to maintain control and not have it be a free-for-all, and they have shown a lot of flexibility with allowing fans to develop their own extensions. It's awesome and I applaud them for their good community relations. I think that a bold, super cool new thing like this is worth putting a lot of other minor features on the back burner for. I hope they keep up that kind of transparency, and perhaps even extend it a bit into an even-more collaborative effort with the users in the area of graphics and 3D.

Well, I guess I've had my say! Have a fun winter everyone, thank goodness we have games and FG to pass the time!

41269

[JohnD]

If you want 3d, get ready to play 1 game every 6 weeks or so. It will take your DM a lot longer to prepare sessions.

[mattekure]

What would 3D add to a virtual tabletop? Its not a first person shooter, or an MMORPG where all of it is made for you. Its a simulation of a tabletop to facilitate playing with friends. I dont see what 3d would add to that.

and I agree with JohnD. Prep time would be insane if DM's had to do 3d modeling for everything.

[Kelrugem]

I did now not read everything, but yes, surely it would add extremely to immersion, and I think that in the long run VTTs will move towards supporting 3D, but I would not expect it in the short term :) (though there are already VTTs out there supporting 3D, but their 3D assets.... well, let us say, most 2D maps look way better :D )

But, as the others said, 3D support cannot come without enough support of (nice-looking) assets for that, and modules having prebuilt 3D things would be probably needed, too. Many people use official adventure bought in the store; when the publishers like WotC do not natively support 3D stuff there, it is unlikely that there will be 3D maps and so on such that such a feature would not be used a lot (when there would be now suddenly such a feature)

However, I think that this feature will and should come in the veryyy long run, before that I suppose that isometric/2.5D stuff gets more popular :) (and I am already excited about using isometric maps but I would like to have more support for that before) Maybe think of vtt development as a much slower but similar evolution as for computer games in that regard :)

So, it is not just about whether or not the engine is able to do 3d stuff, it also depends on many other things to make something like this viable for a company like SmiteWorks :) Before that, features like dynamic lighting are way more important (from which 3D would also benefit) :) support of animations is also probably something which comes before that, and so on :)

EDIT: In general I think that with enough support to reduce the preparation it will surely work out, just arguing with preparation time would lead to denying all new possible features (animated maps, sounds, etc.; hell, how much time I spent for sounds! :D), and people who do not want to spend time on that can still use the typical things :) I know people who build a lot of 3d assets for their games at real tables, and their is a market for these 3d things; so, in general I do not see a reason why it should not be possible to have 3d vtt :) Just a matter of support and interest etc :)

[amerigoV]

I would love to see it (heck, Pathfinder Kingmaker is Unity, so basically what the OP is saying).

There is Tabletop Simulator. I have not played a game in it but a Savage Worlds blogger is a big fan and post videos of it. It looks like what the name says - like tossing out terrain for your tabletop (and all the limitations - "that fig over there is really a fire giant, not a frost giant cuz I have not found a fire giant yet).

One of these days, all the cool features will merge into one platform. I'll probably be too senile to appreciate it.

[JohnD]

This is a true situation.

Before I found FG, I ran games using Neverwinter Nights and Neverwinter Nights 2.

NWN2 had a lot more 3d in areas.

I spent 46 hours working on an adventure area. 46 hours on top of family commitments, work, errands, etc....

Well, my group of players spent 40 minutes on that.

So 46 hours of work on a visual environment for not even an hour of actual game time.

That's an example of what your DM would be working through unless they used pregenerated content that already had this stuff done.

So... a lot more time spent making the adventure meaning fewer actual game sessions.

[Valyar]

Tabletop roleplaying games are not computer games and VTT software is not Infinity engine. 3D is cool, effects are nice gimmick, but the more and more emphasis is put on those, the less quality and the actual role-playing diminishes. As JohnD said, timeprep will be horrible. Today I waste most time on finding nice looking or creating a map for the VTT. Before pandemic, we played face to face with Chessex wet-erasable battle matt and it was much better and faster than any VTT to set up ad-hoc encounters. But it is what it is.

[bmos]

I know the discussion here is about 3D visuals, but I think it is interesting to bring up 'mechanical' 3D also.
I don't want to spend more time on assets, so 3D maps are of no benefit to me (yet). However, MANY rulesets include flight and even without this there are situations of higher ground/lower ground.
Implementing the distance measurement and potentially LOS implications of this would be where I would like to see improvement first.

[Kelrugem]

3D is cool, effects are nice gimmick, but the more and more emphasis is put on those, the less quality and the actual role-playing diminishes.

What do you mean with that? I never understood that argument, so, why should RP be less when there are more graphics used? Or is it just about that more time is spent then on the map such that less time is spent on preparing the RP? :) Then yes, I understand :) But when something takes too much time for one, then I would simply not use it, also just theatre of mind is possible in FG (and with FGU one may be able to simulate your table experience when it is about the drawing stuff, though there is still the method with using just a generic background with global mask and then to unmask it to simulate the "drawing") :)

But that is why I said that enough support is then needed, to avoid that it takes too much time :) Depending on assets, quick battlemaps should be as quickly done as 2d ones; when it is about details, then it will surely "eat" time, because one may start to search for certain assets (but then I'd prefer just to mention that detail via words as I already do when the 2d map does not show certain things) :)

Bmos mentions a good point, mechanical 3D is indeed more important and I would really like to see features for that, because that is indeed something which one faces very often, regardless of the number of dimensions of our maps :D

[SilentRuin]

I may be wrong, but I think the original poster was not talking about all things 3D. The examples given were explosions and graphics behaviors that would come from the engine as the result of some spell/action/token overlay. That is zero setup from the DM's perspective and purely a glitzy option for the game developers to provide.

So while I agree with the Neverwinter nights variety of 3D map/sound/etc stuff being horrific for the DM to prepare - adding explosion graphics (think batman tv show in 60's BAP BIF BOOM) in 3D on a 2D platform is still sort of cool. And as locations and map distances come into play graphically representing auras, areas of effect, and spell results with a bit of 3D zing is not a burden to any DM.

Having said that, the game dev's have a long way to go to get the simple 2D tabletop world and interfaces into it fully working and fleshed out before they should even contemplate doing this. IMHO.

[celestian]

What would 3D add to a virtual tabletop? Its not a first person shooter, or an MMORPG where all of it is made for you. Its a simulation of a tabletop to facilitate playing with friends. I dont see what 3d would add to that.

and I agree with JohnD. Prep time would be insane if DM's had to do 3d modeling for everything.

I think it would be pretty trivial to have 3d tokens, lighting and effects. None of which would require any more work than the 2d versions for a DM (I don't make my tokens now). 3D maps is another issue which would be more complex and require either an amazing building tool or very good image analysis to generate a simplistic walled map. I've seen the latter.

The VTT Talespire is going all 3d and if you check out their reddit you'll see the community has generated a massive amount of maps.

Personally, I'd enjoy a more 3d environment, even if it's 2d+3d. Realistically I think anything like that is years out for Smiteworks.

[LordEntrails]

Technology development, and that is what we are talking about when talk about adding 3D to a VTT, is driven by money and self-driven visionaries.

It takes both for a technology to achieve it's possibility. (Lots of examples if anyone doubts this.) RPGS have lots of visionaries, but very little money.

The RPG market for 2019 seems like it is really big, but it's not. What we really need to look at is what is called the Tabletop RPG market (yes we are talking VTT, but actually the VTT market is so small it's just lumped in under the Tabletop segment). In 2016/17 it was about $45million USD (https://www.enworld.org/threads/how-bigs-the-rpg-market.664499/#:~:text=As%20of%202016%2F2017%20it's,card%20games %2C%20and%20collectible%20games.). Even that sounds large (compared to my household budget), but think of the thousands of people that provides jobs for. And, think of what is spent for a AAA video game of $60-80 million USD. Yes that is right, one video game spends almost twice as much to develop as the entire RPG tabletop market earns in a year!

So, if you want 3D in your VTT, then start spending your money accordingly. Convince your friends to spend their money too, and get new friends, and teach new people to play RPGs, and get them to spend their money. And help put a kabash on people claiming RPGs are too expensive, and shut down PDF piracy and IP theft. Set the expectation that an RPG product should cost the same as a AAA game, and that you should buy everyone that comes out, and you should run your VTT on a dedicated console. *G*

[DM_BK]

https://talespire.com/
Is pretty neat...not out yet and I'm sure it's got years before it gets all the features we enjoy in FG today but it is 3d.

I've seen a couple of others out there as well that do 3d but all fairly primitive on all the other features.

[Jiminimonka]

https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?26242-SmiteWorks-is-growing!-We-have-acquired-Tabletop-Connect

That was 3D and must be in the works for FGU

https://www.fantasygrounds.com/press/sheet.php?p=tabletop_connect#projects

[bmos]

https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?26242-SmiteWorks-is-growing!-We-have-acquired-Tabletop-Connect
That was 3D and must be in the works for FGU


ddavidson even says as much on the last page of that thread:

Our focus is more on the 2D mapping improvements for this initial phase. We plan to move into 2.5D in a future phase and then 3D beyond that.

