# Virtual Tabletop software?



## Sylrae (Aug 12, 2010)

I've recently been shown glittercomm and d20pro. Have people used these? Are there any virtual tabletops that other people recommend?

One thing I'd like to see, is one that does *NOT* force the use of a grid, having circular templates and measuring ranges and distances in straight lines. (instead allowing movement like using a tape measure in warhammer, and cones shaped line cones, instead of cones shaped like cones approximated into squares).

I know these two don't have that. Are there any that do? 

Even without that feature. What sort of virtual tabletops do you guys use?


----------



## IronWolf (Aug 12, 2010)

Sylrae said:


> Even without that feature. What sort of virtual tabletops do you guys use?




Take a look at MapTool.  Freely available, java based so it is cross platform as well.  Use the video tutorials linked to from the site to get up to speed quickly.


----------



## Hussar (Aug 12, 2010)

Holy crap, d20 Pro only allows TWO guest slots for 30 bucks?  What a ripoff.  TEN BUCKS for each new guest slots?  Wow, are there really any suckers who would pay this?  That's crap.

So, I get to shell out 30 bucks as the DM so that my group of seven players can shell out an additional seventy bucks to use the program?  Why in hell should I pay to sell this product.  I loathe with the power of the sun this sort of pricing pyramid scheme.  

/end rant

Maptools does not tie you to a grid if you don't want to.  I'm also watching the development of Epic Table RPG with great interest.


----------



## Scurvy_Platypus (Aug 12, 2010)

I don't tend to use one, but MapTool is likely the one I'd use if I were on a full computer.

I just bought "Battle Map" for my iPad:
Razeware | iPhone and iPad Apps for Gamers | Battle Map

A bit pricey for an app (especially with the exchange rate) but it's got a fair amount of functionality.

Virtual tabletops aren't of a whole lot of use to me as I don't do online rpg stuff. For portability, I don't have a laptop, refuse to get a netbook, and own an iPad. So the choice is easy.

They're working on a port of MapTools to the iPad, but it's going to be essentially worthless to me, since last I'd heard you need to have a real computer running and acting as a server.

Right now Battle Map seems to be the best option for an iPad.

I personally have been very attracted to Battle Grounds, as it looks very nice:
Battlegrounds Home

Thing is, nice as it looks, I'm not sure it's offering that much greater functionality over MapTools.

One thing MapTools, Battle Grounds, and Battle Map have in common is a lack of rule-enforcement. They're electronic boards for shuffling stuff around. 

On the other hand, Fantasy Grounds for example requires a game definition file (or at least it used to) and is actually offering up options based on that. It looked nice, but horribly kludgy for anything other than straight up D&D, unless you're one of those folks that loves to get really stuck in on the more geeky aspects of these things. Since I personally don't care about doing that sort of thing, I immediately bumped FG off my list and never looked back.

But FG does have a huge amount of popularity, so.... *shrug*.... depends on what you're after I suppose.


----------



## Hand of Evil (Aug 12, 2010)

ITable top 
Inferno 
Fantasy Grounds


----------



## Jor-El (Aug 12, 2010)

While I haven't used any, I have heard good things about Maptool and Fantasy Grounds. 

I was able to check out Inferno at Gencon and wasn't too impressed.


----------



## Steel_Wind (Aug 12, 2010)

Hussar said:


> Holy crap, d20 Pro only allows TWO guest slots for 30 bucks?  What a ripoff.  TEN BUCKS for each new guest slots?  Wow, are there really any suckers who would pay this?  That's crap.
> 
> So, I get to shell out 30 bucks as the DM so that my group of seven players can shell out an additional seventy bucks to use the program?  Why in hell should I pay to sell this product.  I loathe with the power of the sun this sort of pricing pyramid scheme.




You are not reading that right.

The DM version gets two FREE guest slots. You can add more free guest slots as the DM for $10 each, or the player can just buy their own client for $10.

For as many free guest slots as you have with D20 Pro, the player does not need to buy any sort of client.

Cost of D20 Pro for a table of four* =**$50*. 

As for why you would want it? Because it's the only VTT software that directly supports Pathfinder, the PFRPG Bestiary and the Advanced Player's Guide?

_Fantasy Grounds_ is also a solid choice. I own them both.

_Blah Blah Blah >>Maptool<<_ : For the most part in life, you get what you pay for. For creating a map? Maptool is handy if somewhat difficult to use software. 

But For running a virtual tabletop game? FG and D20 Pro are both superior, imo.


----------



## Stoat (Aug 12, 2010)

I've been using d20Pro for three or four years now, and I've found it well worth the money.  As Steel_Wind notes, the cost is not as great as Hussar seems to think.  Cost aside, this is what I like about d20Pro.

1.  Stability.  Before d20Pro, I used Klooge, and I nearly tore my hair out over it.  Klooge regularly crashed, hung up and lagged.  I haven't had that problem with d20Pro.

2.  Easy to Add Monsters.  VTT's I've looked at tend to be pretty heavy on data entry.  Again with Klooge, adding a monster to the VTT took a long time and a lot of typing.  d20Pro uses a lot of radio buttons and dropdowns to speed up the process.  I can literally add a monster on the fly without the Players realizing I'm doing it.

3.  Built for D&D.  Related to point 2 above, d20Pro was designed for use with 3.X, and can be customized to work with 4E.  As a result, it automates a lot of little things (flanking, skills, saving throws, BAB).  It's a feature I appreciate.


----------



## Matchstick (Aug 12, 2010)

Sylrae said:


> I've recently been shown glittercomm and d20pro. Have people used these? Are there any virtual tabletops that other people recommend?
> 
> One thing I'd like to see, is one that does *NOT* force the use of a grid, having circular templates and measuring ranges and distances in straight lines. (instead allowing movement like using a tape measure in warhammer, and cones shaped line cones, instead of cones shaped like cones approximated into squares).
> 
> ...




We use Fantasy Grounds and have had an excellent experience with it.  My impression has been that Fantasy Grounds and Maptool are the two best choices, and that they each have things they're better at than the other (though I haven't used Maptool).  I like Fantasy Grounds because the licensed rulesets are embedded in the program making character sheets interactive.  The quickkeys for die rolling are great and the module format and combat tracker help things to move quickly.  We actually play faster over the internet than we do in person.

FG has licensed a bunch of rulesets and is working on getting more.  Savage Worlds, Rolemaster (can you imagine writing that ruleset?) and Call of Cthulhu are some, and there are more in the works (GUMSHOE).  They're also hoping to get a Pathfinder license.

FG is at Fantasy Grounds :: The Virtual Tabletop for Pen & Paper Roleplaying Games.  I'm not involved with the company in any way other than as a user.



ENWorld poster "heruca" makes "Battlegrounds" and also has the (IMO) definitive list of VTT options on his site.  Here's a link:

Battlegrounds Links

Hope that helps!


----------



## Hussar (Aug 12, 2010)

Steel_Wind said:


> You are not reading that right.
> 
> The DM version gets two FREE guest slots. You can add more free guest slots as the DM for $10 each, or the player can just buy their own client for $10.
> 
> ...




The only problem is, of my group of eight (including myself) we're all GM's.  It would actually cost us over two hundred dollars to use this program. 

30 bucks for the DM plus 10 more for each player, presuming we don't have two free loaders, is still going to run me close to a hundred for a program that runs Pathfinder.  Whoopee.  I've played six different RPG's in the past year over Maptools.  

No thanks.

Heck, running Maptools with Rumble's framework, you can cut and paste directly from the DDI into a token without entering anything.  The framework for running Savage Worlds is a thing of beauty.  

I'm just really, really tired of VTT publishers screwing over DM's.  Why in hell does the DM have to pay THREE TIMES as much as everyone else?  There should be one price and you're done.  Shafting GM's is the prime reason I won't ever use pay VTT's.


----------



## Festivus (Aug 12, 2010)

I have used both Maptool and Fantasy Grounds.  I stopped using Fantasy Grounds when Maptool turned the corner and became a really stable alternative to the recently (at the time) released Maptool 2 which kept crashing on us.  

Maptool has a big bonus that it's FREE.  I disliked (but I believe they have changed) the licensing structure for Fantasy Grounds, where bringing new players in was difficult because they had to purchase a client.

I watched the Epic Table RPG app and didn't see anything in there that you couldn't already do with Maptool or Fantasy Grounds.

I can't recall if Fantasy Grounds ties you to a grid or hex map, but I know Maptool doesn't.


----------



## Steel_Wind (Aug 12, 2010)

Hussar said:


> The only problem is, of my group of eight (including myself) we're all GM's.  It would actually cost us over two hundred dollars to use this program.




C'mon, that's not a fair representation. If you are a DM and WANT a DM's copy, then it would cost you $30 each. It acts as a player client as well and does not take up a "guest slot" when it is in use as a player client in somebody else's game.

But it's hardly a reasonable assessment of a niche computer program's cost to suggest it's "too expensive" when you then evaluate its costs on the basis that each player wants to purchase his own DM client as well instead of a player client. That's a choice gamers may make - but it is not a requirement of the software nor the expected price point.

I'm suggesting you should be fair when posting on the cost of software here on ENWorld. If people think the *actual* cost is too much? Then they do. But it's not right to leave people thinking the actual cost is something other than what it really is. Your statement as to the cost of the software is, accordingly, misleading to a casual reader of these forums.

I personally don't think that either D20 Pro or Fantasy Grounds or anybody is "screwing over DMs". I think the asking price for their products is eminently fair. And to be clear on this point: I think the price you expect to pay is neither fair nor reasonable. 

Your opinion is your own, but that doesn't *necessarily* make it a reasonable one.


----------



## Matchstick (Aug 12, 2010)

Steel_Wind said:


> C'mon, that's not a fair representation. If you are a DM and WANT a DM's copy, then it would cost you $30 each. It acts as a player client as well and does not take up a "guest slot" when it is in use as a player client in somebody else's game.
> 
> But it's hardly a reasonable assessment of a niche computer program's cost to suggest it's "too expensive" when you then evaluate its costs on the basis that each player wants to purchase his own DM client as well instead of a player client. That's a choice gamers may make - but it is not a requirement of the software nor the expected price point.
> 
> ...




I agree.  Our group is pretty varied financially but we all bought Fantasy Grounds Full licenses.  I think it's 40 bucks or so?  That's a few months playing an MMOG, or a four trips to the movie theater, or two blu-rays.  Best of all, we're now playing in a group again, with people in five states across three time zones.  I'd have paid twice that (or more) just to get to RPG with the guys again.  And the license is good for years.

Heck, I paid WAY more than that to go to GenCon and see some of my friends for only three days!

Paying isn't the way everyone wants to go.  As you say, that's fine.  And I definitely agree that paying doesn't mean that we got ripped off.  I don't think any one of us feels even remotely that way.  We have at least three GM's working on games and tons of interest in playing.  Everyone's loving that renewed sense of participation and interest in RPG's.


----------



## MadLordOfMilk (Aug 12, 2010)

I use MapTool. I'm completely happy with it, so I see no need in paying for other software.

At GenCon, I actually asked almost every VTT booth "why pay for your program when MapTool is free?" and didn't get a good answer from any of them, surprisingly. Some were better than others at handling it, but it felt like I was blindsiding them every time. You'd think they'd expect that question and have some response prepared.


----------



## Naszir (Aug 12, 2010)

I've been using Fantasy Grounds for 3 years now. Nice piece of software. Used it with Midnight (3.5 D&D Fantasy Flight Games) and for the past two years 4th Edition but it is flexible to enough to use with any system. It does its job well and it has good support and the guys who run the company are continuing to make improvements.


----------



## Jorunkun (Aug 12, 2010)

Another vote for Maptool, which we have been using for more than two years now. It's free, it's stable and the Pathfinder framework is amazing.


----------



## Qwillion (Aug 13, 2010)

Breaking of Fostor Nagar module supports Maptool;  Jonathan Roberts our cartographer is a huge Maptool supporter and all of our Fantastic Maps line supports 4E and Pathfinder frameworks. 

And yes Breaking of Fostor Nagar was given a special dispensation by Paizo to make it compatible with the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game to be able to use the compatibility licence.


----------



## Verdande (Aug 13, 2010)

Scurvy_Platypus said:


> For portability, I don't have a laptop, refuse to get a netbook, and own an iPad.




Just a quick aside: How can somebody refuse a netbook and then get an iPad? The imagination boggles.

On topic: 
I used to use this one free program that was written in Python, although it did force things to a grid. Also, I second MapTools.


----------



## IronWolf (Aug 13, 2010)

Jor-El said:


> I was able to check out Inferno at Gencon and wasn't too impressed.




We have a thread running on Infrno over here:

http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/286387-who-has-tried-infrno-net.html

If you get a chance can you add what you thought of it over there? A few of us were curious.


