1) DDB OFFICIAL integration with a VTT instead of creating one from scratch. I think they should work with Foundry (as i don't see FGU or ROll20 really revamping their business model.) or a similar VTT. This way DDB can focus on "In Person" games and enhancing their Applications/Web Services. This could include a close relation so that lets say Foundry doesn't have to create the rulesets or such and they can focus on maps and tokens and such while still allowing that Compendium to be accessible. SInce it sounds like Foundry is run by the same person that created Beyond20, I could see some amazing collaborations between the two companies/products.
2) I would like to see their Applications and Web Services to focus on "In Person" games because that is what they originally envisioned this way they can focus on the best way to apply this for everyone. Specifically I am excited to see what they do for a DM application and how they improve/enhance the Character app or the Compendium app. This would need to make sure that their Dice application would be able to be rolled from the Character sheet in an "In Person" game as some people forget Dice or only have a single set or whatever. It would just allow a lot of versatility to the application.
3) This last one is just said because of my opinion is with everything going to app based things, If they partner with a VTT (which would be the best idea in my opinion) they need to discuss and make sure the VTT company has either in the works or on the timeline for Mobile Applications. Although it isn't NEEDED for most people I think eventually we will see a lot more people travelling without computers and only with Tablets or Phones. But that is a personal thought. Like being able to see where your character is while at the table in an "In Person" game, or even if you have chores and just being able to click onto the app really quick and run your turns if needed. that would change things dramatically.
4) Ultimately I would just love to see more cooperation between companies that are obviously working to make the best experience for the community while keeping their vision in tac.
Sorry had to rant about that Idea a little bit. It isn't something i see happening but has been on my mind since the release of DDB and There has been a lot of need for VTT over "In Person" game access. Or at least from what i have seen during this pandemic. Anyways, Hope you have a wonderful day.
I agree having DDB using a VTT, would be great. I am not when we will see this. Foundry is so new they probably do not want a merger anytime soon (unless they got PAID), that would be a cool idea though. It is frustrating that each VTT has strengths and weakness. Why can't we have just one that does everything we want :)
As a total convert to Foundry, I have zero interest in a merger between Foundry and DBB. I would much rather see a Fantasy Grounds type situation in which I could buy the rulebooks and such at Foundry. Their system is much more comfortable for me to use (drag-and-drop elements) and I find it very intuitive.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
As a total convert to Foundry, I have zero interest in a merger between Foundry and DBB. I would much rather see a Fantasy Grounds type situation in which I could buy the rulebooks and such at Foundry. Their system is much more comfortable for me to use (drag-and-drop elements) and I find it very intuitive.
I think the best situation would be to still buy content from DDB and have officially support API's to use the content directly in foundry or other VTT's. There are still ways to use the content from DDB in these other VTT's but they are more of a workaround. I don't want my content to be locked into a specific VTT and DDB provides this in an off handed way at least for now.
That's fair enough.I could be happy enough with paying some fee to let everything seamlessly sync between DDB and your chosen VTT, with mine being Foundry, but someone else's being whatever they want (Astral, Talespire, etc).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
As a total convert to Foundry, I have zero interest in a merger between Foundry and DBB. I would much rather see a Fantasy Grounds type situation in which I could buy the rulebooks and such at Foundry. Their system is much more comfortable for me to use (drag-and-drop elements) and I find it very intuitive.
I think the best situation would be to still buy content from DDB and have officially support API's to use the content directly in foundry or other VTT's. There are still ways to use the content from DDB in these other VTT's but they are more of a workaround. I don't want my content to be locked into a specific VTT and DDB provides this in an off handed way at least for now.
Unfortunately, "best for users" doesn't mean it's practical for providers. Each company has its own license with WotC, specifying how much they give WotC per person who acquires the content (and possibly rules on how much they can charge the end user), and unless they negotiate a shared license with WotC, or WotC designs a per-end-user model for licensing, the fact that you have a license at DDB has no effect on Foundry, and vice versa.
Would it be nice if WotC designed such a rights system? Yes, but don't hold your breath.
