Will there be an editor to create dungeons and maps. Could we run "D&D" with it

ghrast
Visitor
7 months ago (edited)

Will we be able to create our own adventures? Level editor or adventure editor? Could we run "D&D" with it. it looks amazing

7 months ago

The devs said there will be no multiplayer for this game.  

A level editor would be fun though for making new single player scenarios.

Arasaka
Visitor
4 months ago

I'd just like to run my own party through some fan-made adventures / campaigns. A creation toolkit for that purpose would be great.

4 months ago

Having spent many, many hours on the NWN and NWN2 toolsets I can only agree.

ovelteen
Level 7
4 months ago

Perhaps something like this could be released as a DLC. I could probably pay 10 or 15 Dollars for a construction kit of some kind. 

exsonic01
Level 9
4 months ago

https://store.steampowered.com/newshub/app/1096530/view/2514646601431097415

Q80: Will there be a level editor?

Myzzrym: Modding Tools, and this includes Level Editor, would be fantastic for us to have. We love modding, and we've taken a look at this topic very seriously - in fact, we do have existing tools that are being used by partners to create more levels. However, these tools are very complex - you need to know how to use Unity and how to make video games - meaning that they'd be useless on their own. We scoped out how much time and effort it would take to make a user-friendly Level Editor, and it turns out it would take no less than... the time to make an entire other project. That's actually what a couple of other projects on Kickstarter are about, such as Talespire.

Long story short, we won't have a Level Editor - at least not at launch. But we'd very much love to have one, so if we get the time and resource, who knows?

Sadly, it seems there won't be a modding tool or level editor, at least up to the point of the full version. Maybe in DLC? 

But I think new subclasses and classes, new feats, new items/weapons, and new customizations and etc... might be doable using Unity tools. I think someone will try to implement PHB content as a mod. I wish to learn how to add these in this game. 

4 months ago

The last I saw in a video, the devs take the position that creating tools themselves would just take up too much time and energy relative to the other things that need to be done to finish the game.

But they are keen for modders to get to work.  Apparently in confabs with modders, the feedback they've gotten is that modders will be happy if the code is relatively transparent, so that's what the devs are leaning towards.

The one thing that won't happen, unfortunately, is level design - not unless some super-genius modder does it.  The devs deem the system just too much of a faff for modders unless they do a tool, but again, it's low priority.

ArcherMagnus
Level 1
4 months ago (edited)

Devs are shooting themselves in the foot. 

Skyrim, Skyrim Extended, Fallout 4, Witcher 3 are still crazy popular because of mods. Even little games like MechWarrior 5 (which is also a unity game) is basically dead with no updates for almost a year, but mods are keeping it going. MW5 thankfully released tools right after the game came out using blueprints. I don't know the first things about modding, but people are making awesome mods with it. 

exsonic01
Level 9
4 months ago

Devs are shooting themselves in the foot. 

Skyrim, Skyrim Extended, Fallout 4, Witcher 3 are still crazy popular because of mods. Even little games like MechWarrior 5 (which is also a unity game) is basically dead with no updates for almost a year, but mods are keeping it going. MW5 thankfully released tools right after the game came out using blueprints. I don't know the first things about modding, but people are making awesome mods with it. 

Of course, devs and we players all know about this. Check what I wrote above, they love modding too. 

However, Tactical Adventure is an indie studio, as far as I know, there are only 16~17 people on the project. Comparing to 300+ people in Larian for BG3 (and they will hire more), you could feel the big difference between "big" studios and indie studios. For the games you listed as examples, do you know how many programmers, designers, engineers... are involved in those games? 

Plus, this project began as a kickstarter project, so their priority is tied to what they promised at the beginning of the crowdfunding. With a limited budget and limited manpower, first, they need to finish this game, and second, they need to optimize the game (which is not easy at all), and they need to keep the promise of sorcerer DLC as a free DLC.

It would be perfect if we have such a "DM mod" modding tool, something like NWN1's one. Or just a map/dungeon editor to create a custom dungeon. However, writing a code for these modding tools and keep the quality of these tools are not an easy job. I'm not working in the game industry, but I wrote some codes for a different purpose. I can say for sure from my experience, coding a program, optimize the product to burn less resource, and debug... are not easy jobs at all. Especially with a limited budget and manpower, the difficulty and time/coding requirement for such a modding tool would be too heavy. 