----------



## Hussar (Aug 13, 2010)

Steel_Wind said:


> C'mon, that's not a fair representation. If you are a DM and WANT a DM's copy, then it would cost you $30 each. It acts as a player client as well and does not take up a "guest slot" when it is in use as a player client in somebody else's game.
> 
> But it's hardly a reasonable assessment of a niche computer program's cost to suggest it's "too expensive" when you then evaluate its costs on the basis that each player wants to purchase his own DM client as well instead of a player client. That's a choice gamers may make - but it is not a requirement of the software nor the expected price point.
> 
> ...




How is that not fair?  My group of eight contains eight DM's.  For us to use this software is going to cost the group over two hundred dollars.

And a group of 5 with 1 DM isn't likely going to be 50 dollars, since we're on the topic of honesty, because how do you decide who gets the free rides?  It's most likely 30 bucks for the DM, and 10 for each player.  30+40=70, not 50.

But, that's the point, why is the DM being forced to pay the extra 20 bucks?  What am I getting for that?  If I'm the DM, I'm BRINGING the group to the program.  For that extra 20 bucks, I get the privilege of selling your product to my players.  Great for the program's producers I suppose, but, other than the fact that I get the non-crippled version of the program, what benefit do I get?

If I'm paying three times as much money to use the program as everyone else, I expect three times more support.  But, I don't get that.  All I get is the ability to run the game.  Which is all I need in the first place.  

I loathe the double price scheme.  It screws over DM's for no reason.  There should be ONE price that everyone who wants to use the program should have to pay.  And everyone who pays that should get the same program and same benefits and limitations.

It's like selling a computer game where, if you want the ability to make custom maps or custom elements, you get to pay three times as much money.  Good luck selling that idea.  It's ridiculous.


----------



## OnlineDM (Aug 13, 2010)

MapTool is the best, in my opinion.  Now, I've never tried the paid tools that others have discussed, but with MapTool I have never felt the need to explore a paid option.  I had previously used OpenRPG and GameTable (now known as OSU-gt), and as soon as I discovered MapTool I never looked back.

If you're just getting into running games online, you might be interested in reading my blog, which I started as soon as I became interested in running games online.  If you just want to see my experiences with MapTool, those posts are under the MapTool tag.

And if you want any help or pointers, drop me a line!  My Gmail address is OnlineDungeonMaster.


----------



## Sigurd (Aug 13, 2010)

*_ONE TIME_ Costs*

If anyone has looked at the cost of gas or experienced the change in people's schedules as they get jobs, move around, have kids etc... they will realize that a one time cost per person of less than $50 is not a lot.

I bought FG when it first came out (I might have been the first purchaser here on enworld  ) and I have never paid anything for all the gaming I've done with it since.

Yes maptool is free but I find it clunky. Fantasy grounds is elegant with a really natural user interface. On top of that, it really seems to be improving a lot recently.

Cost to me is now well under  0.25 an hour.

I can't drive to see all the players I find in a week, much less an evening. Even my close friends an hour away would cost $10+ in gas on an evening and I'd be spending 2 hours in transit. I get stuff done around the house, (Laundry etc) and I'm here for phone calls. My wife is ok with me giving 4 hours on an evening to gaming because its mostly just 4 hours.

I recommend Fantasy Grounds and VTTs to anyone who finds face to face difficult. If its a one time cost don't let it stop you from picking the interface you like. I don't begrudge a company a couple of bucks when they wrote the software, don't charge by the hour, and give you support.

Maptool is a great project too. I just like FG better. I haven't tried any other VTTs.


I think its alarmist and unfair to post group costs without talking per person cost. If your game is not worth 40 bucks to play\DM then you've certainly never actually bought many books and don't spend anything to get to sessions.

Buy a setup to let you game and DM (for FG that's  39.95 USD) you're done. The other players will have to pony up as well.

If you want to carry the costs for your players, you can make other choices (In FG a license that lets people join without a paid license is 149.95 USD). I don't really understand this as I've always let players buy their own books, snacks, dice etc.... If your players aren't into the game enough to spend forty bucks they're likely not very interested.

Unlike any of the bazillion other game products I have, I use my VTT every single game. It saves me money and makes the game possible.


I'm not slamming any other program. I don't get anything for this.

I just hate hearing the implication that this is somehow expensive when it has saved me so much money. I've had games with people all over the world - time zone is actually an issue. It's the biggest, cheapest, improvement I've made to gaming. 


Sigurd


----------



## xaotik1 (Aug 13, 2010)

I'll have to agree with Sigurd here, the gas savings alone make it worth the money I've spent on FG.  Sure there are plenty of free VTTs out there, and I've used Map Tools, Screen Monkey, Kloodge, and any number of others, and the only one that even compares is Battlegrounds.  Spending a few bucks for years worth of convenient play is hardly a chore, and frankly, if you play almost any RPG out there now, 40 bucks is probably less that what you paid to get the players guide and gamemasters guide.  Seeing as the cut down version of the d20srd, 4e, and about 20 other rulesets come free with FG, or at the least are freely available, you can hardly fault them for the asking cost.

Even beyond the cost though, is the constant upgrading and easily modified rulesets and modules that come with FG itself.  With a minimum of effort, you can alter any number of rulesets to fit whatever game you want to play, regardless of system.  The graphics are solid, the chat has quite a few nice options in it, and it's overall a very simple system to learn, making it pretty player friendly.  My only real beef with it is that it should come with voice chat as an option   Though, seeing as the competition hasn't really integrated voice in, I can't really complain there either.

I will say that I like the Battlegrounds maps better.  They have a number of functions and options that I like to use when playing games like Battletech and Robotech, but even at that, I still prefer FG for just about every game I play/run.


----------



## Xorne (Aug 13, 2010)

I use FG2 as well; I've been very happy with the interface and the wide array of rulesets and community support.  I have set up MapTools and tested it out extensively, and it's a nice tabletop, especially when it comes to map/token manipulation.  In the end I preferred the integrated, ruleset specific character sheets, and the DM tools available.  (And the combat tracker, oh my!  I also fiddled with the Battlegrounds demo as well--it seemed solid, I think I preferred some of it's options to MapTools, but I haven't used either in over a year.

I've been very happy with FG2.  When my gaming group first decided to pick it up, we ended up getting 1 Full (DM) and 6 lite (Player) licenses as a group purchase.  I think it was something like 60% off!  But I paid a greater portion of the bill because I ended up with the DM client.  I mention this because I found the rant about a DM paying more for a full client instead of a player client.

If I walked into my FLGS and ranted at the owner that I should get the DMG and MM for free when I buy the PHB, "Because I'm bringing the game to my players!"  His response would be:

...

That's it.  You know the facial expression that represents; there's no point in trying to use words, because the closest summation to his reaction is, "DOT... DOT... DOT".

I recommend trying the demos out for different VTTs and see which ones meet your needs.


----------



## Hussar (Aug 13, 2010)

> I just hate hearing the implication that this is somehow expensive when it has saved me so much money. I've had games with people all over the world - time zone is actually an issue. It's the biggest, cheapest, improvement I've made to gaming.




I'm not talking about how expensive it is.  I'm talking about how the DM is expected to pay triple what the players pay.  It's not like FG is the only one doing this.  It seems that every pay VTT does this - the DM's client is the full featured program and costs twice to three times as much as the "player" client.

It's completely bogus.

And the analogy to the DMG, PHB, MM is a false one.  If I want to run a game, I have to buy all three books.  If I don't want to run a game, I don't.  But, if I want to run a game over Fantasy grounds, I have to pay three times what everyone else does.  

And what do I get for this?  What added value do I get, other than the ability to host the game?  When I buy a Monster Manual, I gain the stats and information on hundreds of monsters.  When I buy a DMG, I gain information on a number of issues related to running a game of D&D.

What added value do I get for buying the DM client?

If all clients were the same price, I'd have zero bitch.  My sole gripe here is that DM's are getting the shaft.  The company producing the VTT has no choice, they HAVE to create a DM's client.  That's a given.  They then have to go about crippling that client to make a player's client.

Why not have just one client?  Oh, that's right, everyone expects the DM to pony up the cash to run the game.  

And, btw, nice snide commentary that my game isn't worth 40 bucks.  Hey, if you're groovy with the idea of being screwed over because you want to run a game, that's fine.  Whatever floats your boat.  Me, I see it as a pure money grab and completely bogus.

I'd love to see something like the next Halo release come out where you have to pay extra to be able to take videos in game.  That would fly so well.


----------



## Hussar (Aug 13, 2010)

Just to be 100% crystal clear here.  I don't care how fantastic FG is.  I couldn't care less if it's the greatest VTT in the world.  I love VTT's.  I've been using them for almost eight years now, in weekly and sometimes twice weekly gaming.  You don't have to sell me on how great VTT play is.  I know it's great.

My sole, lone, complete complaint is the double pricing where if you want to run a game you get to pay three times what the players pay, while gaining absolutely nothing.


----------



## Scurvy_Platypus (Aug 13, 2010)

Verdande said:


> Just a quick aside: How can somebody refuse a netbook and then get an iPad? The imagination boggles.




Simple: form and function. Netbooks fail to meet the needs that I have. An iPad looked like it would, so I bought one. So far, it's satified my needs, exceeded my expectations, and is actually quite useful for my purposes. For anything major, I've still got my desktop machine.

It's all about figuring out what's going to be the right tool for the job. Apparently your jobs are different than mine. Not surprising really. *shrug*


----------



## Naszir (Aug 13, 2010)

Xorne said:


> And the combat tracker, oh my!.




Absolutely! The combat tracker is a great tool. For our 4e games the ability to drag effects onto characters/monsters in the combat tracker really cuts down on trying to remember who was marked/dazed/stunned/restrained/has ongoing damage etc. and for how long it is going to last. Just drag the effect from the character power or monster stat block and drop it in the appropriate place. Great, great stuff!


----------



## tdewitt274 (Aug 13, 2010)

To Hassur:  Well, you are correct.  You are getting no added value by purchasing a GM copy of any VTT.  You are, however, getting added functionality.  Yes, they are different.  You do have a valid argument on price, which I would like to comment on.

The simple economics of computer software are obvious.  Less functionality means less price.  Check out any of the Microsoft Office productivity software.  You are getting less if you only buy the basic package.  Pay a little more and you get Access.  Look at the Windows OS.  Buy the Basic and you don't get the added features that make.  Why would you buy the lesser?  Price and need.  Don't need Access, buy the smaller option.  Yes, even some Open Source has this option (in the form of Service Plans) and "core OS".

What does this have to do with VTT?  It's a similar concept to the OS example.  If you have the GM and Player software at the same price, why bother selling two versions?  Because a Player doesn't want to pay $40 for what they are not going to use.  This translates into a lost sale.  If you lower the price and strip the functionality, you have a product that appeals to the Player.  

Sure, the GM gets "shafted" because they have to pay a higher price.  This is the nature of economics in a computer software environment.  Sure, they could lower the GM price.  However, this would need to be compensated with raising the Player price to offset development costs for the ENTIRE application.  There are more players out there than GMs, just look at PH/DMG sales for proof.

Your group is unique in that you have so many people willing to be a GM.  In the glory days of my group, we had 14 people and only 3 of them would GM.  Now, we have 5 and only 2 GM.

In the end, VTT is a business.  I don't know how the Free VTTs do it, but I'm sure there's some kind of community support or advertisments that offset the bandwidth for hosting a game, downloading the application, supporting, customer feedback, development, and their main site.  It all depends on the business model.  Maybe that additional cost helps with the above in some way.

Finally, I stumbled onto this thread because Sylrae was asking for recommendations of VTT.  The others are trying to answer your question and Sylrae's at the same time.  They are not trying to influence you, only to give their viewpoint as well as defend a product that they find valuable.

For the record, I have only used Fantasy Grounds.  I find the challenge of programming a ruleset intriguing and the Campaign Mangement features are appealing to me for when I do eventually GM.


----------



## Festivus (Aug 13, 2010)

Sigurd said:


> If anyone has looked at the cost of gas or experienced the change in people's schedules as they get jobs, move around, have kids etc... they will realize that a one time cost per person of less than $50 is not a lot.
> 
> I bought FG when it first came out (I might have been the first purchaser here on enworld  ) and I have never paid anything for all the gaming I've done with it since.
> 
> ...




It *is* expensive when you consider that Maptool is FREE.  But beyond that, I agree that Maptool is not for everyone.

I think you will find the following to be true:
Maptool is more complex to get up and running than Fantasy Grounds.  It may require a degree of tinkering and reading to get things exactly the way you want, particularly if you plan on using a framework.  These are not overly complex things, but it does require a bit of time investment to get it done.

People who just want a program that is going to work with minimal tinkering will find Fantasy Grounds more to their liking.  I found that I was able to get Fantasy Grounds 3.5 game up and running in minutes with a minimum of fuss (really was just opening ports on my firewall and I was done).

