Fandom probably can't make a DDB "module" for Foundry -- because Fandom doesn't own the non-SRD content. They only lease it from WOTC. The only entity that could make an official Foundry Mod with compendia containing all the D&D official non-SRD content would be WOTC.
What we need, is for WOTC to do what Pinnacle did and create a D&D licensed module for Foundry with an access code that Foundry can check. You purchase the license from WOTC (or a 3rd party vendor licensed by WOTC, such as DDB if they want to do it that way), and enter the license code into Foundry, and it allows you to D/L the closed-source compendia and put them into your Foundry game.
Absent WOTC doing this, there is literally nothing Fandom can do -- they do not own the rights to ANY of the content on this site. They are only borrowing it. In fact, Kerrec, the reason your extension that scrapes all the (copyrighted) info. off the DDB site and puts it into Foundry is against the DDB TOS, is precisely because DDB is not allowed to expose the content to the public in any way that would be "useful" to us for pirating. They are required to protect the content for WOTC, or else WOTC will yank their license. There's a reason you don't get a PDF with a DDB purchase.
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.
I am not asking for DDB to "sell" or "give" WOTC content in Foundry. What I am asking is for DDB to allow me to use MY content, that I purchased on DDB, in Foundry in an expedient way.
I already use MY content in Foundry. Most of the people that own content in DDB and use Foundry, use their DDB content in Foundry. The only difference between what I made and what happens every day... is time. It takes me maybe10 minutes to create a complex creature manually in Foundry by looking at it on my second screen in DDB and plugging in the values into Foundry with my fat fingers. With my extension, it took 1 or 2 seconds.
You can bet that when I make a creature in Foundry by hand, at 10 minutes a monster, that I save that creature into a Compendium to be reused ad nauseum. Eventually, I will have a decent sized compendium going where I will barely ever have to log into DDB. Now, I am an honest person, but there are others that are not, and compendiums can be backed up, zipped and transferred/downloaded and imported. It is in DDB and WoTC's interest for Foundry users to NOT do this.
And, if a Foundry user that has content in DDB wants to import their content and are willing to pay, it is already a thing. What I wanted to offer would have been free and give Foundry users every reason to never want or need to maintain a Compendium (to duplicate the data they own in DDB, in Foundry).
What I am asking is for DDB to allow me to use MY content, that I purchased on DDB, in Foundry in an expedient way.
Unfortunately, when you paid to unlock content on DNDbeyond you agreed to the Terms of Sale which include "digital goods made available by Fandom on D&D Beyond are only usable in conjunction with the D&D Beyond toolkits, and are not designed to be exported or used with other toolkits or systems".
This seems to imply that it isn't YOUR content, you are simply unlocking it for use on dndbeyond.
Farling is 100% correct. What you and I and the rest of us think of as a "reasonable" use is not what the legal-ese says.
You're also not supposed to do things like, open a paid book section, highlight all, ctrl-c copy, ctrl-v paste into a word document and email it to your friends, either. Same thing.
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.
My problem with Foundry is I only get a single table top with different "worlds" in it. I DM 8 games per week atm. It's unrealistic for me to either have all that info for all 8 games loaded into a single Foundry game and have to sort through it all for each game, and sort who from what game can see and use what from what world. Literally it's multiple gigabytes worth of maps, tokens, sheets, music, effects, etc... for each of my 8 games. I'd need to buy a pretty beefy dedicated server to run it(expensive), or buy 8 different Foundry licenses for 8 different table tops(expensive). It seems great for someone who only runs a single game, maybe two. But for someone like me; this limitation has basically locked me out of ever using Foundry because I doubt I will ever get to a point where I am only hosting a single game at a time.
You can literally set up several games within Foundry. All separate. They can all refer to the same images and data, too. It's really user friendly in that way. Here are my five completely separate games, all in Foundry.
I have also recently jumped onto the Foundry train, and I have nothing but good things to say about it. However, I agree with those that say DDB should NOT buy Foundry. Foundry core is system agnostic, and should remain so.
That said, I DO think DDB should work hard and fast to integrate themselves into Foundry. Let me explain...
Foundry has something called Compendiums. Those are basically databases for Game Masters to pull content into the game for their world. (Because you don't want to upload ALL of your content to ALL of your players as you play. You want to upload just the data you're using that gaming session. Keeps things snappy and responsive.) Right now, the D&D5e system in Foundry only has SRD content, because Foundry doesn't have a license to sell WoTC content. Yet.