[Jiminimonka]

ddavidson even says as much on the last page of that thread:

Exactly.

For the record, I don't care what other tabletops are doing, I have invested a lot of time (and a lot of money) into FantasyGrounds and am sticking with it until I drop dead in 2075.

(p.s. I just took delivery of a 4k monitor so I can have more room on the desktop when DMing)

[Nylanfs]

Why not this setup? (https://falcontradingsystems.com/img/resources/trading-computers-MP.jpg)

[Jiminimonka]

Not big enough for FGU

[Frunobulax]

If you want 3d, get ready to play 1 game every 6 weeks or so. It will take your DM a lot longer to prepare sessions.

That's just silly. It would take not one second longer. They could just place things as usual. Whether they show up as 3D or 2D makes no difference.

[Frunobulax]

What would 3D add to a virtual tabletop? Its not a first person shooter, or an MMORPG where all of it is made for you. Its a simulation of a tabletop to facilitate playing with friends. I dont see what 3d would add to that.

What does 2D add, why not just use text? Why not just play Dwarf Fortress? (https://www.bay12games.com/dwarves/)


and I agree with JohnD. Prep time would be insane if DM's had to do 3d modeling for everything.

Nonsense. No 3D modeling at all would be required. You don't understand how this works. That's like saying players have to model thier Diablo characters first.

[LordEntrails]

Utter nonsense.


Nonsense.
I assume you probably do not intend this language to be insulting or inflammatory, but please try not to use such language in the future when you disagree with someone on these forums. Thanks!

[Frunobulax]

3D support cannot come without enough support of (nice-looking) assets for that, and modules having prebuilt 3D things would be probably needed, too. Many people use official adventure bought in the store; when the publishers like WotC do not natively support 3D stuff there, it is unlikely that there will be 3D maps and so on such that such a feature would not be used a lot (when there would be now suddenly such a feature)

Well, of course it would take some time to work its way through the system. As I said in my original message, it would not happen overnight. But there are a lot of solutions for assets like models. No players have to create them. Certainly WoTC has the manpower and resources to do some simple models. Hell, plenty of teeny one-person indy games have lots of models. It would be no trick at all to whip up a small library of generic models and start from there. Maybe module publishers would not run out and start re-working old modules, but with a standard shared set even that would not be tough, and putting them in going forward would be no more work than putting in a 2D token is. I think if FG had the ability to do this (and now it does), publishers might very well like to be able to spice up their modules.


So, it is not just about whether or not the engine is able to do 3d stuff, it also depends on many other things to make something like this viable for a company like SmiteWorks :)

Oh, I completely agree - it's not as if anyone could snap their fingers and make it happen overnight. Maybe it would start with something small like Smiteworks just turning on the native support for 3D in Unity and then giving people the hooks needed to assign a 3D model instead of a 2D token. And it could grow naturaly from there.


Before that, features like dynamic lighting are way more important (from which 3D would also benefit)

"Way more important"? As hard as I try, I can never understand why dynamic lighting is considered so freaking important by so many people. Personally I'd much rather see my 3D character being menaced and surrounded by a bunch of 3D orcs than looking at dumb light and dark spots on a map. And as you say, dynamic lighting would be WAY better in 3D


support of animations is also probably something which comes before that, and so on :)

Support for 3D models and support for animating them pretty much go hand in hand.

EDIT: In general I think that with enough support to reduce the preparation it will surely work out, just arguing with preparation time would lead to denying all new possible features (animated maps, sounds, etc.; hell, how much time I spent for sounds! :D), and people who do not want to spend time on that can still use the typical things :) I know people who build a lot of 3d assets for their games at real tables, and their is a market for these 3d things; so, in general I do not see a reason why it should not be possible to have 3d vtt :) Just a matter of support and interest etc :)[/QUOTE]

[Frunobulax]

I spent 46 hours working on an adventure area. 46 hours on top of family commitments, work, errands, etc....
Well, my group of players spent 40 minutes on that. So 46 hours of work on a visual environment for not even an hour of actual game time. That's an example of what your DM would be working through unless they used pregenerated content that already had this stuff done. So... a lot more time spent making the adventure meaning fewer actual game sessions.

The same can be said of any game content, it has nothing to do with 3D or not. Let's face it, most of us use maps that others have designed rather than doing it ourselves. And there's no reason it would have to take any longer whether using 3D or 2D. Is it really harder to drag a 3D model of a bush onto a map than it is to drag a 2D image of a bush? Picture playing Rollercoaster Tycoon or any other game that requires placing 3D objects. It would be no harder than that. And hell, for the purists and luddites, 2D would still be available.

[Jiminimonka]

Ok Frunobulax. Go read the post I made about it already in the pipeline a few pages back. Its coming. Eventually.

Stop trying to flame this up.

[Frunobulax]

effects are nice gimmick, but the more and more emphasis is put on those, the less quality and the actual role-playing diminishes.

I don't think that's true at all. What makes you think that? Why put music in movies., why not just voices? In fact, why watch movies at al;l when you can read the novel and get the same story? We see the world in 3D. Therefore, by definition, it looks more realistic to us.


As JohnD said, timeprep will be horrible.

I'm sorry, but you don't understand how it works. No extra effort would be required on the part of the DM. The DMs would not be the ones making models (unless they felt like it).


Today I waste most time on finding nice looking or creating a map for the VTT. Before pandemic, we played face to face with Chessex wet-erasable battle matt and it was much better and faster than any VTT to set up ad-hoc encounters. But it is what it is.

Your definition of "better" is different than mine. I think FG is much, much better than scrawling on plastic with markers.

Are you saying that you want us kids to get off your lawn? ;-)

[Frunobulax]

I know the discussion here is about 3D visuals, but I think it is interesting to bring up 'mechanical' 3D also.
I don't want to spend more time on assets, so 3D maps are of no benefit to me (yet). However, MANY rulesets include flight and even without this there are situations of higher ground/lower ground.

Yes, 3D does not just mean models, but it would also allow things like flying creatures and elevations. A battle on a hillside? Sure. underwater? yeah. If you maker your own battle maps rather than using pre-made ones as most peopl do, then making maps 3D takes a teeny bit m,ore time. But hell, look at ALL the games that let you manipulate terrain and place 3D objects. Playing Cities or Planet Coaster is not considered to be super difficult.

[LordEntrails]

I'm sorry, but you don't understand how it works.
MOD: Again, PLEASE WATCH YOUR LANGUAGE. Telling other people what they do and do know understand is not acceptable.

[Frunobulax]

I think it would be pretty trivial to have 3d tokens, lighting and effects. None of which would require any more work than the 2d versions for a DM (I don't make my tokens now).

I agree. I've always been a game designer, not a programmer, so while I'm familiar with the capabilities of the Unity engine, I'm not really qualified to say how difficult it would be to implement. But from what I understand it does seem relatively trivial to me, too - not any kind of full conversion, of course, but maybe just flipping whatever switch is necessary to allow 3D assets in the game and then letting the community screw around with it in beta or something. I know that with more or less zero training, I once downloaded a free 3D modeling program, made a basic model, and had it moving around in Unity in very short order. It's not rocket science - the Unity engine makes it super easy.


3D maps is another issue which would be more complex and require either an amazing building tool or very good image analysis to generate a simplistic walled map. I've seen the latter.

People keep saying that making maps would be so terribly hard, but I look at the huge number of games in my Steam library that allow terrain manipulation. Cities: Skylines, Planet Coaster, No Man's Sky and a slew of others have that feature and it's super easy. Raise some terrain, lower some terrain, make some lakes and rivers, sprinkle in a few trees and a wall, and bingo - you have a map. It's exactly the same process as in 2D, just with models instead of images.


The VTT Talespire is going all 3d and if you check out their reddit you'll see the community has generated a massive amount of maps. Personally, I'd enjoy a more 3d environment, even if it's 2d+3d. Realistically I think anything like that is years out for Smiteworks.

Wow, that's fascinating, thanks so much for the pointer - I hadn't heard about it. It looks pretty amazing even at this early stage. I think they have the right idea. I'm pretty unclear about the resources Smiteworks has available, or exactly how much it would take to implement at a basic level, but if I were them I would take a look at Talespire and tremble in fear of the future. Maybe not today or tomorrow, but if I were Smiteworks I would not be thinking "Should FG go 3D?", but "How long can we survive without doing it? Before we only had to deal with Roll20, which sucks. How will we deal with this new competition?" Luckily, the hardest part (porting to Unity) is already done.

[Frunobulax]

MOD: Again, PLEASE WATCH YOUR LANGUAGE. Telling other people what they do and do know understand is not acceptable.


I'm sorry, I'm not trying to be insulting or step on anyone's toes, but I do not think "you don't understand" is somehow offensive language. I didn't use any insults or anything. If someone said to me "you don't understand quantum mechanics" I'd say "you're right - I sure don't." I certainly understand that hurling insults or epithets or other kind of bad behavior are unacceptable, but I think that reacting that way to a perfectly innocent comment - and with all caps - is overreacting a bit. Did someone complain? I even went back and edited one of my previous posts to take out a negative word you didn't like. It seems that you are trying hard to defend the feelings of a theoretical person by yelling at me to be nicer. I don't like to be yelled at - have you considered my feelings?

