Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 KM.549 Jan 10, 2012 15:32:54	3rd ed had the etools/ master tools issue. 4th ed WOTC swore up and down again and again that these awsome digital tools would be out at launch. A few weeks before launch they put a little news story on the site that the tools would not be ready at launch.  with other news stories posted between then and 4e launch, it gets buried.  Then no word about the tools from WOTC until a few weeks after launch. So what false promises will WOTC make with 5th ed and digital tools? You know they are going to screw it up somehow. WOTC better know people are watching what they say, and don't say with digital tools and DnD.
#2 Mand12 Jan 10, 2012 15:45:32	So, the last year of dramatic improvements in the tools is...what?  My imagination?
#3 KM.549 Jan 10, 2012 16:02:12	So, the last year of dramatic improvements in the tools is...what?  My imagination? I never said that  they never got any tools up and runing. But they did promise that all of them would be up on 4th ed launch day and were not.
#4 bone_naga Jan 10, 2012 19:01:26	3rd ed had the etools/ master tools issue. 4th ed WOTC swore up and down again and again that these awsome digital tools would be out at launch. A few weeks before launch they put a little news story on the site that the tools would not be ready at launch.  with other news stories posted between then and 4e launch, it gets buried.  Then no word about the tools from WOTC until a few weeks after launch. So what false promises will WOTC make with 5th ed and digital tools? You know they are going to screw it up somehow. WOTC better know people are watching what they say, and don't say with digital tools and DnD. Well the only promise they've made so far was saying that the 4e tools would remain up and running for those that want them. I doubt they are going to go down the same route again. I think this time whatever they announce will be something that is already finished or at least in a testing phase where they just need to work out a few bugs before release.
#5 Damon_Tor Jan 10, 2012 22:48:35	So, the last year of dramatic improvements in the tools is...what?  My imagination? Whoa whoa whoa. Let's take a step back there. The tools are, at best, as good as they were in the Fall of 2010.  The "dramatic imrpovements" only exist in light of what the new tools had been at launch. That said, I do think 5e will have a better digital rollout.  They'll have a better digital rollout because PW is going to be in charge of their entire digital suite.
#6 Mand12 Jan 11, 2012 7:54:14	Monster Builder alone is vastly superior to the prior offering. Your assessment is based on outdated information.
#7 Janx_14 Jan 11, 2012 10:04:23	Monster Builder alone is vastly superior to the prior offering. Your assessment is based on outdated information. I'm a bit confused as to whats changed, I havent used it much, but seems the same as the old monster builder, but with pictures for some monsters. Most of what was bad about the old one is that wizards seemed to "mysteriously" stop support for before announcing the change to online. That said DDI also has the VT which it didn't in 2010 (not that i use it either). I think adapting the various tools for 5e is probably being looked in to. The VT should be easily transferable, dice rolls are dice rolls, and squares are squares. The other tools already have frameworks to modify.
#8 KM.549 Jan 11, 2012 16:07:15	That said, I do think 5e will have a better digital rollout.  They'll have a better digital rollout because PW is going to be in charge of their entire digital suite. WOTC orginally was going  to have a 3rd party do the digital tools for 4th ed, too.  Just saying.
#9 Dane_McArdy Jan 11, 2012 17:04:41	There were and are bigger problems with DDi then the fact they didn't have them ready at launch. The fact that it's been shown that they announced the delay of the tools in two places on the front page of the website, and that delay would be months, they hardly hide anything. As for having a third party do the 4E tools, they did have a third party. That third party failed and they took inhouse to try and deliver. The points you love to stick too, are so minor and unimportant, and you often get them wrong. It's more important I think that they never delivered the full suite of tools. And of those tools they did get up and running, there are features they have been telling us they would have for years, but still can't deliver. Chances are, they are really going to make every effort to have the digital aspect of 5E give you more then 4E digital tools, simply to get people to see it as more attractive.
#10 mudbunny Jan 11, 2012 19:51:55	This was posted over on ENWorld by the poster Truename, and I think it is particularly relevant: Show This is my field. (Companies hire me to teach them how to organize and manage software development teams.) The biggest issue is that software is intangible. It's like the proverbial iceberg; for the 10% of the software you can see, there's 90% more required to make that work. And software development is a huge amount of work. Polished, complete products typically take 5 or more people working for months (at least) or years. Big products take much more than that. But nobody, not even programmers, are good at estimating how much work software development requires. Remember, it's an iceberg. In one study, 90% of projects took longer than the programmers estimated, even though they updated their estimates as work progressed*. Half of them took more than twice as long. These results are typical. *www.toddlittleweb.com/Papers/...ncertain... So even the best-meaning software team has a good chance of taking more than twice as long as their good-faith estimate. Now for the second-biggest issue. The people hiring software teams don't understand how costly and risky software development is. When they get a schedule estimate, they think of the 10% they can see, and respond, "How it could possibly take so long?" (Remember, this is a reaction to an estimate that's almost certainly too optimistic already.) And then they put pressure on the team to go faster. Programmers respond to the pressure by cutting corners. Here's the thing, though. The way you cut corners in software development is to be sloppy in the way you design and write source code. But sloppiness creates bugs and makes the source code harder to understand. This is called "technical debt." The net result is that if you do this for more than a handful of weeks, you actually end up taking longer than you would have if you had just tried to keep things clean. They also respond to the pressure by focusing on the 10% of the code you can see (such as the 3D VTT demo shown when 4e was released) and not the 90% required to make it work for real. This shows progress to the business folks, but creates unrealistic expectations about how long things will actually take. So here's how honest, well-meaning people create software debacles. This happens all the frikkin' time. 1. Company asks software team for some software, and asks how long it will take, so they can plan their budget, marketing, and so forth. 2. Software team creates an estimate that's 2-4x too low. They think they need 9 months and they actually need 2 years. 3. Company flips out and says 9 months is too long and too expensive. "My nephew could do this in two weeks in his spare time." Demands that the software be done cheaper and quicker. 4. Software team caves and says they'll be done sooner. After all, their estimate is just an educated guess; there's no proof, and maybe they actually will be done sooner. 5. Team works on the 10% people can see first, to establish good will and show progress. It's also the most fun part to write. 6. Company is overjoyed at rapid progress and happily signs checks. "I knew they were sandbagging us with that nine-month estimate." 7. Team starts working on the remaining 90%. Company starts pressuring for more results. "You've already shown us everything working, what's taking so long?" Checks signed less happily. 8. Team takes shortcuts, introduces bugs. Work slows down. Strings company along with increasingly desperate promises of progress. 9. Company gets more and more impatient and eventually demands to see the actual software, not the demo they got over a year ago. 10. Actual software fails in a big, spectacular way. It's riddled with bugs, doesn't work on the public Internet, and completely fails to protect company's IP. Furthermore, the source code is so badly written it's pretty much impossible to recover. 11. Product is cancelled, team fired, and work starts over. There are ways of preventing this; the set of approaches I use are called "Agile software development," but it's by no means easy and most software teams don't even know they don't know enough.
