iemckinnon's page

House on Hook Street I think.

I was prepping the maps for use in Fantasy Grounds 2, and I noticed that the grid is not equal. Some columns and rows are larger than others on the fold out map plans of the house.

Normally this would not be a huge issue, but it looks like the grid was drawn before the house and so the house plans are skewed too.
The worst one I have found is the right hand column from room G2 to G7, and that column carries down to other maps. And apparently that grid was used on other maps as well.
I am in photoshop with a scan trying to shrink that one column, with mixed success.

It looks like the artist used the same flawed grid for other maps as well.

I noticed it because I am trying to grid the map for FG2, and it just is all coming our wonky. So I measured it.

I am semi impressed with the maps. They look pretty, but they have a major flaw in that the grid is not even. I am trying to run this through FG2, and in gridding the map discovered that there is at least one column where the grid is not the same size as the others.

Yeah, this causes insanity.

This has probably been brought up many times before, but I am finishing painting my Bones 2 miniatures in preparation for getting my Bones 3.

But for Bones miniatures, is there any chance Reaper will stop having them glued together at the manufacturer for the smaller character miniatures?

Not only do I often find myself breaking apart miniatures to be able to easily paint them, but I swear a full 10% of my Bones 2 order were glued together so badly that there was either a glob of the hot glue they use, or the pieces were not fully pressed together when glued, or in one case an arm was glued on backwards.

It took me longer to try and either pull the pieces apart, or cut them without damage as it would have taken me to glue my whole order.

I know the Bones series is a popular but cheaper alternative to metal miniatures, but I think it would improve customer satisfaction greatly. At least in my case.

I use Bob Smith industries insta Cure + which works fantastic.

Slippers of Venomous Webs?

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/118993615124505499/

Roll20 however has the advantage of not requiring monetary outlay by players and I see it overtaking all the other VTT platforms because of this.

Neither does Fantasy Grounds 2. With my Unlimited subscription at $9/month, I can have an unlimited number of unregistered players (Emphasis Added BELOW), and Roll20 has other issues. Here are the specs from the Unlimited Subscription:

This package contains the ULTIMATE version of Fantasy Grounds. It has the same functionality and resources as the standard Full license but allows players to connect to you without owning a license. With it you can:

Run games as the Gamemaster
Host an UNLIMITED NUMBER OF UNREGISTERED PLAYERS (limited only by your connection speeds)
Host games for registered and unregistered players together.
Join games as a player
Create characters locally to take with you into a game session
Create additional rulesets and modifications
Included Rulesets: D&D 3.5E, D&D 4E, D&D 5E and the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Library modules with D&D 3.5E open gaming content typically found in the SRD. *
Library modules with Pathfinder RPG open gaming content typically found in the PFSRD. *
* enables drag and drop functionality for monsters, npcs, feats, abilities, spells, weapons and armor.

If you ever want to look around, get the FG2 client and let me know and I will set up a server for you to log into and look around.

I run Pathfinder games, and will be running PFS games using Fantasy Grounds II on my Mac, as it does seem to be head and shoulders better than the other options out there, overall. Others may have virtual lighting, line of sight reveal, or other fancy gimmicks, which would be nice, but having tried Roll20, D20pro and others with my gaming groups, I finally tried FG2 when they did a subscription instead of asking for a $140 layout of cash, and my gaming groups said "this is the one".

Online character sheets, more accurate rolling of modifiers, spell effects linked to spells, and better integration with Hero Lab, were the main points my group liked.
The cool dice were a bonus.

I also noticed that they got the official Wizards of the Coast nod and can host licensed products, and get official support.

However, Paizo does not seem to officially support any VTT environments and while I can manually enter the information for the games I run, I have to wonder why not.

I think there was rumors of an official Paizo VTT years ago, but that seems to have died an ignoble death at the hands of a goblin.

I know change can happen, but I am wondering if it is at all being considered by Paizo.

So is this a dead project? It seemed like a great idea, but maybe Paizo needs to focus on aligning with a company that is already doing a VTT if this project has died. I am using d20pro for 4 gaming groups, and would love to see this, but it seems a Mary Celeste project..... the page is still up, but nobody is on board.

I use D20Pro. The biggest hangup is spells. They seem to have all the components, but they don't bring them together. If they did, it would be a fantastic virtual tabletop. Also it has some problems importing accurately from HeroLab.

I have considered maptool, but the learning curve seems a bit horrendous. I may look at it again.

I've just started running this campaign! Since this is literally my first time running ANY campaign and I'm looking for as many aides and resources as possible. This is invaluable! Thanks so much!

Many thanks!!! This will prove invaluable for my current RotR campaign.

I am going to be moving to the Menomonie/Eau Claire area in the Summer of 2015, and I am an experienced PFS / Pathfinder GM. I have been running games / campaigns here in Eugene, OR and I will be looking to open a table to an open PFS game and maybe a closed group game.

CC3 and its slew of add ons is a good vector mapping program. It is similar to Illustrator in many ways (as far as vector graphics) but has nice abilities specific to mapping. I know as many cartographers who use CC3 as use Illustrator.
Now, that said, I would also compare it to another program I use. Arc GIS. In that the program desperately needs revamping. Much of the coding seems to be simply built upon from CC1. More features patched on, much code reused, and it feels kludgey in many ways. It will also crash at the oddest times just like Arc GIS. So save early, and save often. Also save multiple copies. I do wish it had an import from Arc GIS as I would like to use it to make GIS maps prettier for consumer consumption.