As much as I like Foundry, I don't want to split my content between DDB and Foundry, so I very much want DDB to be the "Compendium" to pull from when I'm doing my prep or improvising during play. I also want my content to be available online, not just when I'm hosting Foundry on my PC. So I built a chrome extension, very much inspired by Kakaroto's Beyond20 extension, to do just that. I built it, it works and it took me 2 months coding in my spare time after I've done my day of work and my kids are in bed. 2 months! I don't code for a living and I knew zero about coding in Javascript or making Chrome extensions when I started.
How I did it doesn't jive with DDB's TOS. It was a fun project, but it's dead in the water. Which just makes me that much more frustrated that DDB doesn't do this on their own. No one would need to buy D&D5e content on Foundry if DDB would just see the low hanging fruit staring them in the face! DDB already has their customer base, and some of those are Foundry users. But there's a bunch of Foundry users that could potentially become DDB customers.
DDB: Please create your own Foundry Module to access your content while in Foundry. It can require a DDB login and a subscription, so you don't lose that revenue stream. I already have a subscription here, to share content with my players so they can build their characters. But Foundry is fast becoming able to replace DDB, at least to the point where I wouldn't need to subscribe anymore. I would still buy the modules and source books here to have it available online on demand.
There are some pretty good mods that will let you take your content from DDB and use it on Foundry, saving it to a compendium. MrPrimate is the creator. I have my entire monster, spell and item store. I'm also a fully subscribed, all-sourcebooks-bought DDB customer and I love that I can do this.
DDB: Please create your own Foundry Module to access your content while in Foundry. It can require a DDB login and a subscription, so you don't lose that revenue stream. I already have a subscription here, to share content with my players so they can build their characters. But Foundry is fast becoming able to replace DDB, at least to the point where I wouldn't need to subscribe anymore. I would still buy the modules and source books here to have it available online on demand.
This is actually a great idea, and would in effect accomplish the same thing I was advocating for in my original post - bringing everything under one roof.
An "official" Foundry module would keep Beyond's content secure by requiring an authenticated login to access it.
Having said that, wouldn't the same thing be accomplished by simply offering a robust, secure API that also required a login/paid account? I mean, if they did that. every VTT under the sun could point their players to DND Beyond for content, and simply plug that content into their VTT via the API using their own plugins/modules, etc.
Frankly, there has to be a reason that hasn't happened yet, and I'm sure it has to do with WOTC trying to keep it all locked down (most likely because they simply don't understand the tech itself).
I don't think it's so much not understanding the tech but WotC not desiring to expand DDB's license to managing WotC's digital content in the space WotC awards. Or maybe the tech is really that nuanced and the move would be somehow different or not an end run around WotC licenses to Roll20 and Fantasy Grounds. I mean everyone seems to be talking about Foundry as something radically different from the existing VTT world, perhaps literally a game changer, however what its fans want seem to run afoul or conflict with legal/contractual/license ecosystem already in place, an ecosystem all of which is frankly in place to prevent radical change by upstarts within the established businesses' marketplace. I'm not championing this fact in anyway, but acknowledging the frustrations before the Foundry communities' ambitions.
What I am asking is for DDB to allow me to use MY content, that I purchased on DDB, in Foundry in an expedient way.
Unfortunately, when you paid to unlock content on DNDbeyond you agreed to the Terms of Sale which include "digital goods made available by Fandom on D&D Beyond are only usable in conjunction with the D&D Beyond toolkits, and are not designed to be exported or used with other toolkits or systems".
This seems to imply that it isn't YOUR content, you are simply unlocking it for use on dndbeyond.
That last part, "... or used with other toolkits or systems" is completely un-enforceable and I'll go on a limb and say is violated by a large portion of the userbase on a daily basis. By building a creature in any VTT of your choice while referencing the content you purchased, you are violating this Term of Sale. D&D Beyond is not a closed ecosystem that provides games to play, VTT's to use, etc... such that the content could remain in D&D Beyond. Content from D&D Beyond is INTENDED to be used outside of D&D Beyond. What is the point of D&D Beyond selling a digital version of a map, within the context of D&D Beyond?
I understand the legalese. Quote it all you want. My point is these Terms of Sale and Terms of Service are all copy pasted generic mumbo jumbo that corporations paste everywhere without understanding their own businesses.
Farling is 100% correct. What you and I and the rest of us think of as a "reasonable" use is not what the legal-ese says.
You're also not supposed to do things like, open a paid book section, highlight all, ctrl-c copy, ctrl-v paste into a word document and email it to your friends, either. Same thing.