#11 Damon_Tor Jan 12, 2012 6:51:35	Monster Builder alone is vastly superior to the prior offering. It has pictures. What else am I missing?  Are pictures in the Monster Builder worth losing houserule support in the CB? No.
#12 frothsof Jan 12, 2012 7:43:06	Monster Builder alone is vastly superior to the prior offering. It has pictures. What else am I missing?  Are pictures in the Monster Builder worth losing houserule support in the CB? No. surely you remember what a buggy piece of crap the old builder became. you couldnt even change some fields, and when you did they changed right back. it was unusable
#13 Mand12 Jan 12, 2012 8:30:39	buggy piece of crap the old builder pretty much this also, fyi, there is a fair bit of houserule support in CB now
#14 kimli Jan 12, 2012 12:03:53	I wonder, not with sarcasm or malice, when they are going to stop developing the 4e tools and start working on the 5e tools. Or, alternately,  they keep developing the 4e tools until 5e launches and  create a new team to make the new ones. The latter would be great.
#15 Dane_McArdy Jan 12, 2012 13:27:34	This was posted over on ENWorld by the poster Truename, and I think it is particularly relevant: The set of tools that they are trying to get out under the current edition is, if we are being honest, their first kick at the can. The tools that they will be developping for D&D Next should, assuming they carry over a significant amount of management experience, be significantly better. There was meant to be a whole set of tools for 3.5 that they never finished and shelved rather quickly. So, this would be their third attempt at these kind of products.
#16 mudbunny Jan 12, 2012 18:51:14	This was posted over on ENWorld by the poster Truename, and I think it is particularly relevant: The set of tools that they are trying to get out under the current edition is, if we are being honest, their first kick at the can. The tools that they will be developping for D&D Next should, assuming they carry over a significant amount of management experience, be significantly better. There was meant to be a whole set of tools for 3.5 that they never finished and shelved rather quickly. So, this would be their third attempt at these kind of products. That is true. However, given the time between 3.5 and the start of the programming of the DDI tools, combined with the rapid turnover at WotC in their digital D&D department1 I don't count that attempt at tools to actually have taught them anything. They may have learned something at the time, but not getting the chance to apply it right away means that it probably got lost somewhere. In any case, whether you caount it or not, they don't have a lot of experience in managing software development. Therefore, if the mistake can be made, I think that there is a good chance that they made it. 1 - I think that there is the very real possibility that whatever digital tools department they had for the 3.5 toolset got "future endeavoured" after it didn't work, ans so they were essentially starting from scratch with DDI.
#17 Dane_McArdy Jan 12, 2012 19:44:57	This was posted over on ENWorld by the poster Truename, and I think it is particularly relevant: The set of tools that they are trying to get out under the current edition is, if we are being honest, their first kick at the can. The tools that they will be developping for D&D Next should, assuming they carry over a significant amount of management experience, be significantly better. There was meant to be a whole set of tools for 3.5 that they never finished and shelved rather quickly. So, this would be their third attempt at these kind of products. That is true. However, given the time between 3.5 and the start of the programming of the DDI tools, combined with the rapid turnover at WotC in their digital D&D department1 I don't count that attempt at tools to actually have taught them anything. They may have learned something at the time, but not getting the chance to apply it right away means that it probably got lost somewhere. In any case, whether you caount it or not, they don't have a lot of experience in managing software development. Therefore, if the mistake can be made, I think that there is a good chance that they made it. 1 - I think that there is the very real possibility that whatever digital tools department they had for the 3.5 toolset got "future endeavoured" after it didn't work, ans so they were essentially starting from scratch with DDI. That's just all spin, which means you really aren't being objective about it. Lets be honest, WoTC has been making everyone think they were going to give us the tools they had been saying. That there really was an s on the end of Adventure Tools.
#18 Damon_Tor Jan 13, 2012 0:04:22	Monster Builder alone is vastly superior to the prior offering. surely you remember what a buggy piece of crap the old builder became. There's a key word there. became A company breaking its own software to replace it a year later is not progress.
#19 Bomberg Jan 13, 2012 4:49:14	There was meant to be a whole set of tools for 3.5 that they never finished and shelved rather quickly. So, this would be their third attempt at these kind of products. That is true. However, given the time between 3.5 and the start of the programming of the DDI tools, combined with the rapid turnover at WotC in their digital D&D department1 I don't count that attempt at tools to actually have taught them anything. They may have learned something at the time, but not getting the chance to apply it right away means that it probably got lost somewhere. In any case, whether you caount it or not, they don't have a lot of experience in managing software development. Therefore, if the mistake can be made, I think that there is a good chance that they made it. 1 - I think that there is the very real possibility that whatever digital tools department they had for the 3.5 toolset got "future endeavoured" after it didn't work, ans so they were essentially starting from scratch with DDI. What 3.5 tool are we talking about? I only recall the Character Generator demo in my old 3.0 PHB (sort of worked, very limited functionality, only a fraction of the data available) and the Master Tools fiasco: MT has been announced pre-launch of 3.0 with an impressive feature list. It was an outsourced piece of software. The feature list shrank and shrank, until a bare bones character and treasure generator was published under the name of eTools which was buggy as hell and had no way to enter custom data. Finally the fan group responsible of the open sourc tool PCGen took over and made patches to this thing until it was moderatley usefull. But 3.5? I never heard anything of that.
