How is it running?
Are you happy with the changes they've made?
Is it everything Frothsof said it would be?
Also, feel free to answer questions I didn't ask.
To all of those who got their invite:
How is it running?
Few bugs here and there. Revenants, my race of choice, won't import, and I seem to be alone in not being able to import any monsters. I still love it.
Are you happy with the changes they've made?
Two words: chat room
Is it everything Frothsof said it would be?
It's even more! I am so glad to be back.
Also, feel free to answer questions I didn't ask.
42.
Something Im curious about, if there is an open slot and you join just to watch, do you cause issues for the game flow? Are you considered another player?
You would be taking a slot another player would normally take. So if you wanted to do that, you should clear it beforehand and make sure the DM has one extra slot open for you.
Something Im curious about, if there is an open slot and you join just to watch, do you cause issues for the game flow? Are you considered another player?
Basically, you can arrange it with the DM beforehand. They can add another slot to the table for a spectator. You would have to use one of your passes though to get in. Sometimes, you will find an open table with 6 slots, and only 4-5 players, and most DMs will let you sit in and watch. maybe see what is going on, and then bring in a PC and start playing midway through.
Called it? Yep. And it's everything I had hoped for. And people thought online CB was a bad strategic move...
community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/758...
Called it? Yep. And it's everything I had hoped for. And people thought online CB was a bad strategic move...
Yep, you did. And importing both characters and monsters works great for me, although I couldn't of course test every single monster and character I have. No bugs spotted so far - even the voice chat toggle works normally for me now when it didn't before.
playing like 5 games this weekend
it was a fun relaunch, only prob was i wanted danes grotesquely obese bard in on the game
Voice chat works well, it is easy to set up. Campaign Manager thing is handy. Set up and organisation are probably where WotC VT does better than other products on the market. The actual interface has the basics covered pretty well, but still could do a lot more, certainly this seems to be where they fall behind at the moment. Content is lacking at the moment but I guess that will come with time and when they have an idea on how they are going to price things.
my first impression is someone needs to run a game today
Sadly not all of us have that option.
Realistically, the answer is no. It is a tool for playing D&D online, not a map builder for offline printing and use. If they did that, I am sure their tileset sales would plummet. I personally like it the way it is, a place to get together with people you barely know and work together online to destroy some monsters.
That depends entirely on how they set up print--if they set it up to print at 72 or 92 dpi and/or 1/10 scale or smaller, then it could actually drive tileset sale, because people have access to the tile to create a maze for an adventure, but require the actual tiles for it to be accurate and look nice on tabletop.
I'm just gonna go pro. You know, a professional VT player. I'll just sit at home and play D&D all day long and WoTC will have to pay me for it. Because I'm so good at it and I will melt their faces. And all the DMs know this and want me in their games. Like - I have 200 + customized VT characters - all customized for EXTRA PAIN. A beholder!? Bwha ha ha bring something TOUGH you fool!!!
You heard it here first: D&D, the next big thing in esports.
I'm just gonna go pro. You know, a professional VT player. I'll just sit at home and play D&D all day long and WoTC will have to pay me for it. Because I'm so good at it and I will melt their faces. And all the DMs know this and want me in their games. Like - I have 200 + customized VT characters - all customized for EXTRA PAIN. A beholder!? Bwha ha ha bring something TOUGH you fool!!!
You heard it here first: D&D, the next big thing in esports.
It worked for Starcraft.
I hope they see the future the same way I do, and refocus after this towards "at table" tools. As we've discussed here before, this is one of the somewhat unnerving aspects of the move to the cloud - this cloud only exists as long as it's profitable for Wizards/Hasbro to maintain. At this point, if it gets pulled all we'll have are some semi-functional exports from the CB to local drives.
Also as Dane pointed out, I'm quite happy that you guys are enjoying the VT efforts, in spite of the fact that my face to face Friday night games don't benefit in the least. I'm hoping the enthusiasm will catch on and spur more successful development for face to face games.
And, to be quite honest, none of us who are happy with the VT really care whether it's useful to your face to face game. Hell, I don't even care whether it's useful to my face to face game. What I do care about is this whole new wonderful way of playing D&D has arrived. I got to play with fellow forum posters yesterday. I don't care how inconvenient you may find taking a screenshot of the VT board is and printing it out. This new product stands alone, and it stands way higher than the offline CB ever did.
Actually, I'd like to challenge your assertion that this has nothing to offer your offline game. My group uses the CB to make our characters, but we all...print them out (or save to pdfs for the ipad addicts). Actual editing of characters in situ has never been relevant. Is that really what you want? The only thing that would make you happy?
Hell, I'm actually considering attempting to use the VT as a real-life gaming table. Put up the feed from my computer on my big-screen TV, load in all the PCs characters into my CB account, and manipulate them all via the VT. No more awkward maps printed out on a half-dozen taped-together pieces of paper, no more minis falling off my coffee table...
But then again, I have internet access where I play.
Also as Dane pointed out, I'm quite happy that you guys are enjoying the VT efforts, in spite of the fact that my face to face Friday night games don't benefit in the least. I'm hoping the enthusiasm will catch on and spur more successful development for face to face games.
I've been clamoring for this for quite some time as well. If the VT is simply left as a true virtual game table, and not offer me any pen and paper campaign functionality, the novelty will wear off for me real quick. Yeah, I understand there is a market for it. Great, I get that. But we've been asking for/told we are going to get a fairly robust suite of utilities. Even the signs are there. Why else would the Monster Builder be merely a component (for quite some time now, the only component) of the Adventure Tools?
They can't possibly make them just as slick for offline use, though. Really, you don't understand how slick the online version is...
And, to be quite honest, none of us who are happy with the VT really care whether it's useful to your face to face game. Hell, I don't even care whether it's useful to my face to face game. What I do care about is this whole new wonderful way of playing D&D has arrived. I got to play with fellow forum posters yesterday. I don't care how inconvenient you may find taking a screenshot of the VT board is and printing it out. This new product stands alone, and it stands way higher than the offline CB ever did.
Then you shouldn't care if we are asking for those things, either. Please, continue not caring. But there really is no real good reason to portray disdain for others that are asking for more, nor to gloat that you are getting what you want, or any of those things.
Glad you're happy. Not all of us are.
I'm just gonna go pro. You know, a professional VT player. I'll just sit at home and play D&D all day long and WoTC will have to pay me for it. Because I'm so good at it and I will melt their faces. And all the DMs know this and want me in their games. Like - I have 200 + customized VT characters - all customized for EXTRA PAIN. A beholder!? Bwha ha ha bring something TOUGH you fool!!!
You heard it here first: D&D, the next big thing in esports.
It worked for Starcraft.
What are esports? Is that like exports, only much better!?!? Or iz this yet another american trick!? Ha ha... I think I will just DM full time. Your americen trixks wil awail you nothing you american fools. I will create a race of atomic super beings that shall concquer ze world.
They can't possibly make them just as slick for offline use, though. Really, you don't understand how slick the online version is...
And, to be quite honest, none of us who are happy with the VT really care whether it's useful to your face to face game. Hell, I don't even care whether it's useful to my face to face game. What I do care about is this whole new wonderful way of playing D&D has arrived. I got to play with fellow forum posters yesterday. I don't care how inconvenient you may find taking a screenshot of the VT board is and printing it out. This new product stands alone, and it stands way higher than the offline CB ever did.
Honestly? I don't care whether it's useful for online gaming. there, I said it. I found it all but impossible to use for creating a game as a DM, taking 4 or 5 times as long as a face to face game. In addition, While it was better as a player, it wasn't enough better to make me prefer it over a tabletop game.
If it can't be used for offline gaming, it's use is pretty damn close to nil for me, and a lot of other people. If you are happy with it, good for you, but please, stop discounting the rest of us. Our position should be as important as yours--we pay the same amount for the service as you, so why shouldn't we get the same amount (or even some useful tools?