However, as a compromise, maybe randomly generated dungeons would fill the gap. But I'm also not sure if such works are easy or difficult... I just wish devs finish this game ASAP. 

4 months ago

I really, really hope there is a level editor somewhere down the line, and that the devs leave it open to modders to mod in multiplayer, even if they don't do it themselves.  

But for the reasons exsonic01 mentions, I'm not holding my breath.  I'll be happy if the devs finish and perfect the game, and introduce another few campaigns themselves.

IOW if they can keep the campaigns coming, that'll be good for them (as they'll be able to charge after maybe the first one or two) and - good for us!

sarge33rd
Level 11
4 months ago (edited)

Given the small size of this publisher and the mountainous results we are seeing, )this game design shows HUGE potential), I think maybe this game will help prove their viability and perhaps Solasta 2 will include some of the "wants" for Solasta? Maybe MP, maybe multi-class,  maybe a toolkit, maybe...


As for Bethesda and the ES series...Arena and Daggerfall, the 1st 2 games from the series, did not include toolkits or construction sets as Bethesda called it. Morrowind, the 3rd in the series, was the 1st to offer that. So to compare Skyrim (5th in a series from a HUGE publisher) and use that to set your expectations here, I'm sorry, but that is patently unfair to these folks.

naka
Visitor
4 months ago (edited)

But I think new subclasses and classes, new feats, new items/weapons, and new customizations and etc... might be doable using Unity tools. I think someone will try to implement PHB content as a mod. I wish to learn how to add these in this game.

Unity games are notoriously difficult to mod. I have taken a pretty quick look under the hood at what everything looks like decompiled and it's not promising. Unless I missed something, all of the data we would need to create a new race, class or archetype all seems to be behind Unity serialization we can't decipher. Seems odd that the team said they would not obfuscate anything for modders; which technically seems to be true. However if you cut through the code that doesn't look to be the case in terms of what people obviously need easy access to. 

For example let's say I wanted to make a playable drow and all I really needed to do is take the existing elf stats/model/gizmo information and tweak it to match a drow per the PHB rules and update everything else to recognize those changes. The problem is I can't access any of the original elf stats/model/gizmo info. Now if someone can figure how to do that please correct me. I kept running into issues and comments in the code telling me to refer to WOTC copyright law. 

TLDR: The Solasta team has permission to use the SRD, WOTC will likely get very angry if people pump out race/archetype selections for their D&D 5E franchise and not just the SRD (as a free mod no less). I think we won't have access to juicy parts of the code. Parts that would allow modders to create easy to use/edit race or archetype mods. Without that sort of access modders would literally have to re-develop parts of the game or pull off some really whacky stuff. Neither option is good for anyone. All of this makes me believe modding will not be supported, not in any proper capacity. Modding as it stands would require entire sections of the game to be rewritten and recompiled.

4 months ago

IIRC in a video the team said they intended to make the code more transparent, but they'd do that after the game is released.

I think obviously the code has to be locked up for the sake of commercial caution; but once the game is released and they're making money that's not a problem any more, so they can un-obscure all the things they have to then.

lindad7999
Level 3
4 months ago

Yes and considering the one poster said that he kept running into WOTC copyright issues i doubt you would be able to mod anything not from the SRD and if you got close enough to make WOTC take notice then there would be legal issues.

exsonic01
Level 9
4 months ago (edited)

Unity games are notoriously difficult to mod. I have taken a pretty quick look under the hood at what everything looks like decompiled and it's not promising. Unless I missed something, all of the data we would need to create a new race, class or archetype all seems to be behind Unity serialization we can't decipher. Seems odd that the team said they would not obfuscate anything for modders; which technically seems to be true. However if you cut through the code that doesn't look to be the case in terms of what people obviously need easy access to. 

