# The Dungeons & Dragons Virtual Table



## weem (Nov 18, 2010)

Here we go...

http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/26286405/The_Dungeons__Dragons_Virtual_Table

"....Later today, Thursday November 18th, invites will be going out for the friends and family portion of the Dungeons & Dragons Virtual Table beta. The focus of this stage of the beta will be usability and gathering basic feedback about the D&D VT. It’s important to note that those invited to the beta are able to talk about their impressions of the D&D VT, so don’t be surprised if you see posts, blogs, and screen shots about their experiences. Here’s an example of what you might see:..."


----------



## mudbunny (Nov 18, 2010)

I love being a VCL right about now.


----------



## Festivus (Nov 18, 2010)

mudbunny said:


> I love being a VCL right about now.




...and I love being right (sometimes).  I still owe you a beer whenever I run into you, you make sure to hold me to it.


----------



## Insight (Nov 18, 2010)

VTT FAQ said:
			
		

> *Q: Does the VT integrate with other web-based insider tools like the Character Builder or the upcoming web-based Monster Builder?*
> A: At this point the VT does not integrate with our web-based tools.




Web-based Monster Builder!


----------



## mudbunny (Nov 18, 2010)

Remember a couple of weeks/months ago when I was asked if the web-CB was what I was really, really excited about??


----------



## webrunner (Nov 18, 2010)

it says "Users will need access to the rules and information found in the Dungeons & Dragons tabletop Roleplaying Game Core Rules in order to use the D&D VT. "

Note it does not say "Users will need access to D&D Insider in order to use the D&D VT."

Strange how it doesn't mention insider _at all_ except for the beta test.  Also no mention in the FAQ..

If this ends up only needing insider for the DM, that would be super-awesome.


----------



## Maccwar (Nov 18, 2010)

Wow, looks like a prettier version of Maptool*. 

(* insert VTT of your choice)


----------



## The_Baldman (Nov 18, 2010)

mudbunny said:


> Remember a couple of weeks/months ago when I was asked if the web-CB was what I was really, really excited about??




Try keeping it quiet for a year plus. There are things that suck worse then being a VCL LOL (and peeps - knowing things is kinda cool - knowing and not being able to talk about it with anybody in your same time zone?  Sucks more then the kinda cool part most of the time).


----------



## renau1g (Nov 18, 2010)

mudbunny said:


> I love being a VCL right about now.




So....how do we get in on that beta action


----------



## the Jester (Nov 18, 2010)

Taking a look at the FAQ, I see one worrisome thing right off the bat:



			
				FAQ said:
			
		

> Q: What is the pricing going to be on the finished product?
> A: We have not finalized any pricing decisions at this time.




Sounds like it may not be offered as part of DDI.

COME ON NOW.


----------



## Raunalyn (Nov 18, 2010)

*Perks*

I knew it!! I was pretty sure that this would be the next step after the online CB. I can definitely see where this is all going now, and I am now officially excited.

How do I get in on that beta action?


----------



## Stoat (Nov 18, 2010)

I've been playing online using one VTT or another for about 5 years.  

The VTT I'm using now (d20 Pro) lets me import my own .png's or .jpeg's to use as maps/tokens.  Its got a nifty tile feature that makes it super easy to build maps on the fly or to customize existing maps.  It tracks initiative for me.  It handles the math for attack and damage rolls for me.  It's necessary to do a little data entry when I add a new monster to the program, but the process only takes a few minutes, and it saves a library of every NPC I've ever used.  The program is stable and rarely crashes.  On the rare occasion when it does crash, it gets back up and running quickly and usually without losing any game data.  It took a while to configure my router to allow my players past my firewall, but after I did, I've never had any problems getting folks connected to the game.  I think I paid $30 for it three or four years ago.

I sincerely hope that WotC can do better.  Frankly, I'm not holding my breath.


----------



## mudbunny (Nov 18, 2010)

Raunalyn said:


> How do I get in on that beta action?






renau1g said:


> So....how do we get in on that beta action




Right now, from what I am hearing from WotC, the initial stages is a simple Friends and Family beta. After that, there will be invites sent out to Insiders.

From Trevor



> Hey all. I see a few questions about the future step of the beta where I mentioned we'll be inviting D&D Insiders. To be honest, we don't know yet how many we'll be inviting. I know that at some point we'd like to invite all D&D Insiders to some portion of the beta, but I don't know if that's every going to be a reality. We need to get through this first stage of the beta, or at least further into it, before we know exactly how many D&D Insiders we're going to invite and when.


----------



## keterys (Nov 18, 2010)

mudbunny said:


> I love being a VCL right about now.



So... did you already get your invite? Impressions? Are you restricted to playing with 100% invited people at the moment (ie, can't use your online group)?

Do other VCLs automatically get, or should I poke someone. 

Anyhow, I run weekly VT games and I'm thinking I'd love to see how this works. I suspect two of the people in the game will have invites but not the others.

This is one of the few things that I am pleasantly surprised on - was not expecting this at all anymore.


----------



## Festivus (Nov 18, 2010)

Raunalyn said:


> *Perks*
> 
> I knew it!! I was pretty sure that this would be the next step after the online CB. I can definitely see where this is all going now, and I am now officially excited.
> 
> How do I get in on that beta action?




You can click on this link here:

https://accounts.wizards.com/AmLogi...ds.cfg/php/enduser/doc_serve.php?2=betasubmit


----------



## the Jester (Nov 18, 2010)

keterys said:


> This is one of the few things that I am pleasantly surprised on - was not expecting this at all anymore.




Same here, and it's the thing I was looking forward to the most out of all the pre-release talk. 

I would love to play a game with my group of old, now spread throughout the world, on a good VTT. 

I sincerely hope it will be a part of DDI- that's something that might make the difference in whether I renew next spring if the new CB isn't up to snuff yet, there's no new Monster Builder tool and the content of Dungeon and Dragon hasn't picked up.


----------



## Ktulu (Nov 18, 2010)

Yeah, that's pretty awesome.  I don't have a lot of use for the VT, as we always get together, and I have plenty of tiles, maps, minis...but this is still damn cool.

My two oldest gaming buddies recently moved just too far to make it to regular games.  This may cause us to get back together for regular sessions.


----------



## mudbunny (Nov 18, 2010)

keterys said:


> So... did you already get your invite? Impressions? Are you restricted to playing with 100% invited people at the moment (ie, can't use your online group)?




The invites haven't gone out yet, I think they are sending them out this afternoon PST.



> Do other VCLs automatically get, or should I poke someone.




I have no idea if they are being sent out to all VCLs automatically, or only a select few.


----------



## Riley (Nov 18, 2010)

(From a guy who's main reason for canceling his DDI subscription was the lack of interesting adventures and fluff articles in Dungeon and Dragon...)

I have an honest question for people who want/wanted (or are already using) a VT: where do you see this fitting into your games?

EDIT: Never mind; I guess that question would be better as its own thread.


----------



## TerraDave (Nov 18, 2010)

I like that they are going with something that will work this time.


Or should I say hope?



(jesterdog: I _hope_ they mean nonDDI will have a way to access)


----------



## Sunseeker (Nov 18, 2010)

Hmmm, looks interesting.  Here's hoping it'll turn out good.

Can't say I'll use it, I do like playing in person best.


----------



## renau1g (Nov 18, 2010)

Riley said:


> (
> I have an honest question for people who want/wanted (or are already using) a VT: where do you see this fitting into your games?




I would like to game with members who've moved onto other cities that I can't currently play with. If it linked in PC's and Monsters so I wouldn't need to create macros (like in Map tools) ... wunderbar


----------



## Jack99 (Nov 18, 2010)

Dear WotC - how about fixing the tools we are already paying for and that are currently not working or not updated.

In case I am not clear, I am referring to the Character Builder and the Monster Maker.

Thanks in advance.


----------



## IronWolf (Nov 18, 2010)

Jack99 said:


> Dear WotC - how about fixing the tools we are already paying for and that are currently not working or not updated.
> 
> In case I am not clear, I am referring to the Character Builder and the Monster Maker.
> 
> Thanks in advance.




I find the timing of this announcement amusing.  Uproar over the online CB, I can see the PR folks scrambling and then "Hey look!  Bright and shiny thing over here, look!"  and suddenly people turn their attention away from the CB and to the new VT!  Marvelous!


----------



## the Jester (Nov 18, 2010)

TerraDave said:


> (jesterdog: I _hope_ they mean nonDDI will have a way to access)




Me too. Also from the FAQ:



> Q: What versions of D&D is the VT designed to be used with?
> A: The character and monster information storage portion of the VT is set up to be used in 4th edition Dungeons and Dragons.* The rest of the tools can be used with any edition.*




That's promising- a nod in support of older editions. It might help them gain a little revenue from non-4e players.


----------



## MatthewJHanson (Nov 18, 2010)

I hope this turns into a useful functional program. I really do.

Unfortunately I have been disappointed by WOTC's digital offerings enough times that I'm not getting my hopes up.

Also I think the timing is interesting, coming so soon after the disappointing (for me at least) character builder release. I wonder if it is on purpose.


----------



## BobTheNob (Nov 18, 2010)

Is it browser based, or client side?

Anyhoo, damn. I write and maintain my own virtual tabletop, but that does look good. I wonder whether there will be a change over.

Key points for me:
1. *Support for house rules* : If this things doesnt have good support for house rules, we wont be touching it. We dont have a whole hell of a lot, but they are important. Reality is every group has house rules, and lets hope wizards can figure that out (...this time)
2. DM Flexibility : If there is one thing I have found using a VTT setup, as a DM you need to be able to adapt. My own software I had as a "do everything" approach (it did all the number crunching itself), but I found it un-usable as circusmtance is far too quirky. I ended up changing the whole thing to an open control and built in a reminder system. To Wizards : FLEXIBILITY
3. Dont make your subscribers pay more for this. Seriously, we subscribe, you have our money, and the question you have to ask is whether you want to milk your existing base harder, or expand your base. Please dont charge extra for this, cause there is no way known you will get extra out of me.


----------



## Shemeska (Nov 18, 2010)

Honestly it looks like a mapping / tile tool with some added features, and a step back from the ideas and form behind the original 3d VTT (for better or for worse).

Timing on the announcement strikes me as dubious. Also the question of it being part of the DDI subscription, which such a program was always assumed to be part of when or if it came out. If it eventually comes out as something extra to pay for, that may not go over well with folks who may have subscribed long-term.


----------



## OchreJelly (Nov 18, 2010)

wow I'm pretty surprised to see this!  Conceptially this seems very different from those early tech-demos:
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWZ2WdeTo1M]YouTube - Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition: Part 2[/ame]

Not that I mind.  I'm a usability-first kinda guy and having token monsters is easier than having 3d models .