I believe that technical support for both Maptool and Fantasy Grounds is via message boards and community support, unless something has changed and you can now get someone on a phone line for help with Fantasy Grounds, which would be an edge to that product.


----------



## Hussar (Aug 13, 2010)

tdewitt274 said:


> To Hassur:  Well, you are correct.  You are getting no added value by purchasing a GM copy of any VTT.  You are, however, getting added functionality.  Yes, they are different.  You do have a valid argument on price, which I would like to comment on.
> 
> The simple economics of computer software are obvious.  Less functionality means less price.  Check out any of the Microsoft Office productivity software.  You are getting less if you only buy the basic package.  Pay a little more and you get Access.  Look at the Windows OS.  Buy the Basic and you don't get the added features that make.  Why would you buy the lesser?  Price and need.  Don't need Access, buy the smaller option.  Yes, even some Open Source has this option (in the form of Service Plans) and "core OS".
> 
> ...




The difference being, when you have a VTT package, you HAVE to create the DM's version first.  It's not that the DM is getting a value added Player version, the player's are getting a stripped down DM's version.

Instead of 30 bucks and 10 bucks, why not 10 for everyone?  Is it worth the extra 20 bucks from 1 user?  How much profit is actually being seen here.

With your Microsoft example, MS doesn't actually have to create a fully featured version first.  They can create the basic version and then add to it.  But, a player only version of a VTT is useless without a DM's version.  

In other words, you cannot use the VTT until someone ponies up the DM's version.  Compared to Windows where everyone can run their programs to their hearts content.  If I get the Pro version of Windows, I gets added benefits.  

The DM's version does not.

And, again, it's not the money.  It could be 3 cents and 1 cent.  I wouldn't care.  It's a principle thing.  Why should one user be forced to pay extra without gaining anything?  Without that one user, no game will be played at all.

I just don't understand why the basic VTT isn't fully featured.  EVERY license should be the DM's version.  And, from an economic point of view, if the player license is 10 bucks, then the full version should likely be the same.  You're not gaining anything by adding twenty bucks to the DM's version.  Only a small fraction of your userbase actually pays that.  The additional money is pretty much a drop in the bucket.

Or, put it another way, 1 DM + 4 players is a minimum 50 bucks in FG currently.  Would losing the twenty bucks from the one DM not be paid back by other people running their own games?

Isn't the goal here to get as many people as absolutely possible running games?


----------



## Drahkar (Aug 13, 2010)

Hussar said:


> Just to be 100% crystal clear here.  I don't care how fantastic FG is.  I couldn't care less if it's the greatest VTT in the world.  I love VTT's.  I've been using them for almost eight years now, in weekly and sometimes twice weekly gaming.  You don't have to sell me on how great VTT play is.  I know it's great.
> 
> My sole, lone, complete complaint is the double pricing where if you want to run a game you get to pay three times what the players pay, while gaining absolutely nothing.




I don't think this is a fair complaint though. The added cost to the DM has always been there. They have always been the one expected to have all the books. Often in a Tabletop session they are supplying snacks and related costs. They bring most of the resources that are in a game session. The added cost has always been on the head of the DM. 

Now with a VTT you have the DM who has the fully featured version of the application and the players merely have the ability to connect and play. Nothing else. This is just a continuation of that. It would be unreasonable to expect the Full version and the player version of the software to be sold for the same amount.


----------



## Drahkar (Aug 13, 2010)

Hussar said:


> And, again, it's not the money.  It could be 3 cents and 1 cent.  I wouldn't care.  It's a principle thing.  Why should one user be forced to pay extra without gaining anything?  Without that one user, no game will be played at all.
> 
> I just don't understand why the basic VTT isn't fully featured.  EVERY license should be the DM's version.  And, from an economic point of view, if the player license is 10 bucks, then the full version should likely be the same.  You're not gaining anything by adding twenty bucks to the DM's version.  Only a small fraction of your userbase actually pays that.  The additional money is pretty much a drop in the bucket.
> 
> Or, put it another way, 1 DM + 4 players is a minimum 50 bucks in FG currently.  Would losing the twenty bucks from the one DM not be paid back by other people running their own games?




You miss the point. In software development there is an innate cost accrued for development. The Player version of the software isn't there to cheat the DM. Its there to make the overall cost for playing less. If we were to implement what you are complaining for, the end result would be that they simply stop offering the player version of the software and only offer the DM version. Its not going to cost less just because they stopped offering one of the less feature rich versions. So the overall cost goes from, say $100 for a DM and 4 players to $300 because everyone is buying the full version of the software.


----------



## Matchstick (Aug 13, 2010)

Festivus said:


> It *is* expensive when you consider that Maptool is FREE.  But beyond that, I agree that Maptool is not for everyone.
> 
> I think you will find the following to be true:
> Maptool is more complex to get up and running than Fantasy Grounds.  It may require a degree of tinkering and reading to get things exactly the way you want, particularly if you plan on using a framework.  These are not overly complex things, but it does require a bit of time investment to get it done.
> ...




Very well put.  I've not used Maptools but that was a strength of FG that I took full advantage of.  We had the VTT for years and I finally just said "I'm doing this", bought a module, plugged it into FG, and ran it the following Sunday.  Now everyone is having a great time and wanting to GM.  It was really easy, it had to be for me to be able to "just do it" so quickly.  Regarding Maptools, I know a group that uses it and loves it.  I would definitely recommend any new user try it out.  Competition is good!

I have to say that for me at least, I'm not interested in which VTT is "better".  I'm interested in encouraging people to try VTT's and playing online.    

For the OP and anyone else interested: look at heruca's list, look at some of the options and demos, read the communities, and most of all, *give VTT's and playing online a try!*  The technology is there and it works!


----------



## Maidhc O Casain (Aug 13, 2010)

Hussar said:


> Just to be 100% crystal clear here.  I don't care how fantastic FG is.  I couldn't care less if it's the greatest VTT in the world.




But isn't this the original intent of the thread? To get information about which VTT's folks were using, which one's they considered the 'best?' It looked more like a technical question to me . . .


----------



## amerigoV (Aug 13, 2010)

Hussar said:


> The difference being, when you have a VTT package, you HAVE to create the DM's version first.  It's not that the DM is getting a value added Player version, the player's are getting a stripped down DM's version.
> 
> Instead of 30 bucks and 10 bucks, why not 10 for everyone?  Is it worth the extra 20 bucks from 1 user?  How much profit is actually being seen here.
> 
> ...





I've come around to Hussar's thinking. They might get more people if they had a stripped down GM version  (say $10) and the GM, as desired, could pay extra for features that they wanted. So for $10 you get a whiteboard in virtual space (anyone can host the game). For an additional $20, you get all the bells and whistles.

The problem is the $10 product would have to be better than Maptools.

Regardless, Maptools does it for the groups I am in. I played around with FG2 and liked it, but I did not want to force people to pay money to play (especially since I was already pushing them to Savage Worlds for $10 at the same time). A buddy of mine uses iTable, but i have not talked to him in awhile about it.


----------



## Drahkar (Aug 13, 2010)

amerigoV said:


> I've come around to Hussar's thinking. They might get more people if they had a stripped down GM version  (say $10) and the GM, as desired, could pay extra for features that they wanted. So for $10 you get a whiteboard in virtual space (anyone can host the game). For an additional $20, you get all the bells and whistles.
> 
> The problem is the $10 product would have to be better than Maptools.
> 
> Regardless, Maptools does it for the groups I am in. I played around with FG2 and liked it, but I did not want to force people to pay money to play (especially since I was already pushing them to Savage Worlds for $10 at the same time). A buddy of mine uses iTable, but i have not talked to him in awhile about it.




But that is not a discussion of what is a reasonable cost at that point. Instead its merely, 'Hey, I want everything but I'd rather not spend money for it.' The removal of the 'Player' version of the software would do nothing to the price of the other tools. People need to understand that. All it does it increase the overall cost of playing within the VTT.

If MapTools meets you needs. Thats great. But the reality is that it doesn't meet the needs of a lot of people. For any DM to use it, they have to be extremely proficient in coding for it. That's the biggest advantage for ones like FG2. Once the ruleset is created, you don't have to be a master coder. You just have to learn how to use the ruleset.


----------



## Matchstick (Aug 13, 2010)

amerigoV said:


> I've come around to Hussar's thinking. They might get more people if they had a stripped down GM version  (say $10) and the GM, as desired, could pay extra for features that they wanted. So for $10 you get a whiteboard in virtual space (anyone can host the game). For an additional $20, you get all the bells and whistles.
> 
> The problem is the $10 product would have to be better than Maptools.
> 
> Regardless, Maptools does it for the groups I am in. I played around with FG2 and liked it, but I did not want to force people to pay money to play (especially since I was already pushing them to Savage Worlds for $10 at the same time). A buddy of mine uses iTable, but i have not talked to him in awhile about it.




I was exactly the same way.  I got to that "just do it" point and was very concerned because the VTT that I had was one that the players would have to pay for.  I sent out mail making that clear, presenting the prices, and asking for feedback.  It turned out that four out of the five players had owned FG for years; turned out we had all bought it around the same time simply on spec that we might play!  The fifth had no problem with buying it and away we went.

*It's a very valid concern to worry about "obligating" players/friends to spend money.*  I was there and can completely identify with that feeling.  I do think that there's no reason not to communicate with your players like I did, it might wind up that they are OK with spending the money just to get to play with their friends (MMOG's would be similar) and that opens up the field to more VTT options.  Quite honestly, had the option existed when I bought FG I'd have seriously considered the 140$ option that requires no licenses from players.  Espcially considering the years I've had the license it would have been more than worth it to get to play with my friends and not worry about that "obligating" (quotes above and here are mine).

For my purposes I'm not much of a coder/programmer, nor do I have much free time.  That led to Savage Worlds being a great choice for me, and matched up well with the strengths of Fantasy Grounds.  Lucklily for me, since FG was what we all had!  

Perhaps with Maptools the investment is in time and FG it's in money?  I had more money than time so FG worked out well for me (and continues to do so).  

Again, I have zero negative things to say about Maptools, I can only speak to my experience with FG and that's been very positive.


----------



## Aeolius (Aug 13, 2010)

Of course the cost for Mac users of Fantasy Grounds is $240 higher ($40 for wine-based crossover software + $200 for Windows Home Edition non-upgrade price).


----------



## Rienen (Aug 13, 2010)

Aeolius said:


> Of course the cost for Mac users of Fantasy Grounds is $240 higher ($40 for wine-based crossover software + $200 for Windows Home Edition non-upgrade price).




I'll assume this is tongue-in-cheek and respond in kind,

If you're a Mac user, you should be used to everything costing much more.


----------



## Sigurd (Aug 13, 2010)

*Selling your own product*

Restructuring the costs of a program simply because you don't want to pay that much is cheese. It is not that the DM version is more expensive. The player version is cheaper to give player only customers a break. They are reducing the function of a program to create a cheaper product and still have a market.

I never recommend the player only version because everyone should be able to DM. That's is how a table should work.


I am not going to tell anyone how to spend their money but neither am I going to tell a small software company how they can price their products. I find $40 a steal as a one time cost to play D&D online. Compare that to any online game or membership.

If you think less than a dollar a month for one year is too expensive to game online you are entitled to your opinion. In the end the price between the one time purchase and free is not that different so long as you use the software.

The far more important thing is that you are comfortable with the software and will you use it. Anything you use regularly will give you value, anything you don't use will be a waste.

By all means try maptool first because its free. Then try the demos and read the reviews for the other offerings. The idea works, and that is the more important message. If you want to game and there is nobody local there are certainly people online to game with.

I can't review the other offerings because I liked Fantasy Grounds so much I stayed with it and I use it regularly. I bought my product so, by now I might  pay as much as fifteen cents an hour to play online. Of course if I make myself a coffee while I play that cost probably triples.

s


----------



## OnlineDM (Aug 13, 2010)

I see that a lot of the people on this thread are big Fantasy Grounds proponents, and that's great.  I've never used the program - I discovered MapTool and loved it and have never had any reason to want to look for anything else.

However, I want to be educated about the options.  So, for those of you who know and love Fantasy Grounds and especially those who have also tried MapTool, can you tell me what the advantages of Fantasy Grounds are?  From reading through the thread, I see mention of not having to do any macro programming as in MapTool (I personally LIKE doing some programming, but I know a lot of people don't).  Are there other advantages?  Does game hosting work better in Fantasy Grounds?  Does it have built-in rules support for D&D 3.5 or D&D 4e or something like that?  Better graphics?  Easier UI?  

Obviously it's a great program or else it wouldn't have so many enthusiastic supporters.  What does Fantasy Grounds do that MapTool doesn't - or what does it do better?

Note that I don't care about cost here.  If there were something far superior to MapTool, I wouldn't dismiss it just because MapTool is free.  But MapTool is absolutely fantastic to me, and I find myself wondering what the paid options improve upon.