{edit} I may have responded more violently than intended, given the suggestion in your post that what I and others who don't use online gaming(or PCs at the table) want doesn't matter. Also, I'd like to suggest you not edit your posts in order to sound more reasonable than you were in the original post. It's a classic trolling technique wherein you say something, others respond, and then you change it so your opponents sound unreasonable.
I'd suggest you read my edit.
Yeah, you offered a niche solution, which does nothing for those of us who have a suite of tiles, miniatures, tokens, custom built game tables, and so on. I know that Dane has custom built/hand painted 3D tiles that he created. You think he wants to order up a 42" flat screen and get rid of all his 3D tiles? I don't think so.
But then again, you don't care.
Make me care. Give some actual meat behind your complaints instead of whining. Give suggestions, concrete examples of what you would like to see that would make you happy. Just sitting there complaining about how the new awesome VT isn't as cool for you as it is for me doesn't help anyone, certainly not you.
the suggestion in your post that what I and others who don't use online gaming(or PCs at the table) want doesn't matter
In a thread about first impressions of a tool with the explicit purpose of online gaming and what we'd like to see it evolve into, I'd definitely say that those who don't use online gaming don't have a relevant voice.
Arrogant? Sure. But if you want something that's not online gaming, talk about that. Don't muck up feedback from people who actually want to use the product.
I'll give a less directly related example. A company decides it wants to sell 100-ton mining trucks. The people looking for a commuter vehicle to take their kids to school aren't relevant to the design, and have no business voicing their opinions.
You know, ways to take adventures built in the VT and put them in a format which can be placed in a pdf, or printed out and used IRL.
just sitting there complaining that people don't see how brilliant the VT is doesn't help anyone and just makes you look like a troll.
Explain to me how an offline VT would help your suite of tiles, miniatures, and tokens.
Make me care. Give some actual meat behind your complaints instead of whining. Give suggestions, concrete examples of what you would like to see that would make you happy. Just sitting there complaining about how the new awesome VT isn't as cool for you as it is for me doesn't help anyone, certainly not you.
Whining? Grow up a bit and have an adult conversation without having to resort to the derogatory comments. After all, I see you "whining" yourself about those people you call "whiners."
I've offered my suggestions in other threads for months. But I'll sum it up briefly to appease you. Adventure Tools. A campaign management suite, similar in functionality to Masterplan but hooked directly into the Compendium, with D&D stylization and flare (and expertise). Monster builder, encounter builder, skill challenges, traps, diseases, map editor, to name the most obvious, in a nice neat package that keeps everything organized.
That's the basics of it. I don't think I need to get into details. If you don't know the details to what is needed behind a campaign manager, then I doubt you've run many campaigns.
What I do care about is this whole new wonderful way of playing D&D has arrived. I got to play with fellow forum posters yesterday.
I've been enjoying this wonderful new way to play D&D since August of 2008. I swear, it's like people don't believe other VTT's exist.
Hell, I'm actually considering attempting to use the VT as a real-life gaming table. Put up the feed from my computer on my big-screen TV, load in all the PCs characters into my CB account, and manipulate them all via the VT. No more awkward maps printed out on a half-dozen taped-together pieces of paper, no more minis falling off my coffee table...
I recommend it highly - it's an amazingly cool thing to do. A couple years back, I ran that Free RPG Day Eberron one-shot, with the map from my VT displayed on a 40-inch plasma TV. One of my players, at the end, said "That was goddamn fantastic. We finally can do what we talked about doing for all that time."
In a thread about first impressions of a tool with the explicit purpose of online gaming and what we'd like to see it evolve into, I'd definitely say that those who don't use online gaming don't have a relevant voice.
I don't agree with this.
I think that it is important thatthe DDI devs look at all voices. Sure, the focus of the tool is (and should be) on online play. However, if there exists the possibility to, with a minimal amount of extra work (for some definition of minimal amount) for the devs to also add in a feature or two that also make the VT more useful to those who want to use it to plan campaigns, or as a tile layout program, then I think that the devs should at least consider it.
Does it add more time to the development process?? Sure. However, in the long run, the additional features may pull in people who would otherwise not consider subscribing.
Hmm, jpeg export of maps. monster blocks exportable, or a campaign manager thqat allows you to group monsters, whith the option to export to RTF.
You know, ways to take adventures built in the VT and put them in a format which can be placed in a pdf, or printed out and used IRL.
just sitting there complaining that people don't see how brilliant the VT is doesn't help anyone and just makes you look like a troll.
Serious question, how does the printscreen button not do all of these? edit: except RTF
After all, I see you "whining" yourself about those people you call "whiners."
Yep. I am absolutely whining. Because I'm sick of every thread about anything DDi getting turned into a muckfest about people who are being left behind. I'm sick of good, constructive threads being derailed by the same tired complaints that are clearly not the direction Wizards has chosen.
I accept that DDi will never please everyone. Can you?
the suggestion in your post that what I and others who don't use online gaming(or PCs at the table) want doesn't matter
In a thread about first impressions of a tool with the explicit purpose of online gaming and what we'd like to see it evolve into, I'd definitely say that those who don't use online gaming don't have a relevant voice.
Arrogant? Sure. But if you want something that's not online gaming, talk about that. Don't muck up feedback from people who actually want to use the product.
I'll give a less directly related example. A company decides it wants to sell 100-ton mining trucks. The people looking for a commuter vehicle to take their kids to school aren't relevant to the design, and have no business voicing their opinions.
All customers, current and potential, have a right to voice their opinions. Your analogy isn't complete, either. You forgot the part where the people have been promised that commuter vehicle for years and have been paying for the product and the promise with the expectation of delivery. They're not pissed about the mining trucks. They're pissed that they still don't have their commuter vehicle.
After all, I see you "whining" yourself about those people you call "whiners."
Yep. I am absolutely whining. Because I'm sick of every thread about anything DDi getting turned into a muckfest about people who are being left behind. I'm sick of good, constructive threads being derailed by the same tired complaints that are clearly not the direction Wizards has chosen.
I accept that DDi will never please everyone. Can you?
It's good that you focused on this one sentence of my response, and not the rest, which answers your direct questions which you posed about what I was looking for. This only tells me that you are here for not other reason than to try to pick fights. Ciao.
at the risk of making some of you upset, all i will say is 'masterplan for the win'
Hmm, jpeg export of maps. monster blocks exportable, or a campaign manager thqat allows you to group monsters, whith the option to export to RTF.
You know, ways to take adventures built in the VT and put them in a format which can be placed in a pdf, or printed out and used IRL.
just sitting there complaining that people don't see how brilliant the VT is doesn't help anyone and just makes you look like a troll.
Serious question, how does the printscreen button not do all of these? edit: except RTF
Aside from the fact that the printscreen button is always a terrible option, it makes it extremely difficult to export a map, the map which is exported is terrible quality at best, may be impossible to export as a useable image without stitching it together, which removes the entire point of using the VT(I could just take pictures, or use scanned images of the tiles I own, at that point) and generally makes it much more difficult to use for adventure planning than it needs to be.
In addition, the VT does not allow multiple monsters to be shown at a time, and even if it did, then the Printscreen option would produce an extremely low quality, and possibly unreadable result when printed. Given that the monster builder doesn't have an export option anymore, this is a problem.
As an aside, I would like to see an encounter builder and/or the ability to save encounter groups in the VT. Not just for offline games, but because that would be a step in making it a program I want to use. I definitely overstated my case on it's uselessness--it's just not good enough that i would currently choose it over face to face games.
i think yall are pissed bc you want home campaign planning software and this just isnt it
at the risk of making some of you upset, all i will say is 'masterplan for the win'
Frothsof, we get it. you like the software. now seriously, please stop trying to make it out that anyone who isn't in love with it needs to shut up.
After all, I see you "whining" yourself about those people you call "whiners."
Yep. I am absolutely whining. Because I'm sick of every thread about anything DDi getting turned into a muckfest about people who are being left behind. I'm sick of good, constructive threads being derailed by the same tired complaints that are clearly not the direction Wizards has chosen.
