Kickstarter Clarification Questions

[merlinsghost]

Originally Posted by rob

As long as Windows Server 2011 supports the .Net Framework 4.0 Client Profile, which I'm guessing it does, you should be able to run Realm Works on it. However, I've not personally used Windows Server 2011, so can't promise that with absolute certainty. Sometimes Microsoft does weird things with its server O/S installations...

I have a Windows Server 2012 box I can test this on if you think that will help answer this question. I can load the software on a VM as well and configure it if you have specific configuration questions.

[rob]

Originally Posted by mirtos

out of curiousity, from a technical perspective, have you decided who you are using for your cloud services? Is it local to you? If you are using amazon, id warn you my company has had some bad experiences with them. just as an FYI.

Nothing has been finalized yet, but we're currently expecting to use Azure (Microsoft). We're running a Microsoft server environment, so integrating with Azure appears to be easiest. Also, the database will be maintained ourselves, with third-party cloud storage only being used for blobs (e.g. map images, audio, video, etc.).

[merlinsghost]

Originally Posted by merlinsghost

I have a Windows Server 2012 box I can test this on if you think that will help answer this question. I can load the software on a VM as well and configure it if you have specific configuration questions.

After doing some testing with Realm Works on a Windows Server 2012 (Standard) box logged in with the Administrator account that was NOT a Domain Controller, nor did it have any Roles assigned to it, I can tell you the following:

RealmWorks 104 will install and run.
RealmWorks 107 will install and run.
RealmWorks 112 will install but will NOT run.
RealmWorks 113 will install but will NOT run.
RealmWorks 114 will install but will NOT run.

112, 113, and 114 all gave the same error (I had the system send an error report and entered my e-mail address): Object reference not set to an instance of on object. I can send error reports for each version, but suspect it is the same issue across all 3 versions.

The results were the same with and without Active Directory configured/installed.

Something that I found rather amusing: After running versions 104 and 107 (112, 113, and 114 failed to get past software start), Windows was able to tell me via system tray alert that there were new versions of the software available. When I clicked on the little bubble, it took me right to the beta download page in my default web browser.

I will also test Windows Server 2008 R2 Enterprise if I can find the time.

[rob]

Originally Posted by merlinsghost

After doing some testing with Realm Works on a Windows Server 2012 (Standard) box logged in with the Administrator account that was NOT a Domain Controller, nor did it have any Roles assigned to it, I can tell you the following:

Apparently, we broke something specific to the server side of things with regards to the client version. Thanks for testing the various versions, since that will help to bracket the problem space for sorting this out. We've got the crash reports here that you sent, so we'll figure out what changed and get things working again.

Thanks for the test results!

[pyremius]

Originally Posted by rob

Here's an excerpt from a reply in the Comments section of the Kickstarter that addresses this idea...

Once we get the community repository into place and sharing of material is supported (i.e. the core goals of this KS), you should be able to re-use your own campaign. You would first setup and share your basic campaign world (Realm1). Once it's shared, you could then import that realm multiple times as the starting point for multiple distinct campaigns (Realm2, Realm3, etc.). What's revealed would be completely distinct for all the different campaigns, so different groups would know different information about the overall world.

I think this ties into another question I saw about per-player revealed knowledge. I suspect the desired goal is to have multiple parties adventuring simultaneously in the same world - party A's actions have consequences for party B. Related to this, is it possible to associate Characters with Accounts and Parties, and assign inheritable Rights and Permissions at each level?

An example:

I am running a world with two gaming groups present: one party for my college friends (Beth, Jim, Gwen, and Sue), and one party for the family of one of those friends (Gwen, Fred, Emily, and Sue). Gwen and Sue are in both parties (Sue's my wife, in this example), and thus run two characters each. In party 1, Gwen is running Serena, and Selena in party 2. Creating two separate games doesn't work well because of all the double-entry of data after the split occurs. Likewise, adding all Accounts to one game doesn't work, as Fred will get the information from Jim's game. Organizing Accounts into Parties helps, but fails with Gwen and Sue as they have no good way to tell which data was learned from which game. Allowing Gwen's Player Account to be tied to multiple Characters, and then forming parties of Characters means I can do the following: reveal information to party 1; reveal information to Serena; and reveal information to party 2. Gwen the player knows all three pieces of information, but either of us can look at the Selena/Serena characters to know whether or not her current character knows the information in question (and if it's the information only given to Serena, Beth can ask "How did you find that out? It's not something we all learned.").

