18 months on : FG vs. Roll20 vs Foundry

[strei]

3) You want that? That's an extension. Or write some code.

I'm mildly critical of FG for leaving some stuff which I feel should be core functionality to be handled by extensions. But on Foundry this philosophy is all-pervasive. Even popping out your character sheet to a separate window (core Roll20 functionality and hardly rocket science for something browser-based) requires an extension. The Foundry Discord is reams upon reams upon reams of discussing what extensions to install followed by how to get them all working in the same version. This is a recipe for swift development but a disaster for anyone running a year-long campaign. I've been running my regular group in FG through some absolute convulsions like FGU going through and out of beta and the release of lighting and every week the PHB has been reliably there for my players and the commercial adventure module still works and wow now the maps have lighting! In my limited experience of Foundry everything breaks all the time.

again, there's something true here, but also something misguided. the phb will always work in foundry too, it's not gonna break because of a module or an update to foundry. there are modules that came out day 1 in foundry, almost 2 years ago, and still work without EVER breaking, not once, see, popout module as an example.
so yeah, depending on the user's decisions, it can be more or less work to have the modules all good and dandy when you decide to hit the update button. i would also like to inform people there is no imp with a gun to your head forcing you to hit the update button at any moment in time. you can do it daily, hourly, monthly, yearly...

being on the cutting edge in any industry comes with issues. in terms of modules, hiding things from consumers for 6 months to make sure they are not gonna cause the lowest common denominator any issues, rather than push them out when they are ready to work for most users, is a choice many prefer. up to each person to have their preference, but if they prefer otherwise, they can just delay the updates to cater for this. not for a year really but ye, not on release day or week.


all that said, i would like to stop things for a moment to state this:

foundry experience isn't perfect. and it does require fiddling with modules to have automation going for most systems. modules can have conflicts sometimes, or take a couple weeks to work on foundry's newest version, or with another module you like. you can have all dnd content but it is not there officially. and relies on 3rd party people for some features most of us here love. if this detracts from your experience with a VTT it most likely isn't the VTT for you. considering the prices involved with FGU dnd 5e, you can afford to try out foundry on a whim and it's a drop in the ocean for you. who knows, maybe for your needs, wants, tastes and willingness to give it a shot it works out, maybe it doesn't, if you don't have the time to waste on trying, don't even consider it. if you always seek the best possible experience it's worth to give it a go.

4) The UI is more familiar at a glance, but it still requires arcane juggling the moment you dive deeper. Double right-click to target is not superior to CTRL-click to target. And because Foundry doesn't speak RPG, accessing stuff is often a bit obscured by the totally generic nature of the object model. For example, you cannot see what damage weapons do at a glance on your character sheet. You have to open up the details pop-up, which is a tiny icon and highly non-obvious. I would actually say that we have more plaintive calls for help accessing basic player stuff to the GM and the one technohacker member of the group for Foundry than we ever have for FG. So this much-vaunted UI is actually no easier in practice than FG's much-derided UI. Especially not once you've got 40 extensions installed.

targeting with a keybind has now been integrated into foundry.

the UI and UX is better. it is more generic in names for things, but expecting a competing platform to use the same names for things or have features work in the same way is not a fair expactation to have. using the word "vision" instead of "sight" should make it technohacker non rpg land.
you can see the damage weapons do at a glance on many game systems, and in dnd 5e specifically if you use the most popular character sheets rather than the basic system one. (yeah "there's a module for that", i know. but tidy sheet has been on foundry since it came out and never once broken too, so, you know..)

also, are you telling me, your group playing for years on FG or FGU has less doubts and questions than the people playing on new platform? nooo..... it can't be. people having doubts on new stuff?
sarcasm aside, i do wonder just how much people try to learn the new platform rather than expect it to be their old platform in a new name with extra features. for an analogy, it is common to find users that try to drive the car faster by trying to whip it harder or pulling reigns rather than using a sterring wheel or saying shifters and gears are arcane and break all the time, and then yelling the car is much worse than the horse for transportation, as the horse has beein great for centuries.