I accept that DDi will never please everyone. Can you?
It's good that you focused on this one sentence of my response, and not the rest, which answers your direct questions which you posed about what I was looking for. This only tells me that you are here for not other reason than to try to pick fights. Ciao.
Actually, I was here to provide feedback on my use of the virtual table, which qualifies as "on-topic"
I started picking fights when other people started derailing that topic.
As far as your comments, I didn't respond to them specifically because yes, you and others have been posting them for months and there isn't anything new.
But how many times does Wizards have to tell you "What we said we were doing before is not what we're doing now, and not what we're going to be doing in the future" before you stop turning every discussion in this forum into rehashing the same decision that's already been made?
Do you really expect them to reverse course? Really?
i think yall are pissed bc you want home campaign planning software and this just isnt it
at the risk of making some of you upset, all i will say is 'masterplan for the win'
Frothsof, we get it. you like the software. now seriously, please stop trying to make it out that anyone who isn't in love with it needs to shut up.
I'd at least hope that people who haven't actually used it would shut up in the "First Impressions?" thread, but maybe that's just me.
If you want to make a thread about how you'd like it to be offline-capable, again, go ahead. It'll get ignored by Wizards, again.
Actually, I was here to provide feedback on my use of the virtual table, which qualifies as "on-topic"
I started picking fights when other people started derailing that topic.
As far as your comments, I didn't respond to them specifically because yes, you and others have been posting them for months and there isn't anything new.
But how many times does Wizards have to tell you "What we said we were doing before is not what we're doing now, and not what we're going to be doing in the future" before you stop turning every discussion in this forum into rehashing the same decision that's already been made?
Do you really expect them to reverse course? Really?
Oh, okay. You admit you are trolling. Gotcha. Thanks. It's always good to know what kind of people you are dealing with.
As for the things that you are "sick and tired" of. I'll quote you. "I don't care."
i think yall are pissed bc you want home campaign planning software and this just isnt it
at the risk of making some of you upset, all i will say is 'masterplan for the win'
Frothsof, we get it. you like the software. now seriously, please stop trying to make it out that anyone who isn't in love with it needs to shut up.
I'd at least hope that people who haven't actually used it would shut up in the "First Impressions?" thread, but maybe that's just me.
If you want to make a thread about how you'd like it to be offline-capable, again, go ahead. It'll get ignored by Wizards, again.
Actually, I have used it. stop making assumptions in order to justify your viewpoint. it's obnoxious.
And, to speak to Frothsof's actual point, Masterplan isn't really the option, in part because of WOTCs actions. there is no longer any good way to use it with DDI and the compendium, and quite frankly, they took tools which were originally intended for a campaign manager and converted them to VT accessories. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the VT to be useable as a campaign manager, then, given that it runs on tools which were intended for a campaign manager.
Again, my concern isn't being left behind, but that abandoning efforts to create solid offline tools may doom the whole deal. If they're aren't enough people that see value, the product won't last, and it's not like something you'll have any equity in. All the efforts of the community will disappear with that cloud. That's why I hope they expand online efforts towards competitive tools for face to face games, or better still, provide real APIs and encourage third party development, as opposed to trying so hard to protect their IP.
Actually, I have used it. stop making assumptions in order to justify your viewpoint. it's obnoxious.
And, to speak to Frothsof's actual point, Masterplan isn't really the option, in part because of WOTCs actions. there is no longer any good way to use it with DDI and the compendium, and quite frankly, they took tools which were originally intended for a campaign manager and converted them to VT accessories. I don't think it's unreasonable to expect the VT to be useable as a campaign manager, then, given that it runs on tools which were intended for a campaign manager.
Not only is it not unreasonable, it's a completely feasible step to add that functionality into something that is approaching that type of functionality anyhow.
Attempting to guide a discussion back to being on topic is not trolling.
That is hardly what you were doing. You said it yourself.
FYI, you are in a DDI forum, not the VT forum. This forum, by nature, is to discuss DDI. That is what we are doing. If you want a VT only forum, there is one specifically for that. Go play fight instigator/forum cop there.
But then again, you don't care.
That initial rant was a little emotional, yes. I think I've demonstrated otherwise. Anyone else agree/disagree?
I don't personally believe that the VT is the average D&D player's biggest need.
This is absolutely true. But only because the average D&D player doesn't know they need it yet.
By the way, I too have used the tool. I was in the initial beta. Assumptions are like...
As is the assumption that I don't know that you were in the initial beta. It's not exactly a large group of posters here.
Look, I'll admit that I didn't respond particularly diplomatically, but the alleged first impression of "I wish it did something else" isn't particularly useful. They're not going to un-cloud it. They're just not.
I don't personally believe that the VT is the average D&D player's biggest need.
This is absolutely true. But only because the average D&D player doesn't know they need it yet.
...that would be because the average D&D player doesn't need it. at all.
And, yes, I would agree that you have been displaying the classic traits of a troll.
But then again, you don't care.
That initial rant was a little emotional, yes. I think I've demonstrated otherwise. Anyone else agree/disagree?
Mand12, I often like what you say.
But on this one (ONLY since you asked), it seems you have foot in mouth, IMO.
i.e.
"I started picking fights when..."
or
Asking for his opinion (even though you had seen it before). Why do this? You already knew the answer.
eh, whatever.
I think the VT could be good for table top gaming AND online gaming. It really doesn't seem like much of a stretch to implement that functionality, and I hope they do so. One of the things I value about DnD is the personal, real interaction.
As for picking fights, I fully admit that I let my emotions get the better of me infrequently. And I fully admit that "picking fights" was a poor choice of words. What I meant by that was that I challenge people who are complaining to be constructive with their criticism instead of destructive. And by destructive, I mean "I wish online didn't exist, that way we'd have offline." It's a fallacy to think that we'd have an offline VT if they didn't do work on the online one anymore. And I challenge people who claim that they'd get an offline VT to provide some reason as to why they think they might be right other than "Online doesn't help me."
If you seriously think that "picking fights" meant that I was being deliberately provocative just to get people angry, then you don't know me and haven't read enough of my posts. I am an arguer, yes, but my goal is always a productive discussion. I don't always succeed.
I think the VT could be good for table top gaming AND online gaming. It really doesn't seem like much of a stretch to implement that functionality, and I hope they do so. One of the things I value about DnD is the personal, real interaction.
That's all of us are really asking for... some additional functionality so we can make use of this with our PnP campaigns. With a fully functional VT, the foundation would already be there. It would only be some added features of organization and print options, as well as some of the minor tools like encounter builder, skill challenge manager, stuff like that.
So close, so close...
What I meant by that was that I challenge people who are complaining to be constructive with their criticism instead of destructive.
And yet you completely ignored it when it was offered, even though you spent a paragraph asking for that consctructive content ("Make me care...") which I took the time to respond to, even with your derogatory connotations in that post which you asked.
Or is this no longer the thread for that?
Look, I'll admit that I didn't respond particularly diplomatically, but the alleged first impression of "I wish it did something else" isn't particularly useful. They're not going to un-cloud it. They're just not.
Quote snipped somewhat...
I'm definitely not asking for them to "un-cloud" it. You may be confusing my observations with earlier over-hashed posts from other folks. I understand the many reasons it's in the cloud. I'm only discussing the cloud in the context of how it affects our investment in the product. I say investment, as I've been a subscriber since the first month. I hope to use my relatively few posts here to contructively encourage Wizards to broaden their set of tools, particularly aimed at meeting those from the 2008 advertisements. They have never said they wouldn't try to build out the in-person tools, and in fact many times implied that those are under consideration. I believe they understand that much of their audience only plays face to face.
I'll stop now, as I'm not entirely sure you were reading the posts to which you were responding anyway. At least not very thoroughly.
What I meant by that was that I challenge people who are complaining to be constructive with their criticism instead of destructive.
