-
Please note: In an effort to ensure that all of our users feel welcome on our forums, we’ve updated our forum rules. You can review the updated rules here: http://forums.wolflair.com/showthread.php?t=5528.
If a fellow Community member is not following the forum rules, please report the post by clicking the Report button (the red yield sign on the left) located on every post. This will notify the moderators directly. If you have any questions about these new rules, please contact support@wolflair.com.
- The Lone Wolf Development Team
D&D Next
- Thread starter karpomatic
- Start date
If they actually signed something, I would think they would announce that sooner, rather than later. That is the kind of news that might draw in new customers and prevent current customers from defecting to FG.
MNBlockHead
Well-known member
Who would defect to FG? That's a sincere question, not a statement or challenge. I looked into FG when the WoTC deal was announced, but if you just want digital character sheets and maybe some encounter management, but don't want VTT, it seems like a lot of money for an application whose features and strengths would mostly go unused.
I'm not knocking FG, if I played with a group that was not co-located, I would own it already. But I don't want a VTT, I just want digital character sheets, some basic encounter management, and integration with RW.
Even if I lose all hope of HL and RW getting DnD 5e licensed content, I don't', see a compelling reason to spend the money for FG and all the DnD 5e content, at least until I decide to give VTT a go.
I'm not knocking FG, if I played with a group that was not co-located, I would own it already. But I don't want a VTT, I just want digital character sheets, some basic encounter management, and integration with RW.
Even if I lose all hope of HL and RW getting DnD 5e licensed content, I don't', see a compelling reason to spend the money for FG and all the DnD 5e content, at least until I decide to give VTT a go.
I ended up buying FG and some of the 5e content when they had a sale. I have been using it mostly for "at the table" sessions to display content to the players and such. It's not as useful as I think RealmWorks would be, but I don't have the time to input the content myself. For the next adventure, if I can find the maps, I may use RealmWorks instead. We'll see.
We are also using FG for a 5e campaign where our DM is remote. So, the money wasn't completely spent to replace RealmWorks.
MNBlockHead
Well-known member
Well, I doubt that WoTC is going to let LWD sell their content for less than FG. Personally, while—yes—it is overpriced given that I already bought the hardcover books, but I would still pay because the benefits would be worth it for me.
the_redbeard
Well-known member
I think it would definitely widen the customer base for HL and Realm Works. I have already purchased both HL and RW, but haven't really used either. I think RW would be more useful for at the table sessions. I really like the way that content is linked in RW. But, without the content, it isn't very useful to me.
I really do want to use RW.
I would still need to own FG though... since I play in a campaign that uses FG. That DM didn't like the cloud model of RW, so decided against it. And neither of us like the subscription model of d20pro.
There's no subscription model for d20Pro... Can't remember the name of the one you're probably thinking of. Roll20?
I think you are right... Roll20 had the "free" version with the only other option being a subscription.
I was pretty impressed with Realm Works and had begun entering the Lost Mine of Phandelver into it. But, the convenience of FG having it readily available won me over. I still think RW would be much more useful though. And, if LW were to release 5e for RW, I would still purchase that... but, if purchasing content requires a cloud subscription... probably not.
MNBlockHead
Well-known member
I'm running a campaign in a world I'm creating myself, and RW was the best product for me to manage it. But if I were interested in running WoTC's canned adventure paths, I would definitely consider FG.
@Ddaley, did you play Lost Mine of Phandelver at table? How useful was FG at table if you are not using the VTT functionality?
@Ddaley, did you play Lost Mine of Phandelver at table? How useful was FG at table if you are not using the VTT functionality?
If I were creating my own content, I would definitely go with Realm Works. I really like the auto linking feature and the way that content is navigable.
Yes, we are running Lost Mine at the table and I am using FG. I am finding it somewhat helpful. I use it to display maps and other content to the players. I keep track of combat in FG using the combat tracker. FG makes it easy for me to look at characters to see their abilities/skills/inventory (if I keep it updated). I also use the party sheet to track watch/sleep order and marching order.
When the party has an encounter, someone sketches the displayed map onto a flip map and we then move to miniatures for the combat. I will try to update the displayed map to reflect what is on the mat during combat as well.
What FG has been less useful for is quickly finding content. My original hope was that it would help to speed up game play by giving me an easy way to find rules and such quickly. But, ad-hoc queries into the rules can take longer than just grabbing a book. This is where I think RW would truly rule. Based on the content I did enter into RW, I think RW could really speed up game play here.
Some assumptions above require clarification.
In general, the only companies who actually sign something at GenCon or other such events are the small ones. For sizable companies, meetings and discussions take place at GenCon, but any contracts must still go through lawyers, so nothing gets signed at GenCon. And, in the case of Wizards, they don't even send people of sufficient clout to GenCon to actually attempt to work through licensing details.
So nothing of major note typically gets signed at GenCon (unless it's more of a ceremonial signing after all the lawyers are done in advance of GenCon). And even that's not possible for anything with Wizards.
In general, the only companies who actually sign something at GenCon or other such events are the small ones. For sizable companies, meetings and discussions take place at GenCon, but any contracts must still go through lawyers, so nothing gets signed at GenCon. And, in the case of Wizards, they don't even send people of sufficient clout to GenCon to actually attempt to work through licensing details.
So nothing of major note typically gets signed at GenCon (unless it's more of a ceremonial signing after all the lawyers are done in advance of GenCon). And even that's not possible for anything with Wizards.
Something to consider...
There are a LOT of companies with digital tools who all view D&D 5E as a huge opportunity. I know of multiple that have been actively courting a deal with Wizards. In our case, we've been talking to them in earnest for about two years now. Thus far, exactly ONE company that I'm aware of has actually signed anything (FG).
There may be inferences that can be drawn here...
Lawyers... Lawyers... More lawyers. You're starting to sound like a nightclub owner, Rob. Is there a Lone Wolf Tavern you've been hiding from us?
Sounds right, though surprising. Considering Gen Con's history I'm surprised its an issue. I thought Ed Greenwood still attended as Elminster regularly enough you might to be able to chat woth him and maybe get the ball rolling since WotC uses Forgotten Realms exclusively in modules. Ed has quite the reputation for casting spells in favor of heroes at Gen Con in the gaming areas for the lining campaigns...
It seems a bit backwards having a convention for industry authors and the writers not being there. Gary Gygax loved attending. What happened to Gen Con? It's like the spirit of the convention is gone. It feels like Santa giving up on Christmas and just sending out the Krampus.
Last edited: