18 months on : FG vs. Roll20 vs Foundry

[jharp]

That would be called a MUD.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MUD

LOL. No need for the link.

[celestian]

That would be called a MUD.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MUD

I actually still run one, mind you mainly for the old farts still alive from when I had it running back in the mid/late 90s (only in maintenance mode)

Good times tho... at this point VTT's are much more fun !

[Weissrolf]

The one we played was DikuMUD based, but build in Java.

[Laerun]

I prefer not to be bound by only having access to content online. I do not know of too many other ways to do this other than setting up a local server or having printed out PDFs and character sheets. I have printed at FedEx and other third-party places and it can get pricey. So, despite any interface issues, and not having to rely on just the community devs to make things happen per ruleset, I prefer FGU. I can imagine that most users that cannot afford to purchase content have sought out illicit means to acquire their RPG content. FG makes this effort a little bit less attractive for those that want to grab copyright materials.

@weissrolf Good day. I am very curious about you.
Please PM me as I would like to know what motivates you and what your intentions are in this community.
I have read many of your posts over the past couple of years and really never noticed you so much until recently, over the past few months or so.
You do not owe me anything, and you certainly do not have to oblige, but I would love to understand what makes you tick and what exactly your needs might be.
We have been looking for a strong champion of the PF2e ruleset. Our community needs someone like you that understands Fantasy Grounds and the PF2e ruleset.
If you would consider, there are many things that I have envisioned for you with your vast knowledge of this system and FGU.
In these particular forums, you are mostly engaging with the same dozen or so people that read these posts.
If you would think you can perhaps help the broader community with the PF2e ruleset, that would be very useful and appreciated!
If you don't have the time, I understand. However, making time to FG-related posts here and other places outside of here 'might' be useful in a community that is hungry for help, knowledge, and potentially a little bit of mentorship. We have plenty of DnD5e, we could certainly use more Paizo content and help.

Let us know,
Laerun

FG Academy
PF2_Intro_Class.png

[MrDDT]

Well as your telling me Foundry does everything (except CT) equally smooth as I get in my modified FGU 5E I don't see why everyone is not flooding foundry.

I can't make a judgement myself as I don't use Foundry, but you seem to be saying its all easy to do what my modified FGU 5E does so not sure why Foundry is not showing all this stuff in their demo videos - seems silly not to advertise that stuff.

Having said this, its one thing to say you can do it, and another showing its done in a comprehensive game players are actually running in. I've seen nothing as your describing for sure - again - I may not know where to look for it.

Still as I said - I've got my game where I want it (and modify it when I find something I don't like) so me and my players are happy to "play the game" and not sweat the mechanics or how it was done (they leave that to me). Sounds like you don't like FGU, the direction they've taken, and like Foundry a lot.

I'd stick with what you and your players like as a framework and don't worry so much about what me and players like as a framework. Nobody likes everything so I applaud the fact their are choices out there.

I've made mine. Sounds like you've made yours. May we both enjoy our games

Why isn't everyone running to Foundry you ask?

Well there are a few reasons for this ones that were even pointed out in this thread.

1) Content. 5E is the most popular content and pretty much to get access for that in Foundry, you would have to manually input or illegality get it in Foundry.
This is the not just limited to 5E but all sorts of other things as well. It just harder to access and find the content most people use.

2) Cost. People already in a VTT already likely for a cost. So moving over to another VTT costs money. Normally a great deal, and likely all the stuff you have just can't be used easily in another VTT.

3) Change. People already playing on a VTT know how to use it, have a group of people that use it, and know where to go to find people or items they want. Relearning another VTT, getting it set up right with mods and all the bells and whistles takes a lot of effort and time to just edge out some minor amount of "betterness", so people stay on the VTT they are on.


I don't think Weissrolf has fully made the choice yet, but I feel personally that FGU doesn't fix and bring up to date some of it's stuff, the market lead it has will be slipping away as more and more new people and old people will look at other VTTs like Foundry to play their games on.