Bad example. What I am advocating is emailing that word document to myself, so I can access it regardless of where I am, as long as I have access to the internet, instead of being limited to my PC. I am talking about using MY content for myself. Not copying it and giving it away.
I don't think it's so much not understanding the tech but not desiring to expand DDB's license to managing WotC's digital content in the space WotC awards. Or maybe the tech is really that nuanced and the move would be somehow different or not an end run around WotC licenses to Roll20 and Fantasy Grounds. I mean everyone seems to be talking about Foundry as something radically different from the existing VTT world, perhaps literally a game changer, however what its fans want seem to running afoul of legal/contractual/license ecosystem already in place, all of which is frankly in place to prevent radical change by upstarts within the established players marketplace. I'm not championing this fact in anyway, but acknowledging the frustration's in front the Foundry communities ambitions.
You do the FVTT community a disservice. The entire community strongly advocates enforcing copyrights and if someone were to go and ask them for help to violate those copyrights, they would refuse and provide warnings to not do so.
Farling is 100% correct. What you and I and the rest of us think of as a "reasonable" use is not what the legal-ese says.
You're also not supposed to do things like, open a paid book section, highlight all, ctrl-c copy, ctrl-v paste into a word document and email it to your friends, either. Same thing.
Bad example. What I am advocating is emailing that word document to myself, so I can access it regardless of where I am, as long as I have access to the internet, instead of being limited to my PC. I am talking about using MY content for myself. Not copying it and giving it away.
No one's saying you would do that, but the policy is in place to prevent _anyone_ from doing that. This would be a good time to point out to you that the D&D Beyond App allows you access to compendium content offline (yes over a mobile device, but nevertheless offline). No vendor of D&D has the sort of file you want. This is why you can only find digital 5e over DDB, Fantasy Grounds and d20, but the PDF market is entirely out of print editions.
I don't think it's so much not understanding the tech but not desiring to expand DDB's license to managing WotC's digital content in the space WotC awards. Or maybe the tech is really that nuanced and the move would be somehow different or not an end run around WotC licenses to Roll20 and Fantasy Grounds. I mean everyone seems to be talking about Foundry as something radically different from the existing VTT world, perhaps literally a game changer, however what its fans want seem to running afoul of legal/contractual/license ecosystem already in place, all of which is frankly in place to prevent radical change by upstarts within the established players marketplace. I'm not championing this fact in anyway, but acknowledging the frustration's in front the Foundry communities ambitions.
You do the FVTT community a disservice. The entire community strongly advocates enforcing copyrights and if someone were to go and ask them for help to violate those copyrights, they would refuse and provide warnings to not do so.
Excuse me? I don't see how I'm doing the FVTT community a disservice when all I'm saying is that its (actually "your" since I don't claim to have my hands on the pulse of the FVTT community) desires may not be currently possible given the present license ecosystem. Sure it can be negotiated among the various present commercial stakeholders. All I'm saying is "why" the FVTT community may not be able to achieve its goals in this regard is likely due to frustrations within the present set of license agreements among multiple parties.
You entered this conversation with the literal bold claim DDB should work hard and fast to integrate themselves with Foundry. All your respondants have done is offer explanations as to why that may not be as easy a case as your directive presumes. No one is attacking or belittling the FVTT community.
Actually, thinking more on this, D&D Beyond doesn't need to purchase or integrate themselves with Foundry VTT. What they should do is HOST Foundry servers for their master tier subscribers to use (1 foundry license per subscription). Foundry licences are 1 time purchases, and D&D Beyond subscriptions are yearly, so it would pay for itself fairly quickly.
What this allows is all of the D&D Beyond content available for use in Foundry without breaking any TOS, since the content is being used in D&D Beyond's ecosystem. It also allows Foundry modders to work with D&D Beyond content without running into CORS issues, or be blocked from loading into iframes.
This would also be useful for PBP games, as it provides a way to display battlemaps and move tokens without having to link images from outside sources.
The Forge is already hosting and the people running the Forge are way better at coding and website design than the people at DDB are. Nobody who has tried the Forge would want to switch over to DDB for hosting. There is quite literally no chance the people running this website will ever be capable of coming up with something as slick, user-friendly, and well designed (not to mention super-responsive to customer needs) as The Forge. And what we don't want is DDB's ginormous size to swamp out the smaller hosts like the Forge, forcing them to buckle, and leaving only DDB as the host for Foundry.
