Why no 3D?

[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" 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! )

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" 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! )

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

[Frunobulax]

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

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.