Post your questions here, I will copy them into an index post and then, to keep the thread clean, will have your post deleted. I will not make any changes to your questions.
Hopefully, Cort will answer in this thread, and then I will provide a link to the post where he answers the question from the index post.
I want to point out that this thread is not meant to be the only place that people can ask Cort questions. I hope that, should Cort not have enough time to go digging through threads on the forums for questions to answer, that he can find some in this thread. If I see questions to Cort, or questions that Cort has answered in other threads, I will add them to this thread as well.
Q1 (From Arlen)
[indent]Welcome to the forums! I hear you're the senior developer for the Compendium, formerly known as the Rules Compendium. Sounds like a tough job making the compendium, not to mention keeping all those tidbits of information in order.
Regarding those tidbits, a few people have been complaining about a 'flawed compendium', and since you have the coveted position of top dog, the blame for any innacuracies possibly would fall on yourself. Do the other sections of WoTC report to you and tell you the new feats, magic items, and so on before being allowed to publish them online or within a book? If not, would this be considered a good policy? It would allow paying players to have access to these new feats and powers before they even come out.[/indent]
[indent]Welcome to the forums! I hear you're the senior developer for the Compendium, formerly known as the Rules Compendium. Sounds like a tough job making the compendium, not to mention keeping all those tidbits of information in order.
Regarding those tidbits, a few people have been complaining about a 'flawed compendium', and since you have the coveted position of top dog, the blame for any innacuracies possibly would fall on yourself. Do the other sections of WoTC report to you and tell you the new feats, magic items, and so on before being allowed to publish them online or within a book? If not, would this be considered a good policy? It would allow paying players to have access to these new feats and powers before they even come out.[/indent]
Welcome to the forums! I hear you're the senior developer for the Compendium, formerly known as the Rules Compendium. Sounds like a tough job making the compendium, not to mention keeping all those tidbits of information in order.
Regarding those tidbits, a few people have been complaining about a 'flawed compendium', and since you have the coveted position of top dog, the blame for any innacuracies possibly would fall on yourself. Do the other sections of WoTC report to you and tell you the new feats, magic items, and so on before being allowed to publish them online or within a book? If not, would this be considered a good policy? It would allow paying players to have access to these new feats and powers before they even come out.
What can I say? I'm a curious person. :D But anyway, best of luck at doing your job and making tons of cash. (And feel free to post openly!)
Sincerely,
Arlen
Edit: Okay sir mudbunny, you may delete it.
Edit2: Yeah, no pressure Cort! You're still only #2 as Most Wanted Developer (Ken Troop's he-.. I mean Ken Troop is first!
)Hopefully, Cort will answer in this thread, and then I will provide a link to the post where he answers the question from the index post.
But no pressure, LOL.
I realize the bonus tools are probably not at the top of the to do pile, but will these be fixed before it goes "pay?"
Thanks!
Mentioned this before, but a few of the XP value numbers are off in the Encounter Generator. (One I can think of off hand is the 4th level trap... it says 700xp.)
I realize the bonus tools are probably not at the top of the to do pile, but will these be fixed before it goes "pay?"
Thanks!
I'm not actually the dev for the bonus tools, but I'll bounce this to the person who is.
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1074140
I'll try to check regularly today to answer questions/comments.
I'm not actually the dev for the bonus tools, but I'll bounce this to the person who is.
Thanks for the quick response!
Next:
Looks like you guys missed "Humanoid" in the advanced search options.
Or did the shifty little kobolds steal it to keep themselves hidden? ;)
Thanks for the quick response!
Next:
Looks like you guys missed "Humanoid" in the advanced search options.
Or did the shifty little kobolds steal it to keep themselves hidden? ;)
Is this for the new Compendium or the Bonus Tools?
MJ
Is this for the new Compendium or the Bonus Tools?
Sorry, in the compendium.
Going forward, would things like this be better to send in through the email link, or would you rather have them here?
Sorry, in the compendium.
Going forward, would things like this be better to send in through the email link, or would you rather have them here?
Here, at least for now. That lets people see that an issue is being worked on and I don't get deluged with a hundred emails on the same topic.
As for the "humanoid", you see that as needing to be in the "Type" drop down, correct? OK, I can see the value there, I'll bounce it up the line as a feature request. Can't guarentee anything of course, but I'll make sure it gets discussed.
