Iso maps in maptool
Moderators: dorpond, trevor, Azhrei
Forum rules
PLEASE don't post images of your entire desktop, attach entire campaign files when only a single file is needed, or generally act in some other anti-social behavior.
PLEASE don't post images of your entire desktop, attach entire campaign files when only a single file is needed, or generally act in some other anti-social behavior.
-
UntoldGlory
- Great Wyrm
- Posts: 1649
- Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
So far I'm leaning towards Ryss' "2d Maps on a 3d Engine". I *really* want to see something done with elevation though. Like I mentioned in another thread about this, some for of "lego style" elevation (where when you're drawing, you click "Elevation +/-" on the drawing toolbar) would be really great, and wouldn't add much to the difficulty of creating maps. It would have to be with a 3d engine of course, and would have to include built in VBL, but it would drastically expand the versatility and realism of map creation. Like, currently, if I make even something as simple as a low wall, it either blocks VBL (even from people on a distant hill) or doesn't (even for people crouching behind it as a patrol wanders past).
Plus, 3d tokens would rock the casba, as long as you can still use 2d "easy to make" tokens, but maybe stood on their side (so perpendicular to the ground).
Plus, 3d tokens would rock the casba, as long as you can still use 2d "easy to make" tokens, but maybe stood on their side (so perpendicular to the ground).
Well I'm glad I stirred that pot again .
I'm sorry to hear that the iso is as hard as 3D and would require a shift to a 3D engine. I guess this gets shelved until the 2.0 line for the time being if that is the case.
Having said that, I'm going to run an iso dungeon for my players in a couple of weeks just to see how nasty it is under maptool as it currently stands. I'll try to take a video of it so that others can see how terribly I crash and burn
The only thing that I'd request if it could possibly be slotted into a developers schedule is for the overhang elements of a token to show above hard fog. That's the only thing I can't see a workaround for at the moment. If not, no worries.
So that's my conclusion - and I'd like to say that I don't expect this to go any further. Anything said after this point is just a discussion of the points raised rather than trying to get something implemented that would almost certainly be a serious hassle with no enormous gain.
@thelev: Yes - there was some discussion of this in the context of elevation. If you add elevation in then it quickly becomes a living nightmare - because to calculate what a character can see from a height you really do need to do 3D calculations. That is suddenly a major headache and I entirely understand why that would require a full 3D engine. I explicitly did not state that here. This is only a way of showing an alternative view of a 3D dungeon. Some may think it looks pretty - I do (and I believe the second poster was in agreement ). It is also very close to what DDI is presenting - a fundamentally 2D dungeon shown with some 3D trickery. They have no walls to worry about, and little VBL. Think of it as diablo 1 - the dungeon looked 3D but was actually flat. There was no 3D there apart from the sprites - it was all a clever illusion. You couldn't climb walls or jump. They never had to worry about elevation - there's a reason for that
The original post was motivated by Ryss saying that you needed to go 3D to do iso views. I disagreed and thought it easier to show it than to explain why I thought so. I entirely agree that anything beyond an iso-view of a 2D dungeon (for example, including elevation) would be crazy to implement in maptool, but that for the limited case of adventuring on a flat surface I think it would be possible to run some pretty encounters that might sway some of the DDi interest. This is why I'm going to run an iso dungeon for my next session.
On an aside - I was chatting to the lead dev on Hero Lab tonight (he's one of my old friends from school and now - thanks to maptool - a regular gamer in one of my groups again) and he said that if maptool could do that he could see no reason for anyone to go for DDi.
He remains enormously impressed by maptool as is by the way.
.I'm sorry to hear that the iso is as hard as 3D and would require a shift to a 3D engine. I guess this gets shelved until the 2.0 line for the time being if that is the case.
Having said that, I'm going to run an iso dungeon for my players in a couple of weeks just to see how nasty it is under maptool as it currently stands. I'll try to take a video of it so that others can see how terribly I crash and burn
The only thing that I'd request if it could possibly be slotted into a developers schedule is for the overhang elements of a token to show above hard fog. That's the only thing I can't see a workaround for at the moment. If not, no worries.
So that's my conclusion - and I'd like to say that I don't expect this to go any further. Anything said after this point is just a discussion of the points raised rather than trying to get something implemented that would almost certainly be a serious hassle with no enormous gain.