[Jiminimonka]

I'm sorry, I'm not trying to be insulting or step on anyone's toes, but I do not think "you don't understand" is somehow offensive language. I didn't use any insults or anything. If someone said to me "you don't understand quantum mechanics" I'd say "you're right - I sure don't." I certainly understand that hurling insults or epithets or other kind of bad behavior are unacceptable, but I think that reacting that way to a perfectly innocent comment - and with all caps - is overreacting a bit. Did someone complain? I even went back and edited one of my previous posts to take out a negative word you didn't like. It seems that you are trying hard to defend the feelings of a theoretical person by yelling at me to be nicer. I don't like to be yelled at - have you considered me feelings?

Seriously?

Don't argue with the Mods.

[Kelrugem]

"Way more important"? As hard as I try, I can never understand why dynamic lighting is considered so freaking important by so many people. Personally I'd much rather see my 3D character being menaced and surrounded by a bunch of 3D orcs than looking at dumb light and dark spots on a map. And as you say, dynamic lighting would be WAY better in 3D

Ah, that is just due to that it also has mechanical influences (whether someone has some sort of concealment, surprise rounds due to who sees first, and so on), it arises often and is not unimportant for combat but tedious to check manually (especially when one wants to be very correct in the details) :) So, you can also think of dynamic lighting as combat automation in that regard, or at least an auxiliary tool :) So, it is not just about atmosphere in that regard :)

[LordEntrails]

I'm sorry, ...
Discussion moved to private messages.

[A Social Yeti]

I have to say i find you seem to have missed some of the point of there being, theater of the mind, as an intrinsic aspect of RPing.

Like this:
show me a 3d environment, that would live up to this GM description for every player at the same table:

You enter a room where the geometry of the walls does not seem to make any sense to you. The carvings appear to move and yet do not. There is an other worldly light seeping out of the edges of the strange creatures carved into the walls that at once seem to make a normal room of describable shape and size, and yet when you try to make sense of it in your mind you wold be hard pressed to say if you were actually walking on the floor or maybe one of the walls.


And many other times in the fantasy/far flung sci-fi future, where nothign we have ever seen to date would suffice to replace the verbal description and theater of the mind it creates. That becomes exactly what each listener needs to see in their own mind's eye, to get what the setting is.

more show them visual details, that are say, imagination aids, may help in some ways but also intrinsically limits just how fantastical you could get with it.


"the likes of which no human as ever seen beofre."
is basically impossible to show us, we have to imagine it.

[Jiminimonka]

I have to say i find you seem to have missed some of the point of there being, theater of the mind, as an intrinsic aspect of RPing.

Like this:
show me a 3d environment, that would live up to this GM description for every player at the same table:

You enter a room where the geometry of the walls does not seem to make any sense to you. The carvings appear to move and yet do not. There is an other worldly light seeping out of the edges of the strange creatures carved into the walls that at once seem to make a normal room of describable shape and size, and yet when you try to make sense of it in your mind you wold be hard pressed to say if you were actually walking on the floor or maybe one of the walls.


And many other times in the fantasy/far flung sci-fi future, where nothign we have ever seen to date would suffice to replace the verbal description and theater of the mind it creates, that is exactly what each listener needs to see in their own mind's eye, to get what the setting's vibe.

more show them visual details, that are say, imagination aids, may help in some ways but also intrinsically limits just how fantastical you could get with it.


"the likes of which no human as ever seen beofre."
is basically impossible to show us, we have to imagine it.

I think Gary Gygax told a story along these lines - a few children where asked if they preferred TV or radio, and one of the kids said "radio, because the pictures are better"

[ddavison]

Adding a way to display 2D assets in 3D space (what we are calling 2.5D) is probably the first step. After that, adding support with built-in libraries of 3D assets is probably next. Having 3D assets specific to all the various releases we have each year is probably not something I would expect anytime soon. Pathfinder Kingmaker is a great game and they spent years creating all the great 3D assets for what amounts to 6 adventure modules. We released 301 products so far this year.

[Kelrugem]

Adding a way to display 2D assets in 3D space (what we are calling 2.5D) is probably the first step. After that, adding support with built-in libraries of 3D assets is probably next. Having 3D assets specific to all the various releases we have each year is probably not something I would expect anytime soon. Pathfinder Kingmaker is a great game and they spent years creating all the great 3D assets for what amounts to 6 adventure modules. We released 301 products so far this year.

thank you :)

And I get more and more excited :D

[DM_BK]

"You may quest the way you like, I will quest the way I like."
~Thadeous, Your Highness 2011

Some people like 3d, some don't. Not sure why there was so much condemnation on the topic. The OPs enjoyment of this upcoming feature shouldn't impact your ability to use FG as you always have. Everyone wins.

[Kelrugem]

I have to say i find you seem to have missed some of the point of there being, theater of the mind, as an intrinsic aspect of RPing.

Like this:
show me a 3d environment, that would live up to this GM description for every player at the same table:

You enter a room where the geometry of the walls does not seem to make any sense to you. The carvings appear to move and yet do not. There is an other worldly light seeping out of the edges of the strange creatures carved into the walls that at once seem to make a normal room of describable shape and size, and yet when you try to make sense of it in your mind you wold be hard pressed to say if you were actually walking on the floor or maybe one of the walls.


And many other times in the fantasy/far flung sci-fi future, where nothign we have ever seen to date would suffice to replace the verbal description and theater of the mind it creates. That becomes exactly what each listener needs to see in their own mind's eye, to get what the setting is.

more show them visual details, that are say, imagination aids, may help in some ways but also intrinsically limits just how fantastical you could get with it.


"the likes of which no human as ever seen beofre."
is basically impossible to show us, we have to imagine it.

The same you could also say about 2d maps, but also there we simply describe anything extra which is not shown on the map :) I understand your point though, when an image is showing something opposite or something not well-fitting enough, then it disturbs the imagination; but one can revert that: Often I can simply not imagine something by its description or I, as DM, am unable to describe something, then images help :)
To finish my answer also with a fancy sentence: "A picture is worth a thousand words" :p

One needs both, and the more helping tools the better :) What a certain group needs and wants, depends on the group :)

[Jiminimonka]

"You may quest the way you like, I will quest the way I like."
~Thadeous, Your Highness 2011

Great quote!
3D is in the pipeline already. Has been for a few years now. But development of FGU while keeping backward compatibility with FGC means things go slower. Now that is done, things will move faster.

[steve23eris]

Its not 3d as such but i scratch this 'itch' by using isometric dungeon maps and figures. I was using them on zoom calls via photoshop but find it all seems to work just as well importing them as maps and tokens to FGU. I like isometric as it shows different levels better, even simple things such as balconies. I think the 'look' is the most important thing when gaming online. In person, you have the interaction of other people in the room etc so then its not so important (at least not for me) but if your going to be on computers anyway, then id like to aim at using the machines to the best of 'my' (limited) ability. As said, isometric tends to do that for me. I run a series of different 'shots' - top down, isometric, image etc depending on the need.

[Frunobulax]

Adding a way to display 2D assets in 3D space (what we are calling 2.5D) is probably the first step. After that, adding support with built-in libraries of 3D assets is probably next. Having 3D assets specific to all the various releases we have each year is probably not something I would expect anytime soon.

That sounds like a very reasonable plan with concrete and logical steps. I would never expect full 3D environments and a huge library of 3D assets overnight. For an initial first pass at 2.5D maybe you could just take the 2D textures and paste them on each side of a cube or something.


Pathfinder Kingmaker is a great game and they spent years creating all the great 3D assets for what amounts to 6 adventure modules. We released 301 products so far this year.

Absolutely, which is why I mentioned that specifically. They had a big budget, dedicated modelers, and tons of time. So looking like Pathfinder is not expected and probably not even necessary, as nice as it would be. One the other hand... it does use the same engine, which means everything they do is technically (eventually) possible in FGU without having to code all the support.

Although I'm sure you're aware of it, Doug, others reading this should google "Talespire" and see some of the early videos. It's not even at Early Access on Steam yet, but it will be soon. I don't know if it uses Unity or not. It certainly won't be much competition for FG just yet since it has no core rulesets for D&D or any other game and coding those systems is the really hard work that would take a while. Plus, I don't know if the agreement that Smiteworks has with WoTC is exclusive or not for D&D IP. But Talespire looks great, and in my mind that is the appearance and level of 3D that Smiteworks should shoot for and could certainly achieve. In fact if you read the description on the Kickstarter page very carefully, you will see a whole slew of very cool features that I think Smiteworks should instantly steal. It seems to be being developed by just two guys in a garage somewhere, and the old "If they can do it..." thing comes up. Though I'm sure they had help from others, they already have a halfway decent set of nice-looking models, enough to run a campaign if you don't mind a little placeholding, re-use, and imagination at first.