And yet you completely ignored it when it was offered, even though you spent a paragraph asking for that consctructive content ("Make me care...") which I took the time to respond to, even with your derogatory connotations in that post which you asked.
Would you really have wanted me to say "Well, you asked for that in the past five months and got ignored, what makes you think asking again will change things?"
I didn't say anything because I didn't have anything new to say. I can see how it would appear to be ignoring you, but to be honest the larger issue is Wizards is ignoring you, not me.
So, first impressions about the VT?
Or is this no longer the thread for that?
Were you in the previous beta? If so, it doesn't sound like much has changed (I was in it before they booted the non-subscribers). More stability, a slightly more complete monster/character import, and a chat room on the group page (I think?) so people can organize games. It was an adequate virtual tabletop then, and it sounds like it's adequate now.
I knew what the answer would be. I was hoping that the new answer would be different, and was disappointed.
As for picking fights, I fully admit that I let my emotions get the better of me infrequently. And I fully admit that "picking fights" was a poor choice of words. What I meant by that was that I challenge people who are complaining to be constructive with their criticism instead of destructive. And by destructive, I mean "I wish online didn't exist, that way we'd have offline." It's a fallacy to think that we'd have an offline VT if they didn't do work on the online one anymore. And I challenge people who claim that they'd get an offline VT to provide some reason as to why they think they might be right other than "Online doesn't help me."
If you seriously think that "picking fights" meant that I was being deliberately provocative just to get people angry, then you don't know me and haven't read enough of my posts. I am an arguer, yes, but my goal is always a productive discussion. I don't always succeed.
Except that you were deliberately provocative.
I didn't see anyone say we shouldn't have online. What people were saying before you started "picking fights" was far more along the lines of "I didn't like it because it doesn't do what I need it to do." Like it or not, that is a valid first impression. so is, I don't like it enough to make it something I would want to use regularly. So is, I don't care about the VT,itself, but I would like to see this this and this in it so I can use it offline-- especially if the person actually did try it.
Then, when people respond hostily to what you posted, you edited said posts to sound more reasonable(without marking what was edited, either) and acted offended that people responded in the same fashion as what you posted.
and, on the internet, the statement "if you knew me, you wouldn't think I'm a troll" is about as effective as "but I have a (insert minority you were insulting) freind, so I'm not predjudiced/homophobic/full of it"
So, first impressions about the VT?
Or is this no longer the thread for that?
It's still got a ways to go, but it's definitely a huge step in the right direction from the first beta run. Access to online characters and monsters is huge.
"slightly more complete import" is a bit of an understatement. Instead of manually writing in your entire character sheet, it's now pulled directly from the Builder. You don't even have to "Export" out of the builder first - the entire character list in your Builder shows up in the VT, and you just pick the character you want.
That was there before, was it not? I had access to it in the previous beta. It was buggy as ****, but monsters and characters were both importable, as I recall; it just didn't get everything.
Or maybe it was only monsters. Whichever. I retract - or modify - the "slightly" bit!
Would you really have wanted me to say "Well, you asked for that in the past five months and got ignored, what makes you think asking again will change things?"
I didn't say anything because I didn't have anything new to say. I can see how it would appear to be ignoring you, but to be honest the larger issue is Wizards is ignoring you, not me.
Wizards didn't ask me directly. You did. And I'm not here for someone trying to give me some kind of life-lesson. I'm doing just fine, thanks. I'm here to have discussions about what interests me, just as everyone else is.
Whatever. This discussion is no different than any other. There are twists and turns and topics are brought up that may or may not be on topic. There aren't many threads longer than 2 pages that don't experience this.
i think yall are pissed bc you want home campaign planning software and this just isnt it
at the risk of making some of you upset, all i will say is 'masterplan for the win'
Frothsof, we get it. you like the software. now seriously, please stop trying to make it out that anyone who isn't in love with it needs to shut up.
draco, id never tell you to shut up, i resent when someone does that to me. im not trying to stifle yalls discussion, just plugging masterplan (at least you can design maps with it)
Maybe there's a disconnect here. I don't get the impression that anybody is asking for that. If they were, I missed it. Certainly not I. (nor Jahri from what I recall)
Yay, nothing to argue about! :D
Really, it seems that you are the only one wishing that one variety (offline in your case) didn't exist. If that is not the situation, and you don't despise the existence of offline capability, say so because that is not the impression you've made.
"slightly more complete import" is a bit of an understatement. Instead of manually writing in your entire character sheet, it's now pulled directly from the Builder. You don't even have to "Export" out of the builder first - the entire character list in your Builder shows up in the VT, and you just pick the character you want.
That was there before, was it not? I had access to it in the previous beta. It was buggy as ****, but monsters and characters were both importable, as I recall; it just didn't get everything.
Or maybe it was only monsters. Whichever. I retract - or modify - the "slightly" bit!
Specifically, the "Details" page, I believe, was mentioned by frothsof and others as not getting imported. Now it pulls everything out: ht/wt, deity, the entire thing.
They could do to make feats displayed in a slightly more useful position though, and there's some odd text surrounding some of them. Actually everything in the Details page is pretty hard to read.
Really, it seems that you are the only one wishing that one variety (offline in your case) didn't exist. If that is not the situation, and you don't despise the existence of offline capability, say so because that is not the impression you've made.
I don't wish offline didn't exist. In fact, I wish it did. I have, however, accepted that it won't be anytime soon. I have also accepted that losing offline support is what allowed them to transition the VT from vaporware into something that someone can use.
i think yall are pissed bc you want home campaign planning software and this just isnt it
at the risk of making some of you upset, all i will say is 'masterplan for the win'
Frothsof, we get it. you like the software. now seriously, please stop trying to make it out that anyone who isn't in love with it needs to shut up.
draco, id never tell you to shut up, i resent when someone does that to me. im not trying to stifle yalls discussion, just plugging masterplan (at least you can design maps with it)
I know, and to some extent, I was exagerating for humor, but it does seem like every thread I've read for the past 2 weeks has had you pop up to tell us how the VT will be the salvation of DDI and make up for every problem everyone has ever had with DDI.
That being said, I maintain that masterplan is really a sub-optimal solution, for a copuple of reasons--first, the map builder is less intuitive than the VT, and requires more work to set up. second, Masterplan is blocked from a lot of it's usefulness by being cut off from the compendium and currently the online toolset. 3rd, While I like masterplan, It's free--I'd much rather have a reason to support my favorite hobby with money(the reason I first got into DDI was that it promised to make my life as a dm easier by providing tools to do the things I was doing by hand.)
Really, it seems that you are the only one wishing that one variety (offline in your case) didn't exist. If that is not the situation, and you don't despise the existence of offline capability, say so because that is not the impression you've made.
I don't wish offline didn't exist. In fact, I wish it did. I have, however, accepted that it won't be anytime soon. I have also accepted that losing offline support is what allowed them to transition the VT from vaporware into something that someone can use.
Soon is a four letter word! ;)
To clarify: when I'm saying 'offline' in this discussion, we both mean face-to-face games, right? I'm not expecting them to enable offline anything anymore. I merely mean tools that would be of use when not online. (i.e. map maker, encounter builder, campaign planner, etc.)
This is not a change in stance from me; merely a clarification because I wasn't sure if we were talking about the same thing anymore.
I wouldn't be surprised if they are already planning for SOME parts of that already. To the point that they already realize that it will require minimal addidional code to enable features that will be more of use to at-home, face-to-face games; not that they're already working on it specifically.
1. the vt is not it, nor will it ever be
2. masterplan can do most of the things yall want and its free
maybe im cynical but i dont think the vt is ever going to do what yall are talking about. we cant even save pc files
"i think yall are pissed bc you want home campaign planning software and this just isnt it
at the risk of making some of you upset, all i will say is 'masterplan for the win'"
it comes off as saying "your opinions are irrelivant. Go somewhwere else if you want things DDI isn't providing"
and that it is really conveying messages that you didn't really intend.
no youre misreading me dane. i honestly think if some of you want a home campaign manager software that
1. the vt is not it, nor will it ever be
2. masterplan can do most of the things yall want and its free
maybe im cynical but i dont think the vt is ever going to do what yall are talking about. we cant even save pc files
I'm not quite so cynical--they are making the effort to make the import useful, so that you don't have to, and have at least talked with us about the ability to save pc files to the cloud.
