So I don't know if this is just a me thing, as I'm not seeing other discussions about this, but I wanted to register some feedback on Maps. In its current state (emphasis on current state) I absolutely hate it, BUT a lot of that could be fixed with seemingly fairly trivial adjustments. Bear with me on this.
Issue 1: Maps is pretty terrible for Theater of the Mind (TOTM) tables.
Now to be clear, it doesn't make them impossible to run, but it adds a LOT of unnecessary steps and grief. For those unfamiliar, TOTM is exactly what it sounds like: focusing more on imagination and vibes than things like strict positioning, tokens, etc. Some people like that really regimented, tactical style of combat, and that's great! I'm happy for them. That's just not remotely me. As a matter of fact, it's even partly a disability-related thing, because I have cerebral palsy and thankfully the only cognitive quasi-deficiency it left me with is mostly just...spatial reasoning and I don't get along. I don't THINK visually. It's more work for me. Now to be clear, I understand that I can just like, plop tokens down and just say screw it and run the encounter however. Understood, and that's fine. But it's an unnecessary extra step when, for a DM like me, the old encounter builder does literally everything I need it to, which brings me to...
Issue 2: Locking 2024 Rules math out of the old encounter builder is literal madness.
Why would you do this? One possible fix to all this would be to literally just let the "classic" encounter builder and Maps to both exist and both function. Boom, problem solved. But the old EB (which works way better for me while DMing) ONLY can use 2014 math. Again, respectfully...what? I understand it's like, a forced migration thing, but it is so utterly unnecessary and punitive towards folks who liked the old EB (for all its flaws) for their table. Now, it doesn't matter to me YET, because my current campaign is several years old so we're still using 2014 and didn't want to do a mid-campaign rule/math migration, but I'm hoping to run a one-shot soon-ish with two brand new players. I'll need to use Maps unless I want to manually figure out the points of difference between the rule sets in real time. It's a super easy fix (unless I'm vastly misunderstanding back end tech): just keep the old EB ALSO up and running and have there be a "2024 Rules" toggle for any encounter. Problem solved.
Issue 3: Currently, both Maps and EB have useful features the other doesn't.
On Maps, I can filter available monster tokens automatically by source books I own. This is so unbelievably useful, it almost makes Maps worth it. Almost. In EB, you have to manually filter, which 1. Is way more clunky, time consuming, and irritating, and 2. Assumes I remember every book I do and don't own, which, especially given the sheer number of them, is a bold assumption. In EB, you can filter by Environment. This is SO useful if you know you're building an encounter in a certain area, but are less sure on what types of enemies/antagonists you want to have the PCs deal with. This may exist in Maps, but if it does I can't find it, which is enough problem on its own. EB also has many more (and/or more easily discoverable) filters like HP, alignment, resistances, etc. The ability to hide certain combatants in Maps is hugely useful for things like multi-phased encounters. EB allows for nothing like this. Neither one is an optimized experience (or even close to it).
Issue 4 (with both): Difficulty calculation is deeply unhelpful if using Milestone advancement.
This goes back to TOTM-based issues: we use Milestone advancement. CR and encounter difficulty are inherently based around XP tracking. The entire point of Milestone advancement is to eliminate the need for XP math. Not sure exactly what the solution is here, but if WOTC is so bound and determined to create a "new and better" VTT/encounter experience, which is how this is framed, I'd think there'd be a way to have a more comprehensive encounter difficulty assessment, even in an extremely rough, approximate way, which is frankly all that would be needed.
Issue 5 (with both): There's no easy UI/UX flow with looking at Character Sheets in real time.
As a DM running encounters, it's super useful to be able to occasionally look at character sheets for PCs to check math if a player gets confused, mentally track PC spell slots, etc. Neither encounter system allows you to get to a PC CS with 1 click. Why? They're always tied to campaigns. As DM you have permission to view sheets. These things being more seamlessly integrated would be a massive QoL improvement. Niche, perhaps, but everything needed is already there, it's just a matter of linking it all together.
So what's the solution?
It SEEMS simple to me. Either allow EB to still exist as is, or create functionality within Maps that allows for players to make purely "on paper" encounters that don't force the creation of a map, placement of tokens, etc., basically keeping the current EB within the skeleton of Maps. I'd have zero issue with that. Currently though, the landscape is a bit dire for TOTM DMs. I don't want to use a third party tool. That's the entire point of DDB, isn't it? To have fewer plates to spin? The current encounter building/running landscape, especially for certain types of DMs/games, feels kind of "two steps forward, five steps back", in my humble opinion. If DDB can just bake the EB functionalities into Maps without needing to use a literal map and tokens, and/or keep the EB style UX operational up to date with current rules, everyone can be accommodated, and DDB can continue to be the one-stop shop WOTC so obviously wants it to be. Thanks to anyone who takes the time to read this. Happy gaming, all!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hi all,
So I don't know if this is just a me thing, as I'm not seeing other discussions about this, but I wanted to register some feedback on Maps. In its current state (emphasis on current state) I absolutely hate it, BUT a lot of that could be fixed with seemingly fairly trivial adjustments. Bear with me on this.