Unfortunately, "best for users" doesn't mean it's practical for providers. This is not necessarily true. When I switched my games to all digital on roll20, I still purchased content from DDB and still kept my DDB subscription because I was still able to use it on roll20 with a browser extension. While DDB does not have a VTT they have an incentive to keep their content accessible for other platforms. As we move further away from the days of getting together at the physical table, a VTT becomes more necessary. If DDB can't meet its users needs with a VTT or integrate with a VTT then its users will spend their money somewhere else.
As for licensing, I am not talking about making a copy of the content. DDB has stated they want to make API's accessible to developers, its just not a priority. Right now there is lite integration within discord and DDB via Avrea. This same kind of integration could be done in foundry.
Integration between Foundry and DndBeyond via API could be the best improvement in online rpg history.
It would be.
I'm not holding my breath for it to happen. We'll be lucky if the current Rube Goldberg methods of importing DDB data to Foundry and other VTTs remains viable, let alone it being made easier.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
How often do you play D&D on a VTT (Virtual Tabletop)? I only play online on a virtual tabletop.
How is/was your D&D VTT experience? I love it! I am a DM, VTT reduce the time it takes for setup and incredible amount. There are some downsides, but the time saved and the easy of use really offsets any downsides.
How much do you invest in your VTT (Not including DDB)? I will shell out money when ever the need arises. Thankfully, most purchases are 1 time expenses and not long term subscriptions.
In your mind what is the best VTT? (choose top 2) I actually really dislike automated VTTs. I feel like the second you are clicking a button for every aspect of the game you lose something important too D&D.
So, Roll20, FantasyGrounds and the like are a hard NO from me. I started off with Tabletop simulator and had a blast using it. But, with the release of TaleSpire Beta my group and I have moved over. It is still in active development and if you didn't purchase a key already you can't get access till full release. With that said I expect that once it has full released it will take over the D&D online world very quickly. It is just an amazing product.
Astral is hard on the GPU also, though maybe not as much as Foundry.
Anything that is calculating line of sight is going to take a lot of compute cycles.
Depends on the number of entities you have to track. The quality of ray tracing required to do what Foundry (or, really, any VTT) does shouldn't challenge a modern computer.
I think they all are going to tax GPU's with dynamic lighting and line of sight to some degree. If you have players with lower end machines you can use manual fog of war to help. Foundry 0.7 upcoming release is supposed to improve performance in this area. Right now though foundry performs better than roll20 side by side on lower end machines in my experience.
Depends on the number of entities you have to track. The quality of ray tracing required to do what Foundry (or, really, any VTT) does shouldn't challenge a modern computer.
It shouldn't... but it does. I think this is just programming inefficiency.
For example... a couple of weeks ago we were playing on a new map. I had made this map in DungeonDraft and used the auto-importer into Foundry. Super easy and simple. All the walls, doors, etc, get put in for me, and exactly correctly. The only thing it has trouble with is windows, and this particular map didn't have any.
So we were playing along just fine on this map when all of a sudden... I started noticing my CPU and GPU fans making noise, and I looked up at my monitor program (which I always have running) and the blasted GPU was up at 50-60% use, CPU was up over 70%. What is happening? I tried some different things... I was of course doing video with Google Meet at the same time, can't turn that off. I was recording the whole session with OBS. Tried pausing that, then halting it. No effect. I had been running both my session in the Foundry base app and also running one of the characters as an NPC (the player wasn't there) and I had that character running in a web browser to both (a) see exactly what the party sees rather than the "DM version" of what the party sees... and (b) record the map on the video so I didn't get my DM notes recorded. (We recorded so the other player could watch later -- I didn't want him seeing my notes and such).
I closed the extra browser window and it helped... but I was still having GPU issues. After the session I looked into it and realized that the auto-importer had made hundreds of line segments for rounded building walls. Now as you say, 2 d map, even a 3-digit polygon count should not be taxing my system, but apparently that many surfaces is an issue. Part of the problem is that I am hosting it and so my system is computing for both me and probably everyone else. I cut the polygon count down, but even solo that didn't completely fix the problem (it helped a lot though).