#20 StanC Jan 13, 2012 11:55:18	There was meant to be a whole set of tools for 3.5 that they never finished and shelved rather quickly. So, this would be their third attempt at these kind of products. That is true. However, given the time between 3.5 and the start of the programming of the DDI tools, combined with the rapid turnover at WotC in their digital D&D department1 I don't count that attempt at tools to actually have taught them anything. They may have learned something at the time, but not getting the chance to apply it right away means that it probably got lost somewhere. In any case, whether you caount it or not, they don't have a lot of experience in managing software development. Therefore, if the mistake can be made, I think that there is a good chance that they made it. 1 - I think that there is the very real possibility that whatever digital tools department they had for the 3.5 toolset got "future endeavoured" after it didn't work, ans so they were essentially starting from scratch with DDI. What 3.5 tool are we talking about? I only recall the Character Generator demo in my old 3.0 PHB (sort of worked, very limited functionality, only a fraction of the data available) and the Master Tools fiasco: MT has been announced pre-launch of 3.0 with an impressive feature list. It was an outsourced piece of software. The feature list shrank and shrank, until a bare bones character and treasure generator was published under the name of eTools which was buggy as hell and had no way to enter custom data. Finally the fan group responsible of the open sourc tool PCGen took over and made patches to this thing until it was moderatley usefull. But 3.5? I never heard anything of that. Wasn't it CMP (Code Monkey Publishing) that took over Etools.
#21 kenjoon Jan 13, 2012 15:07:30	That's just all spin, which means you really aren't being objective about it. Lets be honest, WoTC has been making everyone think they were going to give us the tools they had been saying. That there really was an s on the end of Adventure Tools. So when exactly is the last time that WotC made such a claim*, or are you being just as "dishonest" as mudbunny only with the opposite spin? *Your word does not suffice for this.  Proof requires a link to a blog, post or other official statement from someone at WotC.  Otherwise it's just your opinion.
#22 mudbunny Jan 13, 2012 18:52:50	That's just all spin, which means you really aren't being objective about it. Lets be honest, WoTC has been making everyone think they were going to give us the tools they had been saying. That there really was an s on the end of Adventure Tools. I am really not sure what you are accusing me of being not objective about. If it is about how well WotC managed the release and programming of the DDI tools, I have said that they made mistakes, and that most of the problems that we have seen are a result of inexperience in the management and supervision of the programming team. To be blunt, the bit off more than they could chew and they got screwed by the inability of an outside company to present what had been promised. If it is about whether they are going to be rolling out more tools, well, I am not sure how you found *anything* in my post which made any sort of comment on whether I think that they are going to be rolling out more tools or not. Personally, I think that they are going to be rolling out more tools.
#23 Dane_McArdy Jan 14, 2012 12:01:13	That's just all spin, which means you really aren't being objective about it. Lets be honest, WoTC has been making everyone think they were going to give us the tools they had been saying. That there really was an s on the end of Adventure Tools. I am really not sure what you are accusing me of being not objective about. If it is about how well WotC managed the release and programming of the DDI tools, I have said that they made mistakes, and that most of the problems that we have seen are a result of inexperience in the management and supervision of the programming team. To be blunt, the bit off more than they could chew and they got screwed by the inability of an outside company to present what had been promised. If it is about whether they are going to be rolling out more tools, well, I am not sure how you found *anything* in my post which made any sort of comment on whether I think that they are going to be rolling out more tools or not. Personally, I think that they are going to be rolling out more tools. More spin. Now it's accusing me of stuff I never even came close to saying. Thanks. Lovely. Personally, you probably know something you can't say because of NDA. Because I can't see you making a statement about more tools rolling out, where there's a chance you would have to come back and admit you were wrong. Or is it going to be the kind of spin where you can say, I never said 4E tools.
#24 mudbunny Jan 15, 2012 13:25:26	More spin. Now it's accusing me of stuff I never even came close to saying. Thanks. Lovely. *snicker* Where am I accusing you of anything. You were the one who started with the accusations of me not being objective and spinning things. That's just all spin, which means you really aren't being objective about it. Lets be honest, WoTC has been making everyone think they were going to give us the tools they had been saying. That there really was an s on the end of Adventure Tools. To which I responded the following: I am really not sure what you are accusing me of being not objective about. If it is about how well WotC managed the release and programming of the DDI tools, I have said that they made mistakes, and that most of the problems that we have seen are a result of inexperience in the management and supervision of the programming team. To be blunt, the bit off more than they could chew and they got screwed by the inability of an outside company to present what had been promised. If it is about whether they are going to be rolling out more tools, well, I am not sure how you found *anything* in my post which made any sort of comment on whether I think that they are going to be rolling out more tools or not. Personally, I think that they are going to be rolling out more tools. I haven't accused you of anything in my above post. The parts I have bolded make that abundantly clear. Personally, you probably know something you can't say because of NDA. Because I can't see you making a statement about more tools rolling out, where there's a chance you would have to come back and admit you were wrong. Or is it going to be the kind of spin where you can say, I never said 4E tools. Let me make it perfectly clear. I have not heard anything about additional tools coming out, nor have I tested any tools that are not already available to DDI subscribers. I am making a *guess* based on the fact that there is about 18 months between now and when I am guessing the next edition will be coming out (my guess is GenCon 2013).
#25 noctebrisa Jan 15, 2012 14:54:14	Honestly i'm very upset with DDI Tools, there are simple and stupid fails like: Tools in general: they are only in english. Character Builder: a great tool, but for the god sake, the OLD CB let to navigate with cursors through powers, feats, class, races, etc., a much better than now than you have to click every feat with the mouse. Yeah, it's very simple but this lost feature let the players a fast and confortable method of reading powers and feats. Monster Builder: no thematic encounters or classifications (only for type if i remember well), no encounter generation. Compendium: a good tool,  ok with this. Well, i want to comment VT but, belive me, i was expecting it for so long time than i saw it the other day i almost shout of angry, i let you know my opinion of it in the specific post. Bye
#26 FloLeBlanc Jan 16, 2012 2:22:09	I wonder why everyone says they WILL support the 4e tools. Perhaps I missed a post, but what I read was, that the "Techies" WANT to support the 4e tools - that doesn't mean the company line will be we DO support them.