So I don't think the asset problem will be as big as many people think. Through a combination of Smiteworks bundling a small, basic set of original ones with the game, the possibility of Wizards of the Coast making some (and they probably already have thousands), the possibility of buying/licensing some more, and finally uses being able to create and share them... the usable asset library of models, textures, and animations could grow at a nice clip. Also, for me personally I would most definitely pay more for modules that had cool 3d models, especially if I could then use them in my own custom games.

[Frunobulax]

I have to say i find you seem to have missed some of the point of there being, theater of the mind, as an intrinsic aspect of RPing.

For you. There's something to be said for that when it's 100% text, like a novel, and people might come up with all kinds of different ways to imagine the scene and characters. But once you nail it down to an image of any kind - 2d or 3D - then all that really matters is how realistic that image is. I mean, you could do "Game of Thrones" as a radio play, but I think that most people are like me and want to see the dragons and the big battles.


You enter a room where the geometry of the walls does not seem to make any sense to you. The carvings appear to move and yet do not. There is an other worldly light seeping out of the edges of the strange creatures carved into the walls that at once seem to make a normal room of describable shape and size, and yet when you try to make sense of it in your mind you wold be hard pressed to say if you were actually walking on the floor or maybe one of the walls.

I always find this kind of super-vague description to be a cheat - the easy way out for a creative person. I can understand saying "the architecture of the buildings seems alien and hard to describe" or something like that. Descriptions don't have to be 100% specific. But the kind of stuff like you wrote - how am I supposed to get any kind of mental image at all out of that? Human are literally unable to concieve of "things that seem to move and yet do not."


And many other times in the fantasy/far flung sci-fi future, where nothign we have ever seen to date would suffice to replace the verbal description and theater of the mind it creates. That becomes exactly what each listener needs to see in their own mind's eye, to get what the setting is.

hey, it's a matter of taste and style. I like being able to picture things in my mind. If it's a book then I have to make up my own images in my head, but I at least like the author to give me something to start with. Saying "he was a big man wity a thick, bushy beard" is not very accurate but I can build on it. Saying "he kind of looked like a man and yet did not look at all like one" is not at all helpful.l


"the likes of which no human as ever seen beofre."
is basically impossible to show us, we have to imagine it.

But what if it's also impossible to imagine?

[Jiminimonka]

For you. There's something to be said for that when it's 100% text, like a novel, and people might come up with all kinds of different ways to imagine the scene and characters. But once you nail it down to an image of any kind - 2d or 3D - then all that really matters is how realistic that image is. I mean, you could do "Game of Thrones" as a radio play, but I think that most people are like me and want to see the dragons and the big battles.



I always find this kind of super-vague description to be a cheat - the easy way out for a creative person. I can understand saying "the architecture of the buildings seems alien and hard to describe" or something like that. Descriptions don't have to be 100% specific. But the kind of stuff like you wrote - how am I supposed to get any kind of mental image at all out of that? Human are literally unable to concieve of "things that seem to move and yet do not."



hey, it's a matter of taste and style. I like being able to picture things in my mind. If it's a book then I have to make up my own images in my head, but I at least like the author to give me something to start with. Saying "he was a big man wity a thick, bushy beard" is not very accurate but I can build on it. Saying "he kind of looked like a man and yet did not look at all like one" is not at all helpful.l



But what if it's also impossible to imagine?

Humans have a massive ability to imagine, that is why we have myths and games like D&D. It also lets us surpass the limits of our senses, which is why we now have devices that can detect sub-atomic particles and see the spectrum that is not visible to us.

D&D doesn't need maps to be playable. A description of a huge hallways with a golden throne draws more in your mind than a map ever could.

[Kelrugem]

Humans have a massive ability to imagine, that is why we have myths and games like D&D. It also lets us surpass the limits of our senses, which is why we now have devices that can detect sub-atomic particles and see the spectrum that is not visible to us.

D&D doesn't need maps to be playable. A description of a huge hallways with a golden throne draws more in your mind than a map ever could.

We have a good imagination, yes, but it has its limits, especially when it goes towards subjects/sizes etc we are not used to. Extremely big sizes and high numbers for example is normally something someone cannot really imagine. Saying how many earths give the size of a sun only gives you a rough estimation, but at a certain size our brain will just think "that's big" :D Showing an image how big our sun is compared with earth is way more impressive in my opinion :) Of course that is an extreme example, but for SciFi games actually not rare to have big stuff flying around (astrophysics has very big sizes of stuff)

Another example are very detailed things like mentioned from Frunobulax, reliefs etc.. Describing such things is extremely difficult and we only do that very vague, "On the wall you see a relief about the history of the people here". We know what it is about, but it is still difficult to depict, having an explicit image can be also here way more impressive. I often like to use images of certain dungeons of computer games to show my players what the style is, because I could never ever describe in the same detail what type of dungeon they go into. There is a reason why there is the mentioned citation, "A picture is worth a thousand words" :) and then there is the component of art an artist also adds to that which gives you some sort of atmosphere etc; difficult to describe what I mean without showing pictures (hah! :p)

In some sense our brain needs also training to imagine certain things, unknown things are difficult to do

And both together, the effect I describe and the effect you describe (which I do not deny of course), can be even more impressive when used and combined right :)

[Jiminimonka]

We have a good imagination, yes, but it has its limits, especially when it goes towards subjects/sizes etc we are not used to. Extremely big sizes and high numbers for example is normally something someone cannot really imagine. Saying how many earths give the size of a sun only gives you a rough estimation, but at a certain size our brain will just think "that's big" :D Showing an image how big our sun is compared with earth is way more impressive in my opinion :) Of course that is an extreme example, but for SciFi games actually not rare to have big stuff flying around (astrophysics has very big sizes of stuff)

Another example are very detailed things like mentioned from Frunobulax, reliefs etc.. Describing such things is extremely difficult and we only do that very vague, "On the wall you see a relief about the history of the people here". We know what it is about, but it is still difficult to depict, having an explicit image can be also here way more impressive. I often like to use images of certain dungeons of computer games to show my players what the style is, because I could never ever describe in the same detail what type of dungeon they go into. There is a reason why there is the mentioned citation, "A picture is worth a thousand words" :) and then there is the component of art an artist also adds to that which gives you some sort of atmosphere etc; difficult to describe what I mean without showing pictures (hah! :p)

In some sense our brain needs also training to imagine certain things, unknown things are difficult to do

And both together, the effect I describe and the effect you describe (which I do not deny of course), can be even more impressive when used and combined right :)

Try some LSD ;)

[Kelrugem]

Try some LSD ;)

lol :D "How FG lead me to LSD", not sure whether that would be a good ad :D

[Frunobulax]

lol :D "How FG lead me to LSD", not sure whether that would be a good ad :D

Or maybe LSD led you to FG... ;)

[yarnevk]

Actually they hired the dev that had a kickstarter for a 3D tiles tabletop game, who has spent time doing the unity conversion rather than 3D. Also they announced support for tilt5 3D table top glasses. Nothing has come of it since. But with walls in place now, 2.5D could easily be done using a wall generator which is essentially what the 3D dev had done. And that would take no GM setup time to do, make the walls 3D on top of the existing 2D map. Make the 2D map overlays like tables, chairs skeletons have 3D version - again no extra setup time. For physical gaming I use the Paizo flip maps and use blocks as walls and some generic tables chairs and it is very effective illusion and way cheaper than dwarven forge. Who is to say that someday you would not have a dwarven forge DLC in FGU3D?!

[Booker Grimm]

Don't know if it has been mentioned but Table Top simulator has a great 3d environment with many workshopped models. I'm sure FGU community could start producing stuff like that. It's probably quite a way off, but I see FGU finally making the move to 3d community supported graphics with import tools eventually.

[Frunobulax]

Don't know if it has been mentioned but Table Top simulator has a great 3d environment with many workshopped models. I'm sure FGU community could start producing stuff like that. It's probably quite a way off, but I see FGU finally making the move to 3d community supported graphics with import tools eventually.

This is something I've been saying all along but nobody seems to have noticed. Yes, it's not reasonable to expect Smiteworks to just wave a wand and have perfect 3D. It will probably take several steps in between, probably starting with 2.5D. But one thing that many people have said - "Smiteworks doesn't have time to make a million models or the money to buy them!". Well, first, I don't know how much models cost but I bet there are libraries out there you can buy or license for not too much. There may even be models available under a Creative Commons (CC) license.

But the main point is that since FG has such a strong community, it would be no trick at all to ask people to make and submit models, animations, and spell effects. Modeling is not *that* hard, and working with both paid-license and CC models, a library could be built pretty quick. Start with the most common things - player classes, orcs, skeletons, tables, chairs, chests, etc and then gradually expand to include less common figures and objects. We already have a great community which creates and shares all kinds of other content. Smiteworks could do the same as it does with other things - provide a nice big library with the paid FG licenses, and the sell additional sets as paid DLC, sharing the m0oney with the creator. This could actually be a new income stream for Smiteworks.

As for setup time by the GM, it would be just like everything else in the game - they could put in as much or as little time as they want. Figures should be optional, at least at first. As time goes by and 3D support improved in FG, new modules and maps could me made pre-stocked with 3D models and just sold that way (and old ones upconverted if there is demand).