I will be helping monitor forums from time to time as well and between Cort and myself we should be able to help provide you with a great deal of communication =)
MJ
The person from the DDM Warband Generator!What part do you play in the Compendium?
Here, at least for now. That lets people see that an issue is being worked on and I don't get deluged with a hundred emails on the same topic.
Who wouldn't want that! ;)
As for the "humanoid", you see that as needing to be in the "Type" drop down, correct? OK, I can see the value there, I'll bounce it up the line as a feature request. Can't guarentee anything of course, but I'll make sure it gets discussed.
Yes as a type... then again looking further I don't see that any of the actual "types" are listed in the type section. (Animate, Beast, Humanoid, and Magical Beast...) So I'm not completely sure how things were decided on for that search...
Who wouldn't want that! ;)
Yes as a type... then again looking further I don't see that any of the actual "types" are listed in the type section. (Animate, Beast, Humanoid, and Magical Beast...) So I'm not completely sure how things were decided on for that search...
It's basically a keyword association, it allows us to create logical groupings for monster types that don't have to follow one specific formula.
It's basically a keyword association, it allows us to create logical groupings for monster types that don't have to follow one specific formula.
Well I know it's a keyword thing, what I meant was why certain keywords were chosen, and others weren't. Like what determined the keywords that made the cut. Shrug.
In anycase I think (at least personally) all the "official" types should be added? (Animate, Beast, Humanoid, and Magical Beast)
Although maybe you want to seperate them into a different category...
Not a huge problem if they aren't added though. I'm really digging what's been happening so far! :D
Any chance that in the future you'll tie the two searches together? Not a big deal now, but in the future it would be handy...
Well I know it's a keyword thing, what I meant was why certain keywords were chosen, and others weren't. Like what determined the keywords that made the cut. Shrug.
In anycase I think (at least personally) all the "official" types should be added? (Animate, Beast, Humanoid, and Magical Beast)
Although maybe you want to seperate them into a different category...
Not a huge problem if they aren't added though. I'm really digging what's been happening so far! :D
I will make the suggestion to the data entry guys.
Me again (hate me yet? ;))
Any chance that in the future you'll tie the two searches together? Not a big deal now, but in the future it would be handy...
It's already on the list of things we're looking at. A lot will depend on practicality and efficiency concerns.
A couple of bugs/undesirable features I've noticed:
1) There are some items in there from the adventures (Escape from Sembia, Treasure of Talon Pass, and there may be others) that look like they're more specific versions of PHB items (Magic Mace +1, Resounding Maul +1, etc.), and it would be nice if those would disappear to reduce clutter.
2) Some of the monsters from the DMG, Dungeon, etc. are just very slightly different versions of other monsters (I've noticed this with the kobolds, Kobold Pikeman vs. Kobold Piker, Skull Kicker Slinger vs. Kobold Slinger). I realize that since the numbers differ slightly between the various versions, that these are different monsters, but it would be nice if one version (presumably the MM or Dragon version) would be considered authoritative and the others deleted (unless there are more substantive changes I missed).
These are, of course, slightly nitpicky, and reducing clutter certainly shouldn't be your most important priority by a long shot, but when you guys get around to it, it would be nice to have a cleaner database to work with.
Again, the Compendium is looking better and better, and I'm looking forward to your next update.
The new features look great! Keep up the good work.
A couple of bugs/undesirable features I've noticed:
1) There are some items in there from the adventures (Escape from Sembia, Treasure of Talon Pass, and there may be others) that look like they're more specific versions of PHB items (Magic Mace +1, Resounding Maul +1, etc.), and it would be nice if those would disappear to reduce clutter.
2) Some of the monsters from the DMG, Dungeon, etc. are just very slightly different versions of other monsters (I've noticed this with the kobolds, Kobold Pikeman vs. Kobold Piker, Skull Kicker Slinger vs. Kobold Slinger). I realize that since the numbers differ slightly between the various versions, that these are different monsters, but it would be nice if one version (presumably the MM or Dragon version) would be considered authoritative and the others deleted (unless there are more substantive changes I missed).
These are, of course, slightly nitpicky, and reducing clutter certainly shouldn't be your most important priority by a long shot, but when you guys get around to it, it would be nice to have a cleaner database to work with.
Again, the Compendium is looking better and better, and I'm looking forward to your next update.