Issue 1: Maps is pretty terrible for Theater of the Mind (TOTM) tables.
Now to be clear, it doesn't make them impossible to run, but it adds a LOT of unnecessary steps and grief. For those unfamiliar, TOTM is exactly what it sounds like: focusing more on imagination and vibes than things like strict positioning, tokens, etc. Some people like that really regimented, tactical style of combat, and that's great! I'm happy for them. That's just not remotely me. As a matter of fact, it's even partly a disability-related thing, because I have cerebral palsy and thankfully the only cognitive quasi-deficiency it left me with is mostly just...spatial reasoning and I don't get along. I don't THINK visually. It's more work for me. Now to be clear, I understand that I can just like, plop tokens down and just say screw it and run the encounter however. Understood, and that's fine. But it's an unnecessary extra step when, for a DM like me, the old encounter builder does literally everything I need it to, which brings me to...
Issue 2: Locking 2024 Rules math out of the old encounter builder is literal madness.
Why would you do this? One possible fix to all this would be to literally just let the "classic" encounter builder and Maps to both exist and both function. Boom, problem solved. But the old EB (which works way better for me while DMing) ONLY can use 2014 math. Again, respectfully...what? I understand it's like, a forced migration thing, but it is so utterly unnecessary and punitive towards folks who liked the old EB (for all its flaws) for their table. Now, it doesn't matter to me YET, because my current campaign is several years old so we're still using 2014 and didn't want to do a mid-campaign rule/math migration, but I'm hoping to run a one-shot soon-ish with two brand new players. I'll need to use Maps unless I want to manually figure out the points of difference between the rule sets in real time. It's a super easy fix (unless I'm vastly misunderstanding back end tech): just keep the old EB ALSO up and running and have there be a "2024 Rules" toggle for any encounter. Problem solved.
Issue 3: Currently, both Maps and EB have useful features the other doesn't.
On Maps, I can filter available monster tokens automatically by source books I own. This is so unbelievably useful, it almost makes Maps worth it. Almost. In EB, you have to manually filter, which 1. Is way more clunky, time consuming, and irritating, and 2. Assumes I remember every book I do and don't own, which, especially given the sheer number of them, is a bold assumption. In EB, you can filter by Environment. This is SO useful if you know you're building an encounter in a certain area, but are less sure on what types of enemies/antagonists you want to have the PCs deal with. This may exist in Maps, but if it does I can't find it, which is enough problem on its own. EB also has many more (and/or more easily discoverable) filters like HP, alignment, resistances, etc. The ability to hide certain combatants in Maps is hugely useful for things like multi-phased encounters. EB allows for nothing like this. Neither one is an optimized experience (or even close to it).
Issue 4 (with both): Difficulty calculation is deeply unhelpful if using Milestone advancement.
This goes back to TOTM-based issues: we use Milestone advancement. CR and encounter difficulty are inherently based around XP tracking. The entire point of Milestone advancement is to eliminate the need for XP math. Not sure exactly what the solution is here, but if WOTC is so bound and determined to create a "new and better" VTT/encounter experience, which is how this is framed, I'd think there'd be a way to have a more comprehensive encounter difficulty assessment, even in an extremely rough, approximate way, which is frankly all that would be needed.
Issue 5 (with both): There's no easy UI/UX flow with looking at Character Sheets in real time.
As a DM running encounters, it's super useful to be able to occasionally look at character sheets for PCs to check math if a player gets confused, mentally track PC spell slots, etc. Neither encounter system allows you to get to a PC CS with 1 click. Why? They're always tied to campaigns. As DM you have permission to view sheets. These things being more seamlessly integrated would be a massive QoL improvement. Niche, perhaps, but everything needed is already there, it's just a matter of linking it all together.
So what's the solution?
It SEEMS simple to me. Either allow EB to still exist as is, or create functionality within Maps that allows for players to make purely "on paper" encounters that don't force the creation of a map, placement of tokens, etc., basically keeping the current EB within the skeleton of Maps. I'd have zero issue with that. Currently though, the landscape is a bit dire for TOTM DMs. I don't want to use a third party tool. That's the entire point of DDB, isn't it? To have fewer plates to spin? The current encounter building/running landscape, especially for certain types of DMs/games, feels kind of "two steps forward, five steps back", in my humble opinion. If DDB can just bake the EB functionalities into Maps without needing to use a literal map and tokens, and/or keep the EB style UX operational up to date with current rules, everyone can be accommodated, and DDB can continue to be the one-stop shop WOTC so obviously wants it to be. Thanks to anyone who takes the time to read this. Happy gaming, all!