5) I'm sorry to say it, but the fraction of tribal asshats in the Foundry online supporter community seems to be higher than FG or Roll20. There ARE plenty of nice and supportive people out there, but there's also something of a rabid-follower-one-true-way-information-must-be-free-sheeple thing going on too. This may just be my mistaken impression but there it is, that's my experience. I found it rather off-putting.

i have the similar experience, but in mirrored fashion. the amount of aid i've provided to FGU users and the amount of times i get FGU asshats that can't make a logical argument and just have a holier than thou, traditionalist atitude is worse than the roll20 toxic % or astral, owlbear rodeo, talespire communities.

WHAT IT IS NOT GOOD FOR

Maintenance reliability the moment you have extensions, which you will because achieving the awesome requires them
5E content, and purchased adventure content generally
Picking it up and running a game by Saturday (our regular GM spends HOURS AND HOURS doing prep. It's nothing like buying Icespire Peak and away you go)
The learning curve is significantly steeper than Roll20 and player-side automation is much worse especially for 5E
Hard to recommend as your first VTT as a result unless you are comfortable with GitHub and basic developer sysadmin chores

Foundry is a hacker toolbox, not a one-stop-shop VTT

maintance is a potential concern. even for most savvy users. i have spent like 10h in 1 entire year on maintnance. a very different experience than your GM it seems. even tho i used 3 times more feature modules.

5e content can be like what you say for any user who doesn't gain information that would prevent it to be so. unfortunately WotC is not a good company to do business with, and cause this issue. anyone that wants to just buy x adventure module and have it just work in foundry, or use the latest y rule book can, easily too. but they won't be finding that inside foundry void of anything else.

learning curve is higher than roll20 on account of you doing more than in roll 20. for players of dnd 5e, with all automation, it can be lower than FGU assuming the GM knew how to make it so, which is the fault. requiring this user knowledge and it not being obviously apparent and easily found is a lacking. especially compared to FGU.

i have literally helped hundreds of ppl with their 1st vtt experience due to doing a lot of Westmarch and One shot type sessions, and the feedback i got was overwhelmingly positive. it is a much better 1st vtt experience than roll20 fundamentally. but to do the same automation as FG in 5e, from the GM perspective, it will be a much steeper learning curve and harder. for players, it is not the same however. it can be easier than FGU due to the latter's outdated UI/UX imho.

[Jiminimonka]

attacks on the messenger not the message was most of what was posted previously, but only my replies to those get moderation attention, as expected lol

in any case, let me address your initial post then.


calling random developers hackers is something taken straight out of any political propaganda or smear campaign. maybe you are trying to use the term more literally and disregard the connotations and meaning it carries in present day culture, but it sets the tone for your perspective immediately. a guise of unbiased opinion delivering an agenda.
the design philosophy of fostering a thriving mod community is indeed a fundamental part of foundry, but this does not mean the number 1 priority is not the average consumer, which it is. and there's almost 2 years for development proving that. just having great API and a habitat for modders does not need to be mutually exclusive with aiming for the average user.

unlike roll20 and FG, there is no centralized marketplace in foundry. not understanding this isn't your fault however. and navigating the web space to find the products is certainly harder and more effort, a lesser experience, than having everything in 1 marketplace. but the number of adventure or compendium type modules, let's call it content modules, far outnumbers the feature modules by a scale of 10 to 1 or, most likely, above. the average foundry user has gotten used to just expecting foundry content straight from their favourite content creators. which are people living only from making content for VTTs in general, or even some, just foundry in specific.
it is also possible to port any content sold on roll20 to foundry. this is mostly effortless, not perfect but ok.
so to reiterate, while there is definitively a fault on the foundry ecosystem to be found in this aspect, the argument about content to feature module ratio and what it illustrates is fallacious and shows your lack of understanding of matters. FOSS by nature of being open and free, can be put anywhere, like the official module list. paid content needs to be gated. which hides it from the free official module list and not all artists wanted to use the premium partner program and chose to monetize their products directly, getting a bigger cut of the profits.