I don't want to drag this thread in a different direction, but I completely dissagree with this... I think it's oposite what the compendium is trying to do... If I want the rules for that mace that was used in X Dungeon adventure, I want the rules for that mace that was used in X Dungeon adventure, and not one that it was based on.
More options = better.
I don't want to drag this thread in a different direction, but I completely dissagree with this... I think it's oposite what the compendium is trying to do... If I want the rules for that mace that was used in X Dungeon adventure, I want the rules for that mace that was used in X Dungeon adventure, and not one that it was based on.
More options = better.
Also a reasonable position, particularly where the duplicate monsters are concerned, and I suspect that being able to filter on source would satisfy me almost as well.
I would argue, however, that since the +1 Magic Mace (for example) is a type of +1 Magic Weapon, removing it does not decrease the number of options in the database, just the number of entries.
I will be helping monitor forums from time to time as well and between Cort and myself we should be able to help provide you with a great deal of communication =)
MJ
@WotC_Mark - I see you have Eberron listed in your signature as one of your areas for web development.
Senior Web Developer: D&D Insider (D&D, Eberron, Forgotten Realms, D&D Miniatures, RPGA)
What sort of work are you doing with Eberron as a Web Developer? Anything new and cool we fans of the setting can look forward to?
My H1 module tells me it should have 204 HP :D
...a flying creature within 10 squares also forces that creature to gently fall 10 squares of you.
The of you should be deleted, shouldn't it?
so it would read
...a flying creature within 10 squares of you also forces that creature to gently fall 10 squares.
The blue slime in the compendium must have been fed too well by would be adventures - with 750 HP it would mean certain death to most lvl 2/lvl 3 parties disturbing it in it's lair.
My H1 module tells me it should have 204 HP :D
Forwarded to the data group.
I think the 'of you' was meant to be at the end of the other '10 squares'
so it would read
...a flying creature within 10 squares of you also forces that creature to gently fall 10 squares.
Posted to the data group.
In using the View All to see Powers (722 of them) are there going to be ways to filter? For example, I own the PHB, DMG and MM, so I don't want to see them, but I'd like to see anything added from Dragon/Dungeon Magazine. I am aware we can sort via the source column, but this is not the same as filtering.
Searching for Dragon under powers is not a viable option, as it produces 4 results, with the word "dragon" in their name.
In fact, in addition to this, if I was search for powers that were already in my PHB, and your compendium has an updated version of that power, wil it be marked or highlighted in such a way that a casual viwer would know to look at it?
The View All is a nice addition, although I'm still far from crazy about the whole mini-pop up window layout.
In using the View All to see Powers (722 of them) are there going to be ways to filter? For example, I own the PHB, DMG and MM, so I don't want to see them, but I'd like to see anything added from Dragon/Dungeon Magazine. I am aware we can sort via the source column, but this is not the same as filtering.
Searching for Dragon under powers is not a viable option, as it produces 4 results, with the word "dragon" in their name.
In fact, in addition to this, if I was search for powers that were already in my PHB, and your compendium has an updated version of that power, wil it be marked or highlighted in such a way that a casual viwer would know to look at it?
Adding filters to the remaining eight data types is on my personal list of things I'd like to get done. I don't always get to choose my agenda, so I can't make any promises as to when, but it's definately something I want to do.
Filtering by Source is also a feature a lot of folks have asked for, so I'll certainly take that into account when/if I set up the new filter sets.
I also noticed while "view all" searching for monsters (86?!?!), then filtering to level 2 monsters (9?!?!), that your icons all appear to be broken when viewing a monster's details.
Broken icons are a known issue, fix is in process.
There will be more monsters, we launched with what we had set up and run though QA, there is a lot of data out there that needs to be set up. Can't give you dates, but rest assured we're not stopping with 86.
Posted to the data group.
Recommended Feature: A button on the bottom of each data entry, which lets us report an error we found in the data to the data group. As long as one error is reported for an entry, the button vanishes, so errors aren't reported multiple times.
Internally the report could directly link to the cms page which lets you correct the data. This should make the error reporting much easier.
- search terms are not compatible with the "advanced search" - let's say i want to find any plate armor that has an enhancement bonus of +1, i'd like to type the armor type (plate) into the search field, and then choose a level and apply advanced search. (which leads to displaying every +1 item)
- level or enhancement bonus range search. usually, i won't go for a search "i want a level X item" if i am a player or dm. the more likely search would be "ok, my players are at level x, so i need items from x+1 to x+4, let's see..."
