Fantasy Grounds and One D&D - predictions for the future

I started playing D&D in 1985, so I realize I'm kind of in the minority here, but personally, I prefer theater of the mind for ttrpgs. I like 2d maps, I like simpler maps. I also find that even on FGU right now, when I have LOS, lighting and effects (like water effects) going, it slows down the game too much for my players, and I end up having to turn some things off. I prefer ease of gameplay over visuals.

Personally, think the new theater of the mind option you're working on for FGU looks amazing. One thing: it's easy for the average person to some up with 2d assets with transparent backgrounds that will work with it easily! This encourages homebrew.

I would encourage you to continue to differentiate FGU from the direction WotC is going.

Thanks for the update Doug! It was a relief, for me, that WotC is not trying to make their VTT a clone of Fantasy Grounds (or Roll20, Foundry, etc.). I'm really happy with the current mix of pen and paper to automation features FG provides (If I recall there is something like a 70/30 rule?). Fantasy Grounds gives me the right balance of features that scratch my VTT itch.

If 3D maps were to come to FG I would rather they were unique and exclusive to our FG community. Something that comes to mind is licensed virtual Dwarven Forge map tiles. Making another premiere partnership as you have with Syrinscape would be another big win imo.

Thanks for the response, Doug.
I voiced my concerns on the Discord channel when OneDnD was announced. I agree that the 3D VTT that WOTC presented looks good and could change the game. Likewise, I also agree that it could be very expensive to maintain from a player/DM standpoint and the availability of assets. I brought my group to FGU this time last year after trying other VTT's. FGU is the best system overall when it comes to playing DnD. It is very flexible and does so much more than the others. The interface was tough to take in at first, but overtime we have gotten use to it. My only concern is Smiteworks retaining the license to distribute DnD products. This has become our home and I do not want to move again. The 2.5D concept you presented, I find to be the perfect direction to take FGU too. As you mentioned, the assets will be available from the books that we purchase, and it is just the matter of building asset libraries for backgrounds and decor. I do suggest if possible to make some changes to existing platform like the character sheet and introduce pop outs to allow for more real estate. The cool feature that you presented weeks past with dice is also a good start. I would also consider a ping to get the player's attention and a better way to provide a measurement tool outside the pointers on the fly for the players/dm to check distance without leaving it on the table. Maybe create a pointer that will fill a 5' square outwards in a straight line to show the path of something like a lightning bolt. Would also add a way to track movement and lock if the players reach their max, with a DM override if they wish to burn and action to go further. Sorry for the ramble, but from my point of view, the above will make FGU the best place to be over all others and provide what the other systems provide out of the box.

Keep flying and altitude in mind when designing these features. I think this a great approach and being able to tilt your camera up to view flying creatures would be sweet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by similarly

I started playing D&D in 1985, so I realize I'm kind of in the minority here, but personally, I prefer theater of the mind for ttrpgs. I like 2d maps, I like simpler maps. I also find that even on FGU right now, when I have LOS, lighting and effects (like water effects) going, it slows down the game too much for my players, and I end up having to turn some things off. I prefer ease of gameplay over visuals.

Personally, think the new theater of the mind option you're working on for FGU looks amazing. One thing: it's easy for the average person to some up with 2d assets with transparent backgrounds that will work with it easily! This encourages homebrew.

I would encourage you to continue to differentiate FGU from the direction WotC is going.

---

Yep!

I like the ideas presented in the demo video. However, I don't see them as "theater of the mind" as much as another different view of the characters' environment. I would be extremely cautious about labeling something as "theater of the mind" when it presents the kind of view in the demo. TOTM, to me, is having no battle map, no grid, and perhaps some basic images to that give an idea of the environment and the characters' opposition ("here's what the druid looks like when it wild shapes into an owlbear").

I would love to see more TOTM options. The TOTM extension is a start. Even more basic ideas like the Sly Flourish / Lazy DM text-based combat tracking would be welcome. Something that is better and more purpose-built than posting text to Discord, and gives the advantages/automation that a VTT can provide.