----------



## Scribble (Nov 18, 2010)

Shemeska said:


> Honestly it looks like a mapping / tile tool with some added features, and a step back from the ideas and form behind the original 3d VTT (for better or for worse).
> 
> Timing on the announcement strikes me as dubious. Also the question of it being part of the DDI subscription, which such a program was always assumed to be part of when or if it came out. If it eventually comes out as something extra to pay for, that may not go over well with folks who may have subscribed long-term.




Shrug- they probably re-did it as an actually obtainable goal.. Which is good. 

As for timing- I hink it's pretty obvious they choose to announce it now as a way to get people a little less frustrated...

I kind of wonder though if the beta testing isn't really any different then they ever do... Only they just told everyone about it instead of keeping it in house under NDAs.


----------



## Stumblewyk (Nov 18, 2010)

Just going by the text in the FAQ that states that the newly announced VTT does not integrate with the CB or the online Monster Builder (yay!)...I have to ask the question...

Why?  Why do this at all?  There are applications out there that already provide functionality for this.  And those applications do it awfully well, from what I've gathered.

Couple the fact that they say that it doesn't integrate with their other online tools with the fact that they haven't decided on a price structure for it yet, and I have to wonder if it's going to be part of DDI at all.  If it's not, then it might not integrate with the online CB and MB, which means you could be paying for a D&D licensed VTT that does nothing that you can't ALREADY do with pre-existing software. =/

So, that means only one of two things:
#1: When it's all said and done, it WILL integrate the with the CB and MB.
#2: It won't integrate, and we're all left scratching our heads as Wizards tries to force their way into an already crowded market of VTTs.

For the record, I'm leaning towards it integrating with the existing (and soon to come) tools.  I'm just confused why they'd use the language they used in the FAQ.


----------



## BobTheNob (Nov 18, 2010)

Scribble said:


> Shrug- they probably re-did it as an actually obtainable goal.. Which is good.
> 
> As for timing- I hink it's pretty obvious they choose to announce it now as a way to get people a little less frustrated...




Absolutely on point 1. Would far prefer a feature packed VTT than a 3d one. Keep the technology simple, but the functionality rich.

Point 2. This is probably *part of* why they made the change to an online builder in the first place. That the whole "server side" characters concept supports what they envisage for the VTT.

Its funny, I can imagine that they probably didnt want to announce VTT just yet, but they needed to assuage the growing anger a bit.

Actually, I have a rather massive question. This is obviously going to support multiplayer with internet support right? Are they going to require every session to be a subscriber? Will they offer "guest passes" on non interactive "viewing sessions"?


----------



## DEFCON 1 (Nov 18, 2010)

Shemeska said:


> If it eventually comes out as something extra to pay for, that may not go over well with folks who may have subscribed long-term.




Oh, that doesn't matter... folks here on ENWorld will be bitching about it regardless of what happens when it comes out.  

Hell, the announcement's not even three hours old and already there are people declaring they aren't going to use it unless Features X, Y & Z are a part of it.

WotC just can't Win.  Or even Place or Show with some people.  LOL.


----------



## Bagpuss (Nov 18, 2010)

Maccwar said:


> Wow, looks like a prettier version of Maptool*.
> 
> (* insert VTT of your choice)




Or less pretty version of Fantasy Grounds?


----------



## DEFCON 1 (Nov 18, 2010)

Stumblewyk said:


> For the record, I'm leaning towards it integrating with the existing (and soon to come) tools.  I'm just confused why they'd use the language they used in the FAQ.




Simple.  They aren't going to announce anything that isn't pretty far along in the development process just in case something massively horrible goes wrong and they can't complete it.  The fact we still have people throwing the Gleemax VTT in their faces every time there's a screw-up is all WotC needs to keep their mouths shut until they're ready for at least a beta test.


----------



## ProfessorCirno (Nov 18, 2010)

Bagpuss said:


> Or less pretty version of Fantasy Grounds?




Neither - it's a version of multiple popular and free online tabletop applications, only they're talking about charging you to use it, and it's fresh on the heels of an absolute coding disaster.

*But I'm sure this time it'll go well!*


----------



## TerraDave (Nov 18, 2010)

OchreJelly said:


> wow I'm pretty surprised to see this!  Conceptially this seems very different from those early tech-demos:
> YouTube - Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition: Part 2
> 
> Not that I mind.  I'm a usability-first kinda guy and having token monsters is easier than having 3d models .




Thats why I said I liked it. 

All that crashing at D&DXP 08. So much crashing. And the cute little wotcies enduring through it.


----------



## Stumblewyk (Nov 18, 2010)

DEFCON 1 said:


> Simple.  They aren't going to announce anything that isn't pretty far along in the development process just in case something massively horrible goes wrong and they can't complete it.  The fact we still have people throwing the Gleemax VTT in their faces every time there's a screw-up is all WotC needs to keep their mouths shut until they're ready for at least a beta test.



 I agree, and thought the same thing.  But if that was the case, then what is wrong with saying "it doesn't currently integrate with our existing online tools, but such functionality is intended to be in place for final release?"

It says "yeah, it doesn't do it *now*, but we'd like it to, and that's our goal."

Only the most brain damaged among us would leap at that and instantly go "IT'S GONNA INTEGRATE!"

Again, I understand the perceived need to play a constant game of CYA, but I think they could have loosened their belts just a _*smidge*_ on this one. =/


----------



## Caerin (Nov 18, 2010)

I've already tried and failed to not get my hopes up.  Oddly enough, I don't need a VTT anymore, really, but I can think of some occasions when it would be useful.

I am glad they announced it, and I'm glad that those in the beta are able to talk about their experiences. +1 for increased transparency.


----------



## darjr (Nov 18, 2010)

DEFCON 1 said:


> Simple.  They aren't going to announce anything that isn't pretty far along in the development process just in case something massively horrible goes wrong and they can't complete it.  The fact we still have people throwing the Gleemax VTT in their faces every time there's a screw-up is all WotC needs to keep their mouths shut until they're ready for at least a beta test.




Which is the exact wrong thing to do. The right thing to do is to keep the lines of communication open. Clamming up is furthering the mistake.

Edit: to add that they don't have to blab, but they should be talking to their customers, beta test is far to late a stage to find out that your customers will hate what you've produced.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Nov 18, 2010)

If it's better then GameTable, maybe it will be fine. I am skeptical, but the fact that they were working on 2 (3?) applications actually instead of just one might make me see things in a more positive light. Still not a good decision to do that. Polishing the Online CB (and monster BUilder even?) to 100 % quality would make more sense to me.


----------



## fanboy2000 (Nov 18, 2010)

IronWolf said:


> I can see the PR folks scrambling and then "Hey look!  Bright and shiny thing over here, look!"  and suddenly people turn their attention away from the CB and to the new VT!  Marvelous!






Shemeska said:


> Timing on the announcement strikes me as dubious.



I think the timing is meant to coincide with the recent release of the online CB, but I don't think it's a reaction to it's lukewarm reception. Rather, I think everyone involved knew that the change to online only wasn't going to go over well. So they planed to announce the change, implement it, and then announce the beta for the VTT.


----------



## Scribble (Nov 18, 2010)

Stumblewyk said:


> Again, I understand the perceived need to play a constant game of CYA, but I think they could have loosened their belts just a _*smidge*_ on this one. =/




It's neither. 

If you look at the FAQ you'll see everything it talks about is what it currently IS and is not, and not what it will be, or might be.

It's a good way to do it. They're not being completely silent, but they're also not boasting with "promises" they're simply telling you what the current situation is.


----------



## Stoat (Nov 18, 2010)

Shemeska said:


> Honestly it looks like a mapping / tile tool with some added features, and a step back from the ideas and form behind the original 3d VTT (for better or for worse).




I prefer a top-down 2d display to the 3d version WotC was talking about.  Not only do I think it looks better, I think it makes it more likely that WotC will allow users to use custom maps and tokens.



DEFCON 1 said:


> Hell, the announcement's not even three hours old and already there are people declaring they aren't going to use it unless Features X, Y & Z are a part of it.




The fact is there are a half-dozen or so different VTT's currently available at prices ranging from free to cheap.  If those VTT's are already offering Features X, Y & Z, WotC will need to do the same to compete.


----------



## fanboy2000 (Nov 18, 2010)

> Edit: to add that they don't have to blab, but they should be talking to their customers, beta test is far to late a stage to find out that your customers will hate what you've produced.



This edit changes my answer substantially. 

There's talking to your customers via press releases or other public announcements, and then there's market research. The problem with public announcements is that the feedback isn't as complete as Wizards might need to make the product better. For example, the feedback might be overly positive (hard to believe sometimes, but true) or overly negative. Also, many things Wizards might want to know before going forward on something may not be addressed by customers talking off the cuff.

As for a beta test being far to late to get feedback, I disagree wholeheartedly. First, it's always easier to get feedback on something concrete than abstract. Second, given that two people have already posted that they knew about this, it seems likely that they have gotten feedback on the program, but not from the public at large, which is the best way to go about doing things, I think.

Why? Because any statement or question from a company is going to be examined from the perspective of an announcement of a possible (or actual) product or service from potential customers. People will start forming opinions on the product immediately and possibly buying decisions. You don't want people to hate your product based on an announcement particularly when you don't have a product to point to and promote.

Many companies like Apple and Google don't announce products until they're ready to either ship, or in some kind of open beta. (Google in particular is famous for long beta testing periods.)


----------



## BobTheNob (Nov 18, 2010)

DEFCON 1 said:


> Oh, that doesn't matter... folks here on ENWorld will be bitching about it regardless of what happens when it comes out.
> 
> Hell, the announcement's not even three hours old and already there are people declaring they aren't going to use it unless Features X, Y & Z are a part of it.
> 
> WotC just can't Win.  Or even Place or Show with some people.  LOL.



Hey I didnt complain with the CB. I dont think it was a disaster at all and thoroughly look forward to when a few of the kinks are ironed out. I actually think it is a very promising tool.

That said, yes, I will let WOTC know what things would prevent me using this new offering. Fact is, we are already using VTT software (which I wrote and maintain), but an "official" offering with direct 4e support *may *win me over.

So I will let WOTC know what my feature X, Y and Z are, so they have a chance to consider work vs reward and whether or not to get said feature in.

Im not going to direct my nerd rage at them at all, Im not going to flame or make pointless threats. If they choose to implement the features our group needs, great. If they dont, I wont use it, and out group stays with current setup. No harm, no foul.

Do you think WOTC doesnt want to know what features the community desires?


----------



## knifie_sp00nie (Nov 18, 2010)

Anybody notice that it's written in Java and not Silverlight? That probably means the work was farmed out. I might even speculate that they forked or licensed the code for Maptool, which is already mature and written in java. The screenshot looks like it could be Maptool with a custom UI.


----------



## darjr (Nov 18, 2010)

fanboy2000 said:


> This edit changes my answer substantially.
> 
> There's talking to your customers via press releases or other public announcements, and then there's market research. The problem with public announcements is that the feedback isn't as complete as Wizards might need to make the product better. For example, the feedback might be overly positive (hard to believe sometimes, but true) or overly negative. Also, many things Wizards might want to know before going forward on something may not be addressed by customers talking off the cuff.
> 
> ...