Things in FGU is taking a long time to get basic things updated. We have a lot of things on the wishlist that can be added to FGU to catch up some of these issues and it seems like many things just take a very long time with FGU.

You take a look at Foundry had very similar issues with LOS and Lighting that FGU has (laggy and resource hog), they fixed it in months. It seems like FGU is going backwards on this and telling us to curtail how we make maps and to make them smaller instead of fixing the major issue of the lag/resource issue. This is just 1 example.

Personally I'm likely never going to move to Foundry as I'm pretty well locked into FGU, it does what I want and it's good enough even without updates or changes. FGU is pretty amazing. I know it well and I'm here.
I'm kinda sad that Foundry is doing so well and growing so much because that means less market for players on FGU.

[similarly]

Why isn't everyone running to Foundry you ask?

Well there are a few reasons for this ones that were even pointed out in this thread.

1) Content. 5E is the most popular content and pretty much to get access for that in Foundry, you would have to manually input or illegality get it in Foundry.
This is the not just limited to 5E but all sorts of other things as well. It just harder to access and find the content most people use.

2) Cost. People already in a VTT already likely for a cost. So moving over to another VTT costs money. Normally a great deal, and likely all the stuff you have just can't be used easily in another VTT.

3) Change. People already playing on a VTT know how to use it, have a group of people that use it, and know where to go to find people or items they want. Relearning another VTT, getting it set up right with mods and all the bells and whistles takes a lot of effort and time to just edge out some minor amount of "betterness", so people stay on the VTT they are on.


I don't think Weissrolf has fully made the choice yet, but I feel personally that FGU doesn't fix and bring up to date some of it's stuff, the market lead it has will be slipping away as more and more new people and old people will look at other VTTs like Foundry to play their games on.

Things in FGU is taking a long time to get basic things updated. We have a lot of things on the wishlist that can be added to FGU to catch up some of these issues and it seems like many things just take a very long time with FGU.

You take a look at Foundry had very similar issues with LOS and Lighting that FGU has (laggy and resource hog), they fixed it in months. It seems like FGU is going backwards on this and telling us to curtail how we make maps and to make them smaller instead of fixing the major issue of the lag/resource issue. This is just 1 example.

Personally I'm likely never going to move to Foundry as I'm pretty well locked into FGU, it does what I want and it's good enough even without updates or changes. FGU is pretty amazing. I know it well and I'm here.
I'm kinda sad that Foundry is doing so well and growing so much because that means less market for players on FGU.

Wow. That's pretty much how I feel as well.

I'm HEAVILY invested in FGU, and I've spent way more than I every originally intended to spend.

Still, I homebrew so much that, honestly, not having licensed content in Foundry wouldn't be a big deal.

For me, the hardest part would simply be getting used to a new system and the feeling that I'd spent all this money on FGU, only to whimsically decide to move to another system.

I love FGU for what it does, but I have to agree that some things could be better.

That said: for someone like me who has the budget for FGU, FGU is certainly convenient.

[dsaraujo]

I used Foundry for some of my last PF2e one-shots, that we play when the my main group have one or two people missing. I think it is good to try it out different tools from time to time. At least from my last experience, I was still happy to go back to FG, but I could see the strides done on Foundry's ruleset support. While sinking cost is definitely a factor, I feel like I would easily change solutions when the platform starts to offer me a better experience.

[Weissrolf]

1) Content. 5E is the most popular content and pretty much to get access for that in Foundry, you would have to manually input or illegality get it in Foundry.
This is the not just limited to 5E but all sorts of other things as well. It just harder to access and find the content most people use.

The "illegally" get it part is too undefined for me, but not being able to buy lot of the content for money sure can be the main deal-breaker. Pathfinder 2E seems to be gaining a lot of traction lately, though, especially seeing more and more people switch over from PF1E and DnD5E. And there is *more* content for PF2E on Foundry (free of extra charge on top of the Paizo PDF price) than there is on FGU.

2) Cost. People already in a VTT already likely for a cost. So moving over to another VTT costs money. Normally a great deal, and likely all the stuff you have just can't be used easily in another VTT.