Additionally, DDB would never be able to host Foundry properly because (a) they would have to allow user-made mods, which they would never want to do for liability reasons, and (b) Foundry already had contracts with multiple other companies - SWADE, Forbidden Lands, and Warhammer are all now officially supported in Foundry with a purchase and license key. DDB would have to find some way to disable the ability to run such games within Foundry, which means they'd not be able to use a vanilla distro, but would have to alter the code themselves. Once again, the Foundry devs have proven themselves to be far more competent than the DDB devs (sorry, but this is the simple naked truth -- there's no point in sugar-coating it), as well as (once again) much faster at their dev cycle. This means you would end up with some custom-kludged-hackathon version of Foundry that's 3 or 4 publishes behind the official distro, full of bugs, not working right, and with 3/4 of its best features turned off for "licensing reasons." Simple example: Why would anyone buy the absurdly priced "3d dice" here when they could use Foundry's "Dice so Nice!" mod for free? That would have to be turned off... along with Tiamat knows how many other similar modules (like the KFC-style encounter builder) that work as well as or better than anything DDB does here.
Yeah, I just don't see how this would ever work. Foundry is NOT a D&D VTT -- it is a system-agnostic VTT that you can use to play tons of games, not just D&D. DDB is tied to D&D, and so they can't use a system-agnostic VTT on their servers without altering it, and thus breaking/ruining it.
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.
I'm not asking for anything that fancy. All I want is to be able to run Foundry online, under the dndbeyond.com domain. The same way anyone can rent server space at a provider and run Foundry. The Forge is a custom made for foundry service, but I'm not asking for that.
If someone buys a master tier subscription at D&D Beyond to run SWADE or Forbidden Lands or Warhammer on their foundry server, how is that bad for business for D&D Beyond?
If someone will log into Foundry to roll Dice so Nice dice rolls instead of just doing it in D&D Beyond, then they're complicating their lives for no good reason and that's not a D&D Beyond problem.
Regarding Foundry VTT. Players use a web browser to connect to the GM's instance of FVTT. All the content is on that instance. Players maintain their characters on DBB. DM Imports characters from DDB. DM adds his/others game module/graphics/etc. content to FVTT. Super slick and not very complicated, as compared to FGU. FGU is the software that requires you spend a crap load of $$$ to get all the WotC content ingested. Even then you have to go through hoops to get some stuff to work correctly (Paladin SMITE anyone??) because FGU does not have permission from WotC to incorporate it directly. Ton of details to learn.
I know all this because I have the full FGU with the digital WotC books, etc. and it cost me a lot. Abandoned it in the end due to the complexity. Players never got a chance to see it either. What a waste of $$$. Bottom line is, I want to spend time designing games, not learning software.
Anyhow, I gave FVTT a whorl about four months ago. What an amazingly simple transition. I subscribed to a couple of Patreon's for really rich graphic maps and related and dam, I'm hooked. Just night and day difference. I run a f2f group of 8 players. I have a large screen imbedded in my gaming table (see link, Graphics page). I run FVTT and use a second PC to control the "players view" on the big screen. Players don't have to touch any electronics. I put a piece of plexiglass on top of the TV screen because they still want to use miniatures. Fine by me. Feels like a perfect blend of tech and traditional.
Husband, Father, Veteran, Gamer, DM, Player, and Friend | Author of the "World of Eirador" | http://world-guild.com "The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don't need any rules." ~Gary Gygax
Our group is in the process of making the jump from Roll20 to Foundry VTT, and we can't say enough good things about it. SO much easier to use than roll20, and since it is using current tech, the extensibility is second to none.
Having said that, the common complaint is still having all of our info/sheets on beyond and needing to jump back and forth.
I know that a VTT has supposedly been on the drawing board at Beyond for 3+ years now, but I think the management should really take a hard look at Foundry VTT and think about making them an acquisition offer.
Having a VTT completely incorporated with Beyond would finally bring everything we use under one roof, and probably bring Beyond a rush of new users as well.
Just something to think about. I personally think Foundry is on the way to dominance in the VTT market, and Beyond could jump ahead of everyone else in the space in one fell swoop.
This is false. You set up each game in their own world.
"all 8 games loaded into a single Foundry game", not how it works. Set one of them as you need, then export and import the scenes and actors needed to all others. You want to put all the things you are not actively using into compendiums and only the active tokens and maps are loaded in that world. Very much like live table top you don't cover the table in every miniature and map you own.
"pretty beefy dedicated server to run it(expensive)", it runs on a raspberry pi so,...