I do get that.

Specifically, the clamming up after the first VTT debacle was what they shouldn't have done. The silence while 4e was being developed and tested was the wrong way to go. All in my own opinion, of coarse. I do think that they are trying to not clam up and keep the lines of communications going even in the light of the latest heat.

See mudbunny's actions during this whole thing. More of WotC should be like that. In the midst of the storm he's doing yeoman's work.


----------



## mudbunny (Nov 18, 2010)

To the best of my knowledge, the plan for the VT is to gradually introduce features in the beta testing. My guess (and this is a complete guess, based on no knkowledge and requiring no tapdancing) is that the first part will involve them working out the connection issues as well as the functionality, like DM tools, player tools, etc. The next phase will involve communication with the Character Builder. And then communication with the web-based Monster Builder. (You *did* catch that in the FAQ...right??). Finally they will open it up to stress testing with lots and lots of people before they push it gold.


----------



## OnlineDM (Nov 18, 2010)

knifie_sp00nie said:


> Anybody notice that it's written in Java and not Silverlight? That probably means the work was farmed out. I might even speculate that they forked or licensed the code for Maptool, which is already mature and written in java. The screenshot looks like it could be Maptool with a custom UI.




If they did this, I would applaud them.  I don't know anything about intellectual property or the license under which MapTool is released, but if it's "free software" then I think WotC would be SMART to take that successful framework and build upon it.

Mind you, I'm guessing that's not what they've actually done, but their programmers would have to be idiots to not look at the successful virtual table top programs out there for ideas about the best ways to handle various issues.

Me, I'm just hoping to get an invitation to the beta at some point!  I'm a DDI subscriber and I run a weekly game in MapTool.  I'd love to kick the tires on the new program to see how it works and to offer my input on how to improve it.


----------



## ProfessorCirno (Nov 18, 2010)

mudbunny said:


> TAnd then communication with the web-based Monster Builder. (You *did* catch that in the FAQ...right??)




Yes, I was just hoping it was a fluke or joke, since the Monster Builder was the second most useful thing besides CB, and *hahahahaha welp*, we know what happened to the CB.


----------



## JoeGKushner (Nov 18, 2010)

I need to spread some xp around. Can someone hit Weem for me?


----------



## Canor Morum (Nov 18, 2010)

w00t!


----------



## Mirtek (Nov 18, 2010)

So they try to make a cheap copy of maptools now? While they're going to fail, at least they did pick a good role model


----------



## delericho (Nov 18, 2010)

If this works as advertised, it will be awesome. Indeed, the VTT is the one tool that would persuade me to maintain an active DDI subscription.

However, I will believe it when I see it, and maybe not even then.


----------



## Mirtek (Nov 18, 2010)

DEFCON 1 said:


> Simple.  They aren't going to announce anything that isn't pretty far along in the development process just in case something massively horrible goes wrong and they can't complete it.



 Didn't the online CB show that in such a case they just release it anyway?


----------



## Jack99 (Nov 18, 2010)

JoeGKushner said:


> I need to spread some xp around. Can someone hit Weem for me?




Done


----------



## DaveMage (Nov 18, 2010)

the Jester said:


> That's promising- a nod in support of older editions. It might help them gain a little revenue from non-4e players.




Such as the 5e players by the time the bugs are worked out.


----------



## fanboy2000 (Nov 18, 2010)

darjr said:


> the clamming up after the first VTT debacle was what they shouldn't have done.



Actually, I think it was the right way to go. After the VTT was scrapped, they did an poll of their customer base and figured out that a working character builder and monster builder should be their first priority. They announced that, then announced the CB, then delivered.

By doing this, shortening the time between announcement and delivery, they started to repair the breach. They then repeated this with the Monster Builder. Then they preformed monthly updates.

The problem, IMHO, wasn't the lack of communication, it was the monthly updates to the CB and MB. Ironically, they failed to learn form (of all people) Code Monkey Publishing. CMP, if you don't remember or otherwise don't know, took over development of E-Tools after Fluid botched the job up. CMP did two things: 1) Improved the E-Tools over time, adding more functionality that should have been in the 1.0 release; and 2) sold data sets of published books for both E-Tools and PCGen.

Had they sold data sets from the beginning, there wouldn't have been a sudden move to online applications, and no communication problem from lack of warning.

"But", I hear someone say, "what about a continuous income stream? Isn't that what Wizards really wants?" Well, there are plenty of way wizards can get a steady income from players. Online periodicals and continuous compendium access are probably the most obvious.



> The silence while 4e was being developed and tested was the wrong way to go.



Again, I disagree. Once you announce something to the public, you make a commitment to it. It would have derailed the other books they were publishing pre-anouncment. As it was, it was many, many, long months between the announcement and the release. Frankly, I think they should have announced it the day it was released. "Hey guys, new edition! Have fun!"



> See mudbunny's actions during this whole thing. More of WotC should be like that. In the midst of the storm he's doing yeoman's work.



Mudbunny runs around the forums saying he either doesn't know what's going on and is speculating like the rest of us, or saying his NDA prohibits him from saying anything. That's pretty much what Wizard's employees do. No offense, he's a good guy, but so are WotC_Trevor and Mike Mearls.


----------



## Xris Robin (Nov 18, 2010)

Given that I'm using Maptool right now, and it's free... WotC would have to make the most awesome VTT ever to get me to pay for it.

I mean, nice GUI is nice, but it'll take more than that to impress me.  And I'm not certain anything could get me to subscribe to DDI for it.


----------



## tentfox (Nov 18, 2010)

For me to get all my party to use this has to surpass, not just equal, the free current offerings.

To equal them it needs to be as good as deviant null's 4e framework for maptool in terms of handling auto rollers (I would like to see implement and critical damage fixed as well), ease of applying damage and healing and tracking of conditions. As well of tracking power usage, etc  for characters.

To be better than it in any meaningful way, that is enough to be able to get my party to start subscribing to the DDi (which this better be part of with no additional fees), then it needs to use the strength of the other online tools. I would at a minimum need to be able to pull any character, any monster (both from the compendium or online monster builder) and any dungeon tile and just drop it in the tool with no extra work. Currently it takes hours to prepare adventures in maptool for this very reason and to mitigate that work would be a god send.


----------



## blalien (Nov 18, 2010)

I've been a loyal Wizards of the Coast customer for fifty years, but this is the final straw.  I'm going to quit D&D forever, burn all my Wizards products, and get a real hobby like knitting.

By which I mean, I might use it if the price is reasonable and the maps are better than Maptool.


----------



## Zaukrie (Nov 19, 2010)

Not all that interested in this. An updated monster builder (that works better than teh CB) would be nice, though. Really nice.


----------



## Nikosandros (Nov 19, 2010)

delericho said:


> If this works as advertised, it will be awesome. Indeed, the VTT is the one tool that would persuade me to maintain an active DDI subscription.



The FAQ states that they haven't yet decided about the pricing. This seems to me a rather strong hint that the VT won't be part of the current DDI subscription.


----------



## catastrophic (Nov 19, 2010)

Maccwar said:


> Wow, looks like a prettier version of Maptool*.
> (* insert VTT of your choice)



I run maptool games and they look a lot prettier than that, because you can freely import maps and other art into maptool to use in your games.
Unless this program can do that, there's no contest.


----------



## Dragonblade (Nov 19, 2010)

As a DDI subscriber, I expect this to be bundled with my subscription. If WotC wants to offer a separate subscription model for those who want the table only, I don't mind.

And this doesn't change the fact that the builder still needs a lot of fixing.


----------



## mattcolville (Nov 19, 2010)

I blogged about this.

Annoyingly, I just dropped $150 for the Fantasy Grounds 2 Ultimate License and I'm beginning to regret it. It's incredibly hard to figure out, I've spent a week on it so far and been unable to smoothly get a player into it and playing. Which is alarming for a paid app, and $150 at that. 

So I'm sorta excited about this. I'll deeply, deeply regret choosing now to buy FG2, but at least I'll be able to get people into a game quickly and play.

That being said, if we ever get to the point where my players can easily get into one my game and play, I can see how it could be superior, in that it's more like a real table onto which I can drop multiple maps, player handouts, people write notes, share them. All sorts of stuff.

I just wish the damned thing worked.


----------



## Dragonblade (Nov 19, 2010)

And for the love of god, please no microtransactions to buy tokens and such.


----------



## AbdulAlhazred (Nov 19, 2010)

Yeah, there are a few basic resemblances to Maptool. I'd say personally, having used Maptool for most of my 4e games that integration with things like CB and MB IS the key. It should look pretty good, but that is the easy part really. The hard parts are good use case based design to make things go smoothly in-game and good integration to make the DM's job easier. I should be able to create an encounter with this and MB in 15 minutes. 

It is true too that Maptool provides a pretty decent bar to have to pass. At its current level of development there is a lot of good stuff there (marred by some annoying UI shortcomings but even so pretty nice). Again, what Maptool REALLY lacks is tight integration with tools like MB. You CAN import monsters into Maptool with the right macro sets, but it is a lot of fiddly work. There's not too much point in another VTT that still requires all of that.


----------



## Dragonblade (Nov 19, 2010)

mattcolville said:


> I blogged about this.
> 
> Annoyingly, I just dropped $150 for the Fantasy Grounds 2 Ultimate License and I'm beginning to regret it. It's incredibly hard to figure out, I've spent a week on it so far and been unable to smoothly get a player into it and playing. Which is alarming for a paid app, and $150 at that.
> 
> ...




Ironically I posted before reading your blog entry. If WotC starts nickel and diming me for access to this or that class, or this or that token, I'm done.

Where I think WotC can legitimately charge a microtransaction fee that I would support, is lets say they release premade adventure modules for the VT with all the necessary maps already tiled out and the tokens pre laid out and bundled for each encounter. Thats cool with me. But I shouldn't have to pay 99 cents for a beholder token or for access to a given tileset. 

ALL WotC tiles and monster tokens should be standard with the VT. And access to the VT should be included in DDI subs.

After all this is something that DDI subscribers were promised way back when it was first started. Trying to charge extra for the VT, especially after the online character builder debacle would be an outrage.


----------



## MerricB (Nov 19, 2010)

Well, at least some invitations have gone out... because I've got one. 

I hope I'll have enough free time to participate, although the time zones might get me in the end.

Cheers!


----------



## Solvarn (Nov 19, 2010)

*Congrats*

Congrats to WotC, looks like things turned around some time ago for Insider. It is good to see that the value is increasing, although it hasn't been announced if this is part of Insider or a standalone app.


----------



## Scribble (Nov 19, 2010)

MerricB said:


> Well, at least some invitations have gone out... because I've got one.
> 
> I hope I'll have enough free time to participate, although the time zones might get me in the end.
> 
> Cheers!




Maybe they want you to be an optimist again?


----------



## MerricB (Nov 19, 2010)

Scribble said:


> Maybe they want you to be an optimist again?