also, skyrim was sold 13 times, as in, different versions, up to a decade after it came out, unlike almost every videogame, because it is a "code-twiddler's paradise" despite it being a very faulty product. other similar products have long since barely moved units. Minecraft's success is also related to this. roblox is the biggest grossing platform of the day, because how easy it made making experiences on it to anyone wanting to.


they are stuck because they want to. there are often alternatives to 1 module, and without mention of what this feature was that was so important that help someone back, i can't speak much to it.
i can also recount the experience of many people who live on foundry's latest version, get regular updates and don't have extensions break almost ever. they don't update to major system releases on release day however. a healthy wait of 1 week, or a month for those more conservative, is usually the sane option. this while on dnd 5e, and having all features FGU has in terms of automation.

The Forge does nothing to help GMs with maintenance except make it easy to find outdate versions of anything. the same can be a achieve if a user backup their data before doing changes that might end in disaster. some would say this is basic computer practices, but i understand a lot of users do not do it. and some might be limited in their ability of doing it.

at the end of the day, foundry gives the user all the power in their experience. this is a blessing and a curse. because users who are more limited will have a more limited experience. and users will damage their experience without necessity as well, like in any software really. so while there is a fair distance to perfection in this aspect, it is also not the hell some love to portray. most user experiences are found in the middle, not matrix heaven and not installing 1000 modules, modules that clearly should not be mixed, updating on release day of a major revision with session 1h away and then panicking when 1 module breaks entirely.



so, on the previous point you praise The Forge for doing legwork for users, which is keeping outdated versions of modules. but now you fault the platform, foundry, for keeping outdated modules that were since abandoned. ok. and yes, the professional company supports the product, and integrates these extensions into the product, at their pace. if it is a 3rd party extension it is not given official support. that said, given how the most popular extensions have more support from enthusiastic code heads than most competitions official products if the user can sense how to discriminate they might have a better experience than on some other platforms...



what are you going to do if WotC pulls the plug on any existing platform? deals from 2 decades ago aren't going to hold on forever. while in all seriousness 5e will likely last a long time, WotC may make their own VTT at any point now and pull their content from competition entirely.

even the FG staff state competition is good. WotC, and Hasbro, are not agile corporations. any platform that is less than 15 years old is not getting their support. and this is their fault. Paizo, you know, from pathfinder, arguable the number 2 in recognition and being popular, have EVERYTHING in terms of core books in foundry.
you want to support a stable ecosystem? then don't be a them whims of corporations out of touch with the present that operate like a dictator. instead, help foster a healthy market where you can sell your content to any consumer on any platform easily and effectively. without also being gauged in a super high percentage of your sales price to be able to sell in a given storefront rather than a sensible %.

Sorry, what exactly is your point?

[strei]

MODERATOR RESPONSES BELOW
Not acceptable. And until you came to the forums of a application you admit you do not use and made an account on the forum you were not involved in the issue and have no reason to be offended. Again, the thread was closed for a reason, there is no need for you or anyone else to 'right the wrongs' that may have been done in that thread.
That's good to hear. So does the FG experience for those that are actually using FG.

i am gonna just ignore most of what you said, to not waste more time and instead dedicate that to ontopic since how i spend my time worries you so much. ironic that you don't mind the other's offtopic responses, but you did mind my reply to those. but expected from the warrior defending their castle.
also, there's no harm that can be done to "my vtt of choice" from anything related to FG. and even if it could, last i checked i don't own any stake in FVTT nor do i have any sort of loyalty to it. i can't even see a reason to care about 1 vtt over another. i care about my experience or others' in general, consumer experience.