All I need out of any "VTT" service is a space for displaying a basic map and the ability to put tokens on that map. I don't need extensive, expensive libraries of already-paid-for content. I don't need a million Helpful Tools(C) getting in the way of displaying a tactical situation. And I sure as almighty banana Shatner manhell don't need Time-Saving Player Macros(TM) that actively teach my group to stop thinking outside the box simply because there's no video-game "Do The Thing" button for whatever thing they'd otherwise attempt.
That is the beauty of Foundry VTT. No one ever NEEDS to use all of those other bits to make it work for them. What you stated above that you need from a VTT is absolutely feasible with Foundry VTT. All of those conditions, advantage, disadvantage, proficiency bonuses, etc one can still handle just like one does at a live in-person table. So, for that initial one-time fee of $50 you can have what you say you need. The other bits are there for those who want the bells and whistles. I hope this helps. Also, if what you and your players are doing now works well for your group and you do not see any gain for your group, then I would not change.
All I need out of any "VTT" service is a space for displaying a basic map and the ability to put tokens on that map. I don't need extensive, expensive libraries of already-paid-for content. I don't need a million Helpful Tools(C) getting in the way of displaying a tactical situation. And I sure as almighty banana Shatner manhell don't need Time-Saving Player Macros(TM) that actively teach my group to stop thinking outside the box simply because there's no video-game "Do The Thing" button for whatever thing they'd otherwise attempt.
That is the beauty of Foundry VTT. No one ever NEEDS to use all of those other bits to make it work for them. What you stated above that you need from a VTT is absolutely feasible with Foundry VTT. All of those conditions, advantage, disadvantage, proficiency bonuses, etc one can still handle just like one does at a live in-person table. So, for that initial one-time fee of $50 you can have what you say you need. The other bits are there for those who want the bells and whistles. I hope this helps. Also, if what you and your players are doing now works well for your group and you do not see any gain for your group, then I would not change.
That's like a reading comp and chronograpic reading fail. Pretty sure Yurei over the past _year_ is well aware of what Foundry can do and that for $50 she can get it to do what Owlbear radio does for free. I mean you read about what she wants the VTT to do right?
Does Foundry give like credits to folks who get new users. I mean it's great platform and all but there's an insistence on it and effort to convert folks who really don't want a VTT that Foundry is even for them.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Yeah, I just don't see how this would ever work. Foundry is NOT a D&D VTT -- it is a system-agnostic VTT that you can use to play tons of games, not just D&D. DDB is tied to D&D, and so they can't use a system-agnostic VTT on their servers without altering it, and thus breaking/ruining it.
Your entire post here is spot on. I quoted you stating the main reason Foundry should not contract with DDB. If Foundry wants to better/officially integrate D&D into their VTT then it should contract directly with WoTC. Don't get me wrong. I like DDB. I have spent money here and will continue to do so, but having DDB take control of Foundry VTT would be absolutely the wrong way to go.
First of all, I appreciate your input, but I did not see any post stating that Yurei1453 had ANY direct experience using Foundry VTT. I simply stated that it would do what she/he stated they wanted from a VTT.
Second, perhaps you did not read my last statement, "Also, if what you and your players are doing now works well for your group and you do not see any gain for your group, then I would not change.".
While I do have some experience with both Roll20 and FGU (Fantasy Grounds Unity), I am fairly new to the VTT world. D&D got along just fine before the internet existed. Nothing from the internet is needed to play the game. What the internet has done for D&D is enabled players living in different parts of the world to get together and have a regular game. Which internet tools any group chooses to use is up to that group. The people in this thread who are speaking positively about Foundry VTT are comparing it to the two other VTTs I mentioned above that seem to be popular. I do not know why some people seem to be so aggro about this.
Fandom probably can't make a DDB "module" for Foundry -- because Fandom doesn't own the non-SRD content. They only lease it from WOTC. The only entity that could make an official Foundry Mod with compendia containing all the D&D official non-SRD content would be WOTC.
What we need, is for WOTC to do what Pinnacle did and create a D&D licensed module for Foundry with an access code that Foundry can check. You purchase the license from WOTC (or a 3rd party vendor licensed by WOTC, such as DDB if they want to do it that way), and enter the license code into Foundry, and it allows you to D/L the closed-source compendia and put them into your Foundry game.