While I am somewhat dissapointed in the fact that currently there is no way to import other peoples saved adventures, I think that WOTC is aware we want to, and trying to come up with a way to do so.
Given that, I don't think it is unreasonable to expect that if they think there is a market for it, they would let the VT work as a campaign manager, especially since it shouldn't require nearly as much additional work as doing it as a solo project. We aren't asking for the VT to be completely redone, just for some additional features.
And to point 2, I reiterate, no it can't, and I want to give DDI my money, but the VT as it stands now isn't worth it.
To clarify: when I'm saying 'offline' in this discussion, we both mean face-to-face games, right? I'm not expecting them to enable offline anything anymore. I merely mean tools that would be of use when not online. (i.e. map maker, encounter builder, campaign planner, etc.)
This is not a change in stance from me; merely a clarification because I wasn't sure if we were talking about the same thing anymore.
I wouldn't be surprised if they are already planning for SOME parts of that already. To the point that they already realize that it will require minimal addidional code to enable features that will be more of use to at-home, face-to-face games; not that they're already working on it specifically.
There are two aspects people say when they mean "offline." The one that has been accompanied by the most negative reactions are the people who used the CB, in its not-requiring-internet-connection state, at the gaming table in locations where they did not have internet access. That group of people got completely screwed by the switch to the current CB. They simply cannot get that functionality back in any fashion whatsoever, at least not with an officially-supported product. The negative reactions, therefore, aren't particularly unwarranted.
The other aspect are those who say "offline" when they mean "face to face." They may have internet access, and so they could have access to the content, but they don't like to use computers during gameplay or for some other reason that I can't accurately convey just won't end up using the tools in their games. It's this aspect that could be fixed by software tweaks on Wizards' part. Stuff like being able to take what you lay down in the main screen of the VT: a room with two fountains in it and stairs leading upwards. Print, export, whatever you want to call it, even if they're not using it to actually play D&D, it still serves some function.
Expecting a program that runs without an internet connection is a lost cause. Not only are there pretty big platform hurdles that would take up development time (now it needs to run in an actual OS rather than within the mystical internets technologies that I don't really understand), but the baseline assumption behind DDi moving forward is that you have internet to use it. Wizards has made the calculation, as many other companies have done, that internet is the way of the 21st century and that those who don't have internet access to do whatever it is they want to do are a minority not worth devoting resources to.
I don't wish offline didn't exist. In fact, I wish it did. I have, however, accepted that it won't be anytime soon. I have also accepted that losing offline support is what allowed them to transition the VT from vaporware into something that someone can use.
Well, I for one thank you for coming online, as one of those that has accepted DDI/VT as is, and has portrayed themselves as a model forum member that we should all strive to be and that you are telling us to be.
/sarcasm off
You've become what you so descriptively despise. Sorry, but some of us are equally as empassioned about D&D. Some of us would rather direct that energy at Wizards and DDI rather than other forum members.
You are as well within your right to accept the VT as it is currently being implemented just as much as we are well within our right to ask for more.
EDIT:
So, you guys planning on wrapping this up anytime soon? I think several last words have been gotten in at this point.
My apologies, Mock. You're right. Uncle.
youre probably right but i like you guys and honestly didnt mean it to say 'shut up' and if you got that impression i humbly apologize
I hope any one who's going to wine read the above because he apologized, so stop attacking him for allegedly saying the same thing you tell people to do in your replies to his posts *cough* Dane_McArdy *cough*
no youre misreading me dane. i honestly think if some of you want a home campaign manager software that
1. the vt is not it, nor will it ever be
2. masterplan can do most of the things yall want and its free
maybe im cynical but i dont think the vt is ever going to do what yall are talking about. we cant even save pc files
If you feel the VT will never be that, then fine. You don't have to tell people to go elsewhere. You don't have to even say anything about their view. They are just saying what they want.
You are missing the fact that WoTC keeps telling us about things like a campaign manager, an encounter builder and more tools.
All of which were supposed to come out before the VT did. They keep changing what direction they are taking things, sometimes not telling us, and but all the while they keep telling us they are still planning bringing out all those tools.
The VT can have those tools as part of it, and NOT HURT THE VT.
If all you want to do is play DND, guess what? You can use any VT to do that. And they do it better.
And they have communities for those VTs to. And they can be used for many kinds of games. You just might find something you like.
As you see above you tell him not to tell people to go somewhere else... then tell them to "If all you want to do is play DND, guess what? You can use any VT to do that. And they do it better.
And they have communities for those VTs to. And they can be used for many kinds of games. You just might find something you like. " and if I'm misinterperating what you said, I'm sorry and must have over reacted (I really HATE people being hypocrits edit in bold- and often over react on the subject)
Added import capabilities seem to be pretty excellent, there are some noted issues that Josh has commented on being aware of and there is work to repair
Saving goes to 'the cloud' and seems a little iffy (based on a few Frothsof posts? Has this been corrected at all) but is under construction
The chat function seems to have made lots of people very happy and apparently makes grouping easier.
All in all it seems to be a hit with the people who are in.
Now, I also know that apparently *(and I'm not entirely sure cus not a whole lot of people have said anything in regards to being unhappy with anything whatsoever about the VT*) there are a few shortcomings.
Some people seem to want something more wide-reaching, with a larger scope of abilities, which would be nice and does not seem to yet exist.
Am I missing anything? Because honestly I didn't create the thread to hear people go back and forth over and over, really all I wanted was some condense thoughts about what has been put out so people such as myself, and potentially new DDI customers could find a number of reasonable opinions and feedback.
For those of you who have turned this thread into your own personal soapbox from which to attack one another, shameful...
*denotes comment made with heavy sarcasm
I'd like to know how good the resolution on the VT is so when I get an invite will I be able to put it up on my TV and still look nice?
Thank you,
Eathu
Saving goes to 'the cloud' and seems a little iffy (based on a few Frothsof posts? Has this been corrected at all) but is under construction
you can export new ones and they are supposed to fix the old ones (pre blackout) to be able to be saved tomorrow morning (they do a weekly downtime thurs mornings, lasts around a half hour)
It's called pointing out how he wouldn't like the same behavior being done to him that he's doing to others. It's not actually telling him to do it.
And love the bold part about how you hate over reactions. Since that's what you're response is.
I'm sorry if i was unclear with my editing job, I meant that I was over-reacting not that someone else did and now can we be civilized adults and drop the petty arguments to resume making constructive comments and responses to the topic of "The VT: First impressions"
Thank you, and sorry to the people who came here for useful info and just found us fighting like 3 year olds (and I did say US as in, I was doing so as well, before anyone jumps down my throat for calling other people 3 year olds),
Eathu
Sigh I came here hoping for interesting tidbits about the tool and maybe some anecdotes of how people are playing with the tool and allI find are angry rants about what the tool is not. Thread totally derailed...
heres a tidbit-theres an event next weekend using a dungeon adventure
this one
www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/d...
only im going to make it far far more difficult
its actually pretty good though i think. its cool playing on the exact map from the magazines
Sigh I came here hoping for interesting tidbits about the tool and maybe some anecdotes of how people are playing with the tool and allI find are angry rants about what the tool is not. Thread totally derailed...
It is probably exactly like it was long before this thread was "derailed". Everyone wants to play - few want to DM. And this goes around in the tumble-dryer once a week; on the down-spin a DM can't find players at all. No matter how good or bad the VT it is all up to the people who play to make it good or bad. And that is the nature of D&D, no?
Ty Dane - thats exactly the type of info I was hoping for when I came here.