i have used FGU in the past, i no longer want to do so. good to know that aparently you seem to imply this isn't a public forum where anyone is welcome to talk in, but an exclusive forum for people who used FG/U in the last x amount of time. is it week? month? cus i've certainly used it before, i just consider it a lesser experience now and don't want to use it again unless it can outpace the experience i get elsewhere.

also, comparing how the FG experience improves with time to how Foundry user experience improves with time is ridiculous. it's not even within the same 2 leagues of magnitude. see the post of the user asking for multi thread. or any of the ever pervasive posts asking for a lot of features in any place FG is discussed. i will confirm the FGU experience improves with time of course. considerably. but let us not compare paces or act like they are comparable.

[Jiminimonka]

???

I still don't understand you point. Do you have one?

[HywelPhillips]

again, there's something true here, but also something misguided. the phb will always work in foundry too, it's not gonna break because of a module or an update to foundry. there are modules that came out day 1 in foundry, almost 2 years ago, and still work without EVER breaking, not once, see, popout module as an example.

The PHB is not available on Foundry. (Unless it's appeared there very recently). It can be imported via a convoluted process of data scraping from D&D Beyond, but it is not actually available to purchase and install in a straightforward way. Likewise, player facing modules like Tasha's and Xanathar's guide.

Other than that, it seems you agree with at least the core of many of my observations but conclude that they are not a major issue for you and that FOR YOU Foundry is the superior solution.

Which is perfectly fine. I'm 100% sure you're right.

It is not currently the superior solution for me, as I outlined in my original posts.

Foundry's particular drawbacks make it less suitable for my purposes than Fantasy Grounds, and its plus points are less appealing to me than the plus points of Fantasy Grounds.

I set out my experience of using all the platforms for my use case and explained my reasoning; I stand by those reasons as I stand by my observations in my original posts on Roll20, Foundry, FG and Shard Tabletop. We shall have to agree to disagree on our experience of the respective FG/Foundry communities.

I play on Foundry and Roll20 as well as FG, but I prefer to run my games on FG for all the reasons I stated in my posts.

Best regards,

Hywel Phillips

[Zacchaeus]

Let’s not derail the excellent point of the original post here by getting involved in the minutiae of one particular VTT.

Let’s just agree that there are adherents to each VTT on the market and convincing someone of the merits or demerits of any one is a pointless argument. The original post seeks to balance the good and bad in each of the three contenders mentioned whilst neither extolling one or denigrating the other.

Let’s also not descend into personal attacks.

[strei]

The PHB is not available on Foundry. (Unless it's appeared there very recently). It can be imported via a convoluted process of data scraping from D&D Beyond, but it is not actually available to purchase and install in a straightforward way. Likewise, player facing modules like Tasha's and Xanathar's guide.

Other than that, it seems you mostly agree with me for the most part then say that it doesn't matter and that FOR YOU Foundry is the superior solution.

Which is perfectly fine.

It is not currently the superior solution for me, as I outlined in my original posts.

Foundry's particular drawbacks make it less suitable for my purposes than Fantasy Grounds, and its plus points are less appealing to me than the plus points of Fantasy Grounds.

I set out my experience of using all the platforms for my use case and explained my reasoning; I stand by those reasons as I stand by my observations in my original posts on Roll20, Foundry, FG and Shard Tabletop. We shall have to agree to disagree on our experience of the respective FG/Foundry communities.

I play on Foundry and Roll20 as well as FG, but I prefer to run game on FG for all the reasons I stated in my posts.

Best regards,

Hywel Phillips

i think i worded it in the not most clear manner previously. the SRD is in, anything else is not, officially. but whatever it is, content wise, that is in, doesn't break with updates - which was what i was trying to address.