#27 Dane_McArdy Jan 16, 2012 6:42:56	More spin. Now it's accusing me of stuff I never even came close to saying. Thanks. Lovely. *snicker* Where am I accusing you of anything. You were the one who started with the accusations of me not being objective and spinning things. That's just all spin, which means you really aren't being objective about it. Lets be honest, WoTC has been making everyone think they were going to give us the tools they had been saying. That there really was an s on the end of Adventure Tools. To which I responded the following: I am really not sure what you are accusing me of being not objective about. If it is about how well WotC managed the release and programming of the DDI tools, I have said that they made mistakes, and that most of the problems that we have seen are a result of inexperience in the management and supervision of the programming team. To be blunt, the bit off more than they could chew and they got screwed by the inability of an outside company to present what had been promised. If it is about whether they are going to be rolling out more tools, well, I am not sure how you found *anything* in my post which made any sort of comment on whether I think that they are going to be rolling out more tools or not. Personally, I think that they are going to be rolling out more tools. I haven't accused you of anything in my above post. The parts I have bolded make that abundantly clear. Personally, you probably know something you can't say because of NDA. Because I can't see you making a statement about more tools rolling out, where there's a chance you would have to come back and admit you were wrong. Or is it going to be the kind of spin where you can say, I never said 4E tools. UM... well, I am not sure how you found *anything* in my post which made any sort of comment on whether I think that they are going to be rolling out more tools or not. I never suggested you said they were going to roll out more tools in my post. I said "Lets be honest, WoTC has been making everyone think they were going to give us the tools they had been saying." Nothing in that sentence says anything about you saying they are going to be rolling out more tools or not. So why are you saying I found anything in your post about new tools? Do I say, Mudbunny, you aren't being honest about more tools for DDi? Nope. I said it was WOTC not Mudbunny. How come when I saw WoTC, you assume I'm talking about you? Let me make it perfectly clear. I have not heard anything about additional tools coming out, nor have I tested any tools that are not already available to DDI subscribers. I am making a *guess* based on the fact that there is about 18 months between now and when I am guessing the next edition will be coming out (my guess is GenCon 2013). Ok, fine if your *guess* is wrong, are you going to come back and say that? And by tools, it can't be something like a name generator for places or anything on that level. A tool like they have been saying they would have. You know, to actually make the Adventure Tools just that. T-O-O-L-S.
#28 mudbunny Jan 16, 2012 17:32:14	I said it was WOTC not Mudbunny. How come when I saw WoTC, you assume I'm talking about you? Because you didn't say WotC. You replied to me, and in that reply, you said: Personally, you probably know something you can't say because of NDA. Because I can't see you making a statement about more tools rolling out, where there's a chance you would have to come back and admit you were wrong. That is why I got the impression that you were talking about me. In addition, in the *prior* post you made, you also used "you" when replying directly to me. That's just all spin, which means you really aren't being objective about it. (you use WotC in another phrase in that same post, which make it pretty clear that the you above refers to the person you are replying to (me) and not WotC. Ok, fine if your *guess* is wrong, are you going to come back and say that? And by tools, it can't be something like a name generator for places or anything on that level. A tool like they have been saying they would have. You know, to actually make the Adventure Tools just that. T-O-O-L-S. Yeah. I have no problem admitting if my guess is wrong. I *do* find it interesting how much importance it appears that you are placing on my guess on whether they will put out more tools or not.
#29 Dane_McArdy Jan 17, 2012 6:56:33	I said it was WOTC not Mudbunny. How come when I saw WoTC, you assume I'm talking about you? Because you didn't say WotC. You replied to me, and in that reply, you said: Um, go back and read the flow of the conversation. You repied to this: That's just all spin, which means you really aren't being objective about it. Lets be honest, WoTC has been making everyone think they were going to give us the tools they had been saying. That there really was an s on the end of Adventure Tools. By saying: well, I am not sure how you found *anything* in my post which made any sort of comment on whether I think that they are going to be rolling out more tools or not. If you are replying to my post above, but are actually talking about a previous post, how am I supposed to read your mind through the internet and know you are actually talking about a completely different post then the one you replied to? Because in the post you replied to, I am clearly pointing out WoTC, not you. See, that's how conversations work. They move along. And if you suddenly start talking about something that was said earlier in the conversation, you need to acknowledge you are doing that. And for the record, I started out by saying you were putting spin on the fact of how many times WoTC has tried to bring us digital tools to help play the game. If they have 5E tools, it's going to be their 3 third try, with the first two failures to deliver what they said. It doesn't matter if it was being developed via third party or internally. Either way, they still have to manage the project, and a failure to deliver, is still a failure of management. And if you are going to keep putting forth the impression that there could still be more tools for 4e, well, you either know something, because you've said in the past you've gotten advanced look at things, under a NDA. But maybe you don't. Or are you just trying to play PR for WoTC by saying you think that more tools will come out? Because that's something you often do. History shows how WoTC works. 18 months till 5e? With as limited staff and resources they have, and the amount of ramp up time it takes to come out with a new edition, I think it's a safe to say 4e has run it's course. They had been working on 4e for at least 2 years before they announced it. So, chances are, they have been working on 5e for around a year, laying the ground work. And they HAVE to have a digital component to the game. To not have that, will kill 5E. It's an aspect of every day life, and customers demand it. It's what killed newspapers and magazines, hurt large educational publishing companies that refused to get on bored, and why companies like Borders and Barns and Nobels are CLOSING stores. Considering they failed to bring out DDi at the launch of 4e, and for many months after, and it's still hanging around their neck, I'm pretty sure they are going to chain the digital people to thier desks to make sure that there is at least a Character Builder for 5E ready to go at launch. WoTC has told us they couldn't work on multiple tools for 4E because of limited staff and resources. If they couldn't work on multiple tools for 4E, then I doubt they can work on tools for 4E and 5E at the same time. Which version is WoTC focused on right now? Why, 5E of course. Because that's were all their profits are going to come from. So yeah, DDi 4e is pretty much done. That's been my whole point. Anyone associated with WoTC coming to the forums, talking up DDi, is just spin on what happened.
