Special Announcement - Kickstarter

[LordEntrails]

There was a FG 1? I thought Fantasy Grounds started at version 2.7.0
Must have been a different time.

"A long time ago, in a galaxy far far away..."

[Moon Wizard]

FG1 was circa 2004. FG2 was circa 2008. FG3 was circa 2013.

The coding has changed quite a bit over time. The biggest change was between FG1 and FG2 which broke everything; but before my time.

I started working on FG around 2008, and took over with Doug in 2010.

Cheers,
JPG

[seycyrus]

I just added a new video to the Kickstarter page that shows some of the new grid options - color, visibility, grid type. It's short.

I see you also added a video about new dice macros. Everything looks awesome!

One thing I'd like to mention and ask for at this juncture since it seems like it is the type of thing that is far easier to do near the beginning rather than making it work at the end. This is regarding the "count successes" and "count failures" mechanic.

Instead of recording the # of successes/failures of a single die rolled a certain number of times, would it be possible to do it for a group of dice? In Gurps, we don't roll a d20, but roll 3d6 instead, and try to roll under a target number. Would it be possible to roll 3d6 a certain amount of times(say 12 times), and spit out the number of times the results were above/under a certain target (say 10)? Something like, 12x(3d6)s10?

[Moon Wizard]

That would need to be something that will still need to be built at the ruleset level. There’s no implementation for “target numbers” planned; but this is often handled by rulesets in a fairly straightforward manner. Plus, how exceeding/failing vs a target number involves different display requirements depending on the system. Every attack roll in D&D is a roll vs target; but people still want to see the totals.

Regards,
JPG

[seycyrus]

That would need to be something that will still need to be built at the ruleset level. There’s no implementation for “target numbers” planned; but this is often handled by rulesets in a fairly straightforward manner. ....

I'll take your word for it, but I don't understand the difference and it makes me think that I am not expressing myself properly??

How is checking to see if the result of a d20 roll is below or above a certain number different than checking to see if the result of a 3d6 roll is below or above a certain number?

[Moon Wizard]

It’s the difference between having a mode and expression reader that can handle comparisons on a per die basis, vs. a different expression that indicates when an entire set of dice should be used together in total for comparison.

Also, the total desired to be displayed would be different. For systems that use success/failure per die mechanic, such as Shadowrun/Champions. You want the total to display the number of successes and failures per die; not the total of the roll against the target number.

For example, the following dice expression is what will be supported. (3d8+2d6)s>4. This would compare all 5 dice to see if any of them are 4 or higher, and return a total between 0-5.

It’s two different requirements.

Regards,
JPG

[damned]

This is the difference between a Universal Roller and a Custom Dice roller.
The Universal Roller cannot know all the different ways of reporting required for every system so it has been configured to handle the bulk of the dice rolling permutations.
The DORCore generic ruleset has a universal roller while the MoreCore generic ruleset has about 100 specific rollers.
They are different ways of doing things and each have advantages and disadvantages.

Edit: MoreCore will utilise the Universal Roller too when FGU hits and people will likely be able to also make hybrid versions that incorporate target numbers and different textual output (and even using Roll Parameters to use dynamic targets)

[deer_buster]

An analogy that might be useful:

You bought XYZ software in 2012 and received version 6
I bought XYZ software in 2015 and received version 7
Someone else bought XYZ software in 2018 and received version 8

At the end of the year XYZ software version 9 is coming out.
You can upgrade from Version 8 to 9 for $60.
You can upgrade from Version 7 to 9 for $120.
You cant upgrade version 6 or lower - you have to buy a new license.

That is how a lot of places will sell software.

This might feel different because we are all on the same version because all the previous upgrades have been given for free.
But people who bought the software a longer time ago are almost always going to pay more when they upgrade.

Of course if you bought version 6 in 2012 and upgraded it for $60 in 2015 to version 7, and then in 2018 you upgraded it to version 8 for $60 then it would only cost you $60 to upgrade to the new version today.
Of course you have still paid the $180.

In this case everyone got the upgrades thru to version 7 at no cost.
7 to 9 will still cost you $120 and 8 to 9 will cost you $60.

And as a special bonus during the Kickstarter all upgrades are HALF price so ALL versions up to 7 to version 9 is only $60 (veterans) and version 8 to 9 (rookies) is only $30.

Maybe I should just shut up and not muddy the waters any more!

To me - the Kickstarter looks like a great deal all round.

Have paid my 60 Veteran Ultimate upgrade, without a second thought. Great features for the money, plus the money should go towards additional resources to make it even better. So WIN WIN!!!

Having said that, I was slightly off-put by the disparity as well. My Windows 7, purchased when it was released, just got updated to Windows 10 last year. That upgrade cost the same as it cost my wife for her computer that was more recently purchased. despite the fact that there were several years in betwen purchases. I've never heard of anyone pricing you at a higher price for having software longer, as a loyalty penalty or something.

If you want to should something to your loyal supporters, bump those veteran tiers up to alpha access...you gain that much more extra feedback capability to make it better quicker.

[Trenloe]

I've never heard of anyone pricing you at a higher price for having software longer, as a loyalty penalty or something.

See damned's example above - there are plenty of software companies who charge more for upgrades from earlier (longer owned) versions. You joined in 2006 - what version did you originally buy, and how often have you had to pay to upgrade that to v2, v3?

All of that aside - the pricing model is nothing new. SmiteWorks have been saying for over a year that people who are relatively new purchasers of FG Classic will get a bigger discount when changing FG Classic to the new FG Unity platform. This allowed new purchasers to start using FG and know that when FG Unity comes out they weren't going to have to pay a lot of money for the new platform when already having forked out a lot of money for a short period use of Fantasy Grounds Classic.

I also fail to see that you using some software you bought in 2006 for 13 years (I'm making an assumption here, based off your profile join date) without paying for any upgrades makes you a loyal customer and therefore entitled to a bigger discount than someone who has only recently purchased FG Classic - probably knowing that a new version was imminent. A "loyal customer" is someone who comes back again and again, spending more money, supporting upgrades, etc.. If you bought a car in 2006 and you're still using it now and haven't purchased a new car, would the car dealer class you as a loyal customer? No they wouldn't.

Now, if you've spent a lot of money on DLC over the years, you may think that makes you a loyal customer - but does that make you more loyal than someone who bought an ultimate license last month and bought all the 5E material for many hundreds of dollars (yes, people do that). You're still getting a big discount on your new FG Unity license, all of the products you've purchased before will work with FG Classic and also with the new FG Unity. And, like I've said, the bigger discount for newer purchasers has been public knowledge for over a year now.

[Egheal]

I think 60$ is a really generous offer considering my early 2017 Ultimate licence. But yes, a second wave of alpha access some weeks (one week ?) before beta would be a great sign toward your loyal veterans (meaning old and returning DLC customers, the guys who speak "every day" in behalf of there beloved FG).