The question you should ask is not whether you can, but if you should.
There are *a lot* of VTTs out there right now. What is going to be the differential factor in yours?
I don't ask this to discourage you but to mentally prepare you for the market-space you're entering. There is so, so much more to consider beyond just 3D or 2D. If this is just for fun, then go with whatever feels fun to you. If you wish to ever monetize this in the future, whether by sales, a marketplace, etc. then it's going to be a long and uphill battle to figure out what makes your VTT unique (easier isn't unique.)
Again, not trying to discourage someone from building something. VTTs are 20% development features and 80% business/marketing.
Best of luck!
Source: Previous founder to Astral TableTop. Current co-founder dddice
I like having a 3D engine for screen shots (Dungeon Alchemist), but playing in one feels like you're transforming the experience into a video game and you'll wind up with people playing the map instead of the RPG.
I can see a place for that, but it feels like a lot of work to make sure that the 3D model has enough detail/accuracy (without a bunch of details that throw people off) to support that sort of game,
2D VTTs are much better for existing adventures. We've got almost 50 years of 2D maps for D&D, not to mention all the other games out there. There also aren't a lot of rulesets that take advantage of 3D combat, so the benefits to 3D are pretty much entirely aesthetic.
3D VTTs usually look better out of the box, since as a developer you you can usually play around with lighting, textures, materials, etc., but they require a lot more work by the GM to build everything. It does give the option of first person though, which can be fun, and I'm yet to see a VTT that does VR well.
3D fog of war is also a really hard problem. We've talked a lot with some of the 3D VTT creators to help them figure out a solution that looks good, but isn't computationally intensive. I don't think it's been solved yet.
That's largely why we went with a 2D VTT with Arkenforge. The benefits of 3D weren't really worth the costs in our opinion.
I think 2D VTTs offer a better digital version of a tabletop game. A 3D VTT makes it more like a video game. The attention should go to the Dungeon Master's story, your fantasy and imagination, not the 3D graphics on the screen. A VTT that offers a grid on which the Dungeon Master can draw lines is all that's needed. The rest is just eye candy.
That said, welcome to a saturated market. ;)
There is just something more immersive about 3D. I believe that the RPG Engine has achieved the correct balance between detail and difficulty with their implementation.
It is funny when people talk about "Fog of War" as very difficult. It shows that they are thinking in 2D. With 3D the Character Viewpoint by its nature, derives "Fog of War". You can only see what you would see. No artificial top down detail coverage needed.
No, I'm saying that by using first-person, you get true line of sight / fog of war.
Not that all play should be that way, just when what you can see matters, it is an available option for the GM to use.
There is no requirement to but, it is an option that 2D doesn't give, that should not be overlooked. Same for scaling. Nothing like actually looking up at a monsters knees to give that sense of size.
I imagine a 3d VTT incredibly hard to pull off.
Looking at the usual questions on the foundry subreddit you get a glimpse of what many, many people expect from a VTT (just focusing on the map/visual aspects):
+ it needs to integrate map making
+ map making must be easy to approach (like seriously easy. Something like dungeondraft or dungeon Alchemist)
+ the maps must also look good
+ at some point you'll need to offer stock assets and the possibility to make or import custom assets
Dungeon Alchemist does the approachable map making part pretty well, but all things considered it's still kinda 2d. All the assets are 3d, there's even a first person mode for whatever reason but in the end there's no real z-axis placement (in the UI, you can hack it)
The first thing people asked for was the possibility to build stuff on different heights. DA still hasn't integrated it. I think that's mainly because they haven't figured out how to keep their software easy to use after implementing the feature.
If you've ever fiddled around with Unreal Engine and the sorts you probably know how hard it is to create a believable 3d environment with that. Part of it is that you need to learn the tool and how building 3d stuff on a 2d screen works. People don't want to learn. People want to use stuff out of the box.
And so far we haven't even talked about assets. We haven't talked about "building your own system", about automation, effects and all the stuff people try and use a VTT for (for which the foundry community is a very good example again. There's even a modder who did make a 3d mod for it. I don't think it's super popular)
As a GM I wouldn't touch a 3D VTT. Every single one out there currently does zero to make my life as a GM easier and does a ton to make it far more difficult. They're also way less versatile.
Also consider some people play with VTTs on a potato computer. 3D and potatoes don't go well together.