One can hope so! 

Honestly, I'm not displeased by the new CB. I've managed to get it to work (mostly) and I'll be using a character sheet created by it tonight for my D&D game.

However, the _handling_ of it? Oh, my! 

Cheers!


----------



## tentfox (Nov 19, 2010)

Dragonblade said:


> And for the love of god, please no microtransactions to buy tokens and such.




Yeah that was the most retarded idea they had for the original VTT, charging people for extra virtual miniatures. Do that again, and I am out of DDI on principal.


----------



## Kralin Thornberry (Nov 19, 2010)

Solvarn said:


> Congrats to WotC, looks like things turned around some time ago for Insider. It is good to see that the value is increasing, although it hasn't been announced if this is part of Insider or a standalone app.




Actually, for those of us who don't play online, there is no real value to a VTT.


----------



## Aegeri (Nov 19, 2010)

I just giggled when I heard about this. I can't wait to see how terrible it is on release given that their current record for online tools (and tools in general over the past few months) has been terrible.

I just can't be optimistic about this at all, because all I will do is set myself up for massive disappointment.


----------



## Dice4Hire (Nov 19, 2010)

delericho said:


> If this works as advertised, it will be awesome. Indeed, the VTT is the one tool that would persuade me to maintain an active DDI subscription.
> 
> However, I will believe it when I see it, and maybe not even then.




A good table like that would get me to consider DDI. Not much else would., Nothing so far has. And I have never used a VTT in my life.


----------



## Remathilis (Nov 19, 2010)

Eh I dunno DB,



			
				http://wizards.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/wizards.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=2128 said:
			
		

> It is currently loaded with a number of tokens from the Dungeon  Master's Kit and tiles from the Dungeon Tiles Master Set: The Dungeon.




That's not a lot of tokens/tiles. I'm not ruling out buying additional tokens/tiles "by the pack" for a nominal fee...


----------



## BobTheNob (Nov 19, 2010)

Aegeri said:


> I just giggled when I heard about this. I can't wait to see how terrible it is on release given that their current record for online tools (and tools in general over the past few months) has been terrible.
> 
> I just can't be optimistic about this at all, because all I will do is set myself up for massive disappointment.



Im trying to remain optimistic. Really I am.... but there is just so much pressure to be pessimistic.

Quality of offering has only got me a little worried. I dont think CB is that bad, it just needs a few weeks to sort out the issues.

Its what they do with the pricing that has me concerned. To have said "undecided on pricing structure" is very ominous, when they could have outright said "included in your subscription".

Wizards have so far they have taken a number of turns which have left many wondering why they subscribe. Material has dried up, support for key requirements (Essentials and Darksun) was not built into the widely used and trusted tool, then we are told "use the new too" which is buggy as.

They have lost alot of consumer confidence, and given the niche nature of the D&D consumer base (come on, admit it, we arent exactly the "mass" of consumers out there) and the competition they have with other "hobbiest" offerings (like MMO's), you would think that right now confidence in the D&D brand name is paramount.

If they do anything other than give this to subscribers (i.e. pricing above the current subscription) or that aweful "micro-transaction" idea (worked for DDO...wont work for this), they are really going to screw up their market.


----------



## Aspeon (Nov 19, 2010)

My thought about pricing is this:

I don't have a group that plays online. I have friends all over the country who might be interested in this, but I doubt I could get them all to pay $70/year each for the privilege. So my hope is that Wizards is trying to make the VTT buy-in for a player _less_ than DDI, not more. If they're getting some sort of money from each person in a group, that's probably more than they're getting now from a group with, say, the DM subscribing regularly and most of the players updating the offline CB twice a year.


----------



## CM (Nov 19, 2010)

Kralin Thornberry said:


> Actually, for those of us who don't play online, there is no real value to a VTT.




Well I don't play online, but if the VTT ends up being high quality it may finally push me to buy that projector I've been eyeing.


----------



## catastrophic (Nov 19, 2010)

I hope they don't expect to launch with only a bunch of tokens from the starter boxes. I mean, I assume that's not the case, and that's only for the beta.

Because my players, and between two games I have 11, all have unique art for their PCs, including one guy who is pretty good and draws his pcs and also did a pic for the guy playing a gnoll.

Every week, I can trawl the internet for pictures to use for npcs, villains, locations, and of course, maps.

I can build pretty decent maps in maptool, just by dling various object files from free dl sites, and assembling them however I want- if i'm worried about file sizes, I just screenshot the result and then use a flattened png or jpg when running the actual games.

I can't imagine ever paying for a vtt program that can't give me those kind of options. Even if I can trasfter monsters and PCs over.


----------



## Haffrung Helleyes (Nov 19, 2010)

*Well*

I don't know anything about the monster/character builder problems, but I'm curious about this.  I've thought WoTC needed a VTT for a long time, and in my book being a lot like Maptools is a good thing.

Could someone with access to this thing post a thread comparing and contrasting it with MapTools?

Maptools is really awesome, but a Maptools like VTT with tighter integration with a specific rulesset and premade monster tokens (both of which WoTC could easily do) would be even better.    I don't play 4E, but if I did I'd be quite psyched about such a thing.


----------



## falcarrion (Nov 19, 2010)

so far I'm not impressed.
Every thing i see so far I can do for free.


----------



## Hussar (Nov 19, 2010)

Looking at the screenshot on the front page, is that little speaker icons on the left, over the player names?  Integrated chat and sound support would be a pretty big leg up over Maptools and most other VTT's where you have to go to something like Skype or Voxli to do voice.

I'm guardedly optimistic.  Considering the recent events, I might not even be that much.


----------



## delericho (Nov 19, 2010)

Nikosandros said:


> The FAQ states that they haven't yet decided about the pricing. This seems to me a rather strong hint that the VT won't be part of the current DDI subscription.




If they don't include the VTT as part of a DDI sub (whether with an increased price or not), then that would probably signal the death-knell for DDI. From everything I've heard, the eMagazines have been dropping in quality of late (and the early issues I saw were already very poor, especially eDungeon), the tools have not lived up to the hype, the online Character Builder has been a fiasco, and we're about to see a repeat with an online Monster Builder.

They need the VTT to steady that ship. And it needs to be an outright success, not a buggy mess that comes good "in a few weeks".

They may well also want to offer it as a stand-alone option for people who don't want a full DDI subscription (or maybe just a "player client" as the standalone, with the fully-featured "DM console" being part of the sub).


----------



## delericho (Nov 19, 2010)

Of course, maybe we _are_ seeing the end of the DDI as a subscription service. If the revenues haven't matched the projections, and/or the investment has been much more than was expected, then perhaps upper management have started losing confidence in the project.

In which case, going to an online-only CB would be an attempt to build subscriber numbers by locking off the "subscribe for one month out of every six, just for the updates" people. I would also expect to see the eMagazines go online-only in the near future, as well as any other tools that we've forgotten about.

If it doesn't work, or if it's already too late, then we'll see a winding down of all updates, a gradual shedding of subscribers, followed by the "sad news" that the project has been cancelled.

Naturally, that doesn't preclude them starting to sell the VTT, and maybe a "new and improved" offline Character Builder and/or Adventure Tools as a standalone product.


----------



## Keefe the Thief (Nov 19, 2010)

Hussar said:


> Looking at the screenshot on the front page, is that little speaker icons on the left, over the player names?  Integrated chat and sound support would be a pretty big leg up over Maptools and most other VTT's where you have to go to something like Skype or Voxli to do voice.
> 
> I'm guardedly optimistic.  Considering the recent events, I might not even be that much.




The FAQ (i think?) states that this is the case. 

I expect:
- this to cost extra. No big deal for me since they announced that when they scrapped the original VT and other tools. 
- there will be microtransactions of some kind. Let's be honest, the LOTRO & DDO models have simply been far too successful for this to be NOT the case. They have to do this right, however, by truly selling addons that other players/DMs do NOT need. Like the boosters for Gamma World. 
- while they say that the other tools are not directly integrated, there seems to be a character management and monster management tool. This could mean (i hope) that you have to import monsters and characters by hand, and cannot simply dragndrop them into the tool. Which would be acceptable. This would also be what would make me give up Maptool. 

And best of all: 

BETA TESTERS ARE ALLOWED TO TALK ABOUT ALL THEIR EXPERIENCES. How i hope that other companies would do this as well.


----------



## wedgeski (Nov 19, 2010)

mattcolville said:


> Annoyingly, I just dropped $150 for the Fantasy Grounds 2 Ultimate License and I'm beginning to regret it. It's incredibly hard to figure out, I've spent a week on it so far and been unable to smoothly get a player into it and playing. Which is alarming for a paid app, and $150 at that.



I agree. FG is very pretty but I just couldn't get on with it.


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Nov 19, 2010)

mudbunny said:


> To the best of my knowledge, the plan for the VT is to gradually introduce features in the beta testing. My guess (and this is a complete guess, based on no knkowledge and requiring no tapdancing) is that the first part will involve them working out the connection issues as well as the functionality, like DM tools, player tools, etc. The next phase will involve communication with the Character Builder. And then communication with the web-based Monster Builder. (You *did* catch that in the FAQ...right??). Finally they will open it up to stress testing with lots and lots of people before they push it gold.



I figure it was the gametable that had you excited, right? I can see that. Unfortunately, the online character builder diminishes the impact of a game table.

I see no problem in having a MapTool or GameTable clone from WotC as part of my subscription. That's pretty good. But the fact that the new builder leaves a lot to be desired doesn't cause optimism now. 

---

I suppose it is relatively obvious why WotC puts the online builder out now and does not continue supporting the old one with new material. Dark Sun and Essentials are basically "killer apps" for D&D now. The software that supports Dark Sun and Essentials will be the one people want to adopt. A perfect timing for a new software to replace an old and make all those pirated character builder databases uninteresting. 

So I find it unlikely that they will offer to change the online builder to "Beta" version and update the old CB (even if at least Dark Sun seems supportable). It would go against something that is probably core of the strategy for the new CB. Unlikely doesn't mean impossible, of course.


----------



## jbear (Nov 19, 2010)

And there you have it! The cream and cherry on top that I thought would be announced with the online CB. The timing of it does seem like damage control. But so what? At this stage any good news is good news.

As for the screen shot ... hmmm ... it looks okay. But playing on FGII for over 6 months now and I must say having 3d dice that you actually pick up and 'throw' and they roll and bounce off the sides of the box ... funnily enough that is a big draw card for me for some reason. Just clicking on the relevant dice and having a number come up below ... it wouldn't be the same.

So this is intersting news for me personally. 
It's interesting because:
1) I play online and its my only real chance to be a player not a DM

2) Me and the whanau (family) are moving back to New Zealand next year in June/July and we all want to keep the great pencil and paper game going that we have even if that means doing it online. Though the 12 hour time difference may have the final word on that one.

But like others have said, I'd need some fairly strong reasons to ditch FGII which I really really like. 

