I, too, long for all the features that we do not yet have.

And while longing I sometimes forget all that I have already gotten.

I have finally found a system that allows me to work on my world and my campaign in an easy way without having to worry too much about structure (RW handles it by itself more or less). It is actually fun developing my world.

In short, people tend to forget that RW does what no other software does, it does it well - in fact so well that people forget it and just focus on the things that it does not do - yet.

So I am with ruhar on this one. Be careful not letting the frustration get the better of you (I have to remind myself of that too once in a while).

I'm constantly looking at software that will enhance my game prep and play. There just isn't anything out there that meets my needs like RW.

Deleted

To Quote Rob's Quote...
"THIS" ... or perhaps the now more infamous "Soon"

As for myself, I have repeatedly asked this same question and it still amazes that LW can't see the error in having Players casting a vote on a tool primarily designed for DMs... If there was no "realm" created in RW there would be NO NEED for a "players version".

And to then hide behind a flawed polling with .. "well that's what the "public voted"" is simply without good merit.

Rob Quote #2.. the end user simply don't understand the complexities of what it takes.. that's why we can't convey when it will happen.:rolleyes:

Again, many have repeatedly asked this, with the LW response, "hey we are working hard..."
Great, glad they are... but there comes a time when the customer voice should be addressed with REAL deliverables.

As MNB and others have said, I too am always on the lookout for new softwares to improve my gaming table's experience... that is what led me to RW to begin with, via HeroLab... Both, unfortunately with all their collective warts, still have the possibility of being the standard.

My apologies to Liz, that I would resist the urge to post on the RW side in critique. But since this thread and the fact that the SECOND QUARTER of 2016 has now came and went (no surprise), I don't think "early 2016" is in the picture any longer and even her departure for greener fields has caused me to pick up the banner once more.

I'm hoping the next survey captures GM vs player and whether person has purchased. And I'd really like each question on the survey to have a number of "widgets" assigned to it, where a widget is a vague idea of how much time/effort each survey question is estimated to be. And by widgets, I mean just an abstract difficulty or timeframe to give us a sense of what to expect. Perhaps give each person a number of widget points to make final choices with.

It would be nice to group questions by how many months/years it will take to accomplish them based on current estimates.

It would be fantastic to group questions by contingencies -- kinda like skill trees in games. Show the big end goals and what it'll take to get there. It's easier to swallow a long development time if we can see that in order to implement X Lonewolf needs to first do A through W.

I have to wonder whether the voting would have fallen the way it did if people understood how much time was necessary to accomplish what was voted for. I bet knowing the length of time would impact the next voting to create more realistic expectations.

That depends on what features you want. I want the ability to print what I write. There are many things out there that meet my needs better than RW.

Right now, I'm using RW to run RotRL, but I already have that in printed form. But for the stuff I create, I will use anything else. Word, OneNote, Scrivener, Evernote. Because, hey, look, I can print!

Well, sure. If I *needed* to print or *needed* to export, I wouldn't be using RW. I run a single campaign from RW, for a game I run from my home, and it has served me well. After HL started to support 5e, the RW&HL combo have been a great set of tools for me. I don't know that I would want to DM without them.

I am a heavy user of Evernote for both business and personal use, including storing various gaming material. I've looked at Aeon Timeline, Onenote, Wikis, Google Drive, etc. and I like RW because I don't have to juggle multiple tools. All the stuff for my campaign are in one place.

I thought I needed calendars, and almost asked for a refund during the money-back period after realizing the demo video I saw was showing a feature not yet released. Calendars have become much less important than I had wanted them to be in my campaign because of this, but I've gotten over it. Calendars are now a nice to have than a must have and I'm more interested in export and print, but I'm still putting hours of time in RW every week because nothing else comes close to meeting my needs for campaign management.

Yikes, AEIOU... that would be cool...but the amount of time to design and digest responses from such a survey would seem to be enough to develop some new features instead.

If I were RW, I would keep it simple. I would have a separate questionnaire for each edition, player's and GM's. The first question on both should be:

1. Do you own a copy of RW?

If not, I would have some questions asking why they have not bought it. What features are keeping them from buying it? Give some options based on commonly cited reasons, but allow respondents to fill in their own answers.

I would expect the number one reason for most GMs not buying RW will be lack of printing and exporting capabilities. Inability to reuse/copy realms would likely be number 3. For players, it would almost certainly be "my GM doesn't use it." Nobody will buy the players edition if they don't participate in a came where their GM is using it. If the survey answers bear this out then GM responses and requests should be weighted accordingly.

If you do own a copy, next question:

2. Do you actively use RW?

If not, why?

Again, I'll bet you'll see the same reasons those who have not purchased the game will give for not buying it. Printing, export, my DM doesn't use it.

Heck, Liz could easily whip up those survey items before she had her morning coffee. I'm sure our new person could do it in a day or two. :)

Deleted