What can I say? This could either be one of the most awesome things to come out of DDI (after the original CB), or it could be a complete failure. Either way, it is coming, and it will come out. In whatever form.
Have at it.
This is the maker. If it didn't have this, it would be just a drain on my subscription fee.
THIS IS FREAKING AWESOME!
Mac OS X compatibility.
This is the maker. If it didn't have this, it would be just a drain on my subscription fee.
THIS IS FREAKING AWESOME!
Prepare to be dissapointed.
Mac OS X compatibility.
This is the maker. If it didn't have this, it would be just a drain on my subscription fee.
THIS IS FREAKING AWESOME!
Prepare to be dissapointed.
Still pissin' in people's Wheaties I see.
Mac OS X compatibility.
This is the maker. If it didn't have this, it would be just a drain on my subscription fee.
THIS IS FREAKING AWESOME!
Really......
I have a macbook.......if you haven't used bootcamp to dual boot Windows, I suggest that you do it.
I have the old CB and MB on my windows side, and they run just fine.
Mac compatibility shouldn't be even close to a huge issue.......especially since it is so easy to put windows on your Mac.
Now Smartphone/iPhone/iPad compatibility.........that's a valid problem.
My experience is that many of thier promises end up being very nuanced in terms of what actually happens.
Mac OS X compatibility.
This is the maker. If it didn't have this, it would be just a drain on my subscription fee.
THIS IS FREAKING AWESOME!
Really......
I have a macbook.......if you haven't used bootcamp to dual boot Windows, I suggest that you do it.
I have the old CB and MB on my windows side, and they run just fine.
Mac compatibility shouldn't be even close to a huge issue.......especially since it is so easy to put windows on your Mac.
Now Smartphone/iPhone/iPad compatibility.........that's a valid problem.
I don't want dualbooting. That would ruin the major benefit anyways. I don't want viruses. I've never gotten a bug on a mac. If I dualbooted, it would start to get buggy. It also would require more space, and would slow down my computer, and cost a lot (or else require glitchy and illegal software).
I have no interest in dualbooting.
Besides, it's not like I'm wholly taken by this. My group refuses to buy into D&Di, so we probably can't use it. But I could use it with other groups that do.
Mac OS X compatibility.
This is the maker. If it didn't have this, it would be just a drain on my subscription fee.
THIS IS FREAKING AWESOME!
Prepare to be dissapointed.
Still pissin' in people's Wheaties I see.
The last time I warned someone against getting their hopes up about a DDI product, it turned out to be rather good advice. I'm not pissing in anyone's wheaties. If anything, I am warning them the wheaties they seem so exited to consume have been urinated on.
2D? Lame. I've already got a plethora of 2D game table options that have better (looking) graphics. Only thing about the original Virtual Table that made it worth it was the fact it was supposed to be 3D. I'm sure people will bute, but I'm not interested.
Yes, but with more an dmore unique monsters being released in books like new Monster Manuals, as well as new things coming out in minature lines that are not in MM books, the 3d mapping would have been ridiculous.
I, for one, am happy to have a VTT at all. This may mean I can not only get to play more, but also that I may be able to get my old gaming group from college back together, which is curently not an option, as I moved most of the way accross the country.
Mac OS X compatibility.
This is the maker. If it didn't have this, it would be just a drain on my subscription fee.
THIS IS FREAKING AWESOME!
Prepare to be dissapointed.
Still pissin' in people's Wheaties I see.
The last time I warned someone against getting their hopes up about a DDI product, it turned out to be rather good advice. I'm not pissing in anyone's wheaties. If anything, I am warning them the wheaties they seem so exited to consume have been urinated on.
Thing is, I don't need a warning. I believe in WotC, and I believe VT will be great. However, I'm not paort of the crowd who gets all their hopes up and then feels totally let down if it's not what I expected. Besides, I can still use GameTable if I want. I'm really not that invested. But I'm excited because they're actually paying attention to Mac Users. Why would I have to prepare to be disappointed if they're stressing compatibility? They've already proven they want the ChaBuilder compatible, so they wouldn't remove compatibility at this stage.
