18 months on : FG vs. Roll20 vs Foundry

[WishX]

For the newb, do you mean one from a newbie player's point of view playing their first game? Or how to install and run FGU? Or both?

Either! I'm happy to have a look at whatever you feel like putting together. If you like, you can also contact me directly on our Discord server so we don't monopolize this thread: wishx#9236
Thanks!

[Weissrolf]

I keep using FGU for my original Pathfinder 2 group and use Foundry for a second "beginners" group.

- The barrier to entry for players joining in on the fun is a *lot* smaller in Foundry. If everything else fails you can join a Foundry server via smartphone/tablet, even when it is not fully supported. No need to create an account, no need to download and install the software and get it going through your router/provider as player (though still as GM).

- The Pathfinder 2 system incorporated a lot of functionality that originally was only available through modules (extensions). But for many quality of life things I *personally* still want 100+ modules. That being said, I also use 24 active extensions in FGU and would use more if they were not broken since the switch to Unity or supported 5E only.

- With a large group of developers (+project management) working on the PF2 system, there are quick turnaround times for any new product published by Pathfinder publisher Paizo. Furthermore the system is growing quite quickly and with some tremendously great features that easily rival the FG implementation. They had less of a head-start compared to FGU, but they make that up with the sheer enthusiasm and motivation of "I want to play that myself" and maybe getting a bit of community fame. They do not get licensed material from Paizo, which is an advantage and disadvantage.

For end-users this has some ramifications: End-users are only customers of Foundry, but not customers of the PF2E system. As such the PF2E team owes end-users "nothing", not even politeness and some *few* will let you know. That being said, in practice I don't see much of a difference to being a paying SW Pathfinder customer in that regard and the larger team allows end-users to pick those team members for any dealings that they get along with best.

Using Foundry for Pathfinder 2 sure is less expensive than using Fantasy Grounds. Something like the Core Rulebook costs as much in FG as buying a hardcover print ($60 currently), while with Foundry I am happy using my PDF version ($10). Adventures also cost less, because again I only have to pay the PDF from Paizo and then can import that into Foundry via the free PdfToFoundry module. The latter is exclusive to the Pathfinder 2E system, though, so other systems like 5E don't have that advantage.

- Some automation that is available for D&D 5E in Foundry is not available for PF2E, though. For one, because some of the largest modules (Midi QoL) are not available outside of 5E. For another, because the PF2E system developers strictly adhere to Foundry's basic philosophy that only "owners" of characters can apply any changes to them.

The latter means that a player is only able to roll attack against a NPC, but the player is not able to apply damage to the NPC, as the GM is owner of the NPC. The idea is that at the table only the owner of a paper sheet makes changes to said sheet. So the player does a damage roll, but the GM then presses a button to apply the damage (applying whatever modifications necessary on the way). And a player healing another player again only gets to roll the healing result, but the target player has to press a button to apply the rolled healing.

Since the PF2 system on Foundry does not offer resistance automation yet, this approach even is kind of necessary (so the GM/player can apply resistances/weaknesses manually). But once this system is automated I quite strongly disagree with the approach to not solve VTT related problems by VTT related means. One example of this "philosophy" failing is D20 bards' "Inspire Courage" that applies bonuses to their allies. In PF2 the bard sometimes has to reapply that every single round, which means that every single player of a group has to reapply that to their character every single round. This is a VTT produced problem, because you need to tell the computer all modifiers for proper calculation (telling you hit or miss). This is different from the table and as such should be solved by VTT/computer means.

That being said, there are modules that break the philosophy and allow players to apply their results to others. I gave our bard's player a macro that combined with a module applies Inspire Courage to the whole group, so only the bard has to push a button. He also has another button to prolong the duration via "Lingering Composition" roll and then automatically apply that longer duration to the whole group. But, this is fighting against the system/philosophy of Foundry via Javascript "sockets" instead of expanding the system. So it may easily break with future updates.

- Foundry is marketed as "developer-friendly" platform, not as player-friendly! Players are only ever mentioned as being able to connect to "you" via browser and for free, written in third person as some kind of inevitable attachment to developer customers. And for being "developer-friendly" it sure could use more thorough API documentation. The current form is more of a quick reference than a full fledged manual and the assumption seems to be that knowing your way around object oriented programming will lead developers to the correct answers themselves.

Some developers seem to prefer studying the Foundry client source-code instead of relying on the API (docs).

- "Create a module" is something too often read on the Foundry Discord. One reason very likely being that the regulars there all seem to be developers in one another capacity. The advantage of that is that users are dealing with many capable individuals on the Foundry Discord, who know more than to click some buttons. When I created a module for easier token elevation changes it literally got thrown code snippets at me to make it happen. I still had to learn some Javascript, coding tools and Foundry API in about a week, but I was able to find someone holding my hand throughout the process (Git was the worst part of it).

Could I have done the same in Fantasy Grounds? Maybe. Surely not with the ongoing support of ever-online developers easily accessible. And then I would have to learn Lua, which mostly seems only useful for games related stuff, while Javascript is more universally useful to learn and much more modern than the Lua 5.1 engine used in FGU.

And one thing needs to be underlined: Modules can extend/change/improve Foundry to such an extend that there even was a module that fundamentally changed/improved the whole lighting system of Foundry, which then lead to the next Foundry version incorporating much of its design in cooperation with the module's author. Such fundamentally creative solutions are not possible in FGU where end-users have to rely on a rather understaffed Smiteworks to make things happen (or not). When a new major versions breaks module compatibility, though, then only those modules get updated along with it which still have someone to maintain them on a voluntary/self exploitative basis.

