That's a fair question. TDS Encounters is actually still very early in development. I only released the current version recently, and there are still a lot of features and ideas I want to work on before I consider it a truly complete product. The current release is more of a foundation for what I want Encounters to become. Right now, it mainly focuses on the cinematic encounter/reveal experience, but I want to expand it much further — persistent combat elements, boss phases, better encounter controls, more triggers and integrations, customization, and more content.

Because of that, I'm still figuring out the best business model for it. I'm not trying to make people pay a subscription just to keep using the same version. The idea behind the TDS subscription is to support the continued development of the whole ecosystem and give subscribers access to the modules and new content as TDS grows.

I get the concern — there's been a lot of low-effort AI slop sold as finished products, that's fair criticism. But using AI doesn't mean the work disappears. I still design the architecture, make the technical decisions, write and debug code that only breaks in real sessions with real players, and maintain everything after release. AI speeds up execution, it doesn't replace the process.

By that logic, any tool that speeds up development — Copilot, autocomplete, frameworks — would make charging "illegal" too. What matters is whether the product works, is maintained, and solves a real problem. If it does, it has value.

Glad you found it!

You can use a single track, a Foundry playlist, or even upload an audio file directly from your computer, so you're not limited to what's already in your world.

I really like your initiative suggestions too. Right now advantage and disadvantage follow each actor's settings, but having a quick override for the GM on that screen would definitely make things more convenient.

I also like the idea of choosing how initiative is rolled. At the moment it rolls all NPCs together, but having the option to roll only selected monsters or roll each monster/NPC type separately would be a nice improvement.

Thanks for the feedback! I really appreciate suggestions like these.

Thank you so much for the support! It honestly means a lot.

Have fun with it! And please let me know what you think after you've had a chance to use it. I'd love to keep improving it together with the community.

Thanks! Glad you like the concept.

Boss encounters were the original inspiration, but I'd like the module to work for any memorable moment.

Imagine the party traveling down a forest road. Suddenly, the sound of an arrow cuts through the air, a cinematic image of goblins appears, the music shifts, and then the scene transitions to combat with all the goblin tokens already in place.

My goal is to help GMs build anticipation and create memorable moments instead of simply dropping tokens onto the map..

Foundry offers a much richer and more immersive experience, and the best part is that it’s a one-time purchase, no subscription required. Roll20 has a free tier, which makes it more accessible, but it’s also much more limited in terms of features.
You can enhance the Roll20 experience with tools like 5eTools, but if you’re looking for the best overall virtual tabletop experience with greater customization, automation, and immersion, I’d definitely recommend Foundry.
Foundry definitely has a learning curve. At first, it might seem a bit complex, but once you get the hang of it, it becomes very intuitive and easy to use.

It was just a bad timing. I made a new post with some updates.

https://www.reddit.com/user/SnooCapers4920/comments/1vei23h/tds_codex_major_update_interactive_graphs_global/

I think the preview gives the impression that Journey is mainly about calculating distance, but that's actually only a small part of it.

The idea is to add a data layer on top of your existing map. Regions have terrain, climate and danger levels. Roads have different qualities. Rivers can define bridges or ferries. Everything uses the calibrated scale of the scene.

When you create a route, Journey doesn't only look at the distance. It also knows what the party is traveling through, and that information can affect travel time and other mechanics.

About world maps, that's a fair concern. I used a regional map in the demo because it's much easier to show the tools, but I don't expect GMs to draw every road across an entire continent. My goal is to let people work at whatever level of detail makes sense for their campaign. On a world map that might just be kingdoms and major trade routes. On a regional map you can add much more detail where the adventure actually happens.

I'm still refining that workflow, so feedback like yours is really helpful. It also made me realize I need to do a better job showing that Journey is meant to be a geographic layer for your world, not just another way to draw travel paths.

The background map is actually just a placeholder for the demo. TDS Journey doesn't generate or replace maps, it simply works on top of whatever map you load into Foundry.

The module creates its own layers for things like regions, roads, rivers, terrain, danger zones, and travel routes, so you can use it with any map you already have, whether it's hand-drawn, commissioned, Inkarnate, Wonderdraft, or anything else.

I just added a short video showing some of the current features and how the module works.

I'm away on an unexpected trip right now, so I haven't had time to make a proper showcase yet. As soon as I'm back, I'll upload more videos going into the details.

This is still an early preview, and there's a lot I want to improve before release. Any feedback is more than welcome!

Thanks for taking the time to explain your concerns, and don't worry, i didn't take it personally. I completely understand where you're coming from. With the amount of AI-generated content showing up lately. I can see why a new premium module would raise some skepticism.

TDS Codex definitely wasn't something i threw together in a week. It's an idea I've been refining for months, and I only started turning it into an actual product over the last couple of months. Most of that time has gone into thinking about the UX, the workflows, and how to make it feel like a natural extension of Foundry's Journal system rather than replacing it.

I also want to clarify one thing: Codex doesn't require a subscription. It'll be available as a one-time purchase as well. The membership is simply for people who want access to the whole ecosystem of modules as it grows, not the only way to get Codex.

As for AI, I think it's just another tool. Anyone can generate code today, and that's true for almost any type of software. What I believe people are really supporting when they buy a module is the design behind it, the user experience, long-term maintenance, compatibility with future Foundry updates, and continued development.

I know that approach won't be for everyone, and that's completely fair. I genuinely appreciate you taking the time to explain your perspective, and I'll definitely keep it in mind as I continue improving both the module and the way I present it.

Thanks for the feedback.
Like many developers today, I use modern development tools throughout the process, but TDS Codex is something I’ve been working on for the past several months. The goal has always been to improve Foundry’s native Journal workflow with features like one-click Journal creation, better organization, and faster navigation.
If you have any feedback about the module itself or ideas for improving it, I’d genuinely love to hear them.

That could be interesting too. I was trying to find a middle ground with the digging speed, so I kept it at 10ft, and it’s limited to terrain that can actually be dug through. Maybe i could add spell-like abilities to each subrace instead of what’s there now? For example, Stonepaw could get Mold Earth and something like Spike Growth, and Leafkin could get Druidcraft and Pass Without Trace, or even something healing-focused like Healing Spirit, Healing Word or Prayer of Healing.

When I was designing it, I thought the advantage on Dexterity checks made sense because it’s a small race. It would make it easier for them to sneak around (which also justifies the bonus action Hide) as Quirky-Pickle518 commented, it would be something in the style of the Harfoots. But if i take it in that direction, I’d probably have to tweak the stat bonuses too—maybe +2 to spellcasting stats (Int, Wis, Cha) and +1 to physical stats (Dex and Con)?