I was really just excited because of comapabilitiy issues that make the VT even an option, rather than just a dead dog weighing down my subscription costs.
Yes, but with more an dmore unique monsters being released in books like new Monster Manuals, as well as new things coming out in minature lines that are not in MM books, the 3d mapping would have been ridiculous.
I'm fully aware of how insane it would be, but the only thing that could have made shelling out cash for a game table worth it for me was the 3D aspect. Without that, it just looks like freeware that they are charging for to me.
I, for one, am happy to have a VTT at all. This may mean I can not only get to play more, but also that I may be able to get my old gaming group from college back together, which is curently not an option, as I moved most of the way accross the country.
Okay I have to ask, why is it not an option when there are already more than a dozen virtual table top programs out there already(some of them are actually good). I know that I play D&D regularly through OpenRPG with two people in California, one in the Northeast, one in Canada, and one who I don't know the location of off the top of my head(somewhere on the West coast) and I live in New Hampshire. Being able to play with people accross the country is hardly something new.
Up to now my go-to VT has been Fantasy Grounds, which I do like. If the VT makes it decidedly easier to use specifically for 4th, then I'll be happy.
Also, glad they got rid of that nonsense about 3D modelling and what-not. The screen captures so far make it look pretty much exactly like I would expect/hope it to look: a top down on the game table.
Yes, but with more an dmore unique monsters being released in books like new Monster Manuals, as well as new things coming out in minature lines that are not in MM books, the 3d mapping would have been ridiculous.
I'm fully aware of how insane it would be, but the only thing that could have made shelling out cash for a game table worth it for me was the 3D aspect. Without that, it just looks like freeware that they are charging for to me.I, for one, am happy to have a VTT at all. This may mean I can not only get to play more, but also that I may be able to get my old gaming group from college back together, which is curently not an option, as I moved most of the way accross the country.
Okay I have to ask, why is it not an option when there are already more than a dozen virtual table top programs out there already(some of them are actually good). I know that I play D&D regularly through OpenRPG with two people in California, one in the Northeast, one in Canada, and one who I don't know the location of off the top of my head(somewhere on the West coast) and I live in New Hampshire. Being able to play with people accross the country is hardly something new.
The integration with 4e sucks on 3rd party VTs. You have to either find a framework that works, and input all the Characters, Monsters,etc. manually....or you have to find someone who did all the dirty work for you and is willing to share. Plus, noobs don't have the time to deal with custom macros and such......a WoTC version of a 2d VT will definitely make an impact on the MapTool geeks who play 4e, just because the framework will be built in.
I know they said the VT won't INITIALLY have integration with the other online tools, but come-on people.......they will by the end. (IMO, but a very reasonable one.....certainly explains the push for all the other online tools.)
Also...I wanted the 3d too....but I'll settle for anything at this point.....
Okay I have to ask, why is it not an option when there are already more than a dozen virtual table top programs out there already(some of them are actually good).
There are actually somewhere in the neighborhood of 60 virtual tabletop programs for playing RPGs.
I don't want to hear how this is better or that is more pretty, I just want a fast easy simple tool.
It won't take a lot to improve over my hand doodled maps used to recreate the small maps from my adventure modules. And I don't require system resource sucking massively graphically over loaded visual splendor.
I just want to be able to put the image on my TV or my laptop and say 'this is you, this is the creature' (and actually have a proper creature doodle would be nice).
Currently the guys really like my pencil crayon drawnm maps. The colours are correct, the grid is correct the map makes it so everyone knows where everything is. I can reuse them indefinitely. My encounters have been easier in 4th than any game previous.
But having a decent virtual tool can't help be more fun.
I want something blindingly easy to use. I want to be able to game online so easily it makes MMOs seem dreadfully lacking in real fun factor.