----------



## Drahkar (Aug 13, 2010)

OnlineDM said:


> I see that a lot of the people on this thread are big Fantasy Grounds proponents, and that's great.  I've never used the program - I discovered MapTool and loved it and have never had any reason to want to look for anything else.
> 
> However, I want to be educated about the options.  So, for those of you who know and love Fantasy Grounds and especially those who have also tried MapTool, can you tell me what the advantages of Fantasy Grounds are?  From reading through the thread, I see mention of not having to do any macro programming as in MapTool (I personally LIKE doing some programming, but I know a lot of people don't).  Are there other advantages?  Does game hosting work better in Fantasy Grounds?  Does it have built-in rules support for D&D 3.5 or D&D 4e or something like that?  Better graphics?  Easier UI?
> 
> ...




The true power of FG2 in my opinion is the fact that its a true framework environment. If you were to put in a empty base.xml file for a ruleset, there would be nothing there except a desktop and some dice. Even the chat window is built within the framework. That fact gives you a massive amount of development potential for a ruleset. You can, quite literally, develop the interface to cover almost anything. The only limitations to what you can do is in regards to items that require changes to the framework itself. For example the loading and campaign creation screen. 

Each type of resource within the application has a set collection of functions that get called by the framework at specific times. These default ones can then be used to expand out and create a wide variety of features within the environment. This is also a full Client/Server environment so added to this is the fact you don't have to ever worry about the state of an external server environment.

There are a lot of people who often comment about centralized chat and logins, VOIP, etc. But I'm glad that these are not the focus on the software. Instead they are developing a true programming framework that allows the person developing the ruleset to create a vast amount of functionality. And once those features and functions have been created within the Ruleset, anyone playing that ruleset can just used them. Not added setup required! Instead they can focus entirely on content, stories and Roleplaying. That is a *-huge-* deal when it comes to getting a game up and ready for your players.


----------



## Xorne (Aug 13, 2010)

OnlineDM said:


> I see that a lot of the people on this thread are big Fantasy Grounds proponents, and that's great. I've never used the program - I discovered MapTool and loved it and have never had any reason to want to look for anything else.
> 
> However, I want to be educated about the options. So, for those of you who know and love Fantasy Grounds and especially those who have also tried MapTool, can you tell me what the advantages of Fantasy Grounds are? From reading through the thread, I see mention of not having to do any macro programming as in MapTool (I personally LIKE doing some programming, but I know a lot of people don't). Are there other advantages? Does game hosting work better in Fantasy Grounds? Does it have built-in rules support for D&D 3.5 or D&D 4e or something like that? Better graphics? Easier UI?
> 
> ...




I haven't used MapTools to play or run a game; over a year ago I set it up and played around with the map/token manipulation, and it seemed pretty cool.  But what makes FG2 awesome for me?

- 3D animated dice
- ruleset specific character sheet for many systems
- DM Story/Map/Image/Encounter/NPC/Item Database
- Easy exporting to make the above adventure database modular
- Fantastic community support
- 3D animated dice (they deserve two mentions)

Now I don't _know_ how well MapTools or any other VTT can do these things.  I do know that I haven't really bothered to check, as I feel FG2 does these very, very well.  When we bought our Full+Lite package for our gaming group of 7, I think it was $13 each in the end with the discount.  I've spent $13 on a Hardee's value meal before.  

I enjoy FG2 so much I made four tutorial videos to help new players get up and running (with a 4E D&D bias as that's what I play these days).  They can be found at:
Revised 4E Video Tutorials - Fantasy Grounds Message Boards

But if you just want to see FG2, from a player & DM perspective (with some goofy voices narrating) then look at:
Fantasy Grounds II - live streaming video powered by Livestream

In the Video-On-Demand section pull up Example Encounter--gives a real good idea of how FG2 will work for you.


----------



## Sigurd (Aug 13, 2010)

For me the appeal of Fantasy Grounds is that it is a pleasing simulation of pen and paper gaming.

From a players perspective you don't really need to know more than you would to use table top gaming. 

Character Sheet holds your character
Dice are on the table: Click them with the left button of the mouse hold them over the chat window and let go. Everyone sees what you roll as a player but the DM can hide roles.
Tokens on the map: The DM shares a map with the players and the players can move their token on the map like a table top.

Any questions or interaction with the DM are just like face to face except that they are either typed (chat) or spoken online (Skype or whatever). You still want the game books and rules. The  game publishers still are the source for the rules.


Simplicity and genuine simulation is the core of the way this program doesn't 'technofy' the gaming experience.

The combat tracker helps everyone by keeping things organized and automating things. The automation is generally a plus and has been implemented by people programming to make the game easier. Players and DMs don't need to know anything about the programming. Mostly it just works like Windows 'mostly works'.


For me the interface feels right and as a DM I feel like I'm hosting my players in a pleasant space. Maptools is a great product but, for me, it doesn't create the sense of a pleasant space to game in. I didn't get the same sense of focus on my player character. I appreciate the product. My crits are all personal, I thought it felt too harsh and everything was a step more effort that kept me from the game world\setting.

I play D20\Pathfinder pretty exclusively but there are player created rulesets for other games and they liked the program and the other game enough to make the ruleset. That is part of the pleasant space for me.


Thats what keeps me with FG - the pleasant space.


----------



## Rienen (Aug 13, 2010)

Xorne said:


> - 3D animated dice (they deserve two mentions)
> .




Heh, x2 here! It was implemented so well, WotC tried to get away with claiming they did the same for their VTT. (By stealing the image and mocking it up in promo materials).

I have, admittedly, only played around with Maptools. The major differences I saw was Maptools was much better at map/battle space manipulation, and FGII was much better at Character Sheet manipulation. As my playgroup is very role-play oriented, opposed to combat oriented groups, it just worked better. I think it boils down to what fits best to your groups playstyle.

Some VTT's are better at displaying and moving tokens, some provide for a richer "sit around the table with your character sheet" experience. FGII fit my group better. FGII has gotten better at combat (the combat tracker built into several rulesets has been a god-send) and I'm told others have gotten better at handling character sheets. Your mileage may vary.


----------



## Griogre (Aug 13, 2010)

OnlineDM said:


> I see that a lot of the people on this thread are big Fantasy Grounds proponents, and that's great.  I've never used the program - I discovered MapTool and loved it and have never had any reason to want to look for anything else.
> 
> However, I want to be educated about the options.  So, for those of you who know and love Fantasy Grounds and especially those who have also tried MapTool, can you tell me what the advantages of Fantasy Grounds are?  From reading through the thread, I see mention of not having to do any macro programming as in MapTool (I personally LIKE doing some programming, but I know a lot of people don't).  Are there other advantages?  Does game hosting work better in Fantasy Grounds?  Does it have built-in rules support for D&D 3.5 or D&D 4e or something like that?  Better graphics?  Easier UI?
> 
> ...




So you know where I'm coming from I've now used FG for a couple of years now.  However prior to using FG I used and researched a variety of VTTs.  I first started playing online with a program that was just a battlemap that rolled dice.  I next tried ScreenMonkey, Klooge, MapTools, Battlegrounds, Fantasy Grounds and what was then called OpenRPG.  I've also tried a few others, Hecuva has a great list on his Battlegrounds site.

Excluding cost, where VTTs are different is what each one emphasizes.  The major difference between MapTool and FG is their focus.  

With a name like MapTool it should not be a surprise that MapTools' focus is on the map.  It is very map-centric with a lot of development time focused on Fog Of War, LOS and other features that make the map shine.  The last game I played on MapTool was an Aliens Vs. Marines Savage Worlds game and it was awesome.  But it was awesome because it played to MapTools Strengths - Fog of War, Monsters not being displayed if they were not in Line of Sight, Limited range light sources etc.  The downside was all the character where pregens and the character sheets were images.

Fantasy Grounds is *character sheet*-centric the emphasis is on the character sheet and most things revolve around the information on the character sheet.  It is also has an unusual interface in that instead of the standard Window GUI, it simulates play around a table in face to face RPG.  It has dice you throw, it has a battlemap that looks very much like a battlemap and tokens you can put on the battlemap.  It has a very low learning curve because it so closely simulates the way you play around a table in a real game.  People who play RPGs know what a character sheet is and how to fill out one for a game they play, they know what dice are for and they know how a battlemap works.  As FG uses mostly a drag and drop or right click radial menu interface the learning curve is very low to any experienced RPGer.

Most VTTs shine in some area for me MapTools is a great VTT if you want your scenario to revolve around the map.  If I ran a Space Hulk or other tactical combat game I would use MapTools or maybe Battlegrounds.  On the other hand if your game revolves around the character sheet like many RPGs do, I prefer Fantasy Grounds.  Part of this is a style issue about what you are trying to emphasize in a particular campaign.

I run several games and play in another online.  My experience is that from the player's side of the screen any good VTT used by a GM who knows what he is doing is a good experience.  One of the big differences between VTTs is on the other side of the screen.  As a GM how much prep time is required to run your online game?  Given the player experience is about the same with any decent VTT the one the GM wants is the one that has minimal prep time just for the software, and matches the style of the group and the campaign.  For D&D 4E FG has minimal prep time.  Not as good as 3.5 where all the resources were freely available but still the least once you have your resources.

Personally I think the top VTTs out there at the moment are FG, MapTools, Battlegrounds and what ever OpenRPG became.  The software is important but so is the community that has built itself around that VTT.  That is where you will often find replacement players or people to help you if you have a problem with the software.


----------



## Sigurd (Aug 13, 2010)

Griogre said:


> My experience is that from the player's side of the screen any good VTT used by a GM who knows what he is doing is a good experience.  One of the big differences between VTTs is on the other side of the screen.  As a GM how much prep time is required to run your online game?  Given the player experience is about the same with any decent VTT the one the GM wants is the one that has minimal prep time just for the software, and matches the style of the group and the campaign.
> 
> Personally I think the top VTTs out there at the moment are FG, MapTools, Battlegrounds and what ever OpenRPG became.  The software is important but so is the community that has built itself around that VTT.  That is where you will often find replacement players or people to help you if you have a problem with the software.




That's a really important thought. It's actually core to the development of VTTs as a whole. Whatever system will best make games easier to DM and help online communities grow is going to advance the hobby and create a place for itself. From the end users perspective they can only help each other.


----------



## Aeolius (Aug 13, 2010)

Rienen said:


> If you're a Mac user...




To be fair, cross-platform support (without forcing Mac users to purchase Windows) is the first thing I look for, in a VTT. The second would be either a free player version, or a free trial version. Next It has to support 3.5e/d20. Ideally, it would support movement in three dimensions. 

Granted, I DM a chat-based game via IRC, because VTTs seem to befuddle my players. I would need a VTT that had a bulletproof GUI, did not require running multiple programs or accessing CLIs, and had boatloads of support.


----------



## Matchstick (Aug 13, 2010)

OnlineDM said:


> I see that a lot of the people on this thread are big Fantasy Grounds proponents, and that's great.  I've never used the program - I discovered MapTool and loved it and have never had any reason to want to look for anything else.
> 
> However, I want to be educated about the options.  So, for those of you who know and love Fantasy Grounds and especially those who have also tried MapTool, can you tell me what the advantages of Fantasy Grounds are?  From reading through the thread, I see mention of not having to do any macro programming as in MapTool (I personally LIKE doing some programming, but I know a lot of people don't).  Are there other advantages?  Does game hosting work better in Fantasy Grounds?  Does it have built-in rules support for D&D 3.5 or D&D 4e or something like that?  Better graphics?  Easier UI?
> 
> ...




Where Drahkar extols the virtues of the programming flexibility, I'm just the person that sits back and enjoys the results of the flexibility.  I can't compare to Maptool, since I haven't used it.

When I started my SW adventures with FG our group was starting quite a lot from scratch.  We were using FG for the first (serious) time and we were starting with a new ruleset (SW).  About the only thing we had used before was Teamspeak!  So much new stuff could have been a big issue, but it wasn't. 

- We tested connections in FG days before the first session.
- I bought a module from Triple Ace and put it into my SW ruleset for FG.
- I created in FG pregen characters from Pinnacle and the module.  Something like that is very fast, maybe ten minutes per character
- I went through and pre=created combat trackers for all the predicted combats in the module.  When they arrive as part of the narrative all I need to do is drag the characters into it and share it.  Very fast and easy.
- I added some pictures (cars, a mansion, a zeppelin). 
- I made some maps with CC3 and DD3.  I wish the module had come with some, but oh well.

No one had played with SW before, but once they chose their characters they could look at their Edges and stuff and click on them to see what they do (descriptions right out of the book).  So could I if I needed to. If they needed to roll a Spirit check they just double clicked Spirit (or they could do it "manually" if that term applies) on the character sheet.  Need to attack, double click the attack already on the sheet, same with damage.  Wild die is automatic as well!  Very cool!