Further investigation showed that the Foundry app defaults to 60 FPS... why you need 60 FPS for a static image that only changes once a second or something as you move your character, I do not know. But advice online suggested cutting to 30 FPS or 20 FPS, and I cut it to 30 and that helped some too.
But I think some of it is just coding inefficiency. Combined with, if you host it yourself, your computer having to do the work for agents. The players' computers show them the LOS results but the host has to compute it.
There is a way to host Foundry remotely, and I may look into that. But I'm also about to get a new PC or laptop (searching right now) and maybe that will just make the issue go away.
But you are 100% right... I have done renders in DAZ studio with a whole city behind 2 high-res characters on this machine and it should not be having to struggle to show some flat images with LOS.
Yeah I don't do the automatic line of sight import for the very reason you mentioned. I found it adds way more data points that is needed. Foundry makes the task of adding line of sight pretty easy though.
I have looked at several hosting options for foundry and think the forge is the best right now. https://forge-vtt.com/
Further investigation showed that the Foundry app defaults to 60 FPS... why you need 60 FPS for a static image that only changes once a second or something as you move your character, I do not know. But advice online suggested cutting to 30 FPS or 20 FPS, and I cut it to 30 and that helped some too.
But I think some of it is just coding inefficiency. Combined with, if you host it yourself, your computer having to do the work for agents. The players' computers show them the LOS results but the host has to compute it.
Ugh... it should be able to do "has anything changed since last redraw? No? Use the last result". Also, the only reason to do server-side rendering is if you don't trust the clients, and if my players want to cheat they have easier options than a packet filter.
Ugh... it should be able to do "has anything changed since last redraw? No? Use the last result". Also, the only reason to do server-side rendering is if you don't trust the clients, and if my players want to cheat they have easier options than a packet filter.
I am not sure how much rendering is server vs. client. Clearly there is a big chunk done by the client because when I shut down my client version, the CPU/GPU use dropped by a good deal.
I am used to rendering massive scenes in DAZ Studio using nVidia iRay to make near-photorealistic renders. Now sure, my GPU ran at near 100% for that and the CPU ran pretty high as well, and the PC did get warm. But that is a real workhorse kind of activity. Foundry isn't doing anything remotely close to that. It should be child's play for an i7-7th gen CPU, 1080 GTX vid car with 8 GB RAM, and so forth. I mean literally my computer should not even notice Foundry is running by comparison.
Yet it definitely notices.
However, I also think my liquid cooler is starting to go so that may be part of it for the CPU. It doesn't have anything to do with the GPU though, at least not directly -- that thing is air cooled only.
Some things I would love to see:
1) DDB OFFICIAL integration with a VTT instead of creating one from scratch. I think they should work with Foundry (as i don't see FGU or ROll20 really revamping their business model.) or a similar VTT. This way DDB can focus on "In Person" games and enhancing their Applications/Web Services. This could include a close relation so that lets say Foundry doesn't have to create the rulesets or such and they can focus on maps and tokens and such while still allowing that Compendium to be accessible. SInce it sounds like Foundry is run by the same person that created Beyond20, I could see some amazing collaborations between the two companies/products.
2) I would like to see their Applications and Web Services to focus on "In Person" games because that is what they originally envisioned this way they can focus on the best way to apply this for everyone. Specifically I am excited to see what they do for a DM application and how they improve/enhance the Character app or the Compendium app. This would need to make sure that their Dice application would be able to be rolled from the Character sheet in an "In Person" game as some people forget Dice or only have a single set or whatever. It would just allow a lot of versatility to the application.
3) This last one is just said because of my opinion is with everything going to app based things, If they partner with a VTT (which would be the best idea in my opinion) they need to discuss and make sure the VTT company has either in the works or on the timeline for Mobile Applications. Although it isn't NEEDED for most people I think eventually we will see a lot more people travelling without computers and only with Tablets or Phones. But that is a personal thought. Like being able to see where your character is while at the table in an "In Person" game, or even if you have chores and just being able to click onto the app really quick and run your turns if needed. that would change things dramatically.
4) Ultimately I would just love to see more cooperation between companies that are obviously working to make the best experience for the community while keeping their vision in tac.