In short, it doesn't have to be Smiteworks who does ALL the work. I think if they could just put in the structure, the code to support models, then I have a pretty strong feeling that the community would make use of it. The entire history of modifiable video games proves this - when a community CAN add features, they almost always do. In fact of the support were added, I think the players could form a group to work among themselves to prioritize, divide work, create content, organize it, polish it, rate it, and so on. Can you imagine logging into FG one day and getting a message that your favorite modeler has just released a super-awesome new high-res model of a treasure chest or Female Halfling Druid?

Just daydreaming,l I guess. But other than the obvious fact that it would take some effort from Smiteworks to do the coding for 3D model support, I can't see any valid reason to not do this. Other than coding in the support, just about everything else (at least initially) could be handled by the community in terms of content, with Smiteworks gradually phasing in as they get time to work together with the community to distribute great stuff.

[yarnevk]

No need to day dream it already exists in other tabletops. The trick is to use a 3D camera but using 2D assets, that way the setup work is not any more than now. Extrude the wall lines already in your map using 2D texture maps already found in your texture tile library. Use Paizo pawns which are 2D portrait standup tokens using the existing token license. (they zoom into the pawns for FG library because counters look better than pawns in 2D, but absolutely no reason they cannot release the actual pawn images - or you can buy the PDFs and rip them yourself)

Table simulator is the longest 3D tabletop available, but recently you have https://www.3dvtt.com/ which does exactly as I suggest, using a 3D camera with 2D assets. The results look as good as using a Paizo flip mat with Paizo standup tokens at the table, but even better because you can also get texture mapped walls if you go to the same effort as you would in FG unity to draw the wall lines. Here is another one a patreon for Foundry VTT that has added layers to the hex map to make it a 2.5D isometric map without even having to change the core program which is only a 2D program, that literally is exactly the same way that baldurs gate did things and it looks just as good. https://gitlab.com/jesusafier/grape_juice-isometrics. These are things that I have learned about just in the few months since I suggested do it that way last time, not knowing it was already existing. What those companies lack is the asset licensing, and that is FG strength it is why tilt5 selected them for 3D glasses despite not being a 3D tool they already have an extensive market established of licensed indy and top tier published art that could be leveraged to get from 2D to 2.5D to 3D.

But even if it becomes full 3D no need to ever have to learn 3D modeling, Wizkids could sell 3D models of minis rather than WOTC/Paizo selling their token images. Dwarven Forge could sell 3D models of their terrain. These companies already have these models painted in 3D, because that is what they have to do to make these in China. And setting that up would take absolutely no more work than going to your mini and terrain collection to build a map on your table now (it is not extra work just because it is on the computer collection rather than the table collection). It is such an enjoyable part of the hobby for many that there are forums specifically about hand crafting and printing 3D terrain for those who do enjoy making 3D models. some people I suspect just like wargaming spend more time on the hobby than the playing! The problem even with the DwarvenForge and Wizkids support is you can never cover all the terrain and all the mobs you would need, these companies use a collectible go to market strategy because of that. So even if it goes 3D there will always be a need to support 2D assets because they are so much easier to do and people are more likely to have 2D assets. With Paizo I have every monster available as a 2D standup pawn, something I cannot achieve even with $$K of wizkids minis (and I fear WOTC seilling $20 lootboxes of random mini 3d model four packs - but their biz model is their biz model and they will probably think it works for MMOs....)

Saying you need to be a 3D artist to use a 3D tabletop is like saying you have to be a skilled 2D artist to use 2D tokens.

[Egheal]

If we could combine FGU with YAG (you can find it on Steam) it would be by far the best VTT software. But, for now, i prefer a solid 2D experience other whatever fancy 3D software actually in existence.

[yarnevk]

Nope on YAG that is not the way to go, while it makes for god view eye candy - a GM wants tokens for all the monsters in their books. You can have that with 2D pawns, but even licensed videogames with staffs of 3D artists, even wizkids with staffs of 3D artists for mini production have always fallen far short in the depth of their bestiary offerings. My pawns folder for Paizo PF2e which is not even counting the future character books and bestiary coming this year, I already have well over a thousand unique pawns. It is the same problem of tabletop you can never buy all the minis and terrain you would ever need even if you can afford them they are not for sale, so you end up using mats and pawns.

It is why the 2.5D/3D tabletop that is founded on leveraging the easily availability of 2D assets is the right way to go. Because that is the realistic TT that people can afford to make for people to afford to buy it. Save the fancy 3D for the occasional BBEG and heroforge PC minis - but the bulk of it would be 2D assets. Even something like Dungeon Master Mode for Divinity Original Sin was poor because of the limited bestiary in the game. There has never been a licensed D&D game that contains the full monster manual, and Paizo is way more prolific than WOTC on the book releases. No video game artist could ever keep up. Just this week on reddit someonebody was complaining they cannot find a PF2e kobold mini because they are salamanders now, the art style is different in every edition of the game. No art director at Paizo is going to sign up to making a 3D bestiary for PF2e and Starfinder and PF1e, but that is what they would need to do to license such a tool.

But you say it has hundreds of monsters, OK I am missing 90% of the monsters. Actually 99% of them because watching the videos I find that hundreds actually means dozen variations of dozens of monsters. So to use such a tool 99% of my encounters would be 2D pawns.

[Mytherus]

That's just silly. It would take not one second longer. They could just place things as usual. Whether they show up as 3D or 2D makes no difference.

If you are talking just 3d tokens then yes i agree with you. But i believe the quoted comment was referring to the actual maps being 3D. It certainly is NOT silly to conclude that would up game prep time. I'm amazed anyone would think otherwise to be honest the tools to make 3d maps would have a steeper learning curve and if you take pride in making GOOD looking maps not just "yeah i whipped this up in 10 minutes" it would take more time to make.

[RocksFall]

I used FG for quite few months. And enjoyed my time with it. But have now moved on to a 3D tabletop. What im using now, for me anyways, is light years ahead and is more suited for our needs & HB system. I dont fully understand others saying prep time would be horrendous. When in fact its the opposite. I can throw down fully detailed 3d immersible maps with sounds ambiance/lighting/effects in seconds. I can do 100 times more on my 3d table than i could on any RL physical table. Eg. The Dragon i dropped on my party tonight scared the **** outta them. It was above the table, wings flapping, legs moving and body pulsing and then i made it breath green noxious chlorine gas down on the table and party with a massive blast of in game music from my playlist. I smiled in smug satisfaction as the gas billowed over their 3d figs & char sheets....."Initiative" i whispered.... Epic!!!. My players almost fainted.
They got even more into it when it landed on the table and got to witness the other poses the model could pull off. It really gave them a sense and scale of the foe they faced. It also puts everyone on the same page as everyone is witness to the same thing.

[dragonheels]

Basically, RPGs are above all a game of imagination... That's why 2D are largely enough for me. I could even play without map if my player would go for it.

[Jiminimonka]

I used FG for quite few months. And enjoyed my time with it. But have now moved on to a 3D tabletop. What im using now, for me anyways, is light years ahead and is more suited for our needs & HB system. I dont fully understand others saying prep time would be horrendous. When in fact its the opposite. I can throw down fully detailed 3d immersible maps with sounds ambiance/lighting/effects in seconds. I can do 100 times more on my 3d table than i could on any RL physical table. Eg. The Dragon i dropped on my party tonight scared the **** outta them. It was above the table, wings flapping, legs moving and body pulsing and then i made it breath green noxious chlorine gas down on the table and party with a massive blast of in game music from my playlist. I smiled in smug satisfaction as the gas billowed over their 3d figs & char sheets....."Initiative" i whispered.... Epic!!!. My players almost fainted.
They got even more into it when it landed on the table and got to witness the other poses the model could pull off. It really gave them a sense and scale of the foe they faced. It also puts everyone on the same page as everyone is witness to the same thing.

Whats the 3D tabletop you are using?

Doug already said in this thread, first they have to get the core 2d stuff done, and branch away from FG Classic (which was the whole point of Unity, add more features and make a whole new system, but maintain backward compatibility - feel like this is not mentioned enough) - then they will got for 2.5 D (isometric maps etc, and eventually 3d. Also having options to be 2d or 3d or isometric is not an option in whatever 3d tabletop is out there, they are built from the ground up as 3d tabletops.

3D will come, when the core system is done and then built up. We only just got FGU out of beta. If everyone just bought FGU licences and stopped using prehistoric Classic, things would move much faster! ;)

[HywelPhillips]

The (admittedly limited) experience I have of 3D modelling and production makes me agree that it's the asset preparation that's going to be the killer. It probably depends on how much you like to customise stuff. I'm forever adding stuff to maps even on commercial modules to fine tune for the story my group is experiencing. The new tools in Unity for doing that quickly and efficiently are a big help.

In the end I gave up on 3D modelling for making art - I realised that hiring models and shooting it live was cheaper, quicker, more effective and more efficient. That led me into my second career as a photographer and film-maker, in fact. There's a reason why AAA computer games with 3D modelled realities have such huge production teams, whereas a top-notch 2D game can be produced by much smaller teams. 2.5D as a compromise might be workable, but I'm not sure it's actually desirable.