The entire SW players guide is in Fantasy Grounds, providing a great reference for both myself and the players.  It that guide that the character sheet links to, but the contents of the guide are not limited to what the character sheet links to, if that makes sense.  They can look up combat tricks while waiting for their turn for example.  The combat tracker actually deals out cards for initiative, just like in the SW rules!

I used the drawing tool to whip up a simple map when I needed to, with grid, on the fly.   Maybe not as nice as Maptool, but no different than what I could have done on a battlemap    I'm most definitely not an artist!

So for us FG made transitioning to online easy, because its technology  worked well, and made the transition to an unfamiliar ruleset easy because of the rulesets integration into the product and automation within the product.  The guys didn't have to buy the SWEX because it was all there (though it's only there when they're on my server).  

There have been other cool things too, but I think it was the ease which FG allowed us to start all these things from scratch that really impressed me.


----------



## moon_wizard (Aug 13, 2010)

Disclaimer: I currently work for the company who makes Fantasy Grounds.

I used and reviewed quite a few tabletops for the past six years.  I found Hecuva's list on his Battlegrounds site to be an excellent place to start.  When I looked at VTT solutions, I look for customizability of the VTT to run the games I want to play with the rules/automation that I want in my games.

Originally, I chose Klooge, because it had the most customizability at the time.  However, I ended up dropping it a few years later, due to the buggy behavior.  During that time, I overhauled the 3.5E game definition files to add more features.

After another review of all the VTTs, I ended up choosing Fantasy Grounds, which had just released a new version (FG2) with vastly improved customizability.  After joining that community, I rebuilt the d20 game definition, and built the 4E game definition from the bottom up.

I still feel that FG is the best for RPG-style games, which is why I joined the company six months ago and brought my work with me.

For more map-focused games, I agree that Battlegrounds and MapTools have very interesting map features.  However, I tend to avoid dependency on any free products, since the development and support are typically spotty.

Summary
* FG - My choice, best customizability, easiest player experience
* Battlegrounds - Great for moving tokens on a map, good map features
* MapTools - Some map features, customizable with work, sporadic development and support
* Klooge - Good game automation, some map features, buggy
* Epic Table - Looks very interesting, but in perma-beta mode
* The rest - Not even in the same league

Cheers,
JPG


----------



## Rienen (Aug 13, 2010)

Aeolius said:


> To be fair, cross-platform support (without forcing Mac users to purchase Windows) is the first thing I look for, in a VTT.




Then FG would definitely NOT be what you're looking for, as it is ActiveX and will never be anything other than Windows-based without a complete rebuild of the code.



Aeolius said:


> The second would be either a free player version, or a free trial version. Next It has to support 3.5e/d20. Ideally, it would support movement in three dimensions.



As for the free player version, FG DOES have a free player model, but the GM module for that one costs $150 (allowing unlimited free players). It DOES support 3.5/d20 quite well, but has no support for movement in 3 dimensions. I would put it's use of battlemaps as the low point of the software. It's not the FG focus.




Aeolius said:


> Granted, I DM a chat-based game via IRC, because VTTs seem to befuddle my players. I would need a VTT that had a bulletproof GUI, did not require running multiple programs or accessing CLIs, and had boatloads of support.



And this would be a mixed bag. The GUI is great and fairly bullet proof, but a bit quirky. The online support is fantastic though.


----------



## IronWolf (Aug 13, 2010)

Drahkar said:


> For any DM to use it, they have to be extremely proficient in coding for it. That's the biggest advantage for ones like FG2. Once the ruleset is created, you don't have to be a master coder. You just have to learn how to use the ruleset.




This really isn't true.  What was the last version of MapTool you've tried?

With MapTool, once you find a freely available framework for your system of choice you often have a feature rich set of macros at your disposal and ready to use.  You don't have to touch them, just load the framework in your campaign file and then you will have buttons for all sorts of common tasks right within the campaign.

I can run a campaign on MapTool and not need to touch macros if I have a system appropriate framework loaded.


----------



## Festivus (Aug 13, 2010)

IronWolf said:


> This really isn't true.  What was the last version of MapTool you've tried?
> 
> With MapTool, once you find a freely available framework for your system of choice you often have a feature rich set of macros at your disposal and ready to use.  You don't have to touch them, just load the framework in your campaign file and then you will have buttons for all sorts of common tasks right within the campaign.
> 
> I can run a campaign on MapTool and not need to touch macros if I have a system appropriate framework loaded.




And I have not looked lately, but I could sweat that Rumbles Maptool Framework takes a cut / paste from CB or MB, right?  Someone tell me I am crazy but with any VTT, data entry for the campaign is the biggest chunk of time you spend no matter what... so a import from other forms is a boon.


----------



## Vegepygmy (Aug 14, 2010)

Another vote for MapTool here.


----------



## IronWolf (Aug 14, 2010)

Festivus said:


> And I have not looked lately, but I could sweat that Rumbles Maptool Framework takes a cut / paste from CB or MB, right?  Someone tell me I am crazy but with any VTT, data entry for the campaign is the biggest chunk of time you spend no matter what... so a import from other forms is a boon.




There is a stat block importer that someone has written.  I've only used it with Pathfinder, but it has worked well.

I agree a large chunk of time can be data entry and anything to make that simpler and more efficient is a good thing for any VTT to have.


----------



## Vegepygmy (Aug 14, 2010)

Drahkar said:


> If MapTools meets you needs. Thats great. But the reality is that it doesn't meet the needs of a lot of people. For any DM to use it, they have to be extremely proficient in coding for it.



Your statement cannot be correct, because I am a DM, I use MapTool, and I haven't a clue how to code for it.

You can (as I did) learn everything you need to know to DM with MapTool just by watching a few free online tutorials.


----------



## IronWolf (Aug 14, 2010)

Vegepygmy said:


> You can (as I did) learn everything you need to know to DM with MapTool just by watching a few free online tutorials.




The video tutorials really are a great way to get up to speed on MapTool usage.  I do wish there were similar tutorials or documentation for the frameworks for various systems.


----------



## Merkuri (Aug 14, 2010)

Another +1 for MapTool.  I have only used a couple of VTTs, and only free ones, but MapTool is all you need and it's free.

It's got the basics (share a whiteboard/table, roll dice) for those who want to keep it simple, and it's got tons of user-made frameworks for those who want something more.



Drahkar said:


> For any DM to use it, they have to be extremely proficient in coding for it.




As others have stated, this is not true.  The most popular games have at least one framework (for some you have a bunch to choose from), and for the less popular ones you can probably find a code monkey around the forums who'd be willing to put something together for you.  



Xorne said:


> But what makes FG2 awesome for me?
> 
> - 3D animated dice
> - ruleset specific character sheet for many systems
> ...




It doesn't have 3D animated dice (which, while it may look cool, doesn't actually contribute to the game at all, IMO), but MapTool has many frameworks that provide character sheets for lots of systems, they recently implemented the ability to import/export maps, making it modular, and their forums are teeming with people happy to help.  I'm not positive what you'd count as a Story/Map/Image/Encounter/NPC/Item database, but if MapTool doesn't have it built in then you can probably find a framework to do it.

And MapTool costs both players and DMs exactly $0. 



IronWolf said:


> I can run a campaign on MapTool and not need to touch macros if I have a system appropriate framework loaded.




One of the reasons I love MapTool is that I don't _have_ to touch any macros, but I can.  For the 4e game I'm in right now we're using a framework some other gamer put together, but a few months ago we were playing a Sufficiently Advanced game for which there was no pre-made framework, so I had a blast putting one together.  The macro language of MapTool could use a bit of work, but it's still pretty powerful, and if you're a programmer you'll probably enjoy using it to put the rules of whatever obscure system you use into MapTool.


----------



## OnlineDM (Aug 14, 2010)

I love EN World!  I ask a question and I get a whole bunch of well-thought-out answers.  Thank you to everyone who chimed in on what makes Fantasy Grounds 2 a good virtual tabletop.

I think Griogre's post did the most to help me understand how FG2 is different from MapTool.  Being character-sheet-focused makes it very different from MapTool's map focus.  Yes, you have maps in FG2 and yes you can have character sheets in MapTool, but the programs differ in their focus.

Having read the comments from everyone who prefers FG2, it doesn't sound like are any dedicated MapTool users who later switched to FG2.  I also don't hear anything that makes it sound like FG2 has any real advantages over MapTool, at least not for me (though I'm sure the animated dice are nifty).  As I said, I enjoy macro programming, so that's a plus for MapTool, not a drawback (and as others have pointed out, if you prefer a pre-packaged framework, you might not ever need to program anything).  And I do mainly need the VTT for the map and combat, not the role playing.

I just finished running my weekly Friday night four-hour D&D 4e session via MapTool.  In tonight's session we had two combat encounters and a whole bunch of role-playing / skill challenge stuff.  For the combats, we had the MapTool battle maps.  For the role-playing we had Skype.  The only things we were looking at on the screen during the role-playing sections were the outcomes of the dice rolls (which are easy for the players - they just click the appropriate button on their character for whatever skill they want to roll).  We ignored the map during those sections and just talked and rolled some virtual dice.  It was great!

I'm sure that FG2 is an awesome program, and if I had discovered it and gotten invested in learning and using the program before I came across MapTool, I'm guessing I would see no reason to switch to MapTool.  But now that I know and love MapTool, I see no reason to switch away from it.  That's really what I was looking for with my question, and no one said anything that made me feel, "Wow, MapTool is nice, but just look at what FG2 offers! MapTool can't compete with that!"

I imagine that cost will be a big issue for a new player/GM in deciding what tool to use.  If both MapTool and FG2 can do everything a RPGer would want and they do these things equally well, my guess is that most people will choose MapTool because it's free.

I wish the developers of FG2 the best of luck, but it honestly seems to me that there's a community out there that's willing to build a program every bit as good as FG2 just for the pleasure of building it, not as a business.  With that being the case, I imagine it will be hard for FG2 to be profitable since MapTool seems to be just as good, and it's free.


----------



## Hussar (Aug 14, 2010)

Aeolius said:


> To be fair, cross-platform support (without forcing Mac users to purchase Windows) is the first thing I look for, in a VTT. The second would be either a free player version, or a free trial version. Next It has to support 3.5e/d20. Ideally, it would support movement in three dimensions.
> 
> Granted, I DM a chat-based game via IRC, because VTTs seem to befuddle my players. I would need a VTT that had a bulletproof GUI, did not require running multiple programs or accessing CLIs, and had boatloads of support.




To be fair Aeolius, I don't there there are any VTT's that support 3d movement.  I imagine that a 3d environment is simply too hard to code given that the background map would have to be built in 3d every single time.  Wotc's abortive stab at things aside, I don't think anyone else has even tried.

About the best you could do is an isometric map.  OpenRPG does do isometric but is somewhat unreliable and has a very steep learning curve.

While I do like Maptools, I would not call it's GUI bulletproof.  It's not hugely complicated, but, it's not all that easy either.  

I really do wish Maptools supported sound though.  That's the one thing I really miss about OpenRPG.




Festivus said:


> And I have not looked lately, but I could sweat that Rumbles Maptool Framework takes a cut / paste from CB or MB, right?  Someone tell me I am crazy but with any VTT, data entry for the campaign is the biggest chunk of time you spend no matter what... so a import from other forms is a boon.




Yes, that is correct.  You can cut and paste from any pdf file into a token and it will pull out the die roller macros for you.  It's not 100% accurate, but, it works most of the time.


----------



## Griogre (Aug 14, 2010)

Xorne said:
			
		

> Quote:
> Originally Posted by Xorne
> But what makes FG2 awesome for me?
> 
> ...






Merkuri said:


> It [MapTool] doesn't have 3D animated dice (which, while it may look cool, doesn't actually contribute to the game at all, IMO)... snip




Naturally you are in titled to your opinion, but the pretty dice do matter and not just for their prettiness.  What you are overlooking is the dice are also part of the user interface.  What is more natural to a gamer than to pick up and roll dice as an interface when a die roll is required?


----------



## IronWolf (Aug 14, 2010)

Griogre said:


> Naturally you are in titled to your opinion, but the pretty dice do matter and not just for their prettiness.  What you are overlooking is the dice are also part of the user interface.  What is more natural to a gamer than to pick up and roll dice as an interface when a die roll is required?




While MapTool might not have graphical dice to click on there are buttons to make your dice rolls.  Want to make an attack, click the attack button and your attack and damage are rolled, etc.  Graphical dice rank pretty low on my list of desires as well when the frameworks in MapTools already have buttons for me to click to make rolls I need to make.


----------



## Merkuri (Aug 14, 2010)

Hussar said:


> I imagine that a 3d environment is simply too hard to code given that the background map would have to be built in 3d every single time.  Wotc's abortive stab at things aside, I don't think anyone else has even tried.