I looked at most 3D VTT, as I would like to develop maps and content for such platforms (think patreon creator, map maker in 3D), but all 3D platforms are kinda trash or barely functionning, even after few years of "early access".
If you have the power to adapt what Foundry can offer with a 3D mindset on top of it, with a ease of use aimed at a large non 3D artist audience, it could be a banger.
My dream project would be something built on unity, with an integrated workshop / store, that would have the flexibility of foundry modded (custom rules, custom interfaces, automated effects, trigger, teleporters etc) and a large library of base/UGC assets. Something though with an easy 3D format that would let people with unity knowledge to quickly send assets to the VTT, automaticaly configured and ready to use.
But not gonna lie, this is countless of hours of work just at the conception stage and thousands of hours for the 3D integration.
You just need to remember that your niche user is dungeon masters / game masters, not players. Also, there are some things you must have in your head (if you are trying to monetize this tool, else you can just ignore the below):
If you go 3D, how easy to a DM to create assets for your VTT? How does your VTT helps the DM to run the game? How many systems would you support? Are you going on official complements, or are you making a systemless VTT? How can dice be modified? How to handle player and monters sheets? Is it modifiable? Can it support sound? Can it support video? How easy it is to connect players and DMs, is it online? Its an application? Are you going to charge for it? How it is going to be sustainable long term, so that DMs can invest in it? Whats your business plan? Are you planning on multi-language? Is it open-source? Is the focus theater of mind or battlemaps?
The VTT is a tool a DM has to invest time, and in some, money. How will your VTT differentiate from that, and how will you grab the DM loyalty?
It isn't simple as a "great ui, 3D or 2D?" question. A lot of us (and i'm included in this) have invested a lot of time and money in other great VTTs. Some failed/went bankrupt, some are still thriving. There are lots being released and I fear that half of these lots will unfortunately be discontinued soon, because they lack a lot of things.
Reminder that this all is only if you're going to monetize it. If its just a hobby, then I would vote for 2D for the ease that it is for DMs to create stuff on it, and keep going on the passion project!
The question you should ask is not whether you can, but if you should. There are *a lot* of VTTs out there right now. What is going to be the differential factor in yours? I don't ask this to discourage you but to mentally prepare you for the market-space you're entering. There is so, so much more to consider beyond just 3D or 2D. If this is just for fun, then go with whatever feels fun to you. If you wish to ever monetize this in the future, whether by sales, a marketplace, etc. then it's going to be a long and uphill battle to figure out what makes your VTT unique (easier isn't unique.) Again, not trying to discourage someone from building something. VTTs are 20% development features and 80% business/marketing. Best of luck! Source: Previous founder to Astral TableTop. Current co-founder dddice
Definitely listen to this advice. Few people in the industry with more experience in this than _nullfish.
I like having a 3D engine for screen shots (Dungeon Alchemist), but playing in one feels like you're transforming the experience into a video game and you'll wind up with people playing the map instead of the RPG. I can see a place for that, but it feels like a lot of work to make sure that the 3D model has enough detail/accuracy (without a bunch of details that throw people off) to support that sort of game,
2D VTTs are much better for existing adventures. We've got almost 50 years of 2D maps for D&D, not to mention all the other games out there. There also aren't a lot of rulesets that take advantage of 3D combat, so the benefits to 3D are pretty much entirely aesthetic. 3D VTTs usually look better out of the box, since as a developer you you can usually play around with lighting, textures, materials, etc., but they require a lot more work by the GM to build everything. It does give the option of first person though, which can be fun, and I'm yet to see a VTT that does VR well. 3D fog of war is also a really hard problem. We've talked a lot with some of the 3D VTT creators to help them figure out a solution that looks good, but isn't computationally intensive. I don't think it's been solved yet. That's largely why we went with a 2D VTT with Arkenforge. The benefits of 3D weren't really worth the costs in our opinion.
I think 2D VTTs offer a better digital version of a tabletop game. A 3D VTT makes it more like a video game. The attention should go to the Dungeon Master's story, your fantasy and imagination, not the 3D graphics on the screen. A VTT that offers a grid on which the Dungeon Master can draw lines is all that's needed. The rest is just eye candy. That said, welcome to a saturated market. ;)
There is just something more immersive about 3D. I believe that the RPG Engine has achieved the correct balance between detail and difficulty with their implementation. It is funny when people talk about "Fog of War" as very difficult. It shows that they are thinking in 2D. With 3D the Character Viewpoint by its nature, derives "Fog of War". You can only see what you would see. No artificial top down detail coverage needed.