In my experience of roleplaying games, the trick is to provide the maximum "bang for your buck" in stimulating players' imaginations with the most cost-effective and striking props you can... and at the dramatically-appropriate time in the story. The more one goes towards making a simulationist 3D world, the more you run into the problem of HAVING to provide assets for everything- or what's the point? If the gloriously-rendered ogre is actually meant to be a stand in for a bugbear, you've giving people cognitive dissonance, or limiting your story to the assets you have. Which for me personally undermines the whole appeal of TTRPG in the first place- the ability to go completely off on a tangent without the game forcing you back.

When you change the dynamic from around the table to virtual play, some of that freedom leaks away because you've got fewer subtle ways to get everyone involved. We end up with beautifully-rendered maps instead of scribbles on the battleboard or doodles on a piece of paper because the involvement is more fragile when you're not all sitting together in a room. Providing immersive 2D experiences on the map certainly helps with this given that unavoidably players are starting at their computer screen, not at each other.

We are already noticing the effects of this with the proliferation of after-market colour map packs for recent 5E adventures which have old-school black-and-white maps. Those maps are perfectly cool for play around the table where the GM is pulling together theatre-of-the-mind, drawings on paper, miniatures, battlemaps, and 3D terrain as they choose. Some groups aways break out the Dwarf Forge and the fully-painted minis for every encounter, some groups always rely of theatre-of-the-mind, and I suspect most groups are somewhere in the middle- a quick street brawl might be handled in the imagination, but the final confrontation against the dragon master villain of the campaign, the GM may pull out all the stops and produce the painted mini they've spend $$ and hours on to make it memorable.

On VTT by contrast, you get a lot more bang for your buck from a map-as-painting-of-the-scene which shows all the stuff you can interact with. Many groups clearly want and need that and they want it in colour. But IMO this is the sweet spot - quick to prepare, technically much less demanding and a proliferation of free 2D assets to grab. Yesterday I wanted a battlemap of a crystal prison. Googled "blue glowing crystal", found a nice JPEG circa 1000 x 1000 pixels, imported, threw on a grid, FX to have wobbly light effect outside the confines of the crystal and not inside, LOS to stop the players going through the walls of the prison so they could look out but not move out. Total elapsed time - less than 5 minutes.

You might luck out and find a way to do that with 3D assets for such a simple geometrical case. Now do it for a forest in the rain. Then add slime. That is not going to be a 5 minute job. Your players may not even go that way - or you're going to be so attached to all that work that they HAVE to and you railroad them.

For sure if you are 3D wizard and you run relatively predictable adventures, or you're happy to mostly run theatre of the mind and only use the 3D when the story merits it and you have the right assets or time to create it, it could deliver an awesome experience.

Myself, I think colour 2D plus tricks (a bit of animation and FX, lighting and LOS) delivers most of the immersion for significantly less effort. It's great that there are 3D platforms out there for the brave and the bold, but I doubt they'll tempt me as GM. After all, fully-immersive multiplayer D&D in 3D environments has been available for years in the form of Neverwinter Nights modules, and I've never actually gone to the huge effort of doing that for my group. I'd rather spend the time doing other forms of prep. And judging from where people are actually putting their play hours, most groups find the sweet spot at the less-is-more end of the spectrum.

Cheers, Hywel

[Jiminimonka]

Maybe everyone needs to sit around a table and play D&D with pen and paper and learn to use their imaginations, then when they get on FGU they will see what it is - a tool to play the game, but the imagination is where it is really at!

[Fear Grounds]

Maybe everyone needs to sit around a table and play D&D with pen and paper and learn to use their imaginations, then when they get on FGU they will see what it is - a tool to play the game, but the imagination is where it is really at!

This ^

Please, do not turn fantasy grounds into a build your own adventure video game client. A player's imagination is more powerful than any computer, and more vivid than any 3D asset created.

If you want to play a video game, play a video game. If you want to play a Table Top RPG game over the internet, use Fantasy Grounds.

[Kelrugem]

This ^

Please, do not turn fantasy grounds into a build your own adventure video game client. A player's imagination is more powerful than any computer, and more vivid than any 3D asset created.

If you want to play a video game, play a video game. If you want to play a Table Top RPG game over the internet, use Fantasy Grounds.

As already written from some people on the previous pages, both worlds do not necessarily exclude each other :) (but I am personally too lazy to write my arguments again :D Just look at the beginning somewhere :) ) and just because 3d assets would exist at some point doesn't mean that you cannot do theatre of mind anymore :) You do not need to use what is there

I am personally happy about when there will be more and more tools/assets in the future :)

EDIT: It won't be a "video game" just because of 3d. First of all, video games had once similar graphics, they were not always 3d, they may not even have had graphics. And second, the biggest difference of computer games to Pen&Paper is the lack of a gamemaster, which is why a computer game must be prewritten and cannot act spontaneously/flexible to players' choices which were not planned; hence, they are limited in choices. Just because there are 3d assets, doesn't mean that we suddenly play without GMs, so, the freedom of choice given in P&P games will still be given and that is for me personally the biggest attraction of P&P :) So, I see no danger in why it should be suddenly a "computer game" :) (and automation is good to have such that one can focus on RP, many people simply do not have fun with doing the same calculations all over again. So, why not taking the positive aspects of "computer games" if possible :) )

[Jiminimonka]

I agree the automation for combat saves loads of time, especially for high level fireballs! Then you can focus on the story, which is what its all about.

[Fear Grounds]

I am personally happy about when there will be more and more tools/assets in the future :)


I absolutely agree. Making the game easier to set up is always a good thing.



EDIT: It won't be a "video game" just because of 3d. First of all, video games had once similar graphics, they were not always 3d, they may not even have had graphics. And second, the biggest difference of computer games to Pen&Paper is the lack of a gamemaster, which is why a computer game must be prewritten and cannot act spontaneously/flexible to players' choices which were not planned; hence, they are limited in choices. Just because there are 3d assets, doesn't mean that we suddenly play without GMs, so, the freedom of choice given in P&P games will still be given and that is for me personally the biggest attraction of P&P So, I see no danger in why it should be suddenly a "computer game" (and automation is good to have such that one can focus on RP, many people simply do not have fun with doing the same calculations all over again. So, why not taking the positive aspects of "computer games" if possible )


Yes, video games started out as basic text strings, I remember. DM-less adventures are already a thing in the TTRPG world. Not everyone can find a group that they fit and enjoy playing with.

Automation is indeed a great thing to be able to use, like you said, not everyone loves number crunching. But some people do.

My standpoint, is don't force the change. Isometric maps are cool, if you like them. Top down maps are great, if you like those. 3d walkthroughs of ancient ruined strongholds, (let's be honest) sounds amazing, but would crash most DM's systems. Trying to pass that much data, to however many players they have, over an already strained internet connection. Just not something that I, or any of my groups, would be interested in.

[Kelrugem]

I absolutely agree. Making the game easier to set up is always a good thing.



Yes, video games started out as basic text strings, I remember. DM-less adventures are already a thing in the TTRPG world. Not everyone can find a group that they fit and enjoy playing with.

Automation is indeed a great thing to be able to use, like you said, not everyone loves number crunching. But some people do.

My standpoint, is don't force the change. Isometric maps are cool, if you like them. Top down maps are great, if you like those. 3d walkthroughs of ancient ruined strongholds, (let's be honest) sounds amazing, but would crash most DM's systems. Trying to pass that much data, to however many players they have, over an already strained internet connection. Just not something that I, or any of my groups, would be interested in.

Ah, yes, with that I completely agree of course :) One should never force certain playstyles and assets etc. :) The more (good) options there are, the better :)

[Marquis_de_Taigeis]

If someone really wants a full immersive 3D world for the game, could build one on a minecraft server, and then have all the RPG character sheets and dice rolling on a second monitor through FG, how much RAM would that love eating up

EDIT: minecraft could be quite a good map maker in creative mode, build things without roofs, fly up and take a screen shot to export for use. but a bit to square for caverns/natural dungeons in my opinion

[Frunobulax]

I used FG for quite few months. And enjoyed my time with it. But have now moved on to a 3D tabletop. What im using now, for me anyways, is light years ahead and is more suited for our needs & HB system.

So you wrote all that and you're not even going to mention the name of this amazing magical superior software you found and love so much? Um....

[similarly]

One of the problems is that the more the focus shifts to graphics, the better the players' computers will have to be to accommodate it. I've already had people leave the group because they felt FGU was already more than their computer could handle.

[Fear Grounds]

One of the problems is that the more the focus shifts to graphics, the better the players' computers will have to be to accommodate it. I've already had people leave the group because they felt FGU was already more than their computer could handle.

I'll second that statement!

I've already had players who had to upgrade their computers in order to use the Unity engine. If we all have to have "gaming computers" in order to use Fantasy Grounds, then it's going to limit the community.

[The Decepticon]

I am a big fan of the 2D aspect of the maps, characters and overall flow of movement. I would think most 3D builds would be similar to old school dungeon crawls where you are walking with walls moving past.