Things that would make it attractive to me:

1) Flexibility: Both mapwise and characterwise; I wouldn't want to be limited to tiles either. Importing maps which you can lay a grid down on would be a must. And it would be great to be able to import a character from the character builder and drag its token onto the map and be ready to go. But the PCs in my game have homebrew features and objects that I would need to be able to add in. On FG you can type in any feature or power by hand and it will work with the maths. 

2) A Dice box with 3d dice that rolled, spun and bounced 

3) A solid and clean implementation of the 4e rules (conditions, temporary modifiers, auras, etc.) This would be a big bonus. FGII does a good job of this but it's something you really have to hunker down and learn how to do, and is still continually improving upon.

4) Tokens: I wouldn't mind if the VT came with a small sample of tokens. I wouldn't mind if WptC sold token packages. But I already have a massive amount of tokens made up. I would want to be able to import them and not be forced to use WotC tokens. If you could simply pull a monster from the builder down into a token on the map ... wow that would be FANTASTIC! Otherwise the ability to scale tokens would be necessary. If that could be done individually with each token that would be great. That is one of the current flaws with FGII, you can scale a token and lock it but that affects all other tokens. If you scale a big monster down your noraml tokens get tiny. Not a big deal, but worth mentioning IMO.

5) clean, fast and yet flexible intergration with MBuilder and CBuilder. That would make things very interesting. FGII can intergrate anything, monsterwise or characterwise. But there is quite a bit of complication with exporting your adventure modules made and dealing with linking tokens. Being able to drag out a monster or a character straight from the builder that appeared as a token would be so awesome that it's worth mentioning twice.

6) I would be interested in 'buying' ready made adventures with maps, tokens, story with NPCs that you could drag and drop dialog from or ready made drag drop descriptions of areas. Especially if these modules could be then edited easily to add my own stuff to them. If that is the way WotC wants to make micro transactions, then , yep, I'm interested! But again flexibilty is important here. I do that with readymade adventures. They are the bones I build my flesh upon.

The 3d VTT would have had me sold no questions asked. That can't be, fair enough. Maybe in a distant future. In the mean time,this one has certainly pleasantly surprised me and I will follow development with keen interest. My above comments are certainly not demands. They are observations that I hope filter down to WotC from the perspective of an online gamer who already uses a very good VT.


----------



## Jan van Leyden (Nov 19, 2010)

Keefe the Thief said:


> - this to cost extra. No big deal for me since they announced that when they scrapped the original VT and other tools.
> - there will be microtransactions of some kind. Let's be honest, the LOTRO & DDO models have simply been far too successful for this to be NOT the case. They have to do this right, however, by truly selling addons that other players/DMs do NOT need. Like the boosters for Gamma World.




Why would it cost extra when they want to use the free-to-play model of MMO's anyway? Say, DM's access to the VTT is bundled into the DDI subscription, giving some basic contents like tiles and tokens. Additional tiles and tokens or perhaps complete modules can be bought online at the Nentir Vale Adventure Amenities Store.



Keefe the Thief said:


> - while they say that the other tools are not directly integrated, there seems to be a character management and monster management tool. This could mean (i hope) that you have to import monsters and characters by hand, and cannot simply dragndrop them into the tool. Which would be acceptable. This would also be what would make me give up Maptool.




If WotC wants to convince the masses - people like me  - they would have to include tools to make running sessions easy. Initiative and condition tracking are only the first steps.

I don't want to look up a power one of my players uses, calculate and resolve her attack manually and enter the new state in some dialog or message box of the shiny VTT. I fully expect such functions to be automated and without the need of macro coding on my side. This is what actually turned me off when I tried my hand at Maptool one year ago. It felt like I was playing Maptool instead of D&D.

Go ahead, Wizards! Jump right in and make your VTT a tool for the masses.


----------



## delericho (Nov 19, 2010)

jbear said:


> As for the screen shot ... hmmm ... it looks okay. But playing on FGII for over 6 months now and I must say having 3d dice that you actually pick up and 'throw' and they roll and bounce off the sides of the box ... funnily enough that is a big draw card for me for some reason. Just clicking on the relevant dice and having a number come up below ... it wouldn't be the same.




I want wireless dice that automatically interface with a VTT (any VTT), so I can _actually_ pick up and throw them, and they'll automatically transfer the results to the software.

Probably too expensive to be worth it, though.


----------



## Nikosandros (Nov 19, 2010)

delericho said:


> If they don't include the VTT as part of a DDI sub (whether with an increased price or not), then that would probably signal the death-knell for DDI.



Yes, including it for an increased price, I can easily see. That's why I specified _current_ subscription.


----------



## Lord Ernie (Nov 19, 2010)

This looks... interesting. I don't think I'm going to be using it, since I have plenty of offline tabletop opportunities in the area where I live - it's one of the advantages of living in a very densely populated country. It will mostly be interesting to see if they can pull it off, and how well they can pull it off.

For those worrying about the online CB and this: given that they announced the VTT as being in beta and the release of the online CB just a few days ago, combined with my interpretation of some comments of the developers on the WotC forums and my own sense of logic, I would say: "Dont panic." (also, don't forget your towel ). Everything seems to indicate they have two entirely seperate teams of developers working on each tool; in fact, the mentioning of the online monster builder makes me suspect they may have yet another team working on just that. I don't think this will slow down the work on the online CB much at all.


----------



## Jhaelen (Nov 19, 2010)

Oh dear. And there I hoped WotC had given up on this. Why not license one of the great, existing VTT solutions?

They could then use the freed-up resources to, say, fix the issues with the new Character Builder, right?


----------



## zoroaster100 (Nov 19, 2010)

Well, I hope they don't increase the price of DDI to offer the virtual table.  I have no interest in a virtual table of any sort.  I can still justify the DDI subscription for the moment (though recent issues with the online builder and reduced Dragon and Dungeon content means just barely), but if they increased the price to add the virtual table they'll likely lose me.


----------



## IronWolf (Nov 19, 2010)

Haffrung Helleyes said:


> Maptools is really awesome, but a Maptools like VTT with tighter integration with a specific rulesset and premade monster tokens (both of which WoTC could easily do) would be even better.    I don't play 4E, but if I did I'd be quite psyched about such a thing.




The frameworks that you can use with MapTool handle a lot of the rule system specific things.  I believe the Rumble 4e framework is popular and I think there is another popular one as well.



Hussar said:


> Looking at the screenshot on the front page, is that little speaker icons on the left, over the player names?  Integrated chat and sound support would be a pretty big leg up over Maptools and most other VTT's where you have to go to something like Skype or Voxli to do voice.




MapTool has integrated chat support.  My preference is actually to have the voice system handled outside the VTT, primarily because I would rather development time be spent working on the VTT functions and such than rebuilding the wheel when there are several freely available voice chat options.

With that said, what are the benefits people see to integrated voice chat over letting a dedicated voice chat client handle it (like Skype or Ventrilo)?  Maybe I am overlooking some key advantage to an integrated setup?




Keefe the Thief said:


> And best of all:
> 
> BETA TESTERS ARE ALLOWED TO TALK ABOUT ALL THEIR EXPERIENCES. How i hope that other companies would do this as well.




Yeah - this is cool.  I am looking forward to the reports from the beta testers already.


----------



## tenkar (Nov 19, 2010)

There are video tutorials on the Fantasy Grounds Website.  They are priceless for figuring the software out.  They help make a steep learning curve much easier.  I'd link, but its a pita to do that from my ipad 



			
				mattcolville; said:
			
		

> I blogged about this.
> 
> Annoyingly, I just dropped $150 for the Fantasy Grounds 2 Ultimate License and I'm beginning to regret it. It's incredibly hard to figure out, I've spent a week on it so far and been unable to smoothly get a player into it and playing. Which is alarming for a paid app, and $150 at that.
> 
> ...


----------



## IronWolf (Nov 19, 2010)

tenkar said:


> There are video tutorials on the Fantasy Grounds Website.  They are priceless for figuring the software out.  They help make a steep learning curve much easier.  I'd link, but its a pita to do that from my ipad




Yeah - video tutorials for VTTs really help ease the learning curve.  While I don't use FG, I found the video tutorials for MapTool the most useful piece of getting up to speed on the tool.  The VTTs do take some practice to get used to using them, but worth the time up front.

The video tutorials for FG are on the right side:

Fantasy Grounds :: The Virtual Tabletop for Pen & Paper Roleplaying Games


----------



## Dungeoneer (Nov 19, 2010)

My prediction: the DDI sub will remain much the same as it is now when the VTT comes out.  But if you want to use the VTT - *subscribe to DDI Gold!*

That or microtransactions (buying tokens and tilesets) are another possibility.  But they _are _going to try and make money off this thing.  I have no problem with that... if they build a quality product.

But I would be very surprised if there wasn't an extra cost above and beyond the current DDI sub price.


----------



## Spatula (Nov 19, 2010)

IronWolf said:


> My preference is actually to have the voice system handled outside the VTT, primarily because I would rather development time be spent working on the VTT functions and such than rebuilding the wheel when there are several freely available voice chat options.
> 
> With that said, what are the benefits people see to integrated voice chat over letting a dedicated voice chat client handle it (like Skype or Ventrilo)?  Maybe I am overlooking some key advantage to an integrated setup?



Integrated voice chat has it's benefits, especially when playing online with strangers. You don't need to figure out who has what software installed and don't need to coordinate getting everyone into the same virtual audio space. Personally I think it's a bad idea, because as you say, it's a resource drain on the small development team and there's plenty of free alternatives. But also, I remember how Blizzard seriously screwed up trying to add integrated voice chat to WoW, and I wonder if the same sort of thing will happen here.


----------



## El Mahdi (Nov 19, 2010)

> *Q: Is this VT the same virtual tabletop that we saw demos of when 4th edition was announced?
> *A: It's the same concept of interconnected tools to facilitate a D&D session, *with a different look and feel.*






A true statement, but talk about understatement...Wow!

The original was supposed to be 1st person rather than overhead (so as to only show what your character sees, rather than see the whole area as if you had a spy drone at your disposal), have all the D&D minis rendered into 3D figures, have 3D terrain and objects, realistic lighting effects, and be able to import your personalized 3D character into the environment, along with the basic tools required to run a game session.

Instead, it's a basic 1d overhead map program with the basic tools to run a game session.  And it's almost three years after the original demo...

_"It's the same concept of interconnected tools to facilitate a D&D session, with a different look and feel." - _I don't know if WotC's PR skills have gotten better lately or not (as I don't really follow Wizards anymore), but their ability to spin has definitely increased. (For the record, I do not see that as a good thing...)  Do they really expect people to read that and just go "Oh...okay..."

The correct answer to: _"Is this VT the same virtual tabletop we saw demos of when 4th Edition was announced?"_, would have been: "No.  This is basically the same as other virtual tabletops you see around the internet and provided by other companies and services, *just with 100% official 4E support and connectivity with DDI's character builder and our future monster builder*."  That last part is the only thing that separates it from other VT's, and has absolutely nothing that a non-4E player would be interested in.  (...and on a side note: didn't WotC's own polling show that customers actually wanted the monster builder and other features first?)