I DM for two different groups, one with adult friends and one as a youth game club. The adult friends can use FG directly. The game club, not so much. I really hope that FG can expand into the browser and mobile space somehow, to support iPhones, iPads, and Chromebooks. That's the sweet spot for the youth game club. With my investment into FG, I don't want FG to be stuck with a shrinking and aging market potential.

I also wonder if there's a third party opportunity for various VTTs to develop standard import/export formats for assets, maps, NPCs, characters, modules, game rules, etc. I could see this as a way to reduce the complexity, cost, friction, and effort required to get all of that stuff into a non-first party VTT. It could be especially helpful for home-brew and third party / licensed / kickstarted content. In a first-party VTT world, the third party VTTs and content creators might be best banding together — and having something better than a downloadable PDF or ePub.

I for one, as a member of the Fantasy Grounds community, am in strong support of continued relevance of the FGU platform. I am concerned that WOTC may make some bad licensing decisions in the near future in an effort to monopolize online gaming. What can the members of the gaming community do to guide WOTC away from attempting to become a monolithic provider?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ColinO

I for one, as a member of the Fantasy Grounds community, am in strong support of continued relevance of the FGU platform. I am concerned that WOTC may make some bad licensing decisions in the near future in an effort to monopolize online gaming. What can the members of the gaming community do to guide WOTC away from attempting to become a monolithic provider?

---

WotC seems to be pretty engaged with the community through it's social media accounts (atleast Twitter). They also periodically conduct community surveys. The surveys are about specific topics of interest to them, but are a great opportunity to have your voice heard. You can find out about he surveys through various outlets as well as through signing up for a Wizards account via their wewbsite.

Very honest take on the way ahead. You also have the advantage of 3rd party developers like AAW games who make excellent content that you host. D&D Beyond doesn't do this to my knowledge. Certainly an advantage for you to exploit.

Hi Doug,

Your interest in what we think is why I believe you will still have a great following. In addition to that the main advantage I see FGU has over One D&D is that your VTT allows the use of many other TRPG's were WOTC will only have their marketable brands. The other important factor is ease of use. I would not say at the moment that FGU is the easiest to use, it took quite a while for myself to learn. That being said, compared to the other options out there, FGU, is more feature rich than the others, though they are closing in on you. In addition to this your fan base is so awesome, that there is FGU academy!! Wow! All these VTT's have a learning curve though, so it really comes down to aesthetics if everything else is the same. The other factor, which is very important and which many here have shared with you, is accessibility. Using your own assets or assets you have purchased through FGU and other companies is a big plus to me. Nobody likes to be forced to use only proprietary assets when you buy into a VTT or anything else for that matter. You have an advantage here over what 3d assets will do for One D&D. You could expand on this by making your VTT extraordinary by creating a generic format where users could create their own RPG systems. That is actually what I am looking for in a next gen VTT. This way all the RPG's I have in my library I could convert to online play. I know this might be a difficult ask but that is where I see a need no one is currently fulfilling at least to the degree that an average user like myself could accomplish. In short ease of use and flexibility will win out. FGU has a lot going for it, for even though I am unwilling to learn code to make my RPG's there are others that do. I just wish it were more accessible to non-coders like myself. If you can do this, you have nothing to worry about. Even if you don't there is your loyalty base. You have great customer service, a very active and friendly community and most of all, you care.

ps. I know that asking you to create a system where players don't need to buy online manuals mays seem self-defeating. This is one of the rare cases where you have two options; 1 subscription service and 2. Let it roll, if you have assets that I can buy to save me from creating everything from scratch. I am going to buy the products. Yes, there are those who won't, but I believe most would, just having the option would be nice though. Do it before someone else does. You could also have two VTT's this one and the generic ease of use one. Just food for thought, I want you to succeed, I like your company and I like this community.
Most Sincerely James (aka Aramis Dante)