Oh and the interface needs to be redone. It's just not nice. Even Chris Perkins has said he doesn't like it. It certainly doesn't match their current design of tools.
There's definitely something about the interface that doesn't quite work for me. Many things aren't intuitive, such as where imported monsters show up. I clicked the import button so many times, thinking it wasn't working, that when I found the drop box containing the monsters it had dozens of duplicate creatures in it.
I like the way conditions can be managed, but damage and healing aren't as straight-forward. Maybe I just haven't figured out how to do that properly, since I haven't played an actual game yet and have just fiddled with the tools.
I love the character import feature. And love the monster import feature. It's just kind of fiddley at the moment. It needs to be streamlined and, as you said, made to more closely mimic the behavior of the other tools, to make it more approachable.
I'm not asking for a way to print out full sized tiles, I'm asking for a way to make maps, that I can print out to use with my notes. You know, plan it out in advance. Put monster starting markers on it, trap areas. You know, help shorten my prep time, rather then sort through all my tiles, figure out the set up, take a picture, all that stuff.
I guess you could do that but it isn't very helpful, for that you would be better of using Masterplan which pretty much does all that and more already.
Problem with the VT is it doesn't track what sets the tiles come from (although at the moment only one set by the looks of things) or how many of any particular tile you use, or which side of a tile. Or anything that would be useful for a table top game.
There is no encounter builder or anything like that in the VT either so it doesn't help speed up prep time at all. I had a go building an adventure last night, I found it frustrating. I need to have the Compedium open to search for the monsters I wanted to import as the import feature in the VT can't even do something as simple as sort by level. Then I needed the old flash encounter builder open to check the encounter level. I kept having to switch between 3 different windows.
I suppose things will get better but at the moment it doesn't help the home game at all (but then it wasn't designed to).
i think yall are pissed bc you want home campaign planning software and this just isnt it
at the risk of making some of you upset, all i will say is 'masterplan for the win'
Seriously if Wizards bought Masterplan, and then tied it back into the Compendium I would resubscribe tomorrow.
I find Masterplan and power2ool far more useful to me as a DM than anything WotC have produced.
Heck take the tiles that are included. They are divided by size. In the 2 x 8 sections, there are 7 hall tiles that are basicaly the same, a stone floor. I don't need 7 slightly different versions of a tile in a virtual table top.
You can just reuse the same tile, can't you? And though we've asked many times for a wider range of tiles, we got told no. That putting tiles in the table works, and so they don't need to test that. Well, how about you swap out some of those repeat tiles with maybe some varity. Like some outdoor tiles.
See, we weren't just asked to test the beta, they wanted us to form a community and to actually run ongoing type campaigns. Kind of hard when all you can do is make limited kinds of dungeons.
You've hit the nail on the head with that one.
When I had a go at designing a dungeon in order to run a game for all the new folks joining up I was so frustrated by the lack of tiles I nearly gave up. I imagine some people are giving up. I certainly won't be designing any more dungeons until there are more tiles. Thus I won't be doing more testing...
How do you do a beta test without any testers?
They say about 4,000 invites when out this time, double the amount last time.
Well, there certainly weren't 2,000 people being active. There were many times people were looking for a game to play and no one was running one or planning to run one.
The people everyone sees on here talking about the old days, were the most active in the beta. So people weren't to interested, or tried it and thought, eh. I'm kind of in the second half. I've yet to run a game, and I should do that. I've played in several, and it was ok. Certainly not better then playing face to face, but certainly better then not playing.
i agree with this, for all of the invites there are only a hardcore few that seem to really get into it and use it
They say about 4,000 invites when out this time, double the amount last time.
Well, there certainly weren't 2,000 people being active. There were many times people were looking for a game to play and no one was running one or planning to run one.
The people everyone sees on here talking about the old days, were the most active in the beta. So people weren't to interested, or tried it and thought, eh. I'm kind of in the second half. I've yet to run a game, and I should do that. I've played in several, and it was ok. Certainly not better then playing face to face, but certainly better then not playing.
i agree with this, for all of the invites there are only a hardcore few that seem to really get into it and use it
To be perfectly honest, I'd probably get into it a lot more if I didn't have to do so much work to run a game. It took 15 or 20 hours for a 3 hour game on the VT. In my home game, it takes about 15 hours of planning to set up about 15 hours game time.(usually my palnning lasts for 2-3 weeks, with maybe an hour of redesign each week.
Still I think that kind of reflects what they learned in their survey a while back that the majority of people don't actually want a VT, they want tools that will make their home game easier. Why do a survey and then ignore it.
4,000 invites but only 1,875 even have forum accounts, and there certainly not that many people leaving feedback in the Beta test group.
Still I think that kind of reflects what they learned in their survey a while back that the majority of people don't actually want a VT, they want tools that will make their home game easier. Why do a survey and then ignore it.
It doesn't help that even though I have the invite, I can't get into the beta group....
It wouldn't surprise me at all if the majority of people want things to help their home games. That's all that there has been in D&D for a few decades now.
The VT, and a strong, centralized community behind it, could be something entirely new. Nobody knows how to utilize it to its fullest potential yet but that potential should not be underestimated.
People don't want a VT because they don't know how awesome it could be. This could be the kernel of a true online D&D community. Think LFR, only...with an entire world actually able to interact and play together without geographical limitations.
It wouldn't surprise me at all if the majority of people want things to help their home games. That's all that there has been in D&D for a few decades now.
The VT, and a strong, centralized community behind it, could be something entirely new. Nobody knows how to utilize it to its fullest potential yet but that potential should not be underestimated.
VTT's have existed for years already. This isn't breaking new ground. It's a niche market. Yes, there would be more exposure thanks to Wizards' name recognition, but I don't expect it to boom. I use Fantasy Grounds myself, and its features far surpass anything that DDI currently has, except for the direct connection to the DDI cloud.
D&D is a social game. People still enjoy playing PnP because they can physically get together and interact together face to face. The VT does not allow this. It never will. Yes, the VT will be a welcome addition, but it will never replace PnP gaming.
As for the strength of community... Wizards has had the opportunity to strengthen this community and offer us the ability to share custom content and resources. They have not done so to date. I don't expect this any time soon. The Community site that they have created is a step in the right direction, but it's been stuck on this step for years. This is the first time that I have noticed that it does not have the Beta stamp on the Community label.
Build the tool so that only 2 computers need to be used to run the game: The DM's laptop and the players' computer connected to the big screen. Ideally only the DM would have to be a DDI subscriber. To that end, would it be possible for more than 1 computer to log onto the same account somehow, such that additional log-ons have very limited options? Anyway, that's my request. Cheers!
The only thing it is lacking is a import from the D&DI because WotC asked them to remove it.
You do realise that for the home game Masterplan does pretty much everything the VT does (and more), but you can do it on one computer with duel monitors, or say a laptop connected to a monitor or projector.
The only thing it is lacking is a import from the D&DI because WotC asked them to remove it.
first, that export is actually a huge deal.
Second, the learning curve for masterplan is pretty high(I still haven't figured out how to export the plot points to print in such a way that it doesn't use 3 times more paper than necessary, and map building requires a lot of extra set-up the VT doesn't)
third, I Want to pay WOTC for this product. they don't have the product, so I can. Ultimately, I want something that will let me print out information so that I can use it at a table without a pc. Telling me go use Masterplan doesn't help me justify DDI, especially given that it doesn't hook into DDI anymore.
Yeah with that and the Compendium you are pretty much set (shame it doesn't seem to work in college) arrrgh!
Masterplan to do your maps and Power2ool to do your printing and organisation, alternatively wait another two or three years for WotC to catch up.
You do realise that for the home game Masterplan does pretty much everything the VT does (and more), but you can do it on one computer with duel monitors, or say a laptop connected to a monitor or projector.
The only thing it is lacking is a import from the D&DI because WotC asked them to remove it.