This depends on how they wrote their code and how big is the game. Regarding Unity games, the larger the worse. I didn't open their files yet so I'm not sure how it is written, but did they build the game using IL2CPP? If not then it should be not terribly difficult... Or there might be a way via third party software like Melonloader. But again, I also need to check before if I can tell anything fore sure, I'm also speculating.

For example let's say I wanted to make a playable drow and all I really needed to do is take the existing elf stats/model/gizmo information and tweak it to match a drow per the PHB rules and update everything else to recognize those changes. The problem is I can't access any of the original elf stats/model/gizmo info. Now if someone can figure how to do that please correct me. I kept running into issues and comments in the code telling me to refer to WOTC copyright law. 

TLDR: The Solasta team has permission to use the SRD, WOTC will likely get very angry if people pump out race/archetype selections for their D&D 5E franchise and not just the SRD (as a free mod no less). I think we won't have access to juicy parts of the code. Parts that would allow modders to create easy to use/edit race or archetype mods. Without that sort of access modders would literally have to re-develop parts of the game or pull off some really whacky stuff. Neither option is good for anyone. All of this makes me believe modding will not be supported, not in any proper capacity. Modding as it stands would require entire sections of the game to be rewritten and recompiled.

Yeah, you are right, but we can start from inside-the-SRD contents. Even with SRD, there are some modding possibilities.

https://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/systems-reference-document-srd

https://media.wizards.com/2016/downloads/DND/SRD-OGL_V5.1.pdf 

I really wish the full-release version of Solatasta takes "everything" of the 398 pages of SRD. But given the size and budget of devs, that will be hard. So, someone can start modding from there. For example, in the EA version, there is no Dragonborn race and I'm not sure if Dragonborns will be implemented in the full release. But if not, then someone can start from that point. The same can be applied to Bard, Barbarians, Druids, Monks... Plus, we could make a weapon/armor mod based on SRD. For example, I could make a +5 unique greatsword, namely "Chadsword". 



I agree that the modding of contents from outside of SRD should be carefully considered. But, you would also know, if the content is too widespread to be copyrighted, then it is allowed to use. Check these contents.

https://writing.stackexchange.com/questions/41942/is-there-a-website-that-tells-you-which-dd-creatures-are-under-copyright-protec

https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1198&context=wmblr

https://theangrygm.com/save-vs-lawsuit-how-to-publish-dd-content/

https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/d-d-beyond-general/general-discussion/34955-are-drow-copyrighted-and-ogl

For example, some names of unique monsters and normal monsters in D&D are copyrighted. I know the name and concept of "Beholder" and "Mind Flayer" as a monster are copyrighted. But, other monsters are not, because their concepts and names are originated from folklores and/or myths, or too widely spread and used in other contents. These monsters can be modded too, but it would be better to distinguish from D&D contents, by following the concept from corresponding mythology. In this case, such modded contents will not exactly like "D&D" but that is the safest way. 

The same goes for the items and weapons. The concept and name of "musket" and "gunpowder" or "black powder" are originated from history, not from D&D and WotC, so they cannot be copyrighted. We could burrow the design and name from history references, not from any WotC's D&D contents.  

(I wish Tac. Adv. suggest some safety guidelines for the modding, what is OK what is not OK) 

Well said about drow. The concept of dark elf is not the only thing for WotC and D&D. Let me rephrase the comments from one of the links I cited here: 

the concept of dark elves is not at all owned by Wizards of the Coast. They originate from Norse myth, and some very D&D-esque looking dark elves have appeared in Marvel comics, The Elder Scrolls series, and beyond.




While I or you or someone makes mods "strictly inside the SRD" and "widely spread contents", let's wish Tac. Adv. purchases more licenses from WotC. That will open more possibilities like PHB content. This post is what I really meant, but it seems that my previous post was not clearly written. I wish this post helps to clear about my stance. 

lindad7999
Level 3
3 months ago

Unity games are notoriously difficult to mod. I have taken a pretty quick look under the hood at what everything looks like decompiled and it's not promising. Unless I missed something, all of the data we would need to create a new race, class or archetype all seems to be behind Unity serialization we can't decipher. Seems odd that the team said they would not obfuscate anything for modders; which technically seems to be true. However if you cut through the code that doesn't look to be the case in terms of what people obviously need easy access to. 