Absent WOTC doing this, there is literally nothing Fandom can do -- they do not own the rights to ANY of the content on this site. They are only borrowing it. In fact, Kerrec, the reason your extension that scrapes all the (copyrighted) info. off the DDB site and puts it into Foundry is against the DDB TOS, is precisely because DDB is not allowed to expose the content to the public in any way that would be "useful" to us for pirating. They are required to protect the content for WOTC, or else WOTC will yank their license. There's a reason you don't get a PDF with a DDB purchase.
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 am not asking for DDB to "sell" or "give" WOTC content in Foundry. What I am asking is for DDB to allow me to use MY content, that I purchased on DDB, in Foundry in an expedient way.
I already use MY content in Foundry. Most of the people that own content in DDB and use Foundry, use their DDB content in Foundry. The only difference between what I made and what happens every day... is time. It takes me maybe10 minutes to create a complex creature manually in Foundry by looking at it on my second screen in DDB and plugging in the values into Foundry with my fat fingers. With my extension, it took 1 or 2 seconds.
You can bet that when I make a creature in Foundry by hand, at 10 minutes a monster, that I save that creature into a Compendium to be reused ad nauseum. Eventually, I will have a decent sized compendium going where I will barely ever have to log into DDB. Now, I am an honest person, but there are others that are not, and compendiums can be backed up, zipped and transferred/downloaded and imported. It is in DDB and WoTC's interest for Foundry users to NOT do this.
And, if a Foundry user that has content in DDB wants to import their content and are willing to pay, it is already a thing. What I wanted to offer would have been free and give Foundry users every reason to never want or need to maintain a Compendium (to duplicate the data they own in DDB, in Foundry).
Unfortunately, when you paid to unlock content on DNDbeyond you agreed to the Terms of Sale which include "digital goods made available by Fandom on D&D Beyond are only usable in conjunction with the D&D Beyond toolkits, and are not designed to be exported or used with other toolkits or systems".
This seems to imply that it isn't YOUR content, you are simply unlocking it for use on dndbeyond.
Farling is 100% correct. What you and I and the rest of us think of as a "reasonable" use is not what the legal-ese says.
You're also not supposed to do things like, open a paid book section, highlight all, ctrl-c copy, ctrl-v paste into a word document and email it to your friends, either. Same thing.
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.
You can literally set up several games within Foundry. All separate. They can all refer to the same images and data, too. It's really user friendly in that way. Here are my five completely separate games, all in Foundry.
There are some pretty good mods that will let you take your content from DDB and use it on Foundry, saving it to a compendium. MrPrimate is the creator. I have my entire monster, spell and item store. I'm also a fully subscribed, all-sourcebooks-bought DDB customer and I love that I can do this.
This is actually a great idea, and would in effect accomplish the same thing I was advocating for in my original post - bringing everything under one roof.
An "official" Foundry module would keep Beyond's content secure by requiring an authenticated login to access it.
Having said that, wouldn't the same thing be accomplished by simply offering a robust, secure API that also required a login/paid account? I mean, if they did that. every VTT under the sun could point their players to DND Beyond for content, and simply plug that content into their VTT via the API using their own plugins/modules, etc.
Frankly, there has to be a reason that hasn't happened yet, and I'm sure it has to do with WOTC trying to keep it all locked down (most likely because they simply don't understand the tech itself).
I don't think it's so much not understanding the tech but WotC not desiring to expand DDB's license to managing WotC's digital content in the space WotC awards. Or maybe the tech is really that nuanced and the move would be somehow different or not an end run around WotC licenses to Roll20 and Fantasy Grounds. I mean everyone seems to be talking about Foundry as something radically different from the existing VTT world, perhaps literally a game changer, however what its fans want seem to run afoul or conflict with legal/contractual/license ecosystem already in place, an ecosystem all of which is frankly in place to prevent radical change by upstarts within the established businesses' marketplace. I'm not championing this fact in anyway, but acknowledging the frustrations before the Foundry communities' ambitions.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
That last part, "... or used with other toolkits or systems" is completely un-enforceable and I'll go on a limb and say is violated by a large portion of the userbase on a daily basis. By building a creature in any VTT of your choice while referencing the content you purchased, you are violating this Term of Sale. D&D Beyond is not a closed ecosystem that provides games to play, VTT's to use, etc... such that the content could remain in D&D Beyond. Content from D&D Beyond is INTENDED to be used outside of D&D Beyond. What is the point of D&D Beyond selling a digital version of a map, within the context of D&D Beyond?
I understand the legalese. Quote it all you want. My point is these Terms of Sale and Terms of Service are all copy pasted generic mumbo jumbo that corporations paste everywhere without understanding their own businesses.
