Ampersand wrote:
Better late than never.
But is this really the case? We were informed that two sourcebooks and an adventure was going to be our lot in print (unless demand required more) and that any further setting support was going to be through DDI. So it was never a case of "never", really. It is just a case of late.
I picked up DDI pretty much on the strength of that statement. More fool me, you might say. However, having seen the Backdrop article I thought that we would see similar articles of similar quality. In my own opinion, we have not.
I have noticed that Wizards has improved dramatically over the last few months, but for me to start taking them seriously as a professional organisation again these articles are going to have to be superb and regular.
Indeed, and I am glad for you. But as someone who is more fluff than crunch, more lore than rules... Dragon, recently, has been seriously slim pickings.
I gotcha, Dragon has certainly shorted you on that end. I find a lot of the stuff is either used by my players, or by me in my campaign. As someone who delves mostly into the novel end of things I can see why, you would be less than pleased. I think they are leaning towards the backdrop style, of course we will also be getting adventures which are traditionally crunch. Hopefully they include neat bits of lore in the adventures especially in an ancient (read 3.x edition lore) history sort of way, tying things in but leaving them a little open.
Actually, I wouldn't be surprised at all if it were May 2010 :D
Well, I've been wondering where all those promised FR articles remained...
-They were probably stuck in all of the other features that were promised to be out months ago, but aren't yet. ;)
I was hopeing for a bit more also and am glad that it is finally coming. I have been satisifed with DDI so far because as a 4E DM it has helped me out alot.
For the Eberron campaign, we kick things off by detailing a lightning rail line. What's better than having a raging battle within and atop a speeding lightning rail?
[sarcasm]
Wow. That's pretty amazing. I mean, the first article is a conversion of the Encounter listed in the Eberron Campaign Setting?
Where do I register!
[/sarcasm]
I have been satisifed with DDI so far because as a 4E DM it has helped me out alot.
Well, so far the only reasonably good thing about DDI articles were the ones from Shelly. Or was this the bad thing :|
-They were probably stuck in all of the other features that were promised to be out months ago, but aren't yet. ;)
And probably will never be :P
Well, so far the only reasonably good thing about DDI articles were the ones from Shelly. Or was this the bad thing :|
-Shelly M...Well, I don't recall the last name. The girl who wrote the book? What does she write about in her articles?
Times are tough and perhaps they felt that campaign specific articles needed to be limited to sell DDI. Perhaps they do not want to scare off potential customers who did not care for settings or maybe they were just getting material to publish and actually making it good?
All possible. Yet as speculation each can be challenged:
Having just released the FRCG wouldn't it make sense to draw the customers for it into DDI by providing more material? Surely it is easier to ignore something you don't like in DDI than it is to look for something that isn't there.
The material question is, also arguable. The Backdrop article by the esteemed Mr James appeared in Dragon 365... The next Backdrop article will appear in Dragon 375 (if my maths is correct. That is 10 intervening months. These people have access to Mr James and Mr Greenwood at least. Mr James posted his "what do you want to see" thread in September. 4 Months ago. Final poll numbers were collated at the beginning of November... do you see where I am going with this? I find it hard to believe that they could not have published a Backdrop article of quality during that time. That they had other priorities (Rose Keep, Epic Faerun, Class Acts: Swordmage all tended towards crunch, Gontal, Auril's Hall etc. tended towards fluff) is fine. I don't, however, hold with the idea that they couldn't.
I was hopeing for a bit more also and am glad that it is finally coming. I have been satisifed with DDI so far because as a 4E DM it has helped me out alot.
Good. I am glad that you and Kerym have found it useful.
Drats... I miss Ed's old monthly Waterdeep town gossip articles. ><
Having just released the FRCG wouldn't it make sense to draw the customers for it into DDI by providing more material? Surely it is easier to ignore something you don't like in DDI than it is to look for something that isn't there.
The material question is, also arguable. The Backdrop article by the esteemed Mr James appeared in Dragon 365... The next Backdrop article will appear in Dragon 375 (if my maths is correct. That is 10 intervening months. These people have access to Mr James and Mr Greenwood at least. Mr James posted his "what do you want to see" thread in September. 4 Months ago. Final poll numbers were collated at the beginning of November... do you see where I am going with this? I find it hard to believe that they could not have published a Backdrop article of quality during that time. That they had other priorities (Rose Keep, Epic Faerun, Class Acts: Swordmage all tended towards crunch, Gontal, Auril's Hall etc. tended towards fluff) is fine. I don't, however, hold with the idea that they couldn't.
If campaign stuff doens't sell as core only items then I can see them shying away from campaign subjects. Simple as that.
Plus the recent layoffs and holidays probably did throw things off for the DDI crew.
I thought a major selling point of the 4E Realms was its lack of detail.
No... more like lack of canon that seems to put a choke hold on players and DM's from enjoying 4e FR.
It's great to read that WotC wants to draw in more fan support to fill the pages of its products. Time to step up to the plate and make the Realms as DM-friendly as possible.
If the next one is in May, that's just not good enough. I may like the approach of 4E and in fact, I still get major use out of my subscription for a wide variety of reasons, but this support for the FR is really bad. Either properly support the setting or don't bother.