This depends on how they wrote their code and how big is the game. Regarding Unity games, the larger the worse. I didn't open their files yet so I'm not sure how it is written, but did they build the game using IL2CPP? If not then it should be not terribly difficult... Or there might be a way via third party software like Melonloader. But again, I also need to check before if I can tell anything fore sure, I'm also speculating.

For example let's say I wanted to make a playable drow and all I really needed to do is take the existing elf stats/model/gizmo information and tweak it to match a drow per the PHB rules and update everything else to recognize those changes. The problem is I can't access any of the original elf stats/model/gizmo info. Now if someone can figure how to do that please correct me. I kept running into issues and comments in the code telling me to refer to WOTC copyright law. 

TLDR: The Solasta team has permission to use the SRD, WOTC will likely get very angry if people pump out race/archetype selections for their D&D 5E franchise and not just the SRD (as a free mod no less). I think we won't have access to juicy parts of the code. Parts that would allow modders to create easy to use/edit race or archetype mods. Without that sort of access modders would literally have to re-develop parts of the game or pull off some really whacky stuff. Neither option is good for anyone. All of this makes me believe modding will not be supported, not in any proper capacity. Modding as it stands would require entire sections of the game to be rewritten and recompiled.

Yeah, you are right, but we can start from inside-the-SRD contents. Even with SRD, there are some modding possibilities.

https://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/systems-reference-document-srd

https://media.wizards.com/2016/downloads/DND/SRD-OGL_V5.1.pdf 

I really wish the full-release version of Solatasta takes "everything" of the 398 pages of SRD. But given the size and budget of devs, that will be hard. So, someone can start modding from there. For example, in the EA version, there is no Dragonborn race and I'm not sure if Dragonborns will be implemented in the full release. But if not, then someone can start from that point. The same can be applied to Bard, Barbarians, Druids, Monks... Plus, we could make a weapon/armor mod based on SRD. For example, I could make a +5 unique greatsword, namely "Chadsword". 



I agree that the modding of contents from outside of SRD should be carefully considered. But, you would also know, if the content is too widespread to be copyrighted, then it is allowed to use. Check these contents.

https://writing.stackexchange.com/questions/41942/is-there-a-website-that-tells-you-which-dd-creatures-are-under-copyright-protec

https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1198&context=wmblr

https://theangrygm.com/save-vs-lawsuit-how-to-publish-dd-content/

https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/d-d-beyond-general/general-discussion/34955-are-drow-copyrighted-and-ogl

For example, some names of unique monsters and normal monsters in D&D are copyrighted. I know the name and concept of "Beholder" and "Mind Flayer" as a monster are copyrighted. But, other monsters are not, because their concepts and names are originated from folklores and/or myths, or too widely spread and used in other contents. These monsters can be modded too, but it would be better to distinguish from D&D contents, by following the concept from corresponding mythology. In this case, such modded contents will not exactly like "D&D" but that is the safest way. 

The same goes for the items and weapons. The concept and name of "musket" and "gunpowder" or "black powder" are originated from history, not from D&D and WotC, so they cannot be copyrighted. We could burrow the design and name from history references, not from any WotC's D&D contents.  

(I wish Tac. Adv. suggest some safety guidelines for the modding, what is OK what is not OK) 

Well said about drow. The concept of dark elf is not the only thing for WotC and D&D. Let me rephrase the comments from one of the links I cited here: 

the concept of dark elves is not at all owned by Wizards of the Coast. They originate from Norse myth, and some very D&D-esque looking dark elves have appeared in Marvel comics, The Elder Scrolls series, and beyond.




While I or you or someone makes mods "strictly inside the SRD" and "widely spread contents", let's wish Tac. Adv. purchases more licenses from WotC. That will open more possibilities like PHB content. This post is what I really meant, but it seems that my previous post was not clearly written. I wish this post helps to clear about my stance. 

Not really you are still getting really close to if not down right infringing on WoTC copyright with taking classes straight from the pbh and playing word games with other concepts. What you are suggesting is basically a lawsuit waiting to happen WoTC is not know for being lenient with people that want to try and over step they SRD.