Again, for us PF2E players the 50 EUR one-time purchase of Foundry is quickly offset by any FGU module prices being saved in return. In the long run for us PF2E players it's cheaper to switch to Foundry than to keep buying FGU modules.

3) Change. People already playing on a VTT know how to use it, have a group of people that use it, and know where to go to find people or items they want. Relearning another VTT, getting it set up right with mods and all the bells and whistles takes a lot of effort and time to just edge out some minor amount of "betterness", so people stay on the VTT they are on.

I may not subject my 2 years PF2E group to that change, but rather buy the next adventure module for FGU (=extra cost) to allow my players to stay with what they know. I already set up Foundry with mods and everything, though, so for me as GM the effort is already done. The "betterness" would mostly show in the much better technical implementation underneath the added eye candy. The main drawback would be the lack of resistance/weakness automation and uncertainty how well spellcasting and bombthrowing would be handled in comparison.

I don't think Weissrolf has fully made the choice yet, but I feel personally that FGU doesn't fix and bring up to date some of it's stuff, the market lead it has will be slipping away as more and more new people and old people will look at other VTTs like Foundry to play their games on.

This is why I started a second group using Foundry, with one player being in both groups. We tried a bit of PF2E, now try a bit of Starfinder and then are going to decide if those player want to install and learn the FGU client (+mandatory account creation) for a full campaign or stay with the easy access of Foundry. This will be in late April when we will decide on which full campaign to begin (likely PF2E rather than SF).

For the time being it seems like I keep using both. My next summer holiday may be another reason to change that at least temporarily, because compared to Foundry FGU is hard to use for GMs with unreliable and slow internet access.

[TheoGeek]

The "illegally" get it part is too undefined for me, but not being able to buy lot of the content for money sure can be the main deal-breaker. Pathfinder 2E seems to be gaining a lot of traction lately, though, especially seeing more and more people switch over from PF1E and DnD5E. And there is *more* content for PF2E on Foundry (free of extra charge on top of the Paizo PDF price) than there is on FGU.

I'm only familiar with Wizards of the Coast 5E content (campaigns, rulebooks, etc.) where unless you have purchased the book and entered all the info manually into any VTT (other than Roll20 or FantasyGrounds - where you can buy it in VTT format), you have gotten it illegally.

Again, for us PF2E players the 50 EUR one-time purchase of Foundry is quickly offset by any FGU module prices being saved in return. In the long run for us PF2E players it's cheaper to switch to Foundry than to keep buying FGU modules.

I'm not familiar with PF2 licensing - can you get things for free on Foundry that you need to pay for in FGU?

[ddavison]

Illegality is debatable about the approach to PF2E content for free on Foundry (or anywhere else). It is definitely not publisher friendly. The ability to get content for free on one platform when other services charge money for it absolutely harms Paizo's ability to sell official content in the same capacity from other VTTs, and even from Foundry. In most cases that involve disputes over legality of content use, there is the cost and time to pursue legal matters, as well as the PR impacts of doing so. As far as I've been told, the guy providing the content is checking the watermarks and relying upon the Community Use Policy to distribute it for free. Whether it is free or not does not mean that it doesn't harm Paizo since they can't sell something very successfully if it is also available for free. The fact that there is a Patreon attached to its availability also muddies the water about whether or not it is even free.

SmiteWorks could do the same exact thing and give away content for free after a watermark check. Doing so does not benefit our partner or our community of developers who currently do the conversions. We could continue to pay the converters, cut Paizo out of the loop and probably pocket more direct license sales. That is not something we would ever do for our partners. I believe that all VTT companies and their communities should take active steps that help support the companies and people behind the games that we all love and play.

We do think that prices could be reduced to make things more accessible. When we first established the market for VTT content with WOTC, we were required to list everything at full MSRP. We requested the ability to at least match actual prices that people might see on Amazon, and eventually we were able to reduce those prices. This didn't happen until D&D Beyond came into the market and requested the same thing. For Paizo, we currently have to do the same thing. If more VTTs officially enter the market and request lower prices, this could change as well.