#30 bone_naga Jan 17, 2012 20:20:11	I wonder why everyone says they WILL support the 4e tools. Perhaps I missed a post, but what I read was, that the "Techies" WANT to support the 4e tools - that doesn't mean the company line will be we DO support them. They say that because WotC already announced that they will support them even after 5e is released.
#31 mudbunny Jan 17, 2012 21:25:11	What it comes down to is the following: WotC has given no indication as to whether they will be putting out additional tools or not. Some people think that there will be additional tools coming out, some people think that there won't be additional tools coming out. Neither side has any sort of evidence backing them up. They are both WAGs. As for continued support of 4E DDI when the next edition cmes out, WotC has stated that they want to continue to support the 4E tools once the Next Edition is out.  However (cue people whining and complaining about how I am now "waffling"), that is a plan, and plans change. It is a reality of business. Deal with it.
#32 Damon_Tor Jan 18, 2012 17:13:10	I wonder why everyone says they WILL support the 4e tools. Perhaps I missed a post, but what I read was, that the "Techies" WANT to support the 4e tools - that doesn't mean the company line will be we DO support them. They say that because WotC already announced that they will support them even after 5e is released. It doesn't mesh with reality.  WotC does not have spare staff sitting around they can put on projects that don't create revenue.  They won't support the old tools, and I don't blame them for it.  I also don't blame them for witholding the Dark Sun content from the old CB.  Both are good business decisions.  (I do, however, blame them for being dishonest with us, in both cases.)
#33 celloshane Jan 18, 2012 17:26:52	That is true. However, given the time between 3.5 and the start of the programming of the DDI tools, combined with the rapid turnover at WotC in their digital D&D department1 I don't count that attempt at tools to actually have taught them anything. They may have learned something at the time, but not getting the chance to apply it right away means that it probably got lost somewhere. In any case, whether you caount it or not, they don't have a lot of experience in managing software development. Therefore, if the mistake can be made, I think that there is a good chance that they made it. 1 - I think that there is the very real possibility that whatever digital tools department they had for the 3.5 toolset got "future endeavoured" after it didn't work, ans so they were essentially starting from scratch with DDI. If it is about how well WotC managed the release and programming of the DDI tools, I have said that they made mistakes, and that most of the problems that we have seen are a result of inexperience in the management and supervision of the programming team. To be blunt, the bit off more than they could chew and they got screwed by the inability of an outside company to present what had been promised. MB, attempting to redirect here.  As someone who hasn't seen much of DDI from a subscriber perspective, and I'll admit I haven't been paying as close attention lately, most of the problems that I've observed in the past with DDI have been issues that (IMO) stem from poor management.  Given that WotC's inexperience with software development has caused a pattern of failures in the past, I'm concerned about their ability to succeed in the future - especially with a 3rd party involved.  Is there anything you'd like to point out that suggests an optimistic view for DDI in the future?
#34 mudbunny Jan 18, 2012 21:43:47	Now, keeping in mind that this is my opinion: No one will deny that there were numerous problems with the initial roll-out of the DDI tools. However, since they replaced the upper management of DDI (about 18 months ago IIRC), the project management has gotten better. The CB works extremely well, as does the Monster Builder. In addition, with them grabbing the base for the VT from a 3pp (I think that they do the mods in-house, not via the 3pp), there have been regular upgrades to the VT, and there is a fair amount of communication between WotC and the community. Finally, I refuse to believe that the upper management at WotC are morons. What with the numerous stumbles and missteps that have happened over the past couple of years, the management of WotC has gained a significant amount of experience and knowledge in the management of a software project. I think that, as a result, we will see markedly fewer errors in the programming of the tools.
#35 Dane_McArdy Jan 20, 2012 11:53:10	Regardless of the change in upper management of DDi tools, WoTC has yet to come and change any standing statement about what tools will be in 4E. It has been more tools are coming. Which conflicts with, The last thing we will bring out for DDi is a VT (if we do a VT). That's what WoTC told us. They needed to make all the other tools first, before they could have a VT, because they needed them in place first. Anyone disagree with that? So here we are with a VT. And yet at no point has there been a statement from WoTC saying, We changed tracks again, and decided to come out with the VT before the other tools? Or Don't worry, we are still working on the other tools, we just decided to give you a VT now, because we could make it work with what we have. When the other tools are ready, they will be integrated into the VT as well. No, WoTC hasn't. Yes plans change. Guess what, Companies can also lie and misdirect as well. DEAL WITH IT. You can't prove they aren't lying anymore then I can prove they are. And as cynical as that may seem, history and many examples shows us that WoTC does in fact misdirect and play spin. Just because the CB and MB work extremely well, doesn't mean it's better then what the offline versions did. Working well isn't the same as better. I mean, why haven't they added new character sheets? I loved being able to have a campaign filter for my players. The item customization on the offline one was more robust. It doesn't matter if the online CB works, if it lacks features to make it a really useful tool. I mean, rather then being able to send my friends my campaign settings so they can work out their characters themselves, I have to stand there and approve their choices. It's ridiculous in this age with what software can do, that I can't have those settings, and that I have to watch over my players shoulders. More so because I already had that ability. I mean after all, isn't that something WoTC tells us is a great thing about all the options they offer? That a group or a DM can decide what they want and don't want in a game? Don't want a particular race for some reason, you can do it! The fact is, the Character Builder doesn't all represent the spirit of the game in allowing you to make it your own. Which is the very central heart and soul of what DnD is. As for the upper management being morons. I never said that. I must have missed who did say that. All support for 4E DDi means is they will keep the tools up and running so long as it makes enough profit. They aren't going to keep making 4E material to add to it, and at best, bugs will be fixed from time to time. Until they "Change plans" to stop doing that.