Bad example. What I am advocating is emailing that word document to myself, so I can access it regardless of where I am, as long as I have access to the internet, instead of being limited to my PC. I am talking about using MY content for myself. Not copying it and giving it away.
You do the FVTT community a disservice. The entire community strongly advocates enforcing copyrights and if someone were to go and ask them for help to violate those copyrights, they would refuse and provide warnings to not do so.
No one's saying you would do that, but the policy is in place to prevent _anyone_ from doing that. This would be a good time to point out to you that the D&D Beyond App allows you access to compendium content offline (yes over a mobile device, but nevertheless offline). No vendor of D&D has the sort of file you want. This is why you can only find digital 5e over DDB, Fantasy Grounds and d20, but the PDF market is entirely out of print editions.
Excuse me? I don't see how I'm doing the FVTT community a disservice when all I'm saying is that its (actually "your" since I don't claim to have my hands on the pulse of the FVTT community) desires may not be currently possible given the present license ecosystem. Sure it can be negotiated among the various present commercial stakeholders. All I'm saying is "why" the FVTT community may not be able to achieve its goals in this regard is likely due to frustrations within the present set of license agreements among multiple parties.
You entered this conversation with the literal bold claim DDB should work hard and fast to integrate themselves with Foundry. All your respondants have done is offer explanations as to why that may not be as easy a case as your directive presumes. No one is attacking or belittling the FVTT community.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Actually, thinking more on this, D&D Beyond doesn't need to purchase or integrate themselves with Foundry VTT. What they should do is HOST Foundry servers for their master tier subscribers to use (1 foundry license per subscription). Foundry licences are 1 time purchases, and D&D Beyond subscriptions are yearly, so it would pay for itself fairly quickly.
What this allows is all of the D&D Beyond content available for use in Foundry without breaking any TOS, since the content is being used in D&D Beyond's ecosystem. It also allows Foundry modders to work with D&D Beyond content without running into CORS issues, or be blocked from loading into iframes.
This would also be useful for PBP games, as it provides a way to display battlemaps and move tokens without having to link images from outside sources.
Won't work.
The Forge is already hosting and the people running the Forge are way better at coding and website design than the people at DDB are. Nobody who has tried the Forge would want to switch over to DDB for hosting. There is quite literally no chance the people running this website will ever be capable of coming up with something as slick, user-friendly, and well designed (not to mention super-responsive to customer needs) as The Forge. And what we don't want is DDB's ginormous size to swamp out the smaller hosts like the Forge, forcing them to buckle, and leaving only DDB as the host for Foundry.
Additionally, DDB would never be able to host Foundry properly because (a) they would have to allow user-made mods, which they would never want to do for liability reasons, and (b) Foundry already had contracts with multiple other companies - SWADE, Forbidden Lands, and Warhammer are all now officially supported in Foundry with a purchase and license key. DDB would have to find some way to disable the ability to run such games within Foundry, which means they'd not be able to use a vanilla distro, but would have to alter the code themselves. Once again, the Foundry devs have proven themselves to be far more competent than the DDB devs (sorry, but this is the simple naked truth -- there's no point in sugar-coating it), as well as (once again) much faster at their dev cycle. This means you would end up with some custom-kludged-hackathon version of Foundry that's 3 or 4 publishes behind the official distro, full of bugs, not working right, and with 3/4 of its best features turned off for "licensing reasons." Simple example: Why would anyone buy the absurdly priced "3d dice" here when they could use Foundry's "Dice so Nice!" mod for free? That would have to be turned off... along with Tiamat knows how many other similar modules (like the KFC-style encounter builder) that work as well as or better than anything DDB does here.
Yeah, I just don't see how this would ever work. Foundry is NOT a D&D VTT -- it is a system-agnostic VTT that you can use to play tons of games, not just D&D. DDB is tied to D&D, and so they can't use a system-agnostic VTT on their servers without altering it, and thus breaking/ruining it.
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'm not asking for anything that fancy. All I want is to be able to run Foundry online, under the dndbeyond.com domain. The same way anyone can rent server space at a provider and run Foundry. The Forge is a custom made for foundry service, but I'm not asking for that.
If someone buys a master tier subscription at D&D Beyond to run SWADE or Forbidden Lands or Warhammer on their foundry server, how is that bad for business for D&D Beyond?
If someone will log into Foundry to roll Dice so Nice dice rolls instead of just doing it in D&D Beyond, then they're complicating their lives for no good reason and that's not a D&D Beyond problem.