I'm lucky to just be able to have a computer that displays on a wide-screen TV, a lot of folks don't have that. But most folks will have access to more than one computer, perhaps a laptop with a bigger screen that some players could share. And even if you could manage hooking the one computer up to the screen or projector, sharing one computer with the whole group would be cumbersome; you really need at least two seperate interfaces to allow the DM to see his stuff and keep moving while the players take turns.
Oh if it is just justifying the D&DI use power2ool you have to have a D&DI account to use that it has a better monster builder than the both the classic Monster Builder and Online Monster Builder, it arranges all the information you want for your table top game in a neat fashion.
Yeah with that and the Compendium you are pretty much set (shame it doesn't seem to work in college) arrrgh!
Masterplan to do your maps and Power2ool to do your printing and organisation, alternatively wait another two or three years for WotC to catch up.
Thanks for the tip about power2ool connecting to the Compendium, it's pretty slick. I think I'll probably use it for treasure but will stick with the old Adventure Tools for monsters (until the online one is better).
I for one am really anticipating the chance to see how a few pick up games go in the 90's I used to be part of a weekly group and now after a 20 year break am interested in jumping back in but I am housebound, so really very limited on options.
I have seen a few other Vts however there is no easy method of finding or joining a group so I am hoping this begins to work well once those of us with limited choices are brought in.
What gets me about the people who are just raving about the VT, it's mainly the people who have no one around to play DnD with, and really want to play DnD. That's great. But it's also making them a little blind to the truth about the VT.
snip
If people are just going to be blind to what the VT is, and what it could be, because all they care about is finally being able to play DnD, because no one around them can or wants to, well, that's not very helpful is it?
I'd say that's rather insulting, since I'm pretty sure I fall into the category of people you think aren't being helpful. Especially the part about "because no one around them can or wants to" - that's uncalled for. And in my case, at least, untrue as I do have in-person gaming groups.
What you describe as things we're "blind" to for me fall into the category of "Yeah, it's beta, it's not polished yet." Could they do work on it? Absolutely. Should we all submit our suggestions on what they should improve? Definitely.
Am I "blind" to it because I choose to focus on my forum-posted reactions on the core product, rather than things that will probably be fixed and tidied up? Hell no.
To Jharii, yes there have been VTs for years. I'm aware. I'm also aware that they're not all that popular. The difference this time, I believe (i.e. it is my opinion that you can feel free to disregard) that having the weight of the D&D brand behind this official version will be the catalyst to developing true online D&D communities. Basically, it's what D&D Online should have been, rather than an Everquest clone. WotC is able to put a "Play online with people all around the world!" advert in the back of the books, in gaming stores, on their website, etc. to a degree that 3rd party VTs just simply can't do. What gets me excited is the potential that the community might rally behind it as opposed to any technical advantage it may or may not have over the 3rd party apps.
let me see if i understand you dane
only if you have lots of face to face games does your opinion of the vt count?
one of my campaigns started back...does this mean im allowed to like the vt and it *count*?
please help me understand which opinions count and which dont almighty dane
*bows to dane the god of which opinions matter*
To Jharii, yes there have been VTs for years. I'm aware. I'm also aware that they're not all that popular. The difference this time, I believe (i.e. it is my opinion that you can feel free to disregard) that having the weight of the D&D brand behind this official version will be the catalyst to developing true online D&D communities....What gets me excited is the potential that the community might rally behind it as opposed to any technical advantage it may or may not have over the 3rd party apps.
Actually, I've found that the biggest reasons people don't use existing VTTs are that some people can't figure out the technical aspects(opening ports, building/importing frameworks, etc.) and that they tend to have a fairly steep learning curve--both of which are currently untrue of the WOTC VT.
To Jharii, yes there have been VTs for years. I'm aware. I'm also aware that they're not all that popular. The difference this time, I believe (i.e. it is my opinion that you can feel free to disregard) that having the weight of the D&D brand behind this official version will be the catalyst to developing true online D&D communities. Basically, it's what D&D Online should have been, rather than an Everquest clone. WotC is able to put a "Play online with people all around the world!" advert in the back of the books, in gaming stores, on their website, etc. to a degree that 3rd party VTs just simply can't do. What gets me excited is the potential that the community might rally behind it as opposed to any technical advantage it may or may not have over the 3rd party apps.
Yeah, the name recognition well help. But I also see this scenario ensuing: New (to the VT) player joins up and loves the VT. Gets wind from others in the community that FG or d20 has better features. New VT player asks why we don't have these features.
I am not saying that this scenario is going to run rampant. But it will happen. They run the risk of driving people to the competition if their own VT is not the be-all, end-all of VT's, or at least be in the upper echelon. A rift could definitely form in the community, which would be the exact opposite of what the VT is trying to accomplish.
Anyhow, I am pretty sure that the VT is going to be a success. I just hope it meets the needs of everyone in this community.
They aren't going to stop working on because it needs work.
They did with the Character Visualiser, and the 3D Game Table and oh yeah the complied issues of Dragon and Dungeon.....
Actually, I've found that the biggest reasons people don't use existing VTTs are that some people can't figure out the technical aspects(opening ports, building/importing frameworks, etc.) and that they tend to have a fairly steep learning curve--both of which are currently untrue of the WOTC VT.
In all fairness, the VT isn't exactly feature-rich at this point in time. Troubleshooting and support are just barely under way. Things will get more complex as development progresses. You can rest assured that they will encounter many of the same isses that others have.
They aren't going to stop working on because it needs work.
They did with the Character Visualiser, and the 3D Game Table and oh yeah the complied issues of Dragon and Dungeon.....
ha ha ha.
That was evil.
Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.
Fact: In the 5 characters I brought in, there was a lot of mistakes, bugs, and issues with the way the information is presented. The number one being if it's actually information. Such as telling me that the Infernal Wrath grants me the Infernal Wrath racial trait. Or that only 8% of the feats over 5 characters actually said what the feat does.
Same goes with monsters, they don't always import right. They also haven't fixed several of long standing bugs.
This is more what I was going for.
If you have specific questions or want more screen shots, I'd be happy to try and answer or post more.
That would be great. Like screen shots of the interface? Some idea of why level/dungeon design takes so long.
And Dane, the reason I got so frustrated with people's opinions is because it ceased to be about the VT and turned into bickering about unrelated things.
Some idea of why level/dungeon design takes so long.
Currently I'm working on an adventure for 5 level 3 characters.
So first I have to draw the maps, because of the limited tile set I'm forced into doing a dungeon adventure in a grey tiled dungeon (I suppose it doubles as a castle if you have the stair go up instead of down). Designing a map can be pretty frustrating as the tile set is so limited you can't always find what you want. I wanted a throne for example, the only one I could find is clearly for a large creature, so instead I thought I'll put in a tomb. The only coffin is on an 8x4 tile with another just across from it for some reason the 2x1 single coffin tile isn't there. Still I can work with that. So the adventure changes to suit the tiles my throne room becomes a crypt and instead of a single tomb I have two, perhaps it is a family tomb rather than just one for a dead king.
(Actually if I took the time I could probably by masking parts of the tile with other tiles or the paint brush have just one coffin if I wanted but that would take more time)
So I build my map now I need to populate it with monsters.
There is no built in encounter builder for a start so you either have to use the Adventure Tool one (which Flash now gives me a warning about it having a script that can lock up my PC, and it does appear to do) or use the one I wrote for myself in excel.
Then once I've decided what sort (elite, minion, solo, etc) and level of monsters I want try and get it down to specific creatures... it's a tomb so I figure undead, and maybe some spiders and stuff like that.
Now on the compedium I can search on a keyword like undead, and I get all the undead, not in the VT, I can only search on name so putting in undead just gets me four entries. The VT's monster import also doesn't allow you to order anything by name, level or anything useful, and they don't seem to list the monsters in any logical order to start with (See the screen shot of it in the earlier post for what I mean). You can limit by role, and secondary role and source or between level X and Y, but it doesn't really have the functionality I want. Also you can't tell anything about the monster other than name, role, secondry role and level until you import it. All this makes it pretty tricky to import monsters unless you already know what you are looking for. So I'm using the compedium to sort for the monsters I want.