Similar to the posts above me, I play sometimes on my laptop and I know it would not be able to handle a 3D concept map. A person shouldn't have to worry if their gaming set-up can run a specific software, especially the younger generation just getting involved.

But, I recognise that there is a certain set of individuals who is looking for that. Thats's great! That is what makes us all different.

[Stigfinnaren]

A 3D engine made for VTT RPG should be able to output both 3D and 2D top down graphics for players to chose. The game map is still the same, just viewed differently. Similar to the ongoing Kickstarter of Dungeon Alchemist tool which has a separate tread here. It can output flat 2D maps. https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1024146278/dungeon-alchemisttm

The 3D doesn't need to be advanced graphics. You can even get away with 2D characters, like the Wildermyth game. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FlKcicO2-Gc Paizo Pawn packs might fit something like this f.e.

That said, it will be a lot more complex and costly to develop. We will probably get it some time in the future, seeing how VTT became a lot more popular getting more money into the business. But it's not impossible. As a computer game reference, the very popular computer game Valheim, with a open world procedural 3D engine was mainly made by a studio with 5 people. https://store.steampowered.com/app/892970/Valheim/ and the computer version of the boardgame Gloomhaven is also made with a very small studio https://store.steampowered.com/app/780290/Gloomhaven/

[Temmpest]

I'll second that statement!

I've already had players who had to upgrade their computers in order to use the Unity engine. If we all have to have "gaming computers" in order to use Fantasy Grounds, then it's going to limit the community.

Yep! Happened here. I had to upgrade my PC to use FGU.

[deer_buster]

I get what the OP is going for, and I agree with others that true 3D is out of the question right now. But as a virtual tabletop, I would love to be able to setup something that feels like tabletop additions that I actually have like Dwarven Forge dungeon tiles and the like...you know, first generation could just be tiles that you buy and put together however you want without a lot of customization options available...second generation could allow you to do things like add custom weathering, your own liquid features, add assets like furniture and other items. I'd pay for something like that if it was done well (looks at the thousands I have spent on just those types of tabletop accessories)

Now that would give you a market for true artists/designers...

[RocksFall]

"Whats the 3D tabletop you are using?

Doug already said in this thread, first they have to get the core 2d stuff done, and branch away from FG Classic (which was the whole point of Unity, add more features and make a whole new system, but maintain backward compatibility - feel like this is not mentioned enough) - then they will got for 2.5 D (isometric maps etc, and eventually 3d. Also having options to be 2d or 3d or isometric is not an option in whatever 3d tabletop is out there, they are built from the ground up as 3d tabletops.

3D will come, when the core system is done and then built up. We only just got FGU out of beta. If everyone just bought FGU licences and stopped using prehistoric Classic, things would move much faster!"



Hello Jiminimonka,

As a supporter still of FGU (it saved my group and kept us together/gaming) i would rather not advertise the competition on FG's forums.

All models are 3rd party made so its as simple as click and drop. Other mods allow you to setup your table in advance and then spits out the setup table as as need with a click.

Tonight was an epic waterfall battle with 3d terrain/height, waterfall with rushing water & sound dropped into a lapping pool, 3d trees blew in the wind, rocks, animals and even birds could be seen, some moved by themselves. Copses of grass hid baddies ready for ambush the waterfall drowning out their presence. The rain and thunder brought an ominous tone, the lightning flashing the room in strokes of white - the light was low giving a sense of claustrophobia, rain pelting the party trudged onward unawares......

[Temmpest]

"Whats the 3D tabletop you are using?

Doug already said in this thread, first they have to get the core 2d stuff done, and branch away from FG Classic (which was the whole point of Unity, add more features and make a whole new system, but maintain backward compatibility - feel like this is not mentioned enough) - then they will got for 2.5 D (isometric maps etc, and eventually 3d. Also having options to be 2d or 3d or isometric is not an option in whatever 3d tabletop is out there, they are built from the ground up as 3d tabletops.

3D will come, when the core system is done and then built up. We only just got FGU out of beta. If everyone just bought FGU licences and stopped using prehistoric Classic, things would move much faster!"



Hello Jiminimonka,

As a supporter still of FGU (it saved my group and kept us together/gaming) i would rather not advertise the competition on FG's forums.

All models are 3rd party made so its as simple as click and drop. Other mods allow you to setup your table in advance and then spits out the setup table as as need with a click.

Tonight was an epic waterfall battle with 3d terrain/height, waterfall with rushing water & sound dropped into a lapping pool, 3d trees blew in the wind, rocks, animals and even birds could be seen, some moved by themselves. Copses of grass hid baddies ready for ambush the waterfall drowning out their presence. The rain and thunder brought an ominous tone, the lightning flashing the room in strokes of white - the light was low giving a sense of claustrophobia, rain pelting the party trudged onward unawares......

Are you talking about Foundry? The graphics are nice, but I don't think the level of automation is close to FGU. I could be wrong.

[Jiminimonka]

"Whats the 3D tabletop you are using?

Doug already said in this thread, first they have to get the core 2d stuff done, and branch away from FG Classic (which was the whole point of Unity, add more features and make a whole new system, but maintain backward compatibility - feel like this is not mentioned enough) - then they will got for 2.5 D (isometric maps etc, and eventually 3d. Also having options to be 2d or 3d or isometric is not an option in whatever 3d tabletop is out there, they are built from the ground up as 3d tabletops.

3D will come, when the core system is done and then built up. We only just got FGU out of beta. If everyone just bought FGU licences and stopped using prehistoric Classic, things would move much faster!"



Hello Jiminimonka,

As a supporter still of FGU (it saved my group and kept us together/gaming) i would rather not advertise the competition on FG's forums.

All models are 3rd party made so its as simple as click and drop. Other mods allow you to setup your table in advance and then spits out the setup table as as need with a click.

Tonight was an epic waterfall battle with 3d terrain/height, waterfall with rushing water & sound dropped into a lapping pool, 3d trees blew in the wind, rocks, animals and even birds could be seen, some moved by themselves. Copses of grass hid baddies ready for ambush the waterfall drowning out their presence. The rain and thunder brought an ominous tone, the lightning flashing the room in strokes of white - the light was low giving a sense of claustrophobia, rain pelting the party trudged onward unawares......

That was a confusing quote - you edited the bbcode.

Its not advertising, its a legit question. You can talk about other VTT products here, Smiteworks is not scared and won't ban people for mentioning them.

[Jiminimonka]

Are you talking about Foundry? The graphics are nice, but I don't think the level of automation is close to FGU. I could be wrong.

Definitely not Foundry. Its not 3d and it has almost no automation built in.

[broodling123]

What you are describing sounds a lot like Talespire - a Kickstarter-backed project scheduled for early access release in early 2021. I backed the project myself and would certainly recommend having a look - it is really cool and is showing a lot of promise. Otherwise I've heard of people using Tabletop Simulator to run D&D games. With that said, they are both very different products from Fantasy Grounds. Fantasy Grounds offers extensive ruleset automation and has pre-built adventure modules available for purchase, while the other programs focus exclusively on simulating miniatures.

[AzgrymnThePale]

I have just recently seen some VTT map making software that creates 3d rooms pretty quickly. Just cannot recall the link or what it was called at the moment. I came here looking for more info on the Tabletop Connect software written by Carl Pinder that was bought out by Smiteworks. Can anyone point me in the right direction to anything recent on the project? Been waiting for 3d VTT software as well for quite some time.

[LordEntrails]

Tabletop Connect is dead. Carl, and the technology he developed was bought by SmiteWorks (SW). SW has plans to one day consider 3D VTT, but they have many things to do with the current platform before they get to 3D. They have talked about 2.D step in between as well.

[AzgrymnThePale]

Tabletop Connect is dead. Carl, and the technology he developed was bought by SmiteWorks (SW). SW has plans to one day consider 3D VTT, but they have many things to do with the current platform before they get to 3D. They have talked about 2.D step in between as well.

Thanks for filling me in, sad to hear that it dropped, I have been rooting for it for years, ever since he ran the kickstarter for it. Now reading some of the earlier posts I see many share some of the same wishes and hopes. I don't know about some of you but I don't think we really need the animations and all that. Like someone else stated it isn't a video game. Just something that simulates gaming at the table with friends with even more detail. Just like busting out Dwarven Forge and setting up the table. It isn't necessary of course and setting Dwarven Forge up and all that detail during game is a huge time consumer but with some computer software to do it for you, we could have it much faster. Let me find that link on something that looked promising for this very idea.

I am the creator of the dark fantasy RPG Demon Gate. I have been using Roll20 for a couple years now and we just got our sheet integrated into their database. It works like magic and I came over to Fantasy Grounds to see what it was all about since one of the fans had asked if we were gonna add a sheet in FG. I haven't strayed from Roll20 due to its versatility but it would be nice to branch out.

Here is the link (https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/terraintinker/terraintinker/?fbclid=PAAabqJ-GRjNsdg85veyBqiFjxtsqPMFNnpAhUqiPWEPJOsYthD0LH28da H80), seems it is for 3d printable scenery but throwing it down for play in a VTT wouldn't be far off. Maybe it is just gonna have to be up to one of us eh?

