Fantasy Grounds Unity engine

[Varsuuk]

I too have bought everything available for 1e/2e from DTRPG. I already have nearly everything from FGG. And after buying one of their hardcovers on sale (I was digital only guy now for all my RPGs) I fell in love with the quality and now own about 8 older ones and when I buy new ones normally get physical (which of course includes PDFs)

But I responded to this thread through “email alerts” and only just now saw the headline of the thread and realized I didn’t start it but am hugely contributing to the offtrackedness worthy discussion but for its own thread. For this one I won’t be replying on the “why I like more” topic - oops sorry damn phone posting I blame that!

Edit: FGG puts out 5E versions of their adventures as well as their Swords & Wizardry (the version I buy). Unlike some they are ACTUAL conversions to 5E (or 5E to S&W) because they feel proper to that game. Like not sill having a +3 weapon at lower levels or +5s at higher. But more than that - I’ve seen worse in some “conversions” of modules I liked.

[Whaley]

So I know that Unity said during the Kickstarter that they would not support distance calculations into Unity but the 5E combat extension does this now...would this be included now as an official option? I hope so!

[Kelrugem]

So I know that Unity said during the Kickstarter that they would not support distance calculations into Unity but the 5E combat extension does this now...would this be included now as an official option? I hope so!

When I remember it correctly there was a Twitch stream with MoonWizard and he stated that might be something he will look into, he also mentioned the combat extension But it is not something on the immediate road map, especially due to the problems when there are flying monsters since then the height of the monsters would be important when you want to calculate the "rigorous distance". But height is not something which is assigned to tokens yet (and it just means more preparation but flying combat always means that). (Then 3d models would help but I guess it is obvious that 3d will be not something in the near future which was sometimes discussed here and elsewhere )

EDIT: And, to be extremely rigorous, then the actual general size of the monsters would be important; the token only resembles the squares which are more "difficult" terrain occupied by the token. But such things like wings of a dragon can reach outside the occupied space etc... and that affects "effective height", too, of course But that is only important when one wants to be really really rigorous

EDIT2: But an approximated calculation is better than none (as in the combat extension)

[celestian]

So I know that Unity said during the Kickstarter that they would not support distance calculations into Unity but the 5E combat extension does this now...would this be included now as an official option? I hope so!

What do you mean distance calculations? I know it does this already (you can measure) so I must not be understanding the question.

[Kelrugem]

What do you mean distance calculations? I know it does this already (you can measure) so I must not be understanding the question.

As far as I know the combat extension for 5e has some sort of automatic calculation of penalties on ranged attacks due to distance and there is some sort of height informations when someone is flying (which is also respected in the distance calculation). But the calculation is probably roughly approximated (without natural height of tokens, so only taking into account in which "plane" the token lies), I guess? (which is of course no problem, it's a game and better than no help for distance (like it already happens for diagonal movement stuff which is not handled with Euclidean measures,too) so, a cool feature of that extension )

[celestian]

As far as I know the combat extension for 5e has some sort of automatic calculation of penalties on ranged attacks due to distance and there is some sort of height informations when someone is flying (which is also respected in the distance calculation). But the calculation is probably roughly approximated (without natural height of tokens, so only taking into account in which "plane" the token lies), I guess? (which is of course no problem, it's a game and better than no help for distance (like it already happens for diagonal movement stuff which is not handled with Euclidean measures,too) so, a cool feature of that extension )

AH! ok, range calculations in combat actions. Got it. All I could think of was measuring with the mouse, didn't dawn on me what you meant

[Kelrugem]

AH! ok, range calculations in combat actions. Got it. All I could think of was measuring with the mouse, didn't dawn on me what you meant

hehe, no problem At the first moment I was confused about what Whaley has meant, too

[lostsanityreturned]

If I were to rip things out of the 5e combat extension it would be

-flanking (with the +2, +5 options included)
-token height (even outside of combat this is hugely useful, especially in chases
-distance calculation including height
-toggle effects (same effect applied twice turns it off)
-right click effect application

Layers will already be built into unity.

I really need to give a run at automating my homebrew stacking advantage system in FG though
(Works as per normal, second third and fourth sources of give +1/-1 respectively. E.G. two advantage one disadvantage is +1 to the roll, three advantage would be ADV+2 to a roll)

[Moon Wizard]

Token Altitude
Currently, we have no plans to incorporate altitude into FGU scope for the first version. I've been making a pretty firm stand on scope creep when it comes to FGU, because we want to actually get it out the door at some point.

I did mention that it may be something we look at later. Remember that adding support for any one ruleset requires making sure that all the CoreRPG-derived ones work, so it's a slightly larger task than incorporating into a single ruleset.

One of the challenges that I mentioned in the stream with incorporating altitude is that you essentially have to either:
a) ignore creature height (i.e. treat all creatures as flat when measuring distances).
b) create a cube around creatures based on size (i.e. Large creatures are 2x2x2, regardless of whether it makes sense for the creature (i.e. horse, basilisk, etc.))
c) add data fields to every creature to denote the grid "height" of the creature (none of which is defined in the 5E game system as an example).

As for distance measurements, there is actually a mention in one of the 5E rulebooks stating that the distance is the counted just like range (i.e. 1 cube diagonally in any direction is still 1 cube distance). So, greater of vertical, horizontal or altitude is used as range for calculations. The calculation itself will be straightforward.

Adding support for automatic range penalty application is a different feature request, and it's unique to every game system (unlike altitude).

FGU vs. New Features
We are constantly weighing the addition of new features with moving the platform forward. That's one of the reasons why we decided to put out the word to hire more people once the KS campaign successfully funded. Of course, you have to assume as a business that new hires usually take 3+ months to bring up to speed enough to make an overall positive improvement (due to learning, time to train, additional overhead, etc.)

When a KS funds, that is just the beginning of the process; since we now have to deliver the software within a reasonable time frame. We made a decision last year that I personally needed to switch over from spending over half my time on ruleset enhancements and fixes, and focus almost entirely on FGU in order to make a push to get it out. Unfortunately, that means that some of the progress on ruleset improvements takes a back seat until FGU is out.

Cheers,
JPG

[LordEntrails]

Thanks Moon for the lengthy post.

I just want to voice my approval for the decision to keep the scope tightly fixed and focused on product quality and release schedule (rather than additional capabilities).