Sorry had to rant about that Idea a little bit. It isn't something i see happening but has been on my mind since the release of DDB and There has been a lot of need for VTT over "In Person" game access. Or at least from what i have seen during this pandemic. Anyways, Hope you have a wonderful day.
I agree having DDB using a VTT, would be great. I am not when we will see this. Foundry is so new they probably do not want a merger anytime soon (unless they got PAID), that would be a cool idea though. It is frustrating that each VTT has strengths and weakness. Why can't we have just one that does everything we want :)
As a total convert to Foundry, I have zero interest in a merger between Foundry and DBB. I would much rather see a Fantasy Grounds type situation in which I could buy the rulebooks and such at Foundry. Their system is much more comfortable for me to use (drag-and-drop elements) and I find it very intuitive.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
I think the best situation would be to still buy content from DDB and have officially support API's to use the content directly in foundry or other VTT's. There are still ways to use the content from DDB in these other VTT's but they are more of a workaround. I don't want my content to be locked into a specific VTT and DDB provides this in an off handed way at least for now.
That's fair enough.I could be happy enough with paying some fee to let everything seamlessly sync between DDB and your chosen VTT, with mine being Foundry, but someone else's being whatever they want (Astral, Talespire, etc).
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Unfortunately, "best for users" doesn't mean it's practical for providers. Each company has its own license with WotC, specifying how much they give WotC per person who acquires the content (and possibly rules on how much they can charge the end user), and unless they negotiate a shared license with WotC, or WotC designs a per-end-user model for licensing, the fact that you have a license at DDB has no effect on Foundry, and vice versa.
Would it be nice if WotC designed such a rights system? Yes, but don't hold your breath.
Unfortunately, "best for users" doesn't mean it's practical for providers. This is not necessarily true. When I switched my games to all digital on roll20, I still purchased content from DDB and still kept my DDB subscription because I was still able to use it on roll20 with a browser extension. While DDB does not have a VTT they have an incentive to keep their content accessible for other platforms. As we move further away from the days of getting together at the physical table, a VTT becomes more necessary. If DDB can't meet its users needs with a VTT or integrate with a VTT then its users will spend their money somewhere else.
As for licensing, I am not talking about making a copy of the content. DDB has stated they want to make API's accessible to developers, its just not a priority. Right now there is lite integration within discord and DDB via Avrea. This same kind of integration could be done in foundry.
Integration between Foundry and DndBeyond via API could be the best improvement in online rpg history.
It would be.
I'm not holding my breath for it to happen. We'll be lucky if the current Rube Goldberg methods of importing DDB data to Foundry and other VTTs remains viable, let alone it being made easier.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
How often do you play D&D on a VTT (Virtual Tabletop)?
I only play online on a virtual tabletop.
How is/was your D&D VTT experience?
I love it! I am a DM, VTT reduce the time it takes for setup and incredible amount. There are some downsides, but the time saved and the easy of use really offsets any downsides.
How much do you invest in your VTT (Not including DDB)?
I will shell out money when ever the need arises. Thankfully, most purchases are 1 time expenses and not long term subscriptions.
In your mind what is the best VTT? (choose top 2)
I actually really dislike automated VTTs. I feel like the second you are clicking a button for every aspect of the game you lose something important too D&D.
So, Roll20, FantasyGrounds and the like are a hard NO from me. I started off with Tabletop simulator and had a blast using it. But, with the release of TaleSpire Beta my group and I have moved over. It is still in active development and if you didn't purchase a key already you can't get access till full release. With that said I expect that once it has full released it will take over the D&D online world very quickly. It is just an amazing product.
Is great, but Foundry VTT is too heavy for GPU, IMHO. I would LOVE to see Astral integration with DDB - even through Beyond20 extension.
Astral is hard on the GPU also, though maybe not as much as Foundry.
Anything that is calculating line of sight is going to take a lot of compute cycles.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Depends on the number of entities you have to track. The quality of ray tracing required to do what Foundry (or, really, any VTT) does shouldn't challenge a modern computer.
I think they all are going to tax GPU's with dynamic lighting and line of sight to some degree. If you have players with lower end machines you can use manual fog of war to help. Foundry 0.7 upcoming release is supposed to improve performance in this area. Right now though foundry performs better than roll20 side by side on lower end machines in my experience.