As a non-4E player, a VT with a three-dimensional first-person environment with variable lighting effects, 3D terrain and objects, and customized/personalized miniatures and figures - would give me a reason to go to Wizards.com rather than sombody elses site.  However, this Virtual Tabletop?  Not a chance.


----------



## Goonalan (Nov 19, 2010)

I'm a 30 year D&D (fairly exclusive) DM, who without a VTT (or equivalent) wouldn't  have been able to game for the last X years.

I will pay extra for the VTT.

I've had few problems with the CB (one-crash), my players have had few or no problems also.

I use the MB and the Comp most every day- they still make me giggle at how easy they are to use (I'm not very computer savvy).

I will pay extra for tokens (micotransactions- whatever that is), the same way I pay for tokens/minis and maps through RPGNow (& ENWorld) and others.

I don't love WOTC. 

I'm not a fanboy.

I pay nearly twice as much for my newspaper, bacon bun and coffee every morning as I do for my DDI subscription, 50% of the time the bacon bun is the only thing I get to eat at work.

I'm not rich, or even well off- or else I don't consider myself to be in comparison to my friends who got proper degrees (and jobs).

I earn just about the average income for the UK, probably slightly less.

I don't have a big house or a fancy car, I get the bus to work or else walk.

I do spend more on D&D (not just WOTC stuff but as much 3rd party 4e stuff as I can find that fits my needs- like Nevermet, Open Design et al) than anything else/month- maybe films and books run a close second/third, of my disposable income of course.

I have (and continue to) teach and/or introduce at least a dozen people to D&D every year.

I like 4e.

I liked 3.5e

I liked 3e.

I liked 2e/Advanced.

I liked 1e.

I have the rules et al for all of the above, and many more games beside.

I chose to play (DM) 4e at present.

Sometimes I don't like WOTC- I write to them when this happens, they reply- and the problem (mostly) gets fixed.

I think my DDI subscription offers excellent value for money.

I'm a very strange man.

Love Goonalan.


----------



## ki11erDM (Nov 19, 2010)

WotC will find a method for charging for additional tokens and tiles. They will always charge for art assets, because artists have to eat.

If they were wise they would give us two options:
1) The DM account must be a “Gold” DDI member and they have free access to all available tokens and tiles.
2) The DM account is “Silver” (current pricing) and you only get what comes in the first release and you can buy new tokens and tiles as they come out.

The issue with that is how to deal with billing and keeping track of who has what. 

Question: Did we know if this is a downloaded client or a “web app”?


----------



## OchreJelly (Nov 19, 2010)

El Mahdi said:


> A true statement, but talk about understatement...Wow!
> 
> The original was supposed to be 1st person rather than overhead (so as to only show what your character sees, rather than see the whole area as if you had a spy drone at your disposal), have all the D&D minis rendered into 3D figures, have 3D terrain and objects, realistic lighting effects, and be able to import your personalized 3D character into the environment, along with the basic tools required to run a game session.
> 
> Instead, it's a basic 1d overhead map program with the basic tools to run a game session.  And it's almost three years after the original demo...




I don't think the original idea was ever supposed to be first person.  I'm not sure where you got that from.  I never went to the game day demos, so you could be right about 1st person -- I just have never heard that before.  And calling the new one "1D" is really selling it short a dimension 

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWZ2WdeTo1M"]YouTube - Dungeons & Dragons 4th Edition: Part 2[/ame]

From this demo, the original had a rotatable map which still appeared to be based on their tiles.  It had dynamic lighting and 3d virtual minis.  

Frankly I'm really happy they decided to go with 2D "Tokens" over 3d models for a few reasons:

1) Making 3D models is resource intensive.  Making them _good 3D models _is significantly more resource intensive.  I thought those models looked primitive, even when I first watched these years ago.  They have not aged well (and yes I understand it was a prototype).
2) WotC has a huge catalog of quality 2D artwork that they can leverage to turn into tokens.  They may as well play to their strength and stick with that.


----------



## IronWolf (Nov 19, 2010)

Goonalan said:


> ....  *bacon bun* and coffee every morning as I do for my DDI subscription, 50% of the time the *bacon bun* is the only thing I get to eat at work.





Off-topic - but tell me more about this bacon bun!  That just sounds good!


----------



## Dungeoneer (Nov 19, 2010)

OchreJelly said:


> I don't think the original idea was ever supposed to be first person.  I'm not sure where you got that from.  I never went to the game day demos, so you could be right about 1st person -- I just have never heard that before.  And calling the new one "1D" is really selling it short a dimension



I think they just mean that it was fully 3D and that you could have the same sort of perspective on the map that one would expect to have in an FPS.


----------



## Goonalan (Nov 19, 2010)

IronWolf said:


> Off-topic - but tell me more about this bacon bun!  That just sounds good!




This morning it was bacon, sausage and egg- and when I smiled nicely at the lady she game me an my mate an extra half-sausage each.

Sauce was involved.

It got messy soon after.

I have no regrets.


----------



## Scribble (Nov 19, 2010)

Wait a minute... I call shenanigans! 


England doesn't have sausages! They have bangers!


----------



## Goonalan (Nov 19, 2010)

Scribble said:


> Wait a minute... I call shenanigans!
> 
> 
> England doesn't have sausages! They have bangers!




Sausage, banger.

Forget the semantics, you should see my sauce antics.

I'm a two serviette (napkin) kinda guy.

As for 'call shenanigans', your misappropriation of the English language has been duly noted, we'll be watching you.

On a side note the Mrs. is taking me out for a 'full English' tomorrow morning- variety is the spice of life. We'll not be needing the Marriage Guidance Counsellor any time soon.


----------



## OnlineDM (Nov 19, 2010)

jbear said:


> That is one of the current flaws with FGII, you can scale a token and lock it but that affects all other tokens. If you scale a big monster down your noraml tokens get tiny. Not a big deal, but worth mentioning IMO.




My question is off topic I guess, but you really can't re-scale tokens individually in Fantasy Grounds?  I use MapTool, which is free software, and I just assumed that a paid program like FG would be able to do everything the free program can do and more.  Rescaling is simple in MapTool - I actually have buttons that I click to make a token gigantic for a moment so that the players can see the art clearly, and the click again to make it normal size.  

I'm not bashing FG here (I hear it's a great program) - I just am honestly surprised.


----------



## AbdulAlhazred (Nov 19, 2010)

El Mahdi said:


> A true statement, but talk about understatement...Wow!
> 
> The original was supposed to be 1st person rather than overhead (so as to only show what your character sees, rather than see the whole area as if you had a spy drone at your disposal), have all the D&D minis rendered into 3D figures, have 3D terrain and objects, realistic lighting effects, and be able to import your personalized 3D character into the environment, along with the basic tools required to run a game session.
> 
> ...




Maybe you haven't got experience with VTTs. I mean I can't say with THIS one ATM until we see it but if it is even CLOSE to state of the art you have full control over lighting, visibility, vision blocking for walls and such, etc. Go play with Maptool and you'll see what I mean. The experience is excellent, in many ways superior to using a battlemat and figurines. There are some real advantages. For instance each player can only see what THEY can see. The effects of lighting and such are MUCH MUCH more clear and useful with "Fog of War" and lines of sight that are obvious just from looking at the screen. This is why a fair number of people are using things like Maptool and a projector now in their ordinary games, the DM can do a bunch of stuff that was only dreamed of before. You also can't really discount the ability to have all your resources tracked accurately etc. This adds a level of utility that is golden. There are a HUGE number of reasons why a flat 2d VTT is a great thing. 

In fact honestly I don't think I'd even really WANT a 3d equivalent. I can make artwork for a 2d environment. I can easily produce tokens, maps, icons for objects, etc. There's no way I'm going to spend months learning how to use Blender 3d to do something infinitely crappier for a 3d game. I'm not going to want to just use 'stock' stuff really either. I use a lot of stock art now with MT but you can only go so far with that and sometimes you need your own. The players also REALLY like being able to make their own tokens and portraits and such. Again, there's no real way they're going to ever master making 3d models, it is a LOT harder.

I don't really think you'd gain that much from an FPS type perspective either, and if you're going to use a bird's eye view most of the time you're just as well off with the simpler and easier to use 2d space. Some day we'll have 3d holographic scanning and display tech or something and a "Virtual Space" will be a cool concept for RP. I doubt 4e will be a well adapted set of rules for that though.


----------



## ProfessorCirno (Nov 19, 2010)

So it's Maptools.

Only with less functionality.

And they're going to charge you.

Um.


----------



## OnlineDM (Nov 20, 2010)

By the way, my full take on this is now on my blog.  

Summary: I'm optimistic, but I'm very interested to see what they will do about:


Pricing
Map creation
Monster/PC creation
Rules support
Customizability
Finding a game
Using the program with a projector for in-person games


----------



## Kelvor Ravenstar (Nov 20, 2010)

I wasn't too thrilled about this announcement, since I doubt that the pricing structure or terms of use will allow me to use it with my distant friends without DDI accounts.

However, I just got an invite to the 'friends and family' Beta, so I'm hoping this will allow me to test it out with people outside the Beta, I saw something in the email about "requesting passes" for sessions, so hopefully that will let me try it. I'm at least interesting in taking the program for a spin, as I bet I can use it for my dungeon tile mapping needs.


----------



## AbdulAlhazred (Nov 20, 2010)

ProfessorCirno said:


> So it's Maptools.
> 
> Only with less functionality.
> 
> ...




We don't know how similar it is to Maptool. It could be better in any number of practical respects.

Seen it? I'd wait and see what functionality it has, we know nothing, so what makes you think it is less?

They haven't said they are charging a dime for it yet. 

Realistically, as a long time Maptool user, there are plenty of ways the program could be a better VTT for 4e than Maptool is. Maptool has a HUGE amount of customizability but that doesn't mean it is ideal. You can use the Rumble (or other) 4e macro frameworks, but my assessment of them is that they are a good bit of work to use. They are written in a pretty obtuse scripting language that was NEVER designed to do complex stuff like a 4e framework. You can make it work, but Rumble is SLOW (I've had power macros take 3-4 MINUTES to run) and it still lacks many basic nice features. Character importing is piecemeal and very buggy, and the same for monsters. It lacks any kind of real inventory control. In fact it really isn't a character management tool at all except in a very basic way. It lets you invoke a power, attack, hit, and do damage, and marks power expenditure and tracks conditions, HP, AP, and does a few other things. That is GOOD, but you still have to set it all up with the right math and there are tons of powers it can't handle, etc. If you just level your character you have to go in and tweak a whole bunch of numbers in your powers and whatnot for instance. The other 4e frameworks are roughly similar, some do certain things better, but none of them is close to being ideal.