- in the items-tab of the compendium, it should be possible to search for subtypes of magic items. if i want to see e.g. all magic armors, this is a problem.
- search terms are not compatible with the "advanced search" - let's say i want to find any plate armor that has an enhancement bonus of +1, i'd like to type the armor type (plate) into the search field, and then choose a level and apply advanced search. (which leads to displaying every +1 item)
- level or enhancement bonus range search. usually, i won't go for a search "i want a level X item" if i am a player or dm. the more likely search would be "ok, my players are at level x, so i need items from x+1 to x+4, let's see..."
Both the combo search (advanced plus keyword) and the ability to do ranges are features we are currently looking at (doesn't mean they happen, but we realize there is a general desire so we're looking at the possibilities).
Broken icons are a known issue, fix is in process.
There will be more monsters, we launched with what we had set up and run though QA, there is a lot of data out there that needs to be set up. Can't give you dates, but rest assured we're not stopping with 86.
Broken icons in monster detail page should be fixed now.
If you do a View All, you can see that the monster data actually uses the correct term "Standard".
So the result is that you can't search on "Group Role" to find "Standard" monsters because the drop down actually says "Normal"
On the Monster tab, the "Group Role" drop down currently has options for: Solo, Elite, Minion, and Normal - however "Normal" isn't the correct term it should be "Standard".
If you do a View All, you can see that the monster data actually uses the correct term "Standard".
So the result is that you can't search on "Group Role" to find "Standard" monsters because the drop down actually says "Normal"
Yeah, we caught that one as well (just not before launch :P), fix is already in place, just waiting for the next code push.
if the developers name related feats with related words, they will be easier to search for:
For example: Fey Step
Two additional feats were published in Dragon or Dungeon for Fey Step, and they both had "Fey Step" in the name. If this was intentional, then this shows forethought and planning, if not, good job anyways...
same idea behind (hypothetical example) cleave, improved cleave, great cleave...etc.
But barring that, will all racial feats share a searchable word?
Is this suggestion making any sense or resonating with anyone?
This suggestion goes beyond programming...
if the developers name related feats with related words, they will be easier to search for:
For example: Fey Step
Two additional feats were published in Dragon or Dungeon for Fey Step, and they both had "Fey Step" in the name. If this was intentional, then this shows forethought and planning, if not, good job anyways...
same idea behind (hypothetical example) cleave, improved cleave, great cleave...etc.
But barring that, will all racial feats share a searchable word?
Is this suggestion making any sense or resonating with anyone?
Mechanically speaking, you're basically talking about associating a set of human intuitive keywords with data items. This is an approach we are looking at, a lot will depend on if we can figure out a pratical implementation.
Is there any chance that traps might be included in the compendium? They seem to be very well suited for inclusion.
It's on the list of things we're looking at. Can't say which one will be next, we're still figuring that out ourselves.
the action type is listed as "action" and should be "Standard action"
Also, I did not see any reposnse to a previous posters suggestion to add a
"report an error" function. I think that over the years to come (hopefully) such an implementation would allow the community to collectively contribute to keeping this burgeoning database accurate.
I'm dying to know when the gear for Adventurer's Vault will be added to the Compendium.
Since you can't give me a hard date for that book in particular, I'd like to ask if you know of an internal standard turn around time that you guys try to adhere to, between a book's release, and its addition to the Compendium?
I know ETA's aren't your thing.
I'm dying to know when the gear for Adventurer's Vault will be added to the Compendium.
Since you can't give me a hard date for that book in particular, I'd like to ask if you know of an internal standard turn around time that you guys try to adhere to, between a book's release, and its addition to the Compendium?
Technically, turn around this should be within 24 hrs, if not the AM of release. Keeping in mind that the official print template (pdf?) copies were to the printer month(s) in advance, the data monkeys should have had a lot of advance time to do this.
Thanks for your time.
As the Compendium will be going pay only soon, I was wondering if there were still plans to put the page numbers of various powers/items/etc available as part of the free listing? This would allow those of us who own the book but don't buy D&DI to use the Compendium to at least index all our stuff.
Thanks for your time.
Unless plans have changed, there will be no page numbers. The stated reason for not including page numbers a 2nd print might shift page numbers thus making it a less useful tool. I hope at least they would point to chapters or sections of a chapter in place of the page number scheme that they believe will not work. Something those who do not pay can at least find out soon, all things considered.