I understand this false sense of entitlement we have, but c'mon...
I don't believe that's being unreasonable at all in fact, especially because I accepted the two sourcebook plan entirely on the fact they would then add things in (like up to date 4E city maps and such, of which there is a major dearth of such in the FRCG) with DDI.
But, they also admitted that they put too much on their plate and are trying to get things in order.
No... more like lack of canon that seems to put a choke hold on players and DM's from enjoying 4e FR.
Of course, the amount of canon information for the 4E Realms is only going to increase, not decrease.
But, they also admitted that they put too much on their plate and are trying to get things in order.
When forced to, by customers (not just people with a sense of entitlement) who pointed out continually that the DDI team were not communicating with the community.
Point in fact, why not tell us after the last Backdrop, "Sorry guys, we have a huge amount on our plate and you are going to be waiting a while to see the next one of these". Concise, explanatory, understable and would have helped their customers to understand the situation. They did not do this. Instead of this we have heard almost nothing about this until now (and I am an avid reader of the Editorial columns produced and the DDI sub-forums).
The central core of this, for me I can't speak for others, krownhunter is not that they are saying this now... but that they didn't say it 6 months ago.
lol, maybe, just maybe, they didn't know this was a problem six months ago. Hmmm...
...and five months ago when Brian R James suggested his "what do you want to see next" thread?
...and four when he collated and, presumably, submitted the results?
...and three? and two?
I believe you are giving the DDI production team less credit than they deserve. I choose to think that they did know what was going on with their magazine... and just didn't decide or realise that communicating that to us might be a good thing.
We were told things on the FR side were in the works. What is it that is the problem?
I know they said it's taking longer then anticipated...
We were told things on the FR side were in the works. What is it that is the problem?
That after being told that DDI was the future of support from the Realms, we get very little support for the Realms through DDI? And few specific statements about the delays, why they were occuring and when they would be resolved until quite recently?
We know now, but people are still griping about it?
Yes... we didn't know, they might not have known.
We know now, but people are still griping about it?
To be technically accurate, apart from asking (politely) for more FR specific articles my "griping" on this matter didn't start until today.
Yes... we didn't know, they might not have known.
We know now, but people are still griping about it?
People are allowed to discuss how they think WotC has handled this matter. Thank you.
People are allowed to discuss how they think WotC has handled this matter. Thank you.
lol, I never said they couldn't, thanks.
Hey I like 75% of the new FR but even I'd say that there were massive problems with the DDI and coverage with it. Thats why I haven't gotten it yet. I won't until things get more straightened out.
I agree to a point. DDI is lacking in FR content, but it has a ton of useful things that I'm happy to have available right now.
To be technically accurate, apart from asking (politely) for more FR specific articles my "griping" on this matter didn't start until today.
I see.
Well, I too hope we get to see more FR content soon.
lol, I never said they couldn't, thanks.
I'm so glad that's clear then.
I'm so glad that's clear then.
Always a pleasure to convey understanding without veiled intent.
Mrtyl!! forget that whiskey--I don't need it!
People are allowed to discuss how they think WotC has handled this matter. Thank you.
That's funny, I don't recall anyone asking for clarification, nor anyone saying this wasn't allowed.
That after being told that DDI was the future of support from the Realms, we get very little support for the Realms through DDI? And few specific statements about the delays, why they were occurring and when they would be resolved until quite recently?
WotC has been screwing up lately and is behind the 8-ball on releasing content. But so what? Sure those of us who bought a subscription for more Realms content want our money's worth, but it's not like we've been 100% in the dark as to what's been going on at WotC.
If you have content, publish it. That's what they're doing.
If you need to stop and get your corporate house in order (which even you, Iluvrien, have to admit is not something that can be fixed in a month or two) then you do it, then start publishing content again. That's what they're doing.
I'm sure WotC heard the customer criticism, just as I'm sure we'd have seen more Realms support sooner if they didn't have to go through their re-org.
As fun as it is to chime in on the gripes against WotC bandwagon, I’d prefer to keep the thread positive and focused on what we know. That involves the fact that more setting stuff is coming to us, ergo the wait is over, and that WotC wants to find fan sources for some of that content.
If you're a true fan of the Realms and you want to see the new gaming content suit your tastes, this ought to be good news for you.
-Shelly M...Well, I don't recall the last name. The girl who wrote the book? What does she write about in her articles?
Shelly Mazzanoble. She writes about various topics around D&D e.g. her first time as a DM, the attempt to change society's attitude towards D&D, the benefit of D&D for kids and for herself and what she achieved thanks D&D, and so on.
Well, I guess that's not everyone's taste but I like it. Sometimes it's quite amusing. That said, however, I wouldn't buy her book Confessions of a Part-time Sorceress.
But I can't tolerate all of this 'lore' they are proposing - they promised to keep the setting 'lore lite', and now I'm stuck paying for the DDi and reading everything just to keep up?
If I miss even one article or novel, my disgruntled players will once-again beat me with their DM-be-good sticks!
I can't be bothered with that - I want a setting with just a book or two and thats it.