[amerigoV]

I have just recently seen some VTT map making software that creates 3d rooms pretty quickly. Just cannot recall the link or what it was called at the moment. I came here looking for more info on the Tabletop Connect software written by Carl Pinder that was bought out by Smiteworks. Can anyone point me in the right direction to anything recent on the project? Been waiting for 3d VTT software as well for quite some time.

Are you thinking Dungeon Alchemist? It was just KS'd

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1024146278/dungeon-alchemisttm/description

[HywelPhillips]

One thing I'd not appreciated before this thread was that some people want the virtual tabletop to simulate the experience of sitting around the table with your friends, and they want virtual miniatures and virtual dwarven forge dungeons and so on to support that.

That's a use-case I'd not considered, but it does seem like a valid one- and much more achievable than what sprang to my mind when you say "3D VTT", which was something much more like a 3D computer game.

One of the things I actually like about VTT play is that it gets rid of one "indirection" operation. Your token in the VTT is directly tied to your character and character sheet. It *is* your avatar, your character in the virtual world, even though that world is 2D. You, the player, can see what your token can see. You can damage the ogre by dragging and dropping onto the ogre. Very soon in FGU you will be able to see in the dark if your token can see in the dark, and not if not. To me that's a much more direct immersion into the game world, and what I personally am after.

The alternate use case of wanting to feel like you are around the table with your friends playing with physical miniatures is a much more indirect immersion in the RPG world, to me. Why use a 3D miniature in a limited 3D dungeon geomorph and have the "god mode" overview if you can dive deeper and see through your character's eyes? It had not even occurred to me that some people would prefer a 3D rendering with "stand up" cardboard tokens in a dungeon geomorph because it came closer to the virtual kitchen table. Seeing the other characters like you are crouching down at the table and trying to do real LOS feels more indirect than just doing it in 2D.

But I now have a much greater appreciation of why that 3D is appealing if you're trying to achieve the replication of the physical act of gaming around the kitchen table. The reality you are trying to replicate or evoke is different from the one I'm trying to do. No wonder we've been talking a bit at cross-purposes for a lot of this thread!

I was concerned that 3D immersion the way I'm trying to achieve it - making the game world seem real - requires the art and asset department of a AAA computer game developer, rather than being something feasible for GMs to do solo. 2D is the sweet spot for that.

But if the 3D immersion you are striving for is the kitchen table moving miniatures around a map, no wonder you want something more 3D, and no wonder you're not so worried about the creation of all the assets! A decent virtual version of a bunch of dungeon geomorphs and 3D model sculpts from a typical miniature figure range might actually be better than a fully-rendered 3D version of the game world for you. (And fortunately is probably much more achievable).

Cheers, Hywel

[AzgrymnThePale]

Are you thinking Dungeon Alchemist? It was just KS'd

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1024146278/dungeon-alchemisttm/description

That was it I believe, thank you. It got me thinking of it as a possibility. A type of Dwarven Forge for your VTT. I certainly understand what you are saying as well HywelPhillips. It was only a couple years ago that I made the switch to primarily VTT. Most of my game testers wanted that same experience of the table it seemed. I also think that some of the tools we have with the VTT make it more immersive. Not to be an advocate for Roll20 or anything I am just going with what I know here but the fact that you can see through the eyes of your token and in different types of vision with the click of a button is amazingly immersive. As well using the macros built and the sheets for my own Chaos System mechanics in Demon Gate you can configure damage after a dice roll in an instant. That gets you back to the RP of the game.

There are certainly so many great perks to the VTT, especially with Covid around. I have been trying to coerce my old testers to sit down and play. Some of them have trouble turning a computer on. Im like "cmon boomers its 2021 homies, gotta evolve with the tech here."

I just purchased the Oculus Quest 2 for my kids and tried it out. Immediately the rpg table came to mind as I was blown away.

[Nylanfs]

Look up Tabletop Simulator for VR gaming sessions also.

[Merell]

One concern I have with 3d parallels what movies have become. In years past a good movie was based on the story. Today they are based more on the special effects. A lot of "Good" movies these days really suck for story. In fact many of them if you took the special effects away you would not understand at all what was going on in the story because, well there really isn't one. Yes on the flip side you can mention a lot that have both but I think that too many people are getting wrapped up in "what they see" and not what the content is.

I would be afraid that many talented story driven Gms / DMs would be side lined by the guy that loves to throw 100000 explosions in their game just to draw the crowds. But to through my own argument off I guess that would be the audiences (players) choice.

[SteveSchultz]

While everyone here argues about 3D support - everyone else has started doing it. With today's tools, it doesn't take much more time than traditional design. FGU is falling behind.

Dungeon Alchemist is OK for quick 3D maps, but has it quirks - just like every other 2D map making app. Very small learning curve.
Blender4 - I can't say enough about Blender. It does have a larger learning curve but has many tutorials and tons of free tools/models to play with. If you do look into this, may I suggest starting with this tutorial.
Pair that with OpenAI for assistance in image/story creation - wham bam thank you ma'am.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIoXOplUvAw

The river of life, always flowing and changing. If you don't jump in at some point, you'll get left behind and fade away.

[Jiminimonka]

While everyone here argues about 3D support - everyone else has started doing it. With today's tools, it doesn't take much more time than traditional design. FGU is falling behind.

Dungeon Alchemist is OK for quick 3D maps, but has it quirks - just like every other 2D map making app. Very small learning curve.
Blender4 - I can't say enough about Blender. It does have a larger learning curve but has many tutorials and tons of free tools/models to play with. If you do look into this, may I suggest starting with this tutorial.
Pair that with OpenAI for assistance in image/story creation - wham bam thank you ma'am.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIoXOplUvAw

The river of live, always flowing and changing. If you don't jump in at some point, you'll get left behind and fade away.

Dungeon Alchemist is not a VTT and the maps are 2.5D not 3D. Blender is not a VTT, its a full feature 3D modelling suite.

So which VTT is it falling behind (and the others catching up is not the same as FG falling behind).

Good tutorial, I watched it before.

[SteveSchultz]

Dungeon Alchemist is not a VTT and the maps are 2.5D not 3D. Blender is not a VTT, its a full feature 3D modelling suite.

I never claimed any of these were full VTT packages.


So which VTT is it falling behind (and the others catching up is not the same as FG falling behind).

You're kidding right? Google, there are existing (Talespire, TableTop Sim, etc) and many upcoming that are built with unity or unreal engine. Furthermore, did I say it was falling behind other VTTs? No. Falling behind in 3D support? YES. And that's where we're going - you can come if you want.

Argumentative reply at best.

[ddavison]

We are working our way towards 3D and will be releasing the first phase of this in early 2024 with our 2.5D approach.

It is much easier to get to 3D when you start with a 3D centric platform from the beginning versus adding 3D support to our existing platform. We are rebuilt on Unity 3D with FGU though, so I suspect we may be able to get a good blend of VTT game system support mixed with 3D.

[Zacchaeus]

As we've seen from sneak peaks 2.5d is coming to FGU soon.

It's not just a case of cobbling together a few modules and slapping them onto a map. A great deal of under the hood coding has to be done to take advantage of the Unity Engine's capabilities to make that work in Fantasy Grounds. The VTT's that have been mentioned are all web based and so can use the built in features of your browser to do all the work. FGU isn't web based and can't take advantage of such a simplistic method.

But as I say; 2.5D is just around the corner.

[Jiminimonka]

I never claimed any of these were full VTT packages.



You're kidding right? Google, there are existing (Talespire, TableTop Sim, etc) and many upcoming that are built with unity or unreal engine. Furthermore, did I say it was falling behind other VTTs? No. Falling behind in 3D support? YES. And that's where we're going - you can come if you want.

Argumentative reply at best.

You are comparing a VTT with Blender then... other people have posted more useful replies.

[Muagen]

We are working our way towards 3D and will be releasing the first phase of this in early 2024 with our 2.5D approach.

It is much easier to get to 3D when you start with a 3D centric platform from the beginning versus adding 3D support to our existing platform. We are rebuilt on Unity 3D with FGU though, so I suspect we may be able to get a good blend of VTT game system support mixed with 3D.

Since you brought it up, any upcoming sneak peeks on this topic? We've all been very good so far this year.

[Jiminimonka]

Since you brought it up, any upcoming sneak peeks on this topic? We've all been very good so far this year.

I agree ;)

[ddavison]

Just the ones I showed in December.

We have a few devs out on holiday and so nothing new to show since then.

I don't know that I pushed these out on YT, though, so here they are:

Sneak Peek #1 - FGU FPS View Demo
Jg8YyH0LbLw

Sneak Peek #2 - FGU FPS View Demo in the Fallout 2d20 ruleset
-l_GWmMTcWA

[SteveSchultz]

I did look around a bit and missed the sneak peaks you mentioned. I get it, you're (or anyone with a shred of sanity) not going to refactor full 3D support into an existing 2D app/game. It's a complete re-write, saving what little existing code you can along the way! :D

I think a link on your website and/or app that displays a basic outline of future plans for a release would be helpful for everyone.

~Steve

[ddavison]

Please remain civil to one another. Let’s start off 2024 in a positive mode.