#36 Dane_McArdy Jan 20, 2012 12:23:07	I wonder why everyone says they WILL support the 4e tools. Perhaps I missed a post, but what I read was, that the "Techies" WANT to support the 4e tools - that doesn't mean the company line will be we DO support them. They say that because WotC already announced that they will support them even after 5e is released. It doesn't mesh with reality.  WotC does not have spare staff sitting around they can put on projects that don't create revenue.  They won't support the old tools, and I don't blame them for it.  I also don't blame them for witholding the Dark Sun content from the old CB.  Both are good business decisions.  (I do, however, blame them for being dishonest with us, in both cases.) Doesn't it really come down to what they mean by support? What it means to players and what it means to WoTC are going to end up being two different things. Just try and get WoTC to define what they mean by support. Just letting the tools stay up and run maintenance on them from time to time counts as support doesn't it? But don't you think customers are going to want more then just that?
#37 Mock Jan 22, 2012 22:47:28	Doesn't it really come down to what they mean by support? What it means to players and what it means to WoTC are going to end up being two different things. Just try and get WoTC to define what they mean by support. Just letting the tools stay up and run maintenance on them from time to time counts as support doesn't it? But don't you think customers are going to want more then just that? I'm not sure it matters as much as you might think - Wizards knows that DDI subscribers will stick around when no content is being delivered, because it's happened before. Now, perhaps without the benefit of "soon," people will be less likely to hang on just one more month hoping for that article on Ambidextrous Paladins or whatever, but most subscribers will probably let autorenew just tick along.  My bet is just making sure the server stays up will be enough for a lot of people.
#38 kerred Jan 23, 2012 1:43:37	So, the last year of dramatic improvements in the tools is...what?  My imagination? Whoa whoa whoa. Let's take a step back there. The tools are, at best, as good as they were in the Fall of 2010.  The "dramatic imrpovements" only exist in light of what the new tools had been at launch. That said, I do think 5e will have a better digital rollout.  They'll have a better digital rollout because PW is going to be in charge of their entire digital suite. That said, I do think 5e will have a better digital rollout.  They'll have a better digital rollout because PW is going to be in charge of their entire digital suite. What is PW???? Thanks~
#39 Dane_McArdy Jan 23, 2012 6:41:21	Doesn't it really come down to what they mean by support? What it means to players and what it means to WoTC are going to end up being two different things. Just try and get WoTC to define what they mean by support. Just letting the tools stay up and run maintenance on them from time to time counts as support doesn't it? But don't you think customers are going to want more then just that? I'm not sure it matters as much as you might think - Wizards knows that DDI subscribers will stick around when no content is being delivered, because it's happened before. Now, perhaps without the benefit of "soon," people will be less likely to hang on just one more month hoping for that article on Ambidextrous Paladins or whatever, but most subscribers will probably let autorenew just tick along.  My bet is just making sure the server stays up will be enough for a lot of people.   Well considering how there are plenty of of people that are still upset that earlier editions aren't supported with new material anymore, I think we are going to see a lot of posts asking for new material simply because they are paying for 4E DDi.
#40 Damon_Tor Jan 24, 2012 6:27:45	So, the last year of dramatic improvements in the tools is...what?  My imagination? Whoa whoa whoa. Let's take a step back there. The tools are, at best, as good as they were in the Fall of 2010.  The "dramatic imrpovements" only exist in light of what the new tools had been at launch. That said, I do think 5e will have a better digital rollout.  They'll have a better digital rollout because PW is going to be in charge of their entire digital suite. That said, I do think 5e will have a better digital rollout.  They'll have a better digital rollout because PW is going to be in charge of their entire digital suite. What is PW???? Thanks~ Perfect World, the Chinese game developer that bought Cryptic and told them to start Neverwinter from scratch.  Supposedly Neverwinter and the 5e digital suite will be intimately connected, and PW is in charge of both.
#41 KM.549 Jan 25, 2012 19:39:24	WOTC said the 4th Ed tools would have a smooth roll out,too. They were going to be handled by a 3rd parttopology. We all know how well that went.
#42 Jharii Feb 01, 2012 11:42:14	WOTC said the 4th Ed tools would have a smooth roll out,too. They were going to be handled by a 3rd parttopology. We all know how well that went. I am not aware of any company that has ever stated publically to their customers that they are planning on a bumpy roll-out.  Most companies DO plan on a smooth roll-out.  Stuff happens.  Welcome to life.
#43 KM.549 Feb 03, 2012 7:22:20	Problem is WOTC seems to have the same stuff happen whenever they promise digital tools. They had issues with tools/ master tools for 3/ 3.5. The total screw up with ddi for 4th ed. Hope they learned there lesson but I doubt it.
#44 mudbunny Feb 03, 2012 9:12:34	Butu they have improved. While no-one will deny that there were problems with the initial release of DDI (whether it is primarily the fault of WotC or Radiant Machine is a completely seperate question), they have (IMO) continually improved their ability since they completely took the programming in-house. They have also learned when it is a good idea to get things from third parties (VT) and simply modify it. Whether they will use what they have learned for the next edition is a completely subjective opinion.
#45 Jharii Feb 03, 2012 10:22:12	Problem is WOTC seems to have the same stuff happen whenever they promise digital tools. They had issues with tools/ master tools for 3/ 3.5. The total screw up with ddi for 4th ed. Hope they learned there lesson but I doubt it. Everyone could stand to learn a lesson or two, it would seem.  Some people should learn to leverage their expectations against the software development cycle, regardless of the developer.  It's not an excuse, just the reality of the environment. And as Mudbunny has noted, they have improved.  Whether some people are willing to acknowledge that or not is irrelevant; the fact is that they have become more proficient at informing the public of upcoming releases, developing the software itself, troubleshooting and problem solving, and releasing on time.  They are far from perfect, but they are also far from what they used to be.
#46 nshoe Feb 06, 2012 17:21:51	Butu they have improved. While no-one will deny that there were problems with the initial release of DDI (whether it is primarily the fault of WotC or Radiant Machine is a completely seperate question), they have (IMO) continually improved their ability since they completely took the programming in-house. Which is why over a year later the Silverlight Character Builder still can't even do what the abandoned Character builder could do.
#47 Mand12 Feb 06, 2012 18:43:59	It doesn't do what the old CB does, that's correct.  It does more.
#48 nshoe Feb 06, 2012 23:39:56	It doesn't do what the old CB does, that's correct.  It does more. You are correct, it messes things up a great many more ways.