@thelev: Yes - there was some discussion of this in the context of elevation. If you add elevation in then it quickly becomes a living nightmare - because to calculate what a character can see from a height you really do need to do 3D calculations. That is suddenly a major headache and I entirely understand why that would require a full 3D engine. I explicitly did not state that here. This is only a way of showing an alternative view of a 3D dungeon. Some may think it looks pretty - I do (and I believe the second poster was in agreement
). It is also very close to what DDI is presenting - a fundamentally 2D dungeon shown with some 3D trickery. They have no walls to worry about, and little VBL. Think of it as diablo 1 - the dungeon looked 3D but was actually flat. There was no 3D there apart from the sprites - it was all a clever illusion. You couldn't climb walls or jump. They never had to worry about elevation - there's a reason for that The original post was motivated by Ryss saying that you needed to go 3D to do iso views. I disagreed and thought it easier to show it than to explain why I thought so. I entirely agree that anything beyond an iso-view of a 2D dungeon (for example, including elevation) would be crazy to implement in maptool, but that for the limited case of adventuring on a flat surface I think it would be possible to run some pretty encounters that might sway some of the DDi interest. This is why I'm going to run an iso dungeon for my next session.
On an aside - I was chatting to the lead dev on Hero Lab tonight (he's one of my old friends from school and now - thanks to maptool - a regular gamer in one of my groups again) and he said that if maptool could do that he could see no reason for anyone to go for DDi.
He remains enormously impressed by maptool as is by the way.
Actually that was a misunderstanding both on our parts. When you said iso view I automatically took everything else that's connected to geometry into consideration. But all you wanted was the illusion of iso (simple iso as you put it). That is not hard to do as you've proven, all you need to do is multiply some values in the 2D code with iso values (rotation and shrinkage).torstan wrote: The original post was motivated by Ryss saying that you needed to go 3D to do iso views. I disagreed and thought it easier to show it than to explain why I thought so. I entirely agree that anything beyond an iso-view of a 2D dungeon (for example, including elevation) would be crazy to implement in maptool, but that for the limited case of adventuring on a flat surface I think it would be possible to run some pretty encounters that might sway some of the DDi interest. This is why I'm going to run an iso dungeon for my next session.
I agree with your friend. A pretty MT (3D, iso or as the way it is now, doesn't matter, just pretty) with better usability might very well be the final nail in the coffin of DDI.On an aside - I was chatting to the lead dev on Hero Lab tonight (he's one of my old friends from school and now - thanks to maptool - a regular gamer in one of my groups again) and he said that if maptool could do that he could see no reason for anyone to go for DDi.
He remains enormously impressed by maptool as is by the way.
I'm gonna talk to Trevor about 1.4 stuff. He wants "eye candy" (desperately needed IMO) and I'd like to put better usability into the roadmap of 1.4. Which in fact is my next goal regarding tokens and macros regardless of the roadmap
Yep, that seemed to be the case I'd better fess up and admit to my previous record on this issue here. Also, I can't resist putting this back in here. This is tongue in cheek - but a mock up in Blender of how a top-down to iso transition could be managed in maptool.
http://gallery.rptools.net/d/16517-1/In ... 91784361d8
Note - this was in the context of elevation - and therefore not really applicable to what we're talking about here.
I blame all this on the Diablo 3 trailer that was posted in the General Discussion form.
I agree about the eye-candy (obviously). There are many things that could be done which would be pretty, but less heavy going (I hope) than any 3D stuff. Pretty light effects would be top of my personal list - way before an iso view.
I'd better fess up and admit to my previous record on this issue here. Also, I can't resist putting this back in here. This is tongue in cheek - but a mock up in Blender of how a top-down to iso transition could be managed in maptool.http://gallery.rptools.net/d/16517-1/In ... 91784361d8
Note - this was in the context of elevation - and therefore not really applicable to what we're talking about here.
I blame all this on the Diablo 3 trailer that was posted in the General Discussion form.
I agree about the eye-candy (obviously). There are many things that could be done which would be pretty, but less heavy going (I hope) than any 3D stuff. Pretty light effects would be top of my personal list - way before an iso view.
Time for more fun with isometrics.
http://magist.com/vry/FunWithIsometrics.cmpgn
Made in 1.3.30 (I really should download a newer one some day, should work in newer versions though.)