So, a VTT that is 4e specific and handles a bunch of stuff elegantly? Oh yeah. It doesn't have to be Maptool in all its glory to succeed. If you can drop a PC onto the thing from .dnd4e file and use your powers and have the right math, the rest is gravy. Right now it takes 2-3 hours of work to set up a 4e token for Maptool. Make that 30 SECONDS and you enable a whole new level of pickup gaming and flexibility.


----------



## Bagpuss (Nov 20, 2010)

Goonalan said:


> This morning it was bacon, sausage and egg- and when I smiled nicely at the lady she game me an my mate an extra half-sausage each.




See I have black pudding instead of the bacon, but strangely I got an extra half sausage as well, where I get my breakfast butty.


----------



## Hussar (Nov 20, 2010)

IronWolf said:


> /snip
> 
> MapTool has integrated chat support.  My preference is actually to have the voice system handled outside the VTT, primarily because I would rather development time be spent working on the VTT functions and such than rebuilding the wheel when there are several freely available voice chat options.
> /snip




As far as I know, there is no sound support whatsoever for Maptool - voice chat or otherwise.  What am I missing?


----------



## luide (Nov 20, 2010)

Hussar said:


> As far as I know, there is no sound support whatsoever for Maptool - voice chat or otherwise.  What am I missing?




Ironwolf was talking about text chat I believe. 
For me, having integrated voice chat does not add any value for 3rd party VTT because of the multitude of good, free, multiperson voice chats available. 

But if WoTC want to have true integrated tool set, having voice chat probably does belong in there.


----------



## Keefe the Thief (Nov 20, 2010)

Sound support should be in because new players and DMs will expect it. Nearly every online game today has sound support. Skype can be a bandwith hog with many players, and Teamspeak is cool but fiddly for beginners. Voice support should be in because many people cannot be buggered to look for alternatives, and you need those customers, too.


----------



## renau1g (Nov 20, 2010)

the problem they'll run into with voice chat is that people will expect the same quality as ,say, the SKype offering. If they fail to produce those results people will be up in arms, but I'm not sure they have the budget for such an undertaking. (this is from someone who has no idea how much work it woudl be)


----------



## IronWolf (Nov 20, 2010)

luide said:


> Ironwolf was talking about text chat I believe.




Yep, I was talking about text chat already in MapTool.  I thought Hussar's post had been referring to both.  I think that's because when I see chat I read it as text chat.  



Keefe the Thief said:


> Sound support should be in because new players and DMs will expect it. Nearly every online game today has sound support.




Though several online games have it, nearly all the beyond casual players I know end up using Vent or Teamspeak to actually play because the built-in voice chat system isn't up to par when compared to an application actually built for the task.



			
				Keefe the Thief said:
			
		

> Skype can be a bandwith hog with many players, and Teamspeak is cool but fiddly for beginners. Voice support should be in because many people cannot be buggered to look for alternatives, and you need those customers, too.




There are no guarantees that a built-in system would be any less fiddly or bandwidth intrusive than any of the existing alternatives out there now.


----------



## Hussar (Nov 20, 2010)

True, but, I think Keefe the Thief has the right of it.  People are going to expect voice chat built right in.  It's not that difficult to have, particularly if you build it in from the beginning.  Sure, you might not get Skype level quality, but, then again, I think people will be fairly happy with reasonable clarity.

One thing I really do hope they do is allow you to synch sound files across multiple users.  I know OpenRPG allows you to do this.  Makes it great for having soundtracks and sound effects to go with the game.  Hey, we're already online, might as well use the resources that are available.

For myself, being able to drop in my own maps is an absolute must.  If we're limited to WOTC maps, I won't go for it, regardless of how integrated other elements are.  

I am glad they backed off the 3d thing actually.  That would make the tool useless for most DM's since it would force you to use prefab map pieces.  No thanks.  Too fiddly.


----------



## IronWolf (Nov 20, 2010)

Hussar said:


> One thing I really do hope they do is allow you to synch sound files across multiple users.  I know OpenRPG allows you to do this.  Makes it great for having soundtracks and sound effects to go with the game.  Hey, we're already online, might as well use the resources that are available.




I've used background music and sound effects in my MapTool sessions before.  The dripping water effects in the sewers was a hit as was the splashing water when critters came running through the water. 

I usually use Ventrilo for voice as it is very lightweight.  So I use a second instance of the Vent client on my GM machine which is hooked directly into WinAmp via a virtual audio cable.  I have a playlist of background music and sound effects loaded and when I need them, I just double-click and the entire group in Ventrilo hear whatever sounds I play.  It worked really well.  It does take a little bit of setup.


----------



## heruca (Nov 20, 2010)

Kralin Thornberry said:


> Actually, for those of us who don't play online, there is no real value to a VTT.




There are VTTs (e.g., Battlegrounds) that are designed to support offline play in face-to-face games, using a projector, HDTV, or large LCD screen for the players to view the action. In effect, a digital battlemat. Doesn't look like WotC's Virtual Table is particularly well-suited to this sort of use, but we really only have a single screenshot to go on, for now.


----------



## heruca (Nov 20, 2010)

Stoat said:


> The fact is there are a half-dozen or so different VTT's currently available at prices ranging from free to cheap.  If those VTT's are already offering Features X, Y & Z, WotC will need to do the same to compete.




There are actually around 60 virtual tabletop programs (click here for links to all of them). Most are already available, but a handful are still in beta.

WotC only needs to put an official WotC/D&D logo on their VT, and even if their VT has minimal functionality compared to what's already available, they will quickly have a larger userbase than all the established VTs _combined_.


----------



## Gort (Nov 20, 2010)

El Mahdi said:


> Instead, it's a basic 1d overhead map program with the basic tools to run a game session.  And it's almost three years after the original demo...




You _are_ confused. If it was 1d it'd be basically invisible.


----------



## avin (Nov 20, 2010)

VTT? Wizards can't even finish CB and MB and want to try this?

I predict an EPIC fail.


----------



## Hussar (Nov 21, 2010)

IronWolf said:


> I've used background music and sound effects in my MapTool sessions before.  The dripping water effects in the sewers was a hit as was the splashing water when critters came running through the water.
> 
> I usually use Ventrilo for voice as it is very lightweight.  So I use a second instance of the Vent client on my GM machine which is hooked directly into WinAmp via a virtual audio cable.  I have a playlist of background music and sound effects loaded and when I need them, I just double-click and the entire group in Ventrilo hear whatever sounds I play.  It worked really well.  It does take a little bit of setup.




Heh, that's a bit beyond my capabilities.  

Although, I did just see this little gem - Social networking site for synching Youtube videos across multiple users.  Very sweet.  I could see using that very easily, and it runs in your browser: YouTube Social brought to you by Socialvision - www.socialvisioninc.com


----------



## Keefe the Thief (Nov 21, 2010)

avin said:


> VTT? Wizards can't even finish CB and MB and want to try this?
> 
> I predict an EPIC fail.




They do not "try" this. They worked on it all the time. Projects do not suddenly pop out of the ground, and development times vary widely. It's beta time right now for a product they are working on, that's why the VTT has been announced.


----------



## Mirtek (Nov 22, 2010)

AbdulAlhazred said:


> Seen it? I'd wait and see what functionality it has, we know nothing, so what makes you think it is less?



 WotC's proven track record with such things?


AbdulAlhazred said:


> They haven't said they are charging a dime for it yet.



 The FAQ entry about pricing?


----------



## AbdulAlhazred (Nov 22, 2010)

Mirtek said:


> WotC's proven track record with such things?
> The FAQ entry about pricing?




So you're really just guessing. CB and MB have been pretty good programs. The online CB is still a little wonky but it does work and they appear to be clearing up issues pretty quickly. Honestly, if you look at what they have actually ever said was a released or soon-to-be-released product their track record is pretty good. 

The FAQ entry on pricing says NOTHING about pricing, just that they don't have anything to say on it and haven't even figured it out themselves. It could range anywhere from 'free download' to 'pay extra on top of DDI' in theory. Speculation on that score is fun, but anyone who claims to have any information about it is talking out something besides his mouth.

Really, people, AT LEAST wait for the beta testers to report back. Good grief, either there are a heck of a lot of psychics on this board or well it is the Internet, bs does rule...


----------



## falcarrion (Nov 22, 2010)

VTT programs are used differently from group to group. Some may use it just to project the map on a table. Some may use it to play with friends through out the world. some what to be able to customize it.
A thread like this is great. It lets people see how others use it and may convince others who haven't tried one to do so. Just waiting to hear what beta testers have to say isn't going to give a broader picture of how VTT's are used and capable of.  
If you read between the lines of complaints, guessing and wishes, you can learn alot of what a VVT program can do or does now. It also give people a chance to look at what is out there now.
Beta testing is only as good as the beta testers. I would trust more the beta test from people here then a small hand picked group by Wotc. If Wotc only picks people with subscriptions.


----------



## Mirtek (Nov 22, 2010)

AbdulAlhazred said:


> So you're really just guessing.



 Just like the rumor of them taking away the CB and making it online only was just guessing. So far the only thing that WotC did reliably was to fulfill the worst guesses.


AbdulAlhazred said:


> The FAQ entry on pricing says NOTHING about pricing, just that they don't have anything to say on it and haven't even figured it out themselves.



 Which is already worse enough. There shouldn't be anything for them to figure out, it should be part of the DDI fee we are already paying them. Not paying separately or paying an increased fee.

At best a current FAQ answers of "Included in the current DDI fee and we've not yet determined if there'll be a way to buy access outside of the DDI suite and how much this might cost" would be acceptable.



AbdulAlhazred said:


> Speculation on that score is fun, but anyone who claims to have any information about it is talking out something besides his mouth.



 Or simply takes a look back at WotC's track record


AbdulAlhazred said:


> Really, people, AT LEAST wait for the beta testers to report back.



 I've had enough of lying WotC employees (I don't blame them personally, lord knows I have blatantly lied to customers when I had been told to do so and will certainly do so again in the future) and people close enough to them to also report favorably on their newest project.


AbdulAlhazred said:


> bs does rule...



 At least WotC seems to make good money with it


----------



## I'm A Banana (Nov 23, 2010)

Here's my bag.


*If* it is usable (better than "character builder classic" usable, even).
*If* it isn't extra money.
*If* it doesn't use obnoxious microtransactions for customizability
*If* it isn't needlessly tethered to Dungeon Tiles and "what we've already got in the database" (e.g.: it permits house rules at least).
 and *If* people without DDI accounts can still play without having to pony up a few bucks

*Then* it will be a solid VTT that I might consider using. 

I wouldn't think that's a generally big list. There are cheap or free programs out there right now that do this. 

But this is WotC. Their record has been, by and large, disappointing. Their ability to meet the most basic requirements is in question. 

So I will wait and see. It could be neat. But there's no real cause for optimism about it.

One thing is certain: there's so many free or cheap programs out there that the VTT isn't going to feature into my decision to purchase DDI access on a given month or not. 

So, I guess, unlike the CB, if the VTT does suck, I won't be too irate.