It's a 2d map with two-digit polygon counts and nothing exotic like reflection or water effects.
It shouldn't... but it does. I think this is just programming inefficiency.
For example... a couple of weeks ago we were playing on a new map. I had made this map in DungeonDraft and used the auto-importer into Foundry. Super easy and simple. All the walls, doors, etc, get put in for me, and exactly correctly. The only thing it has trouble with is windows, and this particular map didn't have any.
So we were playing along just fine on this map when all of a sudden... I started noticing my CPU and GPU fans making noise, and I looked up at my monitor program (which I always have running) and the blasted GPU was up at 50-60% use, CPU was up over 70%. What is happening? I tried some different things... I was of course doing video with Google Meet at the same time, can't turn that off. I was recording the whole session with OBS. Tried pausing that, then halting it. No effect. I had been running both my session in the Foundry base app and also running one of the characters as an NPC (the player wasn't there) and I had that character running in a web browser to both (a) see exactly what the party sees rather than the "DM version" of what the party sees... and (b) record the map on the video so I didn't get my DM notes recorded. (We recorded so the other player could watch later -- I didn't want him seeing my notes and such).
I closed the extra browser window and it helped... but I was still having GPU issues. After the session I looked into it and realized that the auto-importer had made hundreds of line segments for rounded building walls. Now as you say, 2 d map, even a 3-digit polygon count should not be taxing my system, but apparently that many surfaces is an issue. Part of the problem is that I am hosting it and so my system is computing for both me and probably everyone else. I cut the polygon count down, but even solo that didn't completely fix the problem (it helped a lot though).
Further investigation showed that the Foundry app defaults to 60 FPS... why you need 60 FPS for a static image that only changes once a second or something as you move your character, I do not know. But advice online suggested cutting to 30 FPS or 20 FPS, and I cut it to 30 and that helped some too.
But I think some of it is just coding inefficiency. Combined with, if you host it yourself, your computer having to do the work for agents. The players' computers show them the LOS results but the host has to compute it.
There is a way to host Foundry remotely, and I may look into that. But I'm also about to get a new PC or laptop (searching right now) and maybe that will just make the issue go away.
But you are 100% right... I have done renders in DAZ studio with a whole city behind 2 high-res characters on this machine and it should not be having to struggle to show some flat images with LOS.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Yeah I don't do the automatic line of sight import for the very reason you mentioned. I found it adds way more data points that is needed. Foundry makes the task of adding line of sight pretty easy though.
I have looked at several hosting options for foundry and think the forge is the best right now. https://forge-vtt.com/
Ugh... it should be able to do "has anything changed since last redraw? No? Use the last result". Also, the only reason to do server-side rendering is if you don't trust the clients, and if my players want to cheat they have easier options than a packet filter.
I am not sure how much rendering is server vs. client. Clearly there is a big chunk done by the client because when I shut down my client version, the CPU/GPU use dropped by a good deal.
I am used to rendering massive scenes in DAZ Studio using nVidia iRay to make near-photorealistic renders. Now sure, my GPU ran at near 100% for that and the CPU ran pretty high as well, and the PC did get warm. But that is a real workhorse kind of activity. Foundry isn't doing anything remotely close to that. It should be child's play for an i7-7th gen CPU, 1080 GTX vid car with 8 GB RAM, and so forth. I mean literally my computer should not even notice Foundry is running by comparison.
Yet it definitely notices.
However, I also think my liquid cooler is starting to go so that may be part of it for the CPU. It doesn't have anything to do with the GPU though, at least not directly -- that thing is air cooled only.
WOTC lies. We know that WOTC lies. WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. We know that WOTC knows that we know that WOTC lies. And still they lie.
Because of the above (a paraphrase from Orwell) I no longer post to the forums -- PM me if you need help or anything.
Roll20 with D&D Beyond is a amazing combo with the Beyond20 Browser extension
That guy is doing the lord's work.
I Cancelled my Master Tier Subscription January 12th 2023 because of "OGL" 1.1 - Resubscribed 28th of Jan, now the SRD is in CC-BY-4.0