This isn't something that can work for normal use without being able to texture the soft fog, but it's kind of neat anyway.
Best viewed with "show as player" active.
http://magist.com/vry/FunWithIsometrics.cmpgn
Made in 1.3.30 (I really should download a newer one some day, should work in newer versions though.)
This isn't something that can work for normal use without being able to texture the soft fog, but it's kind of neat anyway.
Best viewed with "show as player" active.
Everything in this post may be wrong.
My proposal (using 3D engine to render 2D stuff) totally matches your video. It look awesome doesn't ittorstan wrote:Yep, that seemed to be the case
http://gallery.rptools.net/d/16517-1/In ... 91784361d8
Note - this was in the context of elevation - and therefore not really applicable to what we're talking about here.
I blame all this on the Diablo 3 trailer that was posted in the General Discussion form.
I agree about the eye-candy (obviously). There are many things that could be done which would be pretty, but less heavy going (I hope) than any 3D stuff. Pretty light effects would be top of my personal list - way before an iso view.
Yeah, Diablo 3 got everyone excited. Me included.
If I'm not mistaken 1.4 will be mostly eye-candy will pretty much cover everything you say in your last paragraph. Though I'd like to remind you that I'm talking out of my butt here because there is no formal 1.4 roadmap (or even 1.3) and I haven't talked to Trevor about this.
@Vry: I have to say Vry, that was a very fun and interesting twist with your artwork. I was very entertained!
I was also surprised how believable it was too - that a game could actually be played that way. But then I started thinking about light radiating from center and a bunch of other technicalities that pooped all over my fun.
Curious question: How long did it take you to make that map anyway? I bet a lot longer than a 2D hand drawn map of similar quality. That is the part that makes me avoid wanting 3D ISO.
I was also surprised how believable it was too - that a game could actually be played that way. But then I started thinking about light radiating from center and a bunch of other technicalities that pooped all over my fun.
Curious question: How long did it take you to make that map anyway? I bet a lot longer than a 2D hand drawn map of similar quality. That is the part that makes me avoid wanting 3D ISO.
The idea of that was as a quick mockup to see if the concept would work right before making a version of it using the 3d pieces in my example on the first page, but it had a certain charm so I just went with the mockup instead.
The major problem I have with it is that if you put the front walls as a fog texture then you can't have any real fog. It would work for some games, but you certainly couldn't do a dungeon crawl like that.
Yes, it took a lot longer than anything of "similar quality" should. Still, the walls aren't technically needed, and as we've seen can cause a lot of problems. The simple flat iso maps shouldn't take much longer than standard topdown.
The major problem I have with it is that if you put the front walls as a fog texture then you can't have any real fog. It would work for some games, but you certainly couldn't do a dungeon crawl like that.
Yes, it took a lot longer than anything of "similar quality" should. Still, the walls aren't technically needed, and as we've seen can cause a lot of problems. The simple flat iso maps shouldn't take much longer than standard topdown.
Everything in this post may be wrong.
That is awesome, kudos for the idea and the sweet avatar. Great idea and I think it looked great, played around for a few minutes watching the cool vision effects.Vry wrote:Time for more fun with isometrics.
http://magist.com/vry/FunWithIsometrics.cmpgn
I wonder if MT could rotate a map, then you could line up another piece of art (ie the wall) along a line in the grid to set the appropriate z layer (and thus allow those behind to be 'behind' the wall, and those "in front" to to be in front.
• snikle •
snikle.wordpress.com
snikle.wordpress.com
I think you are right in essence. It really is not as easy to use as top down, but I remember the first time I saw that Ravenloft map and the way my hair stood on end and how cool I thought the map looked....and all those issues are completely forgotten.Jector wrote:That's my big issue with Iso. It's pretty and very select things are easier to see, but overall it's harder to judge distance and position as quickly as you can with top-down. Just not worth it for me.
• snikle •
snikle.wordpress.com
snikle.wordpress.com
-
UntoldGlory
- Great Wyrm
- Posts: 1649
- Joined: Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
That is "bite your knuckle" gorgeous. I <3 that.torstan wrote: http://gallery.rptools.net/d/16517-1/In ... 91784361d8
Note - this was in the context of elevation - and therefore not really applicable to what we're talking about here.