----------



## Dungeoneer (Nov 23, 2010)

People just need to get used to this idea: the VTT *will* cost extra money.

This is a project on a whole different level from something like the character builder.  It's much more resource-intensive to develop.  It will require its own extensive network infrastructure, servers and support team.  It ain't gonna come cheap, and since Hasbro is a for-profit corporation, we the customers will be asked to pony up.

I don't know exactly what form the extra cost will take (although my money is still on a 'gold' subscription), but realistically we need to accept that there will be an extra cost.

And hey, if I'm wrong at least you'll be pleasantly surprised.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Nov 23, 2010)

> People just need to get used to this idea: the VTT will cost extra money.




*If* that's the case,

then I will take my business elsewhere.

(and I'm no fan of Lone Wolf, either...army builder army builder army builder!...)

Screw that noise. There's free or one-time-payment alternatives. _Something tells me_ this won't be worth even $25 *per year* (about a $2/month more) on top of what I'm already paying for.

It's possible it could be worth it, better than those cheaper-or-free alternatives, but that would require some killer things. Possible, but I'm not holding my breath. In absence of that, extra money just ain't friggin' worth it.


----------



## Scribble (Nov 23, 2010)

Coolest things I see about this so far is that it has a lobby feature, combines with the fact that it will be on the D&D homepage... Which means it will more then likely be filled with people looking to game, without having to go through various means to find them and set it all up.

Log on- find a game- game.

Yay.


----------



## renau1g (Nov 23, 2010)

Hmm...it might be good, but D&D is a bit more complex than finding some pubs to go game with in Left 4 Dead (or any other online game) and I kinda worry about the quality of some people (My PC is Chaotic Neutral, I slit your throat while I'm on watch and take all your stuff). I really do like that there's something there... just wonder how effective it'll be (i.e. how many DM's will be sitting around waiting for PC's)


----------



## Hussar (Nov 23, 2010)

Yeah, other than perhaps requiring at least (and possibly more) one user to be subscribed, I can't see why this would cost money.  Totally understand if they want all users to be subscribed (it would suck, but, I can see why they might go this way) but, I doubt this is going to jack up the price of a DDI sub.

I could see them selling stuff to use on the DDI though.  Image packs for minis, virtual monster manuals, images for PC's, that sort of thing.  Got no problem with that, so long as it's not a requirement to use the table.


----------



## Scribble (Nov 23, 2010)

renau1g said:


> Hmm...it might be good, but D&D is a bit more complex than finding some pubs to go game with in Left 4 Dead (or any other online game) and I kinda worry about the quality of some people (My PC is Chaotic Neutral, I slit your throat while I'm on watch and take all your stuff). I really do like that there's something there... just wonder how effective it'll be (i.e. how many DM's will be sitting around waiting for PC's)




Same sort of risk you might run when going to a convention though. Just the biggest convention of all.


----------



## IronWolf (Nov 23, 2010)

Scribble said:


> Coolest things I see about this so far is that it has a lobby feature, combines with the fact that it will be on the D&D homepage... Which means it will more then likely be filled with people looking to game, without having to go through various means to find them and set it all up.
> 
> Log on- find a game- game.






renau1g said:


> Hmm...it might be good, but D&D is a bit more complex than finding some pubs to go game with in Left 4 Dead (or any other online game) and I kinda worry about the quality of some people (My PC is Chaotic Neutral, I slit your throat while I'm on watch and take all your stuff). I really do like that there's something there... just wonder how effective it'll be (i.e. how many DM's will be sitting around waiting for PC's)




Yeah, I'm with renau1g on this.  Pick-up games done in a virtual lobby on the Internet sounds a whole lot like PUG'ing in the popular MMOs.  I doubt I would find a quality gaming experience from a virtual lobby.

There are several good spots to find an online game - either longer term or among a community of folks who run organized play games online.  

Lots of cool things about a VTT, but not sure a virtual lobby is something I would be excited about.  But who knows!  Maybe it will work out!


----------



## IronWolf (Nov 23, 2010)

Scribble said:


> Same sort of risk you might run when going to a convention though. Just the biggest convention of all.




True - but people tend to act better face-to-face as opposed to when they have the anonymity of the Internet going for them.


----------



## renau1g (Nov 23, 2010)

Scribble said:


> Same sort of risk you might run when going to a convention though. Just the biggest convention of all.




Very true... that's probably why I've never gone to a convention...well that and money. 



IronWolf said:


> Yeah, I'm with renau1g on this.  Pick-up games done in a virtual lobby on the Internet sounds a whole lot like PUG'ing in the popular MMOs.  I doubt I would find a quality gaming experience from a virtual lobby.
> 
> There are several good spots to find an online game - either longer term or among a community of folks who run organized play games online.
> 
> Lots of cool things about a VTT, but not sure a virtual lobby is something I would be excited about.  But who knows!  Maybe it will work out!




I do like that there's at least the options though. More options are always useful.


----------



## Hussar (Nov 23, 2010)

renau1g said:


> Hmm...it might be good, but D&D is a bit more complex than finding some pubs to go game with in Left 4 Dead (or any other online game) and I kinda worry about the quality of some people (My PC is Chaotic Neutral, I slit your throat while I'm on watch and take all your stuff). I really do like that there's something there... just wonder how effective it'll be (i.e. how many DM's will be sitting around waiting for PC's)




I've been playing online for a long time.  I've found it's pretty much the same as face to face.  You get good players and bad players and it's just a matter of sifting through until you build the group you like.

As far as DM's sitting around looking for players, if you check out the various VTT sites, you'll see that there's a new DM or experienced DM looking for a player or five for pretty much any system, pretty much for any time slot.  I know we could probably use another warm body in my group right now.  The dreaded fifth seat at my table, for some reason, comes with a build in time release death capsule.  Anyone who sits into the fifth player position invariably quits after a few months.

Sigh.

The other five of us (including the DM obviously) have been playing together for some time - the newest player has been in the group for more than a year and three of us have been gaming together for five years now, but, for some reason, that fifth seat is death.  

I remember Erik Mona talking about a sort of "critical mass" for living campaigns where you get enough players and DM's so that any given convention will have Living events being run.  I think the same applies to VTT games.  As soon as you have a critical mass of users, there will be at least one game being run in any give time slot that will be in need of players.

Honestly, I think about a thousand users is going to be critical mass.  That's about 150-200 groups (presuming weekly play), which means a game being run every hour of every day.  In reality that will bunch up on North American time zones, but, then again, most of the users are North American anyway.  Hopefully they can get that many users.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Nov 23, 2010)

> I could see them selling stuff to use on the DDI though. Image packs for minis, virtual monster manuals, images for PC's, that sort of thing. Got no problem with that, so long as it's not a requirement to use the table.




They gotta be careful. Right now, I can find 90% of the stuff I'd need with a quick google search. If they charge for stuff I can google for, it's not going to be worth it. 

However, microtransactions might work. It's just gotta be done in such a way as though I get everything that makes the thing competitive with MapTool or even d20Pro for gratis, and then something extra-special on top of that can be charged for. 

Given that MapTool has a totally free library of about 2 gigs including all the art and room features you could ever need, I don't think "art packs" qualify as something that would work.

Not sure what would, honestly. I could see them making their own tokens/monsters with unique powers and then charging for them, perhaps, but that would aggravate my "NO COLLECTIBLES" bones, and I'd be out of the VTT faster than you can say "Expansion Pack." 

Still, this is all my personal limits. It's entirely possible for WotC to cash in on a few customers who wouldn't mind doing this, theoretically.


----------



## IronWolf (Nov 23, 2010)

renau1g said:


> I do like that there's at least the options though. More options are always useful.




Options can be good.  I am sure there are people that will enjoy it and I am sure there will be horror stories that come from various pick-up groups just as there are horror stories from PUG'ing in an MMO.


----------



## Hussar (Nov 23, 2010)

KM - yeah, I can agree with that.  Although, to be fair, you do get what you pay for.  The art in the map pack in Maptools is great, but, sometimes a bit too much memory, or the images are the wrong size, things like that.

I'd pay a couple of bucks for a bunch of trees, or swamps or whatever.  Heck, there are already all sorts of sites that sell this sort of thing - 3D Models, 3D Modeling Textures and Plugins at TurboSquid for example, although, that's more 3d models as well as straight up art.  But, you get the idea.

Or premade monster tokens sold in packs would be cool - kinda like the Fiery Dragon token packs that Claudio Posas has.  

Of course, virtual modules would be FANTASTIC.  If everything was already coded in - all the tokens laid, maps prepped, sound, line of sight set and all that.  That would be worth ten bucks to me, for sure.

Can you get all this online already?  Yup.  Basically you're paying for time.  The time it would take to hunt up just the right image/map/sound for the adventure you're running.  

I'm really hoping you can just drag and drop from the Character Builder and Monster Builder into the VTT.  You can't yet, but, hopefully that will come.


----------



## IronWolf (Nov 23, 2010)

Hussar said:


> Of course, virtual modules would be FANTASTIC.  If everything was already coded in - all the tokens laid, maps prepped, sound, line of sight set and all that.  That would be worth ten bucks to me, for sure.




*This* would be cool.


----------



## heruca (Nov 23, 2010)

Battlegrounds has a growing number of artpacks available for it, some for sale, some for free, that make a GM's life a lot easier. They no longer have to go hunting around for a lot of commonly-used things, or resize them in a graphics app prior to use to conserve bandwidth. Just look at this single artpack and how much content it has. Would you want to spend untold hours trying to find all that yourself?

And the quality of the artpack content is top-notch, since it's created by well-respected digital artists like DevilDan, Alynnalizza, Kepli, BluDragn, Iron Dwarf, and more (all of whose names you should immediately recognize if you frequent the Dundjinni forums).

One nice thing about artpacks is that all their content is immediately available on demand during a game session. You don't need to wait a few minutes for the Colossal Dragon token to transfer over, for example, because the players already have all the content locally, on their computers.


----------



## Hussar (Nov 23, 2010)

Those are prety sweet heruca.  I'm personally not a huge fan of the top down view - I like tokens better, but, these are nice.  

As someone who has spent untold hours finding all that by myself, I can say that yup, buying packs like this is nice.

My only real beef with programs like Battlegrounds and FantasyGrounds is that the DM gets shafted by having to pay as much as double (not that BG does this, it's only a bit more) for the license.  I loathe this pay scheme with a passion.  And, the fact that my entire group also DM's means we'd all need DM's licenses which would make this a pretty expensive proposition.

I will never understand why the DM client is more expensive.


----------



## Baron Von Mandrick (Feb 28, 2011)

I'm not sure if this is the right thread to bump or not, but I saw that they are definitely moving to integrate the Adventure tools from D&D Insider with the Virtual Table.

Whoops! Browser Settings Incompatible

I may have missed the appropriate thread, if so I apologize and would happily see this post deleted or moved.

I hadn't heard from any of the beta testers on the virtual table in a while.  I'm keeping my fingers crossed that it all goes well and will be available to the public soon.


----------

