Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I've had this idea on and off for a while now, and I thought I'd ask DakkaDakka forum-goers:

What if a program existed that was basically a two-person 3d modeling program and dice roll generator that would allow you to generate a surface and populate it with 3d models, then proceed to play through whatever tabletop game you want without ever having to physically build any of the models? Assume it's sophisticated enough to render good-looking, textured, shaded models of troops and so forth, and that it's scaled 1:1 with the real dimensions of the models.

Would you use it? Would you consider it a betrayal of the hobby in some way to use it? What would be lost by placing the whole of the tabletop and all its contents into virtual space, assuming no changes to the rules whatsoever?

Also, couldn't the models used technically be considered proxy models?

I would certainly use it for practice and tactics, it would seem like a very good tool. I wouldn't consider it betrayal, because there is no feeling like painting your own army and putting it up on the table to fight your enemy. There was a similar program, but it was 2D, I forget the name.

Vassal is what you describe but that is 2D.

Yes, I'm just saying it served the same purpose in my opinion. 3D would be cool.

Vassal 40k is the 2d program and that basically does everything you just explained...

you can different modules for each gaming system fantasy, 40k, warmachine and fields of war plus loads more...

But if a 3d version was available then i would use it for practice, but would never stop collecting the minis..

jim..

I think you just described Blood Bowl for the PC.

Is there something like that for Mac?

I would use this all the time. For practice. Right.

Unfortunately, GW and several other publishers' content is verboten for Vassal modules, and Blood Bowl isn't the tabletop game.

I was hoping there's be an engine out there that wouldn't include specific statlines and so forth so as to avoid violating copyright; rather than a tabletop gaming engine, it'd be a two-person 3d engine that could be used for tabletop gaming.

Trekkin wrote:Blood Bowl isn't the tabletop game.

Really? It seems to be exactly LRB5 to me.

Trekkin wrote:I was hoping there's be an engine out there that wouldn't include specific statlines and so forth so as to avoid violating copyright; rather than a tabletop gaming engine, it'd be a two-person 3d engine that could be used for tabletop gaming.

That's exactly what Vassal is except that it's 2D. Vassal does not include statlines - that's not why GW complained about it. It was the trademarked unit names that got their attention and you'll have the same problem with any system.

If you're planning a project like this you really should spend sometime using Vassal to see what it's doing right/wrong.

Would be cool, but GW would banhammer you. How would you avoid that?

Ideally by making everything that would violate copyright be entered by the players; it would literally be nothing but a surface and a bunch of models, both imported from other 3d design engines. If someone makes a model of a Fire Prism in Blender or something, it's not Blender's fault, and two players can agree that a given model is a Gyrocopter or a Daemonette or whatever else they like for whatever system they like, GW or not, and move it around as such without it being so labeled in the game itself.

GW can't copyright moving things around on a board, looking at them, and rolling dice (yet), and that's literally all this program would do, which is actually less than what Vassal does in that Vassal's modules DO contain copyrightable content. Vassal gives you a library of models and tells you what they are; this would not.

And I do intend to download and use Vassal extensively as soon as I have the time to devote to it. I've poked around their website and it looks to me like GW just banned GW-based modules rather than the engine itself, which supports my theory that if individual players were the ones entering all content and it connected P2P rather than over a dedicated server, distribution of the engine itself wouldn't be legally objectionable.

Incidentally, I didn't know Blood Bowl had a tabletop equivalent; by "the tabletop game" I meant WHFB. Thank you for showing me that a tabletop Blood Bowl exists.

There are a number of sites for playing various games. Vassal has been mentioned. I play on www.youplay.it sometimes, where they support Blue Max and Wooden Ships & Iron Men. I also play the computer version of Race For The Galaxy.

None of these replace the face to face experience of "real games" or the enjoyment of collecting and moving your own little men (or gribblies, etc) around a nicely decorated tabletop.

Trekkin wrote:Ideally by making everything that would violate copyright be entered by the players; it would literally be nothing but a surface and a bunch of models, both imported from other 3d design engines. If someone makes a model of a Fire Prism in Blender or something, it's not Blender's fault, and two players can agree that a given model is a Gyrocopter or a Daemonette or whatever else they like for whatever system they like, GW or not, and move it around as such without it being so labeled in the game itself.

If the goal is to create an engine where you know the primary use is going to be for using GW IP, presuming you're OK since the engine itself contains no such use of the IP, and who can help what their users do, right? - you're covering ground that's already been covered.

If you're adding 3d models (of what? Generic representations of tanks and soldiers?) - why not just create your own game? Is this piggybacking onto an existing graphics engine? Or is the goal just to create a toolset/sandbox, such as Garry's Mod?

No thanks.

I like the non-gaming aspects as much as the gaming ones.

If the goal is to create an engine where you know the primary use is going to be for using GW IP, presuming you're OK since the engine itself contains no such use of the IP, and who can help what their users do, right? - you're covering ground that's already been covered.

Well, it WAS going to be generic enough that the primary purpose would be the manipulation of the same 3d model by two people, which actually has more apparent legal uses than illegal ones, but point taken*. Chiller effect takes another idea, GW doesn't lose a bit of hypothetical money, and I end working on this to avoid what would probably end in a legal battle. Thanks all while it lasted.

*As in it only allows the movement of models that have to be present on the hard drive of both computers already. Then again, not having some detection system to automatically report the IP of both participants if anything looks like anything that's ever been copyrighted is probably punishable by six-figure fines.

I think the big problem you're going to have is the models. Unless players create their own models (can't imagine that would be popular) then the models themselves are a potential issue.

Incidentally, Vassal40K is still going strong - it's just that the Vassal folks don't acknowledge or distribute it. It's still out there and still being improved.

ETA, have you looked at the various 3D sandbox applications that are already available? Platinum Art's Sandbox looks like it would do most of what you want and since it's open source it wouldn't be hard to make the required changes.

ETA2 I used post 2000 for this?

I like the physicality of wargaming. If I want to play video games - I do just that. It's another flavour of gaming.

If C&C make me roll little dice every time I attacked an enemy unit, I'd ditch the game. Invisible dice rolls are key to video games, not actual ones.

Something similar to this?




or this?

Reactable would only be a valid means of representing tabletop gaming if you combined it with something like computer generated holography and 3d mouse technology. That said, such an apparatus would be fantastically fun.