Player View not Dynamic?

[kbs666]

Originally Posted by Bidmaron

If the GM will have a web version and that version does anything but view, it will have to do one of three things:
1. Make the GM's computer a server for the database - wow, I'd be shocked if a company with the resources of LWD ever tackled something like that.

This is actually really easy. Every DB out there is network aware right out of the box so whether the updates come from the thick client on the local machine or a thin client on a local machine should be irrelevant.

The scenario where you use the web client on a different machine than one where the DB is installed would likely mean the web client talks to the cloud rather than your local DB, strictly for security reasons and lack of knowledge of your ip addy and whether opened the right port on your firewall and left your system running, but the technical issues of accessing a DB remotely are trivial.

[Silveras]

My experience is similar to kbs666... even though I got my players licenses for free, they refused to even try it. I can kind of understand the Mac-based players not wanting to run a virtual machine .. but the ones on PCs claimed to be too computer illiterate to even run Setup.

However, my hope is that more people will see it used as Grey Mage mentions... a perfect place for House Rules, custom spells, and so on.

I play Pathfinder... and if I adopt say, 15 of the many variant rules in Pathfinder Unchained, a realm that has the Core Rules other than these, and has these replacing the relevant parts of the Core Rules, means the players have one place to look for all the relevant rules.. without needing to remember, "oh, the ones page XX of the Core Rulebook are replaced by the ones on page YY of Unchained".

Similarly, a pet peeve of mine has been the rules (from 3.x on into Pathfinder) for knowledge checks about monsters. So I am making my own, and have a "Critters" Category that is solely for what the PCs know or think they know about each monster. A section of header information giving me the numbers needed to determine a check... a section of bits of information graded by the DC for the knowledge check.. and a third section for things they've learned by experiencing them (meeting the creatures). All automatically cross-referenced to the encounters where they happen.

[kbs666]

Originally Posted by Silveras

My experience is similar to kbs666... even though I got my players licenses for free, they refused to even try it. I can kind of understand the Mac-based players not wanting to run a virtual machine .. but the ones on PCs claimed to be too computer illiterate to even run Setup.

However, my hope is that more people will see it used as Grey Mage mentions... a perfect place for House Rules, custom spells, and so on.

I play Pathfinder... and if I adopt say, 15 of the many variant rules in Pathfinder Unchained, a realm that has the Core Rules other than these, and has these replacing the relevant parts of the Core Rules, means the players have one place to look for all the relevant rules.. without needing to remember, "oh, the ones page XX of the Core Rulebook are replaced by the ones on page YY of Unchained".

Similarly, a pet peeve of mine has been the rules (from 3.x on into Pathfinder) for knowledge checks about monsters. So I am making my own, and have a "Critters" Category that is solely for what the PCs know or think they know about each monster. A section of header information giving me the numbers needed to determine a check... a section of bits of information graded by the DC for the knowledge check.. and a third section for things they've learned by experiencing them (meeting the creatures). All automatically cross-referenced to the encounters where they happen.

That's been the annoying part. My campaign is very heavily modified from "straight" pathfinder. Only specific races, classes, archetypes and feats are allowed. The central listing of those is in RW, I tried creating a campaign specific source for HL but I failed miserably and have never had the time or inclination to try again. So my players really need to access RW to know what are and aren't legal options for their characters. Some of the players just ask me and some just level up and hope I don't review their character sheet afterwards, I always do, and then complain if they've done something out of bounds and I make them fix it.

[Silveras]

Originally Posted by kbs666

That's been the annoying part. My campaign is very heavily modified from "straight" pathfinder. Only specific races, classes, archetypes and feats are allowed. The central listing of those is in RW, I tried creating a campaign specific source for HL but I failed miserably and have never had the time or inclination to try again. So my players really need to access RW to know what are and aren't legal options for their characters. Some of the players just ask me and some just level up and hope I don't review their character sheet afterwards, I always do, and then complain if they've done something out of bounds and I make them fix it.

That's why once I finish my Rise of the Runelords realm I will be looking for a group of new players (not just a new group of players, but those new enough not to have bad habits).