#49 Dane_McArdy Feb 07, 2012 7:23:19	Butu they have improved. While no-one will deny that there were problems with the initial release of DDI (whether it is primarily the fault of WotC or Radiant Machine is a completely seperate question), they have (IMO) continually improved their ability since they completely took the programming in-house. They have also learned when it is a good idea to get things from third parties (VT) and simply modify it. Whether they will use what they have learned for the next edition is a completely subjective opinion. But even their improvements have fallen way short of reasonable expectations. They said that when plans change, they will let us know. Well, then at this point I can assume they are still planning to bring out all the other tools for 4E DDi they have been saying they are planning on bringing out. But we also know they work under very tight budgets. And it's also clear tht 4E has run it's product course. I really can't see them spending more money on more tools for an edition that they are no longer publishing. Support for the current 4E tools doesn't mean they will come out with new material for 3E. So unless there are more tools close to being finished, what you have is it for tools. Feb 6, 2012 -- 4:43PM, Mand12wrote: It doesn't do what the old CB does, that's correct.  It does more. The offline CB had more functionality and still does, then the online CB. All the online CB has more of is content, and not much since some people were taking the time to try and keep it updated. Wrongly, which is why WoTC sent them a CD letter.
#50 mudbunny Feb 07, 2012 22:30:56	But even their improvements have fallen way short of reasonable expectations. Whether it has fallen short, met or exceeded reasonable expectations is very subjective. I think that it has met reasonable expectations in most cases, and exceeded it in a couple of others. You obviously feel different. Each of us brings our own biases and opinions to the table that we use to determine where the tools have gotten to. So unless there are more tools close to being finished, what you have is it for tools. And if (and I am saying that having no additional information beyond what WotC has shared with the community) these are all the tools that come out, I am very happy with them.
#51 old_dog Feb 08, 2012 5:34:51	But we also know they work under very tight budgets. And it's also clear tht 4E has run it's product course. I really can't see them spending more money on more tools for an edition that they are no longer publishing. Support for the current 4E tools doesn't mean they will come out with new material for 3E. So unless there are more tools close to being finished, what you have is it for tools. The last time I looked at the VTT there was a dropdown menu to select the version of the game you want to play.  It would be possible to leave teh 4e character builder available and then come out with one for 5e.  If the demand was there they could easily modify the forms for 1e, 2e, etc.
#52 kimli Feb 08, 2012 5:48:55	But we also know they work under very tight budgets. And it's also clear tht 4E has run it's product course. I really can't see them spending more money on more tools for an edition that they are no longer publishing. Support for the current 4E tools doesn't mean they will come out with new material for 3E. So unless there are more tools close to being finished, what you have is it for tools. The last time I looked at the VTT there was a dropdown menu to select the version of the game you want to play.  It would be possible to leave teh 4e character builder available and then come out with one for 5e.  If the demand was there they could easily modify the forms for 1e, 2e, etc. That would be a huge undertaking.There is really no support for older editions in the VTT. I know you can use the map, and make powers for your PC, but it is all completely manual. N.B: maybe frothsof can enlighten us, as he plays older editions with the VT.   The appeal of DDI is that you can use the CB to make a character and import it, with all his powers ready to go, and kill monsters. It's all a nice package. I don't see them updating the software to support the old editions. I do, however, see them leaving the 4e stuff there as long as people are paying for the subscription. I would think that they would just roll it into the DDI subscription with 5e, personally.
#53 Dane_McArdy Feb 09, 2012 6:16:58	But even their improvements have fallen way short of reasonable expectations. Whether it has fallen short, met or exceeded reasonable expectations is very subjective. I think that it has met reasonable expectations in most cases, and exceeded it in a couple of others. You obviously feel different. Each of us brings our own biases and opinions to the table that we use to determine where the tools have gotten to. So unless there are more tools close to being finished, what you have is it for tools. And if (and I am saying that having no additional information beyond what WotC has shared with the community) these are all the tools that come out, I am very happy with them. No, it's not subjective. If WoTC tells us to expect one thing, and delivers something that isn't close to what they tell us, objectively, they have fallen short. Now, at times they have come and told us, we had to scale back, here's what you can now expect. And that's fine we change our expectations. But WoTC hasn't always done that, have they? No. Sometimes on small things, sometimes on very big things. Again, the last official word on from WoTC was that they were going to bring us all those other tools before a VT. Now we have a VT but none of those other tools. See, their statements contradict each other. Officially they told us that they have to make all those other tools first, map maker, encounter builder, campaign manager, before they could put out a VT, because it would need those tools anyway. Makes sense. Then they come out with a VT that doesn't need those tools. However, the VT lacks any functionality of those tools. Maps are limited to what tiles they provide, which is short of the Tiles they have put out. The drawing tools are as basic as Windows Paint, and when used, take up a LOT of memory. If you want to export, you have to do screen shots. Really? Screen shots? They couldn't even put in an export to jpeg feature? There is no campaign manager feature to it, and they have said they are not going add one. There is no encounter builder, no way to add treasure, no way to do hand outs. So the idea that the VT includes those tools they said they needed, doesn't cut it. And so what are we to think? That they will still come out with those tools? That they have the money to make tools for DnDNext AND 4E? They didn't even have money to work on more then one tool at a time for 4E. We know this, because they told us. As for you being happy with what they did manage to do. Great. Guess what? That doesn't change the facts that they fell short of what they told us, none of which they have come and taken back. There has been no official announcement of change of plans. You being happy also doesn't change the fact that even with what they did put out, they still fell short of what they told they would be doing. The Online CB still doesn't have the same level of functionality and features the offline did. And PaoloM said many times that in time, the Online CB will do everything that the offline CB did and more! Well, here we are, at the end of 4E life, and that goal hasnt' been reached. See, this is what I mean by spin. You come across as if the points I bring up aren't valid, because you say you are happy, HAPPY! with what they did manage to do. I'm not questioning your HAPPINESS! I'm talking about what WoTC told us, vs what WoTC was able to do. It's close to a year since they last addressed