One of the biggest problems with using RW live at the table is when you're switching from nontactical activity and time which RW handles beautifully with its fog of world feature and tactical activity and time which RW simply punts on. The ability to integrate with a VTT would at least let you export a partially revealed map to the VTT and place the party on it and begin tactical movement from there using the VTT's lighting and reveal features and that is before you start tracking init and status effects.
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
-
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
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
How long, Really?
- Thread starter Madmaxneo
- Start date
"Integration" is a topic that is "bigger than a breadbox". It sounds simple... "Just integrate!" But, as they say, "the devil is in the details".
In the short term, if you are using Rol20, the url for a game/campaign can be put into RealmWorks for the players to launch from there. The GM would still need to open a browser and go there manually, though.
EDIT:
To be clear, I think more integration options with VTT tools would be great. BUT.. the VTT makers need to be partners in that operation. No other tool can do much without the VTT maker enabling external manipulation in some way. Currently, no VTT that I have looked at has that. They have character importers, for instance, but no way for an external program to launch a specific encounter map or the like,
In the short term, if you are using Rol20, the url for a game/campaign can be put into RealmWorks for the players to launch from there. The GM would still need to open a browser and go there manually, though.
EDIT:
To be clear, I think more integration options with VTT tools would be great. BUT.. the VTT makers need to be partners in that operation. No other tool can do much without the VTT maker enabling external manipulation in some way. Currently, no VTT that I have looked at has that. They have character importers, for instance, but no way for an external program to launch a specific encounter map or the like,
Last edited:
Of course the VTT maker has to be on board but I'm sure one of them will be interested.
But just consider the number of times people come here thinking RW is a VTT. RW needs a better answer than no. Further as I say above it is frustrating to be using RW's really amazing controlled reveal of a map but when you need to start tactical movement you have to stop everything and move to physical minis and map or some other solution. I even messed around with embedding a screen in a tabletop but I still prefer having an upright screen for giving most info to my players and don't really have the budget for that many screens in my gaming room.
If RW doesn't do this one of the VTT's will get the idea that a persistent wiki or some other solution makes sense for at least some of their customers and RW will have a competitor that may never be as good but will be broader in scope and that breadth may well kill RW.
But just consider the number of times people come here thinking RW is a VTT. RW needs a better answer than no. Further as I say above it is frustrating to be using RW's really amazing controlled reveal of a map but when you need to start tactical movement you have to stop everything and move to physical minis and map or some other solution. I even messed around with embedding a screen in a tabletop but I still prefer having an upright screen for giving most info to my players and don't really have the budget for that many screens in my gaming room.
If RW doesn't do this one of the VTT's will get the idea that a persistent wiki or some other solution makes sense for at least some of their customers and RW will have a competitor that may never be as good but will be broader in scope and that breadth may well kill RW.
When/if the next survey comes around I strongly suggest we all vote for integration with one or more of the VTT packages and individual reveal. Besides custom calendars those features seem to be the biggest weaknesses of RW.
My #1 request is the ability to print.
Of course the VTT maker has to be on board but I'm sure one of them will be interested.
But just consider the number of times people come here thinking RW is a VTT. RW needs a better answer than no. Further as I say above it is frustrating to be using RW's really amazing controlled reveal of a map but when you need to start tactical movement you have to stop everything and move to physical minis and map or some other solution. I even messed around with embedding a screen in a tabletop but I still prefer having an upright screen for giving most info to my players and don't really have the budget for that many screens in my gaming room.
If RW doesn't do this one of the VTT's will get the idea that a persistent wiki or some other solution makes sense for at least some of their customers and RW will have a competitor that may never be as good but will be broader in scope and that breadth may well kill RW.
The issue then is "How does LoneWolf better manage expectations so that people do not think of RealmWorks as something it is not?" How do they manage the message better so that people do not assume a tool that is not marketed as a VTT is a VTT anyway.
Some of the confusion was inevitable. RealmWorks, when hints and previews began, was a new thing.. a campaign management tool. People understand new things in relation to existing things.. so people who are used to seeing VTTs competing for their attention now see "a new VTT with more campaign management" instead of "a campaign management tool."
Last edited:
For me it seems as though Lonewolf doesn't grok that once you get the content into Realmworks you need a way to share it with the players.
Printing, a functional live web view, sharing of realms, PC specific reveals, player journals etc are all a CORE function of Realmworks that desperately needs to be implemented if it's promise is to be realized.
Without these tools Realmworks runs a real risk of becoming irrelevant as roll20 et al add these features to their VTTs.
Printing, a functional live web view, sharing of realms, PC specific reveals, player journals etc are all a CORE function of Realmworks that desperately needs to be implemented if it's promise is to be realized.
Without these tools Realmworks runs a real risk of becoming irrelevant as roll20 et al add these features to their VTTs.
When/if the next survey comes around I strongly suggest we all vote for integration with one or more of the VTT packages and individual reveal. Besides custom calendars those features seem to be the biggest weaknesses of RW.
Definitely not. We don't use VTT and have no intention to start with one. There are so many features that are much more important (at least to me) that IMHO an integration with VTT should be ranked #237.
As soon as the content market is in I feel they should be throwing all focus as the Web View (I suspect they will). We know they already have a working alpha as of 27 Feb 2015. You would hope some work has been done on it since there.
Web View will get the player's interested in RW also greatly expanding the customer base. Not to mention the dynamic it would add by getting my players into the world and content I've created.
I agree that VTT is completely not required for me. I run a 3 screen setup. I LOVE that I can display NPCs, Monsters, Handouts, etc on the second screen and would not want to give that up to run the map from within RW (keeping in mind RW only supports 2x screens currently). I have absolutely no concerns with going to another window to control the map via MapTools.
To be honest, RW's is too slow IMO for me to justify using it as a VTT. And by that i mean switching tabs takes longer than switching to MapTools. It's not an issue if you are just starting out, but the larger your database gets, the longer the load takes.
Web View will get the player's interested in RW also greatly expanding the customer base. Not to mention the dynamic it would add by getting my players into the world and content I've created.
I agree that VTT is completely not required for me. I run a 3 screen setup. I LOVE that I can display NPCs, Monsters, Handouts, etc on the second screen and would not want to give that up to run the map from within RW (keeping in mind RW only supports 2x screens currently). I have absolutely no concerns with going to another window to control the map via MapTools.
To be honest, RW's is too slow IMO for me to justify using it as a VTT. And by that i mean switching tabs takes longer than switching to MapTools. It's not an issue if you are just starting out, but the larger your database gets, the longer the load takes.
I have to agree with daplunk about the speed of RW once you get a medium-large Realm. It can seriously cause a slowdown. I am running an i7 with 32g of RAM and some of my larger topics take a noticeable amount of time to load.
As for my 2 cents about things after the Content Market is live... I sort of lean towards calendars and the webview; say 60/40%.
Hope everyone had a good weekend.
As for my 2 cents about things after the Content Market is live... I sort of lean towards calendars and the webview; say 60/40%.
Hope everyone had a good weekend.
gamemasterbob
Active member
I was one of the first in on the KickStarter. Loyal. Hopeful.
So...
I searched the forum for "content Realm Works" and got this thread. Now here I am after drilling through 21 pages (as of this writing) of posts with the question STILL remaining "Any ETA on content for RW?"
There are many loyal fans here and LWD, you seem a bit defensive. Don't be. Be glad! Get us some content to buy and you can have our money.
You underestimated the work involved in this. Big time! Understandable. So we wait.
Peace.
So...
I searched the forum for "content Realm Works" and got this thread. Now here I am after drilling through 21 pages (as of this writing) of posts with the question STILL remaining "Any ETA on content for RW?"
There are many loyal fans here and LWD, you seem a bit defensive. Don't be. Be glad! Get us some content to buy and you can have our money.
You underestimated the work involved in this. Big time! Understandable. So we wait.
Peace.
Last edited:
ChipmunkPDX
Member
I have been waiting patiently until the day I can buy RW and experience it for myself. My gaming group is an almost exclusive Apple/MAC group. Luckily we all have iPads and love HL. If they do offer a Web or MAC version, I know they will get our money because HL has impressed us. I know we are probably a smaller group, but living on the West Coast, I mostly see Apple products and think they would get an entire new group of costumers.
According to the latest update we might know more by the end of this week. We don't know what more includes though and how detailed more will be.
Julian Assange promises it'll be a huge October surprise!
Julian Assange promises it'll be a huge October surprise!
Wikileaks reveals rob is the former child actor from 80's coming of age classic "Flight of the Navigator"!
You can run RW under an emulator but there has been no word on a native Mac version.I have been waiting patiently until the day I can buy RW and experience it for myself. My gaming group is an almost exclusive Apple/MAC group. Luckily we all have iPads and love HL. If they do offer a Web or MAC version, I know they will get our money because HL has impressed us. I know we are probably a smaller group, but living on the West Coast, I mostly see Apple products and think they would get an entire new group of costumers.
JustinThomason
Well-known member
You can run RW under an emulator but there has been no word on a native Mac version.
I had very good luck running RW in a Windows virtual machine through Parallels. I ended up buying an inexpensive Windows laptop as my GM machine, but until that time, Parallels worked great!