So I have my excel sheet open, the Compendium open and the VT open and I'm switching between the lot to build my encounter. I eventually find a nice group of skeletons, minions and elite some standard ones and import them in the VT (I haven't taken the time to muck about with them in the OMB that would be another window, I'll take them as they come). All the monsters come in with the same dragon head icon as their token. So I edit each one to have a suitable skeleton token, due to the limited tokens all my skeletons have the same picture... but at least they have a token that looks like the monster, not so lucky with my ghosts later on.
Then I add some notes to the map, description of the place, DM notes about features of the room, etc. Add some Public Journal entries, and some private ones, after doing three more rooms I realise that the Journal feature isn't so great because again there is no way to order things in it, no folder options let alone an alphabetical listing.
So since I'm being a good beta tester I take time out from adventure design to report it in the feedback forum.
Oh and then I come here and feedback to other folks...
Still I've got three rooms done and three more to go, and I've figured out at least two ways to do secret doors and traps in the meantime. I think I'll probably be able to run my adventure next week sometime.
Some idea of why level/dungeon design takes so long.
Currently I'm working on an adventure for 5 level 3 characters.
invite me
Thanks for taking the time, that was some insightful stuff. I had heard about importing issues, but it's good to see how they impact things.
And it definitely seems as if encounter designing in general is pretty weak.
I know tableside I just use a large wet-erase map and don't plan a ton of the details out ahead of time because I know I can just plop it down with ease. I can see now that putting stuff together in the VT is going to be a bit more... time intensive.
Hopefully that is something they address asap.
I'd be interested in DM'ing online (though I've not dm'ed much in real life) if it's not too cumbersome to manage.
I have to admit, I'm one of the Masterplan junkies, so I'm eager to try DMing with the VT so I can do a comparison. I've gotten handy enough with the MP map builder than I can pull together encounters with it during sessions with my players - just put on my kobold voice and distract them with drinking songs until the ambush - and pretty much all of them are using iPlay4e as well.
How is the VT for planning encounter-chain flow? Does it have any sort of Masterplan-like flowchart ability? Can you map out a large dungeon, break it out by area, and automatically generate your encounter line-up from that for the larger ones? Does it have tracking features for summons and companion creatures (a gripe with MP. Have to either add them as a token, without a health bar, or as a combatant, which affects the displayed XP balance)?
How bandwidth intensive is it? I'm in an area with less than adequate internet, and half the time I end up just tethering my cellphone; is that going to be enough - obviously it won't be enough for voicechat - or will I have/cause issues even with that?
No idea I'm on cable.
I have to admit, I'm one of the Masterplan junkies, so I'm eager to try DMing with the VT so I can do a comparison. I've gotten handy enough with the MP map builder than I can pull together encounters with it during sessions with my players - just put on my kobold voice and distract them with drinking songs until the ambush - and pretty much all of them are using iPlay4e as well.
I would Masterplan currently organises tiles better, but the VT isn't that hard to use for map building. You can't zone the maps like you can in Masterplan, you can put notes on it, or in the Journal you can't link the Journal notes to a location (like you can in Masterplan).
How is the VT for planning encounter-chain flow? Does it have any sort of Masterplan-like flowchart ability?
No
Can you map out a large dungeon, break it out by area,
You can map a large dungeon, then hide it an only reveal sections at a time.
and automatically generate your encounter line-up from that for the larger ones?
No.
Does it have tracking features for summons and companion creatures (a gripe with MP. Have to either add them as a token, without a health bar, or as a combatant, which affects the displayed XP balance)?
Since the VT does no XP tracking what so ever you don't have that problem with summoned creatures, I've not tried bringing a creature in mid battle yet to see what that does to the initiative board though.
I did not get a lobotomy and become unable to report things I consider bugs as a result.
Keep in mind that some supposed bugs are more "this doesn't work how I want it too".
I've made large maps (the entire Red Box dungeon, and half the flipside of it), and sometimes you just need to draw stuff or layer tiles to get the effects you want. That isn't ideal of course, but it is a good starting point for testing the way the product works. The truth is that for testing those extra images are not critical, but they are for a live product.
This is a beta.
It is not version 1.0.
People seem to expect the beta to do exactly what they want like products that have been on the market and in development for years before it reaches version 1.0.
That isn't the point to the beta test, the point is to use the tool and report bugs, and identify feature improvements that can be made in the products lifetime.
So yes I like the VT as it stands as a starting point for a product. If this was the "live" VT I would have serious complaints, but it isn't and it is being improved.
It might not be the DnD experience you want, but that is a subjective opinion rather than a critical reflection on the way the product works. The fact that I'm happy with the experience it provides in no way stops me providing a critical opinion on its function.
I've reported plenty of bugs and suggested plenty of features: all because I like the product and I want it to get better.
Would I recoment taking out a DDI sub for the VT-Beta? No. You are not certain to get a spot after all.
Do I think being involved in the beta and having a chance to give feedback (bugs or feature suggestions) is worthwhile? Yes. Most definately. The VT is making a great start.
Keep in mind that some supposed bugs are more "this doesn't work how I want it too".
Agreed a lot of the stuff I'm reporting aren't bugs more features the VT needs. There are still bugs however, thankfully none appear so critical that the thing falls over.
The truth is that for testing those extra images are not critical, but they are for a live product.
This is a beta.
It's kind of in the transition though, if they are planning to open it up to all the D&DI (eventually) even in Beta state it is going to need more flexibility in adventure design or people just aren't going to be interested in using it.
People seem to expect the beta to do exactly what they want like products that have been on the market and in development for years before it reaches version 1.0
I think people would like to have seen WotC have at least looked and learn some ideas from other products on the market rather than trying to reinvent the wheel. The journal aspect of the VT is terrible, it looks like it has been throw on as an after thought, have they not looked at journals in other VT's before hand?
That isn't the point to the beta test, the point is to use the tool and report bugs, and identify feature improvements that can be made in the products lifetime.
But you really shouldn't need to point out stuff they could have learned from spending a couple of days researching other products on the market. Did they do any market research of competitors products or asking customers what they might want out of a VT before they started programing?
It doesn't look like it.
That's why we need to test and report actual bugs, not creat bugs out of features that are not present.
(You'll note I don't deny the existence of bugs.)
They clearly did some research, and I think they have hit the major requirements to make a VT work, even if they still need a good polish. Once that is done feature enrichment can happen.
That's why we need to test and report actual bugs, not creat bugs out of features that are not present.
(You'll note I don't deny the existence of bugs.)
If it's as similar to the previous beta cycle as it sounds, what features are there to test?
@Mock - Importing is the main thing to test right now, there are bugs with it, although some of those bugs are just transfers of the bugs from the Character Builder.
They clearly did some research, and I think they have hit the major requirements to make a VT work, even if they still need a good polish. Once that is done feature enrichment can happen.
That's why we need to test and report actual bugs, not creat bugs out of features that are not present.
(You'll note I don't deny the existence of bugs.)
If it's as similar to the previous beta cycle as it sounds, what features are there to test?
I don't think anyone is creating bugs out of missing features, but missing features are still missing and worth feeding back as such.
@Mock - Importing is the main thing to test right now, there are bugs with it, although some of those bugs are just transfers of the bugs from the Character Builder.
I think that one of the things that they are also working on is server loads. By gradually increasing the number of people in the beta, they can cautiosly increase the load on the servers to find out where it needs reinforcing.
"slightly more complete import" is a bit of an understatement. Instead of manually writing in your entire character sheet, it's now pulled directly from the Builder. You don't even have to "Export" out of the builder first - the entire character list in your Builder shows up in the VT, and you just pick the character you want.
Any houserule support? I play in a campaign with an extra feat allowed and the CB doesn't allow for it.