I don't believe WotC's game table was truly 3D either.  I mean, it was shown in 3D, but I don't recall seeing any photos of minis on different levels.  The bells and whistles may have been rendered in 3D, but I think under the hood the map was still flat.

There are lots of problems with rendering maps in 3D, especially if you're talking about something like multiple floors of a building.  Unless you're showing it in a first-person perspective (from inside the map, essentially) you have to decide things like where to cut the map or make it transparent, where you let the camera go (if the camera's movable)... there's just a ton more processing needed for a 3D map than a 2D one.

It's also a lot harder for a user to make their own 3D map.  3D programs tend to have high learning curves.  The time you'd need to create a 2D map of a building is probably a lot less than the time you'd need to create an equally detailed 3D map of the same building.



Griogre said:


> Naturally you are in titled to your opinion, but the pretty dice do matter and not just for their prettiness.  What you are overlooking is the dice are also part of the user interface.  What is more natural to a gamer than to pick up and roll dice as an interface when a die roll is required?




You pick up dice just as often in MapTool as you do with any other VTT, which is to say not at all.  The difference is in how you see your fake dice on the computer screen, whether it's as a number or as an animated image.  That part's just set dressing.  IMO, the number you get from the roll (and how random it is) matters more than how it's shown to me.

Oh, and by the way, there are macros in MapTool that will show you an image of your die with the right number showing after you make a roll.  It's not animated, but it does prove that you can use MapTool to show you dice.


----------



## Steel_Wind (Aug 14, 2010)

Merkuri said:


> I don't believe WotC's game table was truly 3D either.  I mean, it was shown in 3D, but I don't recall seeing any photos of minis on different levels.  The bells and whistles may have been rendered in 3D, but I think under the hood the map was still flat.




The only program which matches this feature set is NWN1.


----------



## Aloïsius (Aug 14, 2010)

Merkuri said:


> It's also a lot harder for a user to make their own 3D map.  3D programs tend to have high learning curves.  The time you'd need to create a 2D map of a building is probably a lot less than the time you'd need to create an equally detailed 3D map of the same building.




I remember playing with the doom editor tools when I was young... You don't really need "real" 3d for 99% of the dungeon you are using. Just something that allow you to create stairs and cliffs, and would manage flying creatures...


----------



## Merkuri (Aug 14, 2010)

Steel_Wind said:


> The only program which matches this feature set is NWN1.




Was NWN1 true 3D, though?  Do you ever remember bad guys being on a different elevation than your party?

Just because the set is 3D doesn't mean the map is true 3D.  And if everyone is going to be on the same elevation anyway I'd actually _prefer _it to be in 2D so my imagination can take over.

When the tokens for everyone's PCs are static 2D images (or even posed unmoving 3D sculptures) on a sketched 2D map it's easy for you to imagine the battle scene with characters parrying and dodging and leaping all over the map.  But when the depictions of the characters move and make the same attack animation over and over again it gets hard to imagine them doing anything else differently.  There comes a point where if the images look too real they drown out your imagination, which could have done a much better job of rendering the scene than the computer is doing.

In that sense, to simulate a PnP RPG I would actually prefer a flat 2D map with 2D image tokens like MapTool, over a 3D animated world like Neverwinter Nights.  The only time I might want a 3D map is if I were trying to simulate characters being on different elevations.


----------



## Aeolius (Aug 14, 2010)

As it incorporates underwater combat, I wonder how Into the Deep , DDO Update 6, will handle 3D movement.


----------



## Merkuri (Aug 14, 2010)

Aeolius said:


> As it incorporates underwater combat, I wonder how Into the Deep , DDO Update 6, will handle 3D movement.




Possibly, it won't.  It may just have characters walking on the bottom.


----------



## Steel_Wind (Aug 14, 2010)

Merkuri said:


> Was NWN1 true 3D, though?  Do you ever remember bad guys being on a different elevation than your party?
> 
> Just because the set is 3D doesn't mean the map is true 3D.




It's "true 3d" in the sense that all spell effects are targeted at the head node. So it appears in 3d for all intents and purposes.  There is no indepedent 3d pathing in the pathnodes in the tiles - so in that sense, no.

(You can fake putting characters at different heights though with a swap appearance script.)

Still - it can work and it is easy to make things appear 3d and have monsters in flight over party's heads, etc.

Now - I personally wouldn't run a campaign using NWN - and I think it's fair to say that I have a helluva lot more technical knowledge on the Aurora engine than probably anybody else here on ENWorld.  I'm just saying that if you _really_ wanted to present something in 3d or isometric, NWN1 was as close it reasonably gets.


----------



## tenkar (Aug 15, 2010)

Pretty nice overviews.

I mainly use FG2.  For ease of use, especially if the DM has the ruleset for the RPG in question, is second to none.  Character sheets, dice, maps and decent fog of war, in program rules lookup for certain RPGs (the Labyrinth Lord one is an example of a free package)

I played around with Maptools in the past, and the line of sight feature was awesome.  But it felt too much like actually playing a computer game.  I'm not computer languge literate in the least, and at the time in question that made Maptools less then useful for me.  It may have improved in time.  I'm sure it did.

Battlegrounds is well done, but works better for board games / war games in my opinion.  I haven't patched in over a year.  Again, in that time it could only have improved.  Heruca's VTT list is amazing.  Great place to start.

Klooge.  Painful.  Really.

iTabletop - Not quite ready for full release, but if it reaches half of its potential it should be amazing.  Voice, video, sound... will be just like my dining room table.

Screenmonkey - ehh, not my cup of tea.


----------



## Greatwyrm (Aug 15, 2010)

I started with ScreenMonkey and I really just can't recommend it.

I don't know where all the talk about programming is coming from for MapTool.  All I've ever done is make up some basic die macros and everything works fine for me.  Maybe I'm doing it wrong.


----------



## Vegepygmy (Aug 15, 2010)

Greatwyrm said:


> I don't know where all the talk about programming is coming from for MapTool.



I think it's coming from people who want (or assume you have to have) a "framework" that has all kinds of bells and whistles attached to it. I'm not really sure what all such a thing can do (because I don't use one). A former player of mine wanted us to start using one, and not only was it bafflingly complicated to me, the end result didn't feel much like pen-and-paper tabletop gaming.

I don't want my MapTool game to feel like a video game, so we switched right back to playing without any "framework."


----------



## Hussar (Aug 16, 2010)

The frameworks can vary wildly.  Some are fantastic, some are... not so much.

Really depends on the system and how much effort someone put into making the framework.

The framework one of my players made for my Sufficiently Advanced game was fantastic.  Loved it to pieces and it made things so much easier.  Mostly because SA has a bit of a wonky rolling system (statxd10, skillxd10, take the better of the two) which is a bit tricky to type in each time.

Do you have to use them?  No, not at all.  It's an option.


----------



## IronWolf (Aug 16, 2010)

Vegepygmy said:


> I think it's coming from people who want (or assume you have to have) a "framework" that has all kinds of bells and whistles attached to it. I'm not really sure what all such a thing can do (because I don't use one). A former player of mine wanted us to start using one, and not only was it bafflingly complicated to me, the end result didn't feel much like pen-and-paper tabletop gaming.
> 
> I don't want my MapTool game to feel like a video game, so we switched right back to playing without any "framework."




I think how MapTool is being used has some bearing on how useful a framework is (and of course even this will vary from group to group admittedly).  If using MapTool as the tool of choice to display maps at a face to face group then I think a framework is not as necessary.

For the pure virtual experience over voice over IP chat or text chat, I've found the frameworks quite useful to help keep the game moving and such.


----------



## Festivus (Aug 16, 2010)

I think that if you have the time, the frameworks are great but I tend to agree with Veg, it can get in the way of the fun.

To speed your online games, we have found that video skype is amazing for the person who cannot make the event.  While free for more than a person to person call right now, it's probably going to cost money later.

Skype Launches Group Video Chat


----------



## IronWolf (Aug 16, 2010)

Festivus said:


> To speed your online games, we have found that video skype is amazing for the person who cannot make the event.  While free for more than a person to person call right now, it's probably going to cost money later.
> 
> Skype Launches Group Video Chat




Yeah, we've done video chat in our group when we have one person that can't make it there physically but has the time open to play from home.  It has worked well and we did not use a sophisticated setup at all.  Just two web cams.

For all players being in different locations I think it can get a bit trickier which is when a decent framework seems to make more sense.  Though Steel_Wind noted that his setup is being done with a good old fashioned battle mat, a good unidirectional mic and the Skype Beta with much success.


----------



## Xorne (Aug 16, 2010)

Merkuri said:


> It doesn't have 3D animated dice (which, while it may look cool, doesn't actually contribute to the game at all, IMO), but MapTool has many frameworks that provide character sheets for lots of systems, they recently implemented the ability to import/export maps, making it modular, and their forums are teeming with people happy to help. I'm not positive what you'd count as a Story/Map/Image/Encounter/NPC/Item database, but if MapTool doesn't have it built in then you can probably find a framework to do it.




What I mean is that as a DM I have a bunch of icons on the right, labeled Story, Maps/Images, Encouters, Personalities (NPCs), and Items.  After I build my adventure with these I can export it and have a module file that I can send to anyone that wants to use my adventure I created.  While FG2 has the best character sheet support I've ever seen, the Campaign Management facet of the VTT is awesome, as well!

I could explain it all out, or just refer you to my FG2 Livestream channel, where you can just see what I'm talking about.  

www.livestream.com/fgii

There's 4 videos there--Player Quickstart, Hosting Games, Campaign Management, and Example Encounter.  The first two cover the tools for the Player & Gamemaster, the third shows how to organize your campaign and create adventure modules, and the last one shows everything in action using FG2.  I think it would be hard to better demonstrate what makes FG2 unique.

But I'm not telling anyone that MapTools is bad--just why I love FG2.

Oh, there's a free demo for FG2 as well.


----------



## athos (Aug 16, 2010)

Sylrae said:


> What sort of virtual tabletops do you guys use?





I use openRPG, which is free.  It has the maps and dice roller and stuff you need for organizing and running combats.

3 of the games I am in use skype as well for talking and role play.  This has its ups and downs as far as I am concerned.  With pure typing, everyone gets "heard", with skype, it seems like whoever talks the most and the loudest tends to dominate more of the game.

What I prefer the most, is the GM using skype to read large amounts of info to the party, but the party using OpenRPG to type their actions, this way it seems like nothing gets "lost".  Either way, gaming in real time with OpenRPG with/without Skype is fun for me since I live too far from any local groups that play.


----------



## Steel_Wind (Aug 16, 2010)

IronWolf said:


> Though Steel_Wind noted that his setup is being done with a good old fashioned battle mat, a good unidirectional mic and the Skype Beta with much success.




Yup. Works perfectly actually. I have actually come to prefer it, as my commute to the game is a _pain in the ass._

Using Skype, it is nearly all of the fun with none of the hassle. I game with my local group in Toronto now via Skype video, as well as my other game (my podcast co-host runs his _Kingmaker _campaign in San Francisco).

Really is no difference at all from being there in terms of the game experience - only real difference is not pitching in for the shared pizza.  

I recommend Skype video highly -- once you lay out the extra money for a decent omnidirctional microphone and a HD webcam and boom, that is.


----------



## Greatwyrm (Aug 17, 2010)

athos said:


> I use openRPG, which is free.  It has the maps and dice roller and stuff you need for organizing and running combats.




I took a look at OpenRPG.  It struck me as the kind of thing that would be four quarts of awesome if I could only figure out how to make it work.  Kinda like Campaign Cartographer.


----------



## Merkuri (Aug 17, 2010)

IronWolf said:


> I think how MapTool is being used has some bearing on how useful a framework is (and of course even this will vary from group to group admittedly).  If using MapTool as the tool of choice to display maps at a face to face group then I think a framework is not as necessary.




Exactly.  It depends on what you want to get out of your VTT.

If you just want to simulate a "live" tabletop session where an attack is just someone declaring their action, rolling a die, and doing the math in their head then no framework is needed.

On the other hand, if you want to take advantage of the fact that you are sitting in front of the computer you can use a framework and create your own macros to do a lot of the crunchy bits for you.  With the right framework you can automatically calculate bonuses and penalties, keep track of what effects are on who and when they expire, and even store your entire character sheet within MapTool so all you need to do is pick a target and click a button to use your abilities.

My group likes that second option, but I totally understand the whole "don't want it to feel like a video game" argument.  


A couple people mentioned OpenRPG.  My group used that VTT for years.  It's got a couple nice features that MapTool doesn't, but we eventually moved over mostly because OpenRPG had a habit of being buggy and (at the time) there was no one actively developing for it so the bugs that were there were likely to stay there.  

And personally, being a computer programmer I loved the macros available within MapTool.  With OpenRPG I hacked the heck out of the "nodes" portion of the program to create rollers that would auto-calc my bonuses and things like that, and the end result was usually great, but the way I had to do it was ugly as heck and hard to upkeep.  The MapTool macro language could use a lot of work, but it's a ton more capable than using OpenRPG nodes.