On a more serious note - I'm willing to bet my bottom-dollar it's going to be Ed Greenwood and Waterdeep . I personally find WD a total yawn-fest, but I know a lot of folks like it, so whatever.
Why do I say that? Because I KNOW for a fact Ed has been working on a DDi project for awhile now, he knows Waterdeep better then anyone (and better then any other city), and he supposedly sent in something like 200 pages on Waterdeep for the FRCG, which was shortened to seven pages (IIRC).
So they probably hired Ed to take all of that material - that was already paid for (why waste it?) - and turn it into more cash-flow for them, by chopping it all up into smaller articles.
Yay.
Just what we needed... because, ya know... its not like we ever got sourcebook on Waterdeep.
If I'm right about this (and I almost always am), chalk-up another 'doozy' for the "lords of UN-originality' over at WotC beating another dead horse... again...
Waterdeep.... snore.....
Maybe they'll even save some of that material for the 5e Waterdeep book... which should be available in just three years...
I suppose I would only have the right to be angry if I had actually paid for the DDlie. :P
If you're a true fan of the Realms and you want to see the new gaming content suit your tastes, this ought to be good news for you.
I guess I'm not a True Fan of the Realms.
BTW, how are YOUR maps coming? ;)
I guess I'm not a True Fan of the Realms.
You're getting there in fits and starts. :P
All your base are belong to us and all that.
BTW, how are YOUR maps coming? ;)
Maps? That's what I was supposed to be working on?
D'oh!
Just what we needed... because, ya know... its not like we ever got sourcebook on Waterdeep.
Well, we don't know that any upcoming articles are going to be about Waterdeep.
remember this was free
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/archfr/2001
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/archfr/2002
...
Maps? That's what I was supposed to be working on?
D'oh!
Sorry for that... I hate being lumped into a category with everyone else, hence my... 'attack'. :embarrass
If we didn't care about the Realms so much, we wouldn't be so emotional about the changes... and I think you know that.
As for 4e rules - I'm going to be trying them out ASAP, and hopefully I will like them. I've always prided myself on bringing new players to the table, but I've always used the most current set of rules... which is why I find myself currenltly incapable of running a game.
Inner struggle and all of that.
Well, we don't know that any upcoming articles are going to be about Waterdeep.
Very Ture - it's just me taking shots in the dark again.
At one point I thought Ed's articles (that he keeps hinting at) were going to be on Returned Abeir - he mentioned awhile back having a desire to 'further develop' it in future DDi articles. Thats why I did the Returned Abeir map - I thought Ed was coming out with articles for the place, and I wanted to show my support of him (and them) by providing folks with a... more detailed... map.
Unfortunately, I think I may have been wrong on that one (everyone has an off-day :P ), because of this announcment of doing a cities series. I've already explained why I think it's Watedeep above.
We'll see - either way, I'll never get to read them.
Online material should support printed material, NOT be the ONLY material. I big part of this hobby is the 'bragging rights' about how many books you own, and they just took the entire 'collectibility factor' right out of the hobby.
Tidbits of online support for fans willing to pay for it (and the truck load of other perks) = cost effective for long term continuation...
It might not be what we (the niche within the niche, if you will) want, but it is better then nothing.
A large corporation will NEVER be able to produce a decent Roleplaying game, because it doesn't understand the mindset of the players.
Hasbro is trying to turn D&D into a 'toy' - thats why they are now forcing the miniatures on us.
They don't care if anyone actually plays it... just so long as someone buys it. Thats how Toy companies make money - they convince everyone that they have this year's 'must have' toy, and stupid parents go out and buy it all... even though the kid will probably only play with it once or twice.
Game settings are being relegated to the same marketing scheme - they needn't be GOOD, just SHINEY, and folks will buy them, use them once or twice, and move on to the next one.... just like a toy.
Or do you think the 'One setting a year' isn't perfectly in-tune with that?
A setting should have 'Staying Power', and thats NOT at all what a corporation wants - they want you to go out and buy next year's model when it comes out.
And thats why this country is heading for the worst economic collapse in history within the next four years... and god help us all.
Blame the depression on RPG's.... wow... :P
I like the setup well enough. I'd like more books, but the 'new toy' works for me too.
Online material should support printed material, NOT be the ONLY material. I big part of this hobby is the 'bragging rights' about how many books you own, and they just took the entire 'collectibility factor' right out of the hobby.
Even though they still have minis?:P
(and the truck load of other perks)
That reads like an overstatement to me.
A large corporation will NEVER be able to produce a decent Roleplaying game, because it doesn't understand the mindset of the players.
-I don't know. Wizards of the Coast used to produce a roleplaying game that I liked, and many others did/do as well. They are/were a large corporation.
That reads like an overstatement to me.
Would you know? Do you have DDI?
Would you know? Do you have DDI?
I would, because I do. And at this time I would personally happen to agree with Rin. At the very least it reads as extreme optimism to me.
I would, because I do. And at this time I would personally happen to agree with Rin. At the very least it reads as extreme optimism to me.
lol, if you knew me, you would not associate me with optimism...
There are a lot of perks with