[rob]

Originally Posted by pyremius

I think this ties into another question I saw about per-player revealed knowledge. I suspect the desired goal is to have multiple parties adventuring simultaneously in the same world - party A's actions have consequences for party B. Related to this, is it possible to associate Characters with Accounts and Parties, and assign inheritable Rights and Permissions at each level?

That's not something we had considered previously, but the architecture we've designed should be able to accommodate it cleanly. There's also the extra complication for players to be able to view what's revealed from the perspective of individual characters. I'm not sure if this would be part of the initial roll-out of the feature, but it's definitely doable with our current design. I've added this to the todo list so we can make sure this gets slated for inclusion at an appropriate time.

[pyremius]

Here's a couple more quick thoughts before I forget them:

Can you set things up so that revealed information is keyed to game time? Specifically, I'm thinking about characters who have been Raised - especially in sequential campaigns where one or more dead from Campaign 1 are brought back in Campaign 2, and not all of the original knowledge was "made public" such that everyone would know it (they have secrets the new party needs to find out).

Can information be revealed to NPCs? Here, I'm thinking about "nemesis parties" where the PCs are in a race towards a future confrontation. Some information the PCs will get first, and some the nemesis group will get. This would also benefit information brokers and spies, who would tend to gain private knowledge over time.

I'm pretty sure these would flow naturally from my previous suggestion about PC-level knowledge instead of account-level knowledge, but I thought I should toss them out just in case.

I am absolutely looking forward to this, and can't wait to stop by at GenCon and find out what other ideas the first few months reveal.

[mirtos]

Originally Posted by rob

That's not something we had considered previously, but the architecture we've designed should be able to accommodate it cleanly. There's also the extra complication for players to be able to view what's revealed from the perspective of individual characters. I'm not sure if this would be part of the initial roll-out of the feature, but it's definitely doable with our current design. I've added this to the todo list so we can make sure this gets slated for inclusion at an appropriate time.

I have to say, character level info is extremely important to me. I can understand its not going to be at roll out, but I hope its going to be pretty soon, because without it, i think the usefulness for some of us is going to be limited. and a lot of DM's that allow the "passing of notes", I would imagine. I absolutely have to keep track of what characters know what, and provide that information to the players who are in charge of those players. Without character level tracking, I will still have to keep my own notes, limiting the amount i would use the product, I think. I might not be in the majority of DMs, but I dont think I'm in the minority either. This is ESPECIALLY true for play by post gaming that exists on bulletin boards. Just my two cents.

[mirtos]

I also agree with pyremis about the revealing info to NPCs too. Because sometimes I have to keep track of what NPCs have learned what, and what the PCs have told what NPCs what.

For example: The PC's may have bluffed the captain of the guard that they are one thing, but told the truth to the head of the merchant's guild.

[rob]

Originally Posted by pyremius

Can you set things up so that revealed information is keyed to game time? Specifically, I'm thinking about characters who have been Raised - especially in sequential campaigns where one or more dead from Campaign 1 are brought back in Campaign 2, and not all of the original knowledge was "made public" such that everyone would know it (they have secrets the new party needs to find out).

Once we get the individual (non-group) reveal capability exposed, you'll be able to control who knows what. This might be tied to time, such as the example you provide, or space, such as a PC going off on his own at some point, or something else entirely, such as some characters being unconscious during an event.

Originally Posted by pyremius

Can information be revealed to NPCs? Here, I'm thinking about "nemesis parties" where the PCs are in a race towards a future confrontation. Some information the PCs will get first, and some the nemesis group will get. This would also benefit information brokers and spies, who would tend to gain private knowledge over time.

That's not something we had envisioned, but I guess you could do it that way. I would think it would be easier to make a private note of what the various NPCs do and don't know as part of the info for those NPCs. Trying to track them as a separate party seems like a lot of unnecessary work to me. But I guess you could do it once we get individual control into place on a character level (as opposed to player level).

Originally Posted by pyremius

I am absolutely looking forward to this, and can't wait to stop by at GenCon and find out what other ideas the first few months reveal.

We'll have some seminars at GenCon that delve into more details about the product, so keep an eye out for those and definitely strive attend them.