Unless plans have changed, there will be no page numbers. The stated reason for not including page numbers a 2nd print might shift page numbers thus making it a less useful tool. I hope at least they would point to chapters or sections of a chapter in place of the page number scheme that they believe will not work. Something those who do not pay can at least find out soon, all things considered.
I see. Thanks for the info
Along the same lines, will the DM be able to run a true PC from his end or will any such character have to be built as an NPC/Monster?
When you sign up for DDI will you get access to back logged issues of dungeon and or dragon mag? Meaning that if I signed up say in december, would I be able to access november and sceptembers issues?
No.
No.
If thats the case, will there be any way to buy backlotted issues?
If thats the case, will there be any way to buy backlotted issues?
Though the mechanism for doing so hasn't been made apparent yet, we've been told that we'll be able to buy back issues, yes.
Whether that will be an option through DDI - thus tying those issues to your account here, or through a third party (like the books for sale at driverthrurpg.com) remains to be seen.
Though the mechanism for doing so hasn't been made apparent yet, we've been told that we'll be able to buy back issues, yes.
Whether that will be an option through DDI - thus tying those issues to your account here, or through a third party (like the books for sale at driverthrurpg.com) remains to be seen.
Alright, I appreciate you taking the time to answer. It's good to know I'll be able to buy back issues.
1. Where can I find information on the forums about what the tool is intended to do and not do?
2. Is there any plan to include full stat blocks and not just name / xp values?
3. Can we get page numbers at least to reference a book to look up stat blocks?
#2 and #3 lead into my comments which are that the encounter tool seems to be very basic and the real utility (stat blocks) was missed in the original design of the tool. As a DM typing up the xp values and number of creatures is a lot less work than typing up mind-numbing stat blocks over and over.
I'm surprised they were not implemented. I'm surprised page numbers and book were not included for creatures in the tool at the very least.
However, I'm sure that it was considered and is probably either planned or was shelved, where can I find discussion or information on this?
Also, it seems there is no place for specific discussion of DDI tools (specifically no forum). There are DDI forums for General, Technical, Dungeon, Dragon, but not the tools themselves. It would be nice to have a place with threads that had feature requests, tool discussion, and perhaps planned future release info.
Thanks.
Also, it seems there is no place for specific discussion of DDI tools (specifically no forum). There are DDI forums for General, Technical, Dungeon, Dragon, but not the tools themselves. It would be nice to have a place with threads that had feature requests, tool discussion, and perhaps planned future release info.
Thanks.
You can discuss it in DDI General.
Bait and Switch:
the action type is listed as "action" and should be "Standard action"
Also, I did not see any reposnse to a previous posters suggestion to add a
"report an error" function. I think that over the years to come (hopefully) such an implementation would allow the community to collectively contribute to keeping this burgeoning database accurate.
We've been pretty much using the forums to provide that functionality, but agreed that it might be nice to have "built in" for the Compendium. I'll add it to the backlog.
When you sign up for DDI will you get access to back logged issues of dungeon and or dragon mag? Meaning that if I signed up say in december, would I be able to access november and sceptembers issues?
I can't give the authoritative response on this (particuarly as it's not Compendium related) but I suspect Randy will address that specifically in his blogs.
I mean, when you update the compendium database, does it have any impact on the character builder, or do you have to update both data sets separately?
(I infer from DDI #16, that at the very least, exporting the information into the CB is a separate event.)
I'm sorry if you have answered this elsewhere, but I'm curious as to whether the character builder and the compendium are "using" the same database?
I mean, when you update the compendium database, does it have any impact on the character builder, or do you have to update both data sets separately?
(I infer from DDI #16, that at the very least, exporting the information into the CB is a separate event.)
They are using the same source database, but Compendium has an intermediate step, which means it has it's own update schedule. But the source data is identical.
Also, perhaps there would be some way to tie the filters on the Compendium to the legality checks in the Character Builder; it would reduce code duplication as well as allow the possibility for more advanced filters (someone might complain about duplicating features, but that's a good thing, since if I'm making a character, even being able to filter by all feats a level 8 human warlock can take without starting the CB would be nice).
Both my requests probably don't fit into the nice structure of easy requests you are looking for (especially the second one!), but just saying "add more filters" doesn't seem all that productive.