"mostly agree" when so many corrections and conflicting remarks were made is a big stretch. but there is certainly a chunk of stuff we can agree, namely, factual things.

we definitively agree it seems like it's not the best platform for you, are least, i think most certainly not for your GM. i am glad you have a platform that works good for you to run your games in!

also, it seems i need to state it since the last 2 posts here as i'm writing this, 1 yours the other from zacchaeus,are going somewhere with the conversation i never intended or tried to take it: i do not care what anyone's vtt of choice is, here or anywhere. unless it's someone i play with, it means very little to me. the point of my participation is clearing misinformation, warning interested parties in the pitfalls of foundry and relating how it compares to FGU from a very proficient user of FoundryVTT.

also zacc, for the initial post to work as it is supposed to be intended, it needs to be accurate in its claims. some of them do involve minutiae.
i may make my own thread with a 1st post like the one from here. but consider how if i misrepresent the FGU experience under the guise of it having been my experience, people here would most certainly call me out on it, and contribute corrections or clearings to the thread.
actually, i think that's what i should have done from the very begining, just make my own thread telling the tales of my adventures on FVTT, FGU, r20, astral, talespire and TTS as player and GM.

[Jiminimonka]

"Trolls in the Dungeon!

Just thought you ought to know....

faints..."

[LordEntrails]

i am gonna just ignore most of what you said, to not waste more time and instead dedicate that to ontopic since how i spend my time worries you so much. ironic that you don't mind the other's offtopic responses, but you did mind my reply to those. but expected from the warrior defending their castle.

If you have a problem with moderation, take it up with the moderator privately or directly with support. Arguing with moderation publicly is never acceptable in this community or any other I know of.

Users that have been an active member of this community and have positively contributed to the community are given a little more leeway than those who don't. If you feel a post is inappropriate, then report it via the "Report Post" button and one of the moderators will review it.

i have used FGU in the past, i no longer want to do so. good to know that aparently you seem to imply this isn't a public forum where anyone is welcome to talk in, but an exclusive forum for people who used FG/U in the last x amount of time. is it week? month? cus i've certainly used it before, i just consider it a lesser experience now and don't want to use it again unless it can outpace the experience i get elsewhere.

If you have used FGU in the past it is not under the user name you are currently using. If you wish to be given credence for such experience, then it would be best not to use an account you created just to argue the benefits of Foundry. Such behavior can be seen as creating a throw-away account for the purpose of trolling. And will not be looked upon kindly.

You hold a common misconception, because something is publicly accessible does not mean it is a public resource. This forum is not a public resource, it is privately owned by SmiteWorks. They pay for it and maintain it and they get to decide what it is used for. And the purpose they provide this for is as a resource for users of Fantasy Grounds, i.e. the FG Community. The FG Community welcomes respectful discussions that benefits the Community.

If you wish to contribute respectfully to this forum in a way that benefits the FG Community, please do so. If you don't wish to do so, please refrain from posting here.

[SieferSeesSomething]

If the UI and Performance improves then I would be so happy. The UI especially is what is causing some players to want to move to Foundry, despite me already buying books for FG. I'm not even talking fancy animated maps or dice skins, I mean I have to constantly tell them how to do stuff. One player didn't know how to edit a text field because it wasn't obvious what buttons to press to make it editable and there was no flashing text caret to indicate that it had focus. Those kind of things.

But I know you guys had to get to Unity, and the new lighting, image, and layer control tools demonstrate a more modern approach to UX so I know you guys are going in the right direction and will continue to improve all the old, clunky stuff now that you're no longer so tethered to FG Classic. For example, the new sidebar looks great, it takes up less screen real estate. And the themes that are coming out, like the winter theme from the other year, look beautiful, too.

Overall, I'm excited for all the changes. While I don't like the pressure from my players to change VTTs, I do think the competition is healthy. It makes me excited that FG has a reason to push forward and improve itself. Foundry seems to be making faster progress, but FG has a respected history, expansive extension and module catalog, and a strong base feature set. It's very hare and tortoise. The only one that scares me is the DnD Beyond VTT that was supposedly being considered. I haven't heard much, but that could be a game changer if that becomes a thing or WotC make one.