----------



## IronWolf (Aug 17, 2010)

Xorne said:


> What I mean is that as a DM I have a bunch of icons on the right, labeled Story, Maps/Images, Encouters, Personalities (NPCs), and Items.  After I build my adventure with these I can export it and have a module file that I can send to anyone that wants to use my adventure I created.  While FG2 has the best character sheet support I've ever seen, the Campaign Management facet of the VTT is awesome, as well!




In MapTool you have a library much the same.  You can have icons, tokens, and such all at the ready to drag and drop onto the map.  You can have multiple maps in the campaign and have them pre-populated and ready to go.  You can do GM notes for the icons or even areas on the maps if you want.  And this can all be exported to a campaign file which can be loaded by anyone else that is running MapTool. 



			
				Xorne said:
			
		

> But I'm not telling anyone that MapTools is bad--just why I love FG2.




Yeah, I am not trying to change your mind.  Plenty of room in this world for all of us to run our VTT of choice!


----------



## IronWolf (Aug 17, 2010)

Merkuri said:


> On the other hand, if you want to take advantage of the fact that you are sitting in front of the computer you can use a framework and create your own macros to do a lot of the crunchy bits for you.  With the right framework you can automatically calculate bonuses and penalties, keep track of what effects are on who and when they expire, and even store your entire character sheet within MapTool so all you need to do is pick a target and click a button to use your abilities.




Oh, I agree.  I think the frameworks out there are great.  Especially when you are running a game where no one is sitting at the same table.


----------



## Vegepygmy (Aug 17, 2010)

Merkuri said:


> Exactly. It depends on what you want to get out of your VTT.
> 
> If you just want to simulate a "live" tabletop session where an attack is just someone declaring their action, rolling a die, and doing the math in their head then no framework is needed.



Exactly right. I DM an online game; half my players are on the other side of the country, none of them are in the same room as me. And we don't use voice chat, because we have found that we stay in character better when it's all texted.

It definitely takes longer to play this way than if we Skyped and set up the computer to do our math for us, but that's okay. We're not in any hurry to "get somewhere."


----------



## Hussar (Aug 17, 2010)

Vegepygmy - I've felt that way as well.  I think it is easier to stay in character in a chat based game.  But it is slower.  Sometimes painfully so.  I had a DM who typed about 20 words per minute.  And never pre-typed any text.  Sigh.

There's not being in a hurry and there's zoning out for half an hour because the DM is hunt and pecking his way through five sentences.


----------



## Twowolves (Aug 17, 2010)

So, no one has any experience or an opinion on d20Pro? 

My group is thinking about using it, but mainly because we are already hooked on Hero Lab and you can export characters (and thanks to the Bestiary data pack, monsters too) from Hero Lab directly into d20Pro. We play Pathfinder, so right now Hero Lab compatibility is a big plus, but we haven't committed to anything yet.


----------



## Stoat (Aug 17, 2010)

Twowolves said:


> So, no one has any experience or an opinion on d20Pro?
> 
> My group is thinking about using it, but mainly because we are already hooked on Hero Lab and you can export characters (and thanks to the Bestiary data pack, monsters too) from Hero Lab directly into d20Pro. We play Pathfinder, so right now Hero Lab compatibility is a big plus, but we haven't committed to anything yet.




See my post on page 1.  I've been using d20Pro for a while, and I like it.  It's stable.  It's relatively easy to use.  It doesn't take a lot of data entry to run.  

It's built for D&D.  Unlike Vegepygmy and a few others, I want my VTT to handle the math for me.  I figure one thing computers are good at is knocking out the math, and I've found that the time it takes to add together dice and bonuses bogs down the game.  So I'm happy to have a VTT that takes care of it.


----------



## Hippy (Aug 18, 2010)

Twowolves said:


> So, no one has any experience or an opinion on d20Pro?
> 
> My group is thinking about using it, but mainly because we are already hooked on Hero Lab and you can export characters (and thanks to the Bestiary data pack, monsters too) from Hero Lab directly into d20Pro. We play Pathfinder, so right now Hero Lab compatibility is a big plus, but we haven't committed to anything yet.



I bought D20pro and use it as a "add-on" for the tabletop minis.  I do not have a projector to point down onto the table (some day I hope to), but I use a monitor and we match the mini battle mat to the screen tokens.  It works really well to see how much damage the party is inflicting rather than a vague description of "he looks kinda hurt", also the ability to place the area effects for spells, etc. on the screen quickly and see who/what is within the range is a huge time saver.  We used the metal radius makers for the battle mat in the past, but they tend to knock over minis or not sit right with all the stuff on the mat.  With this info on the screen...not conflicts and much quicker play!  I also have used Maptools and like it except that I run primarily published modules and scanning the maps into maptool and getting the scale right for the tokens was a guessing game and a pain!  D20Pro has a dynamic graphical interface for scaling the maps and it is a snap to import and scale very quickly!

Cheers!

Hippy


----------



## The_Ditto (Aug 18, 2010)

Hey there, I realize I'm hopping onto this thread a bit late, and the topic seems to be around frameworks, 3d and other such stuff ... so I just wanted to acknowledge my awareness at that (so I don't get yelled at .. ) and just step back to the original post ..



Sylrae said:


> One thing I'd like to see, is one that does *NOT* force the use of a grid, having circular templates and measuring ranges and distances in straight lines. (instead allowing movement like using a tape measure in warhammer, and cones shaped line cones, instead of cones shaped like cones approximated into squares).
> 
> I know these two don't have that. Are there any that do?
> 
> Even without that feature. What sort of virtual tabletops do you guys use?




I'm surprised nobody else mentioned this already (if they did, I missed it), but we use Gametable (sourceforge.net), it's free, open source, and allows Square or Hex grid, as well as No grid, allowing free placement of pogs ala Warhammer.  It's got your measuring tape, line drawing capabilities, ability to create your own pog/environment/underlay/overlay/etc allowing you to create cones in whatever shape/size you want ...

We're playing 3.5 D&D with it, and I had my friend create a 2-color pog (smaller size) to show light radius (30', 60' and 120'), makes things really easier on DM as he can quickly spot how far each character can see given the current light source ... 

So far, I'm pretty impressed with it's rich features and abilities considering open source / free software ...

I'd highly recommend you taking a look at it if you haven't yet ...


----------



## Twowolves (Aug 18, 2010)

Stoat said:


> See my post on page 1.  I've been using d20Pro for a while, and I like it.  It's stable.  It's relatively easy to use.  It doesn't take a lot of data entry to run.
> 
> It's built for D&D.  Unlike Vegepygmy and a few others, I want my VTT to handle the math for me.  I figure one thing computers are good at is knocking out the math, and I've found that the time it takes to add together dice and bonuses bogs down the game.  So I'm happy to have a VTT that takes care of it.




I am looking for something to use with my Pathfinder game, most likely using Pathfinder Society Organized Play scenarios to test the waters and see how it runs. I can't see what the differences between FG2 and d20Pro are that would justify the difference in price.

(Speaking of price, $30 + 2 free player slots is the same as $10 each for 3 players. And is there some reason you can't use a communal DM log in and just take turns logging in as the DM?)


----------



## Rienen (Aug 20, 2010)

Twowolves said:


> I am looking for something to use with my Pathfinder game, most likely using Pathfinder Society Organized Play scenarios to test the waters and see how it runs. I can't see what the differences between FG2 and d20Pro are that would justify the difference in price.
> 
> (Speaking of price, $30 + 2 free player slots is the same as $10 each for 3 players. And is there some reason you can't use a communal DM log in and just take turns logging in as the DM?)




To be honest, I don't know enough about D20Pro to tell you. However, if you go to the FG forums, you can ask if anyone is willing to demo a game for you and show you the features. There are multiple people now with the Ultimate license (which allows for unlimited free players to connect to the GM client). The reason I bring that up is the Demo version is rather dated, being built off an old version. If someone with an Ultimate version has the D20_JPG ruleset installed, there is a fan created extension (rule and/or look & feel changes) that is for Pathfinder.


----------



## Hawkwind (Aug 22, 2010)

I use an online whiteboard site for my games. It is not designed for gaming but it does the job and it's free and all you need is a browser and skype and we use google docs for character sheets so I  never have to worry about networking issues or software problems with my fellow players, you can import  and scale your own graphical images and the board has layers for images so you can have minis on floor plans and there is a chat window with a simple dice macro in it. The board can be found at www.twiddla.com and I recommend it for anyone wanting to try online pnp rpg for the first time. It also helps if the dm can use graphical editing software like Gimp or Photoshop for making your maps and counters


----------



## wbcreighton (Sep 13, 2010)

*Interesting*

I just finished reading through this rather informative and interesting thread.

I have downloaded and played around with Maptools.  Yesterday I was able to play using a VTT for the first time using FGII.

One important thing that hasn't really been discussed enough probably because most of the people commenting are playing the World's Most Popular RPG, is support for less popular games.

It has been mentioned that FGII is character sheet centric and Maptools is map centric.  Both programs offer great support for DnD 3.5 and 4ed.  But it is support for the less popular games that could make the difference.  With FGII you need to buy (unless you want to do programming ) a ruleset for other rules systems ( it comes with DnD).  With Maptools you can ignore the rules or use a framework.  The problem is you need to find a framework that someone has volunteered to write or you have to write it yourself.  With FGII if the ruleset is available you buy it.  It is approved by the game publisher and will work.  With Maptools, you might be able to find a framework or you might not.

Character sheet centric really means rules centric and map centric is really graphics centric.  You can play FGII without using maps.  If you don't use maps then why would you use Maptools ?  If you only want a VTT for the maps then Maptools seems like the way to go.

I wanted to use Maptools to play RQ but there aren't any frameworks for it.  I tried to modify a CoC framework to use with it but it wouldn't work.  I looked into learning how to modify the framework but don't have the time to spend.

One of the positive things in Maptools favour is price.  It is free.

Of course if you want to make a framework for a game to work like a FGII ruleset does, then you have to spend time to do that.  If you value your free time at zero then Maptools is still free.   With FGII you have to pay for the program and you have to pay for the ruleset.  So if you put a value to your free time you can decide if the cost of FGII is worth it or not.


My first ever experience with FGII happened yesterday.  We hooked up with a GM who owns an Ultimate license.  That means we were able to download a free full version of the program to play in his game.  It was a BRP game, an old fashioned dungeon crawl.  I will say that the 3 of us who had never used FGII were able to pick it up very easily and were rolling dice and RPing in no time at all.  All of the info for our characters was available on character sheets, and we can just double click on the skill name or weapon name or weapon damage and the rolls happen automatically.  The tokens worked great, the maps and grids and FOW worked great too.  We skyped for our OOC stuff.

I think it is that interaction between the rules and the graphical interface that really makes FGII easy to use.

Every RP game I have ever played, I had to buy the book or three.  I have also bought plenty I haven't played.  I don't think the cost of the VTT should be the most important factor in what VTT you use.  I think the focus of your group is the most important factor and the ease of use of the VTT is what counts.  And don't forget about support for other rule sets or frameworks.


----------



## Merkuri (Sep 13, 2010)

bostoff said:


> I wanted to use Maptools to play RQ but there aren't any frameworks for it.




There are some MapTool fans that love making frameworks.  If you post a request in the MapTool forums you might find someone willing to make a framework for you.


----------



## OnlineDM (Sep 13, 2010)

bostoff said:


> With Maptools you can ignore the rules or use a framework.  The problem is you need to find a framework that someone has volunteered to write or you have to write it yourself.




For what it's worth, I disagree here.  I run D&D 4e in MapTool, and I don't use a framework, nor have I exactly written one of my own.  I've simply written enough to work for my campaign.  I set up some properties (hit points, ability scores, etc.) and then wrote macros for each character that reference those properties.  It's not all automated, nor does it need to be.

Frankly, I think MapTool would work just fine if you used it solely for the maps.  You can have everyone keep track of their own hit points on paper, roll their own dice and announce the results, etc.  I've decided to simplify life for my players by giving them buttons to click to make the attack rolls and damage rolls for them and to increase and decrease their hit points, but that's all optional.

All I'm saying is, don't get locked into the idea of needing a framework.  If you want to play a game online with your friends, the amount of technology you NEED in order to make the game happen is pretty minimal.  For me, voice chat (Skype) and a shared battle mat that everyone can see (MapTool) is enough.  Anything beyond that (automated dice rolling, tracking hit points, etc.) is gravy.


----------



## amerigoV (Sep 13, 2010)

OnlineDM said:


> All I'm saying is, don't get locked into the idea of needing a framework.  If you want to play a game online with your friends, the amount of technology you NEED in order to make the game happen is pretty minimal.  For me, voice chat (Skype) and a shared battle mat that everyone can see (MapTool) is enough.  Anything beyond that (automated dice rolling, tracking hit points, etc.) is gravy.