I don't want the world, I just want evidence Wizards actually DOES want to get me to subscribe regularly. The idea they can't produce a programmer that can't produce a demanded product with some level of speed is ludicruous. It's the main reason I have no reluctance to regularly spit on their name.
Also, I find it a bit of a hassle that I have to spend the time either drawing (in illustrator), painting (in photoshop), or finding (on the internet) and then resizing for use (in photoshop) all of the images I want to use.
So silverlight + (the assumption of) all those pre-made tokens and tiles (which had better be drag-and-drop snap to grid easy to arrange) = I'm in.
If WotC could get the VT to integrate CB and Monster Builder into it and then have a feature that would build the encounter for you, that would be awesome. The advantage to the VT seems to be all the dungeon tiles they are going to incorporate into the software. This would be a huge advantage to building all your campaign files from scratch.
The other feature that does interest me is the voice option. We currently use Skype to communicate and MP to play. To incorporate the 2 crucial features into one would probably tax your system a lot less. Who would do it better that the people who created the game to start with.
On the other hand I am fully prepared to be disappointed.
Why WOTC chose to bring out this rather than a tool that every group can use is a big question to me more groups could use an adventure builder or a campaign builder than a VTT. More people still get together to play D&D than people that play over the internet, this decison is odd and as I still play at a table with friends this is not a product I will use at all.
I mainly agree with you, a fast simple adventure or campaign builder might well have wider appeal.
But I see the VTT more as a tool to replace the map on the table (that I often need to draw), for a TV screen.
I too prefer in person at a table. I'd be playing in person at a table, but the map would be on a screen and vertical where everyone could see (not as always half buried under books and dice and record sheets).
It would be nice to be able to play online as well though, but not my main useage.
In order for me to care about this product it needs to:
- be able to pull characters from the character builder
- be able to pull monsters from the monster builder
- be able to run multiple characters on the same acct simultaneously, as in one of my games the group is small and players control multiple characters, while in the other not everyone has an account so some would have to share
- be able to track what conditions are on what characters and monsters at a given time
- be able to run macros such as 'use this power on that enemy' and tell us if the attack hits and how much damage it does without rolling each die on the roller individually and applying attack and damage bonuses by hand, including applying conditions
- though not required, it would be nice if pre-published adventures and Dungeon adventures could be loaded up into the table tool with a single button click, with maps laid out and monsters pre-loaded. That's the kind of interactivity that would make me actually excited about this tool, while also renewing interest in Dungeon magazine content.
I can see it won't have any of that functionality upon initial release. Until it does I'm not bitter or upset or angry. Rather, I just don't care about this tool one way or the other. If it increases the subscription price for DDI without that functionality, well that's just one more reason for me not to bother renewing.
Why WOTC chose to bring out this rather than a tool that every group can use is a big question to me more groups could use an adventure builder or a campaign builder than a VTT. More people still get together to play D&D than people that play over the internet, this decison is odd and as I still play at a table with friends this is not a product I will use at all.
I hate to be a 'me too,' but 'me too'.
I usually play in my FLGS. Sorry, not usually, always, and I'm not sure I'd want to take my laptop with me. I also don't run tactical combat, so I don't really need the maps and other stuff either. I'm sure it's a great product, but it's not for me.
They should it make accessible through a battle.net type of system with customizable content and customizable creature figurines i.e. the ogre doesn't always look like he's only wielding a short sword when in fact he's also got an animated shield. If their was an offline content builder and a CHEAP monthly subscription fee in addition to the main program, then it would have the potential to remain on the shelf for quite a while in the internet age (I know people who still look for old NES games on eBay and Craigs list because they're still games that you can play and have fun with nowadays).
This could combine the miniatures game and the tabletop RPG game (with the exception of physical die rolling) as well as PC Graphics and the feel of an online community. Give a customizer that can import 3d models with their skins as well and you'll have a product that people can expand upon in an amazing way.