Regarding Foundry VTT. Players use a web browser to connect to the GM's instance of FVTT. All the content is on that instance. Players maintain their characters on DBB. DM Imports characters from DDB. DM adds his/others game module/graphics/etc. content to FVTT. Super slick and not very complicated, as compared to FGU. FGU is the software that requires you spend a crap load of $$$ to get all the WotC content ingested. Even then you have to go through hoops to get some stuff to work correctly (Paladin SMITE anyone??) because FGU does not have permission from WotC to incorporate it directly. Ton of details to learn.
I know all this because I have the full FGU with the digital WotC books, etc. and it cost me a lot. Abandoned it in the end due to the complexity. Players never got a chance to see it either. What a waste of $$$. Bottom line is, I want to spend time designing games, not learning software.
Anyhow, I gave FVTT a whorl about four months ago. What an amazingly simple transition. I subscribed to a couple of Patreon's for really rich graphic maps and related and dam, I'm hooked. Just night and day difference. I run a f2f group of 8 players. I have a large screen imbedded in my gaming table (see link, Graphics page). I run FVTT and use a second PC to control the "players view" on the big screen. Players don't have to touch any electronics. I put a piece of plexiglass on top of the TV screen because they still want to use miniatures. Fine by me. Feels like a perfect blend of tech and traditional.
Campaign website: world-guild.com
Husband, Father, Veteran, Gamer, DM, Player, and Friend | Author of the "World of Eirador" | http://world-guild.com
"The secret we should never let the gamemasters know is that they don't need any rules." ~Gary Gygax
DnD Beyond Importer is a thing. Use it.
This is false. You set up each game in their own world.
"all 8 games loaded into a single Foundry game", not how it works. Set one of them as you need, then export and import the scenes and actors needed to all others. You want to put all the things you are not actively using into compendiums and only the active tokens and maps are loaded in that world. Very much like live table top you don't cover the table in every miniature and map you own.
"pretty beefy dedicated server to run it(expensive)", it runs on a raspberry pi so,...
That is the beauty of Foundry VTT. No one ever NEEDS to use all of those other bits to make it work for them. What you stated above that you need from a VTT is absolutely feasible with Foundry VTT. All of those conditions, advantage, disadvantage, proficiency bonuses, etc one can still handle just like one does at a live in-person table. So, for that initial one-time fee of $50 you can have what you say you need. The other bits are there for those who want the bells and whistles. I hope this helps.
Also, if what you and your players are doing now works well for your group and you do not see any gain for your group, then I would not change.
That's like a reading comp and chronograpic reading fail. Pretty sure Yurei over the past _year_ is well aware of what Foundry can do and that for $50 she can get it to do what Owlbear radio does for free. I mean you read about what she wants the VTT to do right?
Does Foundry give like credits to folks who get new users. I mean it's great platform and all but there's an insistence on it and effort to convert folks who really don't want a VTT that Foundry is even for them.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Your entire post here is spot on. I quoted you stating the main reason Foundry should not contract with DDB. If Foundry wants to better/officially integrate D&D into their VTT then it should contract directly with WoTC. Don't get me wrong. I like DDB. I have spent money here and will continue to do so, but having DDB take control of Foundry VTT would be absolutely the wrong way to go.
MidnightPlat,
First of all, I appreciate your input, but I did not see any post stating that Yurei1453 had ANY direct experience using Foundry VTT. I simply stated that it would do what she/he stated they wanted from a VTT.
Second, perhaps you did not read my last statement, "Also, if what you and your players are doing now works well for your group and you do not see any gain for your group, then I would not change.".
Third, you speak as if I was aware of Owlbear radio. I just looked it up. (You have a typo. It is actually Owlbear Rodeo) Here is a link for anyone interested: https://www.owlbear.rodeo/ Also, here is a link about it from PCGamer: https://www.pcgamer.com/owlbear-rodeo-is-a-more-lightweight-virtual-tabletop-for-your-dandd-needs/
While I do have some experience with both Roll20 and FGU (Fantasy Grounds Unity), I am fairly new to the VTT world. D&D got along just fine before the internet existed. Nothing from the internet is needed to play the game. What the internet has done for D&D is enabled players living in different parts of the world to get together and have a regular game. Which internet tools any group chooses to use is up to that group. The people in this thread who are speaking positively about Foundry VTT are comparing it to the two other VTTs I mentioned above that seem to be popular. I do not know why some people seem to be so aggro about this.