Also, the more the frameworks and toolsets do, the more it locks you into them - so you lose flexibility. I was looking at the FCII site today. It looks really good. But I use Savage Worlds. I see the core book is coded up, but what about all the different settings? The fun of SW is it can run a variety of things. Each setting has some modest tweeks, a few Edges, etc. I do not know how easy it is to add stuff, but you then get diverted to coding and not gaming.

I have been playing with the SW framework in Maptools. It does about what I want - it tracks initiative (cards) and had the common conditions of the system. Anything more is too much - its up to the players to track their character .

I liked the post about where do you put your value. If you are looking for the battlemat, then Maptools is hard to beat. FC looks like a very cool environment. I was looking at the iTabtop - real nice environment but I am not sure the mapping tools behind it (you can sign up for free, but you cannot loadup/make maps so its hard for me to judge if the money is worth it).


----------



## Zaran (Sep 14, 2010)

bostoff said:


> I just finished reading through this rather informative and interesting thread.
> 
> I have downloaded and played around with Maptools. Yesterday I was able to play using a VTT for the first time using FGII.
> 
> ...




What I like about maptool is that you really don't need frameworks.  you can make macros for die rolls and use squares or hexes for the maps and use any picture you want as a background.   You really don't need to imbed the rules for any game.  You don't have that at the tabletop and don't really need it online.


----------



## wbcreighton (Sep 14, 2010)

> Originally Posted by bostoff : With Maptools you can ignore the rules or use a framework.







OnlineDM said:


> For what it's worth, I disagree here.  I run D&D 4e in MapTool, and I don't use a framework, nor have I exactly written one of my own.  I've simply written enough to work for my campaign.  I set up some properties (hit points, ability scores, etc.) and then wrote macros for each character that reference those properties.  It's not all automated, nor does it need to be.
> 
> Frankly, I think MapTool would work just fine if you used it solely for the maps.  You can have everyone keep track of their own hit points on paper, roll their own dice and announce the results, etc.  I've decided to simplify life for my players by giving them buttons to click to make the attack rolls and damage rolls for them and to increase and decrease their hit points, but that's all optional.
> 
> All I'm saying is, don't get locked into the idea of needing a framework.  If you want to play a game online with your friends, the amount of technology you NEED in order to make the game happen is pretty minimal.  For me, voice chat (Skype) and a shared battle mat that everyone can see (MapTool) is enough.  Anything beyond that (automated dice rolling, tracking hit points, etc.) is gravy.




I think I didn't word my statement clearly.  When I said "with Maptools you can ignore the rules or you can use a framework"  I meant:

In order to use Maptools to run the game you can use it for the maps and handle the rules on your own  or you can use a framework.  In other words unless you find or make a framework adapted to your game rules do not expect it to be able to function the way FGII does.  FGII is fully integrated with the ruleset and that is what you are paying for.

I definitely agree that if you used Maptools to just handle the maps it would be perfect.

When it comes to the technology required to make a game happen I agree with your evaluation.  A VTT program, Skype, a chat log etc is all that is required.

I guess what I am looking at in FGII is a way to use the power of the program to help manage the data.  Recording the chat log, keeping track of the char sheets, and providing an integrated ruleset.  In order to accomplish that with MT you most likely need some kind of framework.


----------



## wbcreighton (Sep 14, 2010)

amerigoV said:


> But I use Savage Worlds. I see the core book is coded up, but what about all the different settings? The fun of SW is it can run a variety of things. Each setting has some modest tweeks, a few Edges, etc. I do not know how easy it is to add stuff, but you then get diverted to coding and not gaming.




I honestly couldn't answer that question.  I have only used FGII as a player once.  I know our GM said he usually plays SW with FGII so he would be a better person to ask.  As with Maptools there is a very active community that modifies the rulesets constantly.



> I have been playing with the SW framework in Maptools. It does about what I want - it tracks initiative (cards) and had the common conditions of the system. Anything more is too much - its up to the players to track their character .




  As a player I would say anything I have to keep track of is too much !  I think if the program can give the players a way of keeping their sheets up to date it actually benefits the GM.




> I liked the post about where do you put your value. If you are looking for the battlemat, then Maptools is hard to beat. FC looks like a very cool environment. I was looking at the iTabtop - real nice environment but I am not sure the mapping tools behind it (you can sign up for free, but you cannot loadup/make maps so its hard for me to judge if the money is worth it).




I agree.  I decided to signup with iTabletop with their $25 lifetime membership but I think they are a long ways away from being able to touch FGII, MT or BG.  There are some games running on it but not many.  The mapping tools are next to nonexistant.  You have to make the maps elsewhere.  No combat tracker yet.  It will be a minimum of a year before I would even try it.


----------



## wbcreighton (Sep 14, 2010)

Zaran said:


> What I like about maptool is that you really don't need frameworks.  you can make macros for die rolls and use squares or hexes for the maps and use any picture you want as a background.   You really don't need to imbed the rules for any game.  You don't have that at the tabletop and don't really need it online.




I agree you don't need frameworks.  You don't need to imbed the rules.

But you normally do have the rule books and character sheets and dice and miniatures and maps and adventure writeup ( behind a screen ) on your table top right ?  Its not just a battle map, miniatures, and dice.

So FGII is attempting to recreate your gaming tabletop, not just your battle map.  I believe the idea behind  MT frameworks, Chartool, Iniattool (sp) is to help recreate a tabletop environment on your computer.

I like the idea of using the computer to help recreate that environment and to do what computers do best: calculate things, organize and save data, and give you cool visuals,  maybe even sound effects, music, video etc.

I think that if you want to compare different VTTs you also have to understand what they are trying to do and what they are capable of.


----------



## wbcreighton (Sep 14, 2010)

OnlineDM said:


> All I'm saying is, don't get locked into the idea of needing a framework.  If you want to play a game online with your friends, the amount of technology you NEED in order to make the game happen is pretty minimal.  For me, voice chat (Skype) and a shared battle mat that everyone can see (MapTool) is enough.  Anything beyond that (automated dice rolling, tracking hit points, etc.) is gravy.




BTW I checked out your blog and I am impressed.  That projector rig for using MT on your tabletop is very impressive.

Now I have no choice but to respond. All I'm saying is don't get locked into the idea that you NEED to spend $500 bucks to rig up a projector to display maps on your kitchen table in order to play a rp game.  I would suggest a piece of graph paper and a pencil or you could splurge on an erasable battlemat.


----------



## amerigoV (Sep 14, 2010)

bostoff said:


> I agree.  I decided to signup with iTabletop with their $25 lifetime membership but I think they are a long ways away from being able to touch FGII, MT or BG.  There are some games running on it but not many.  The mapping tools are next to nonexistant.  You have to make the maps elsewhere.  No combat tracker yet.  It will be a minimum of a year before I would even try it.




I am on the fence if the $25 investment is worth it (since, as you say, it cannot touch the existing VTTs...yet). I love the idea of mapping music and sound effects to a map/room. I am running Ravenloft and that would have been fantastic. But the multi-user liceases are rather expensive and I would hesitate to push players to something now that is not better than using Maptools for free (other than the cool music thing).


----------



## Hussar (Sep 14, 2010)

Sound support is the one thing that I'm very disappointed with for Maptools and about the only reason I might consider using OpenRPG.  I love having soundtracks and sound effects in the game.  Heck, we're connected to the Internet when playing over a VTT, why not make a VTT that takes full advantage of that fact?

sigh.


----------



## OnlineDM (Sep 14, 2010)

bostoff said:


> BTW I checked out your blog and I am impressed.  That projector rig for using MT on your tabletop is very impressive.
> 
> Now I have no choice but to respond. All I'm saying is don't get locked into the idea that you NEED to spend $500 bucks to rig up a projector to display maps on your kitchen table in order to play a rp game.  I would suggest a piece of graph paper and a pencil or you could splurge on an erasable battlemat.




Thanks for the praise!  And I absolutely agree that shelling out for a projector does NOT make sense for most people.  I do have a Chessex battlemat and had also printed out maps on paper before, and they worked just fine for my tabletop games.

I had been having so much fun using MapTool for my online game and I had just gotten a bonus at work and I figured, hey, you only live once!  Let's get a projector!  Plus now I don't need to collect monster minis since I can use virtual monsters. 

Also, to your earlier point, I see where you were coming from now.  You WANT your online gaming program to handle the rules for you, in which case you would indeed need a framework in MapTool.  I can live without the program handling the rules (if it handles TOO much it feels like we're playing a video game instead of a tabletop RPG), but that's just me.


----------



## IronWolf (Sep 14, 2010)

Hussar said:


> Sound support is the one thing that I'm very disappointed with for Maptools and about the only reason I might consider using OpenRPG.  I love having soundtracks and sound effects in the game.  Heck, we're connected to the Internet when playing over a VTT, why not make a VTT that takes full advantage of that fact?




I'm not sure if you're using a VoIP application, but I've been able to play soundtracks and sound effects over Ventrilo by having a second instance of winamp running that is joined to the Vent server and whatever is playing in winamp is heard in the Vent channel.  I've only tested this and not used it in actual gameplay, but it seemed to work well.


----------



## wbcreighton (Sep 14, 2010)

*Sound*



IronWolf said:


> I'm not sure if you're using a VoIP application, but I've been able to play soundtracks and sound effects over Ventrilo by having a second instance of winamp running that is joined to the Vent server and whatever is playing in winamp is heard in the Vent channel.  I've only tested this and not used it in actual gameplay, but it seemed to work well.




That sounds very inventive.  We used Skype in our FG session and I thought it really helped speed things along.  I don't think FG offers any support for music or sound effects in the program.

I noticed that Battle Grounds mentions support for sound effects and such But I have never used the program and I'm not sure how it works.

I am always worried about having too many applications running at the same time.  It introduces another thing that can go wrong or create a program conflict on your computer.


I am curious for those of you out there who have tried multiple programs for VTTs what features would you pick from each program to be in your "dream VTT".

I am thinking that to start the mapping functions of Maptools.

Then add the video chat and sound capabilities of itabletop

add in the data management and ruleset handling ability of Fantasy Grounds

I don't know what Battlegrounds does best ?


----------



## Hadrian the Builder (Sep 15, 2010)

Are there any VTT's that manage LOS in accordance with 4E rules? (grid based vision) That's what I want. Tokens, map, 4e Vision, and templates for area effects.


----------



## Hussar (Sep 16, 2010)

Hadrian, refresh my memory on 4e LOS rules.  IIRC, it's, if you can draw an unblocked line from any corner of your square to any corner of the target square, you can see it, right?

Maptool does do this actually.  You can set player views based on their vision limits (torchlight, sunrod, whatever) and then in the token layer of the map (I think it's the token layer, it's been a while since I watched the instructions) you can add invisible lines that will block LOS.  So, you could trace out your dungeon map with sight lines, and then, when a door is opened, erase out the door square and the players will only see through that opening.

It does work very well, particularly when you set it for individual views and one player can see something and no one else can.


----------



## Hadrian the Builder (Sep 16, 2010)

From what I can tell (messing with the latest version of MapTool, and still learning about all the settings), MapTool does a version of line of sight that resembles ray-tracing from the center of the square the token is in. It's clearly a  useful approximation, and better than nothing, but it's not 4E specific.

True 4e LOS, (and all other templated area-based events) is drawn from the 4 corners of the square, not the center, and is blocky, and cover, concelament, or total concealment are determined by the number of corners you can draw an unobstructed line to.


----------



## Griogre (Sep 21, 2010)

amerigoV said:


> Also, the more the frameworks and toolsets do, the more it locks you into them - so you lose flexibility. I was looking at the FCII site today. It looks really good. But I use Savage Worlds. I see the core book is coded up, but what about all the different settings? The fun of SW is it can run a variety of things. Each setting has some modest tweeks, a few Edges, etc. I do not know how easy it is to add stuff, but you then get diverted to coding and not gaming.




Sorry for the late reply but the ENWorld notice was getting caught by my spam filter.  FG has a number of SW settings/scenarios available for purchase:  https://www.fantasygrounds.com/store/?sys=3&pub=-1&typ=-1&x=12&y=18&sort=4

I agree with you, while I generally like 4E for Fantasy RP, I very much like SW for other settings.  Full disclosure I converted some of the SW products being sold to FG.  I will say once you have the core ruleset its not difficult to add content.  For the adventure it would be no harder for text than at a face to face game (IE tons to just winging it).  The things you would have to add to FG would be any new NPCs/Monsters and Maps.

You can get more elaborate if you wish but you certainly don't have to.  Here's a reskin of the FG Desktop I did for PotSM: http://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10639


----------



## amerigoV (Sep 21, 2010)

Thanks for the info, Griogre! Always good to know the options.


----------