[MostTornBrain]

Part 3: A dry run of the game

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...it?usp=sharing

If you have feedback, let me know. Or I can hand these off to someone for inclusion in the wiki and maintenance (he says, hopefully...)

Cheers, Hywel

You did a fantastic job with these tutorials!

One minor cut-and-paste thing with tutorial 3. One of the leading sentences says "This tutorial will take you through generating a party of four pre-generated player characters ready to run a one-shot adventure." which I believe is accindetally left over from the intro to tutorial 2. When I first read it, I thought I opened the wrong tutorial. :-)

Also, nice tip for the Mac launching a second instance of FGU. I had done a more wasteful method of creating a second copy of the program and named it something different so I could just double-click on the icon, but that is a bit of a waste of disk space. I like your method better and despite using the Mac terminal on a nearly daily basis, I had no idea that I could launch applications that way.

Cheers,
Brian

[HywelPhillips]

Fixed, thank you. We’re in the process of adding them to the official wiki

Hywel

[celestian]

I keep using FGU for my original Pathfinder 2 group and use Foundry for a second "beginners" group.

Detailed information. Very insightful. Thanks for taking the time to write it up.

[Hagedreper]

This has to be the most biased and condescending language I've seen in a good/bad comparison of products.

[SilentRuin]

Why I chose Fantasy Grounds and why I think people don't always like it... (copied from another post because I'm lazy)

I think people don't like Fantasy Grounds because of the "bling" factor. Other apps have more flash and simplicity with basic simple things.

However, FGU is the only app I use to run my campaigns. I like it because I can be ultimately lazy in how I run the game. I can actually spend time crafting the experience rather than constantly managing every little roll with all that can effect those rolls. I like the fact the LOS/Lighting is completely flexible (albeit new and still under development) and I can design/add/change things on the fly as I need them on the map during actual game play. I like my players can play for free with no costs - as host I've bought the ultimate license and all the books. I ESPECIALLY like that anything annoys me in the app I can override by writing my own extensions (note: EXTENSIONS = RISK) to make it do what I want to do in my games. Nothing has this kind of flexibility or power.

In the end, what I've crafted for myself makes running the actual games simple where I can be lazy. But to get to that state - mastering the flexibility and power? That can be a chore. And have some complexity with it. Granted, once the issues are solved and implemented, I could be lazier than any other DM in any other app. But to get to that point required a learning curve and effort. Granted, I don't do DATA and pretty much bought the FGU modules for PHB, MM, and DMG and supplemental data from DMsG to make my life even lazier with extensions. Though I have also written a huge amount of data myself - to run my own SW5e variant campaigns - so I have that flexibility to do it if I want to go through that pain and effort. But that is a learning curve even if you don't do any of it yourself and get free/paid for modules/extensions to use in your campaigns.

So in a nutshell, people don't like FGU because of the learning curve and overhead in mastering it.

But I would use nothing else. I like being the master of my universes and not having to do much during game play. Even if it costs me an inordinate amount of time to get to where I wanted to be in crafting/running the campaign. Now I can craft a campaign in no time. But yeah....

Was not easy to get to that point. And if you don't want that level of power and control - stick to the simple apps. In the end, the game is what you and your players make of it. These "apps" are just tools and can only provide as good an experience as the people that are running them.

[Jiminimonka]

Why I chose Fantasy Grounds and why I think people don't always like it... (copied from another post because I'm lazy)

I think people don't like Fantasy Grounds because of the "bling" factor. Other apps have more flash and simplicity with basic simple things.

However, FGU is the only app I use to run my campaigns. I like it because I can be ultimately lazy in how I run the game. I can actually spend time crafting the experience rather than constantly managing every little roll with all that can effect those rolls. I like the fact the LOS/Lighting is completely flexible (albeit new and still under development) and I can design/add/change things on the fly as I need them on the map during actual game play. I like my players can play for free with no costs - as host I've bought the ultimate license and all the books. I ESPECIALLY like that anything annoys me in the app I can override by writing my own extensions (note: EXTENSIONS = RISK) to make it do what I want to do in my games. Nothing has this kind of flexibility or power.

In the end, what I've crafted for myself makes running the actual games simple where I can be lazy. But to get to that state - mastering the flexibility and power? That can be a chore. And have some complexity with it. Granted, once the issues are solved and implemented, I could be lazier than any other DM in any other app. But to get to that point required a learning curve and effort. Granted, I don't do DATA and pretty much bought the FGU modules for PHB, MM, and DMG and supplemental data from DMsG to make my life even lazier with extensions. Though I have also written a huge amount of data myself - to run my own SW5e variant campaigns - so I have that flexibility to do it if I want to go through that pain and effort. But that is a learning curve even if you don't do any of it yourself and get free/paid for modules/extensions to use in your campaigns.

So in a nutshell, people don't like FGU because of the learning curve and overhead in mastering it.

But I would use nothing else. I like being the master of my universes and not having to do much during game play. Even if it costs me an inordinate amount of time to get to where I wanted to be in crafting/running the campaign. Now I can craft a campaign in no time. But yeah....

Was not easy to get to that point. And if you don't want that level of power and control - stick to the simple apps. In the end, the game is what you and your players make of it. These "apps" are just tools and can only provide as good an experience as the people that are running them.

I could not have put it better myself... and I probably would have got a Moderator telling me off if I tried.

[Weissrolf]

Detailed information. Very insightful. Thanks for taking the time to write it up.

Well, I just got a bad rep from a forum regular, so opinions on that seem to differ.

[Jiminimonka]

Well, I just got a bad rep from a forum regular, so opinions on that seem to differ.

Yeah, that was me, and it was a mistake. Sorry Weissrolf.