the subject of New Character Sheets in the CB. And I remember the one CV, AsmodousLore kind of getting on me because I was point out how long it was taking. Basically it came down to Trevor saying it wasn't on the schedule for the next update, and AL coming back and saying, well, if we work it out, that would mean May/June for new character sheets. It never happened. When people bring up new Character Sheets for the CB, no one at WoTC says anything anymore. Those are facts. Not opinions. You want my opinion? The CB works. It's a nice piece of software. My biggest frustration with it? No content filters. No sharing abilities with my players. There's no reason to encourage any of them to get a subscription. Since I have all the toys, and I cook a full meal for each session, and the only person with a place big enough to have everyone over (Manhattan), we always play at my place, so I let them use my CB (When I had it). I dont' like that it doesn't print a text editiable PDF. At least the old CB did that, and made tweaking characters possible. Heck, when you had the Character Sheet open in the Old CB, you could actually go in, alter things like hit points, and it would recalculate healing surges and such! I mean how awesome was that? Players could re-arrange the boxes on the character sheet so information was arranged how they wanted it. The New Monster Builder. It works. It's as good as the old one in terms of altering monsters. But again, the out put isn't a text editable PDF. Sigh, and I had such a great system of being able to ut in a row of boxes to track a monsters current hitpoints that made playing the game SO MUCH EASIER! The VT. It works. It's not impressive to me. See, that's being objective. I dont' claim any of the software doesn't work or is crap. But, I am being fair when I say features the old software had, which I used a lot, have failed to show up in the new software, as we were told by WoTC it would. Now, if your response to all this is "Plans change, Get over it." Yes, plans do change. And when plans change, I adjust my expectations. Also, WotC has told us over and over, we will tell you when plans change. Fair enough. Provided you tell us the plans changed before we find out. Something they have done several times, tell us after the fact. Which they know we hate. So at this point, they haven't told us any change of plans. They haven't told us much about what's going on with DDi save it will continue to be supported when DDNext comes out. So I say to you, get over it. DDi has fallen short of what WoTC has told us, even after all the official change of plans we have been told about. You don't have to get over being happy with what they did. But your personal views on the quality of DDI doesn't change the facts.
#54 Mand12 Feb 09, 2012 8:22:30	Holding them to statements made three years ago before a fundamental design change is what isn't reasonable expectations.
#55 Plaguescarred1 Feb 09, 2012 9:06:36	I for one has been happy with DDi regardless of what has been said or done. The CB, the MB and Compemdium, the Character Name Generator, the D&D VT, Dragon and Dungeon magazines, everything i had access to and been given to download, for less than 75$ a year has been more than a fair price and something i would do again tomorrow if 5E point its nose with a new suite of tools. These aids have been a real boon in helping me build campaigns and one shots, run games and or simply read on the hobby from home and from work.   To WoTC i say a large THANK YOU for this realisation, DDi, regardless of the bumps that were encountered along the way, this service has kept me more than satisfied.
#56 Dane_McArdy Feb 09, 2012 10:25:15	Holding them to statements made three years ago before a fundamental design change is what isn't reasonable expectations. Only, I'm not. IWhen they said they were going to have to change the roll out of DDi, I accepted it and adjusted my expectations. When they said they were going to do all the other tools first, and only then revisit the idea of the VT, which was being shelved for the time being, I adjusted my expectations. When they switched from offline to online, but promised us the online would have all the functionality of the offline and more, I adjusted my expectations. However, they haven't reached that goal yet have they? That wasn't a 3 year ago design change, was it? Nope. See, I'm holding them to their last official word on what we should expect. So far, they haven't delivered on that completely. Plaguescarred. That's fine. But it doesn't address the subject of WoTC failing to deliver what we have been told to expect. Trying to gloss over that with Thank you's is basically trying to shut people up. You're happy. You feel you got your money's worth. Great, you've made threads about just that which get stickied so they stay at the top of the forum. I certainly didn't go into your thread and try and nay say what you felt. (edited: baiting)
#57 ORC_Booker Feb 09, 2012 14:29:01	I've removed content from this thread because Baiting is a violation of the Code of Conduct.  You can review the Code of Conduct here: www.wizards.com/Company/About.aspx?x=wz_... Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks. You're welcome to disagree but please do so in a respectful way! If you wish to report a post for Code of Conduct violation, click on the "Report Post" button above the post and this will submit your report to the moderators on duty. Thanks!
#58 Benird Feb 12, 2012 19:43:09	I couldn't agree more with Dane_McArdy. I was a DDI subscriber right up until late last year and hold a very similar opinion. If you're happy with your DDI susbcription that's excellent and good luck. However please don't hold it against those of us who aren't happy and would like to hold WoTC to account for broken promises. The OCB is a good piece of software and I haven't used the other tools nor do I need to. However the OCB doesn't provide the functionality that I need to run my characters that the offline CB did. As a result I chose to end my subscription as a protest over a piece of software that does not meet my expectaions as I felt was promised by WoTC. So Dane here's +1 from me (take it for whatever you tink it's worth).
#59 Mand12 Feb 14, 2012 14:20:12	How long are you going to 'stick it to the man' while depriving yourself of something you might enjoy? Seems like a nose/face issue, but that may just be me.
#60 Dane_McArdy Feb 15, 2012 9:32:23	How long are you going to 'stick it to the man' while depriving yourself of something you might enjoy? Seems like a nose/face issue, but that may just be me. If you mean, me, I was a subscriber from Day one. I let my auto renew stop last November. So I know exactly what DDi offers. And since it's not going to offer much more soon, I can say that I've pretty much experienced it at it's full. If you are talking directly to Benird, he also was a subscriber, so also experienced what DDi offers. So, our opinions aren't being based on speculation. Again, your happy. Fine. That doesn't change the facts.
#61 Benird Feb 20, 2012 21:34:28	How long are you going to 'stick it to the man' while depriving yourself of something you might enjoy? Seems like a nose/face issue, but that may just be me. If you mean, me, I was a subscriber from Day one. I let my auto renew stop last November. So I know exactly what DDi offers. And since it's not going to offer much more soon, I can say that I've pretty much experienced it at it's full. If you are talking directly to Benird, he also was a subscriber, so also experienced what DDi offers. So, our opinions aren't being based on speculation. Again, your happy. Fine. That doesn't change the facts. +1 I've gotten from DDI what I needed and now I get what I need in my gaming elsewhere. I'm happy if you're happy, but I wasn't happy so I left DDI.