The Realm us more than 85% done ... I just have to finish the last Adventure chapter and it will be done. Well, that, and populate the shells of the 100+ "Critter" records I made for knowledge checks.

[Vargr]

I use RW for my own benefit as a GM and world builder.

During game sessions I present info on a secondary monitor, which works very well.

All my players bring a windows laptop to the table and make notes and keep their character sheets on it.

One player has invested in RW Player Edition and usually looks up things during the session (which would only be information from the past sessions - not the one we are running). After the session when I have updated the realm he looks through the new info for fun (he is that kind of guy).

I have never suggested they should invest in RW - they know I use it and like it (they even insist I drop smart pen-and-paper maps on the table and instead uses the fog-of-world of RW. Which works very well.

[Bidmaron]

Originally Posted by kbs666

The scenario where you use the web client on a different machine than one where the DB is installed would likely mean the web client talks to the cloud rather than your local DB, strictly for security reasons and lack of knowledge of your ip addy and whether opened the right port on your firewall and left your system running, but the technical issues of accessing a DB remotely are trivial.

This is not correct for most non-commercial databases. You can go through the cloud, but that is not the way RW works. For a computer to serve a database, it must at least be turned on, connected to the internet, and have a port open as a server (or use UPN or some other auto-server type protocol).

The option you mentioned, going through the cloud, is one of the three options I listed.

[kbs666]

Originally Posted by Bidmaron

This is not correct for most non-commercial databases. You can go through the cloud, but that is not the way RW works. For a computer to serve a database, it must at least be turned on, connected to the internet, and have a port open as a server (or use UPN or some other auto-server type protocol).

The option you mentioned, going through the cloud, is one of the three options I listed.

WTH is a non commercial database?

[Bidmaron]

OK, kbs, you go try to set up any database you own to serve database entries. Yes, some databases come with that capability, but it is beyond the ability of most users to actually get it to work. First, you have to go open the port, tell your firewall to allow the program to use that port, etc, etc.

Then there is the problem that almost everyone who isn't commercial user has a dynamic IP address, and serving database entries just is not something non-commercial users can do (yes, there are commercial packages that cost butt-tons that can partially automate the process - that is what I meant by commercial database).

But we are getting distracted. My main point was that we are not going to get dynamic updating realms any time soon. RW does not maintain the database on the cloud - you have to sync to get the updates there, and you cannot do that while you are in the realm database. Until they change that policy, we are NEVER going to see any client or web edition that accesses a realm in active use by the GM.

That would be a major architecture change. And that is also why we will never see a GM version that lets you do any edits on your realm (unless they do one of the three things I said they could do).

[Ckorik]

The reason it doesn't do network outside of the cloud is the marketplace.

Like Diablo 3 - the only way to ensure sanity on rights management is to have a central server. That complicates 'live' updates.

This program isn't meant to be a live update.... really it's more like:

* replaces your campaign world notes
* allows the gm to make notes of who is alive and dead and when
* Create a new NPC on the fly that the players like? Now you don't forget the name - can look it up easy - and it auto-links when you create new content.
* Want to place a hint to adventure B 100000 miles away (on the map) in the dungeon? You can - and link it - and have links back to it - so that you don't get lost trying to remember who the 'mysterious letter' was for or about.
* Replace Obsidian Portal (for those of you who use that) as a campaign tracking device
* Be your own personal Wiki and rule keeper
* Create a new house rule to deal with 'something' note it and it's always linked to your house rules - no more forgetting about it until months later when you all go 'how did we rule that last time?'
* Let your players review the world they know (with the player version) when they are trying to remember the name of that baron that offered them a reward if they found sandlewood bookshelves ever.

etc.

[kbs666]

Originally Posted by Bidmaron

OK, kbs, you go try to set up any database you own to serve database entries. Yes, some databases come with that capability, but it is beyond the ability of most users to actually get it to work. First, you have to go open the port, tell your firewall to allow the program to use that port, etc, etc.

I do it for a living. You're asking the wrong person if you think its hard.