Why no 3D?

[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.