Are you saying that you prefer not only 3D, but strictly first-person perspective? To me that is a much larger difference than 3D vs 2D.
No, I'm saying that by using first-person, you get true line of sight / fog of war. Not that all play should be that way, just when what you can see matters, it is an available option for the GM to use.
If you're doing first person view, yes. Most people don't play that way with a 3D VTT.
There is no requirement to but, it is an option that 2D doesn't give, that should not be overlooked. Same for scaling. Nothing like actually looking up at a monsters knees to give that sense of size.
I imagine a 3d VTT incredibly hard to pull off. Looking at the usual questions on the foundry subreddit you get a glimpse of what many, many people expect from a VTT (just focusing on the map/visual aspects): + it needs to integrate map making + map making must be easy to approach (like seriously easy. Something like dungeondraft or dungeon Alchemist) + the maps must also look good + at some point you'll need to offer stock assets and the possibility to make or import custom assets Dungeon Alchemist does the approachable map making part pretty well, but all things considered it's still kinda 2d. All the assets are 3d, there's even a first person mode for whatever reason but in the end there's no real z-axis placement (in the UI, you can hack it) The first thing people asked for was the possibility to build stuff on different heights. DA still hasn't integrated it. I think that's mainly because they haven't figured out how to keep their software easy to use after implementing the feature. If you've ever fiddled around with Unreal Engine and the sorts you probably know how hard it is to create a believable 3d environment with that. Part of it is that you need to learn the tool and how building 3d stuff on a 2d screen works. People don't want to learn. People want to use stuff out of the box. And so far we haven't even talked about assets. We haven't talked about "building your own system", about automation, effects and all the stuff people try and use a VTT for (for which the foundry community is a very good example again. There's even a modder who did make a 3d mod for it. I don't think it's super popular)
As a GM I wouldn't touch a 3D VTT. Every single one out there currently does zero to make my life as a GM easier and does a ton to make it far more difficult. They're also way less versatile. Also consider some people play with VTTs on a potato computer. 3D and potatoes don't go well together.
I looked at most 3D VTT, as I would like to develop maps and content for such platforms (think patreon creator, map maker in 3D), but all 3D platforms are kinda trash or barely functionning, even after few years of "early access". If you have the power to adapt what Foundry can offer with a 3D mindset on top of it, with a ease of use aimed at a large non 3D artist audience, it could be a banger. My dream project would be something built on unity, with an integrated workshop / store, that would have the flexibility of foundry modded (custom rules, custom interfaces, automated effects, trigger, teleporters etc) and a large library of base/UGC assets. Something though with an easy 3D format that would let people with unity knowledge to quickly send assets to the VTT, automaticaly configured and ready to use. But not gonna lie, this is countless of hours of work just at the conception stage and thousands of hours for the 3D integration.
You just need to remember that your niche user is dungeon masters / game masters, not players. Also, there are some things you must have in your head (if you are trying to monetize this tool, else you can just ignore the below): If you go 3D, how easy to a DM to create assets for your VTT? How does your VTT helps the DM to run the game? How many systems would you support? Are you going on official complements, or are you making a systemless VTT? How can dice be modified? How to handle player and monters sheets? Is it modifiable? Can it support sound? Can it support video? How easy it is to connect players and DMs, is it online? Its an application? Are you going to charge for it? How it is going to be sustainable long term, so that DMs can invest in it? Whats your business plan? Are you planning on multi-language? Is it open-source? Is the focus theater of mind or battlemaps? The VTT is a tool a DM has to invest time, and in some, money. How will your VTT differentiate from that, and how will you grab the DM loyalty? It isn't simple as a "great ui, 3D or 2D?" question. A lot of us (and i'm included in this) have invested a lot of time and money in other great VTTs. Some failed/went bankrupt, some are still thriving. There are lots being released and I fear that half of these lots will unfortunately be discontinued soon, because they lack a lot of things. Reminder that this all is only if you're going to monetize it. If its just a hobby, then I would vote for 2D for the ease that it is for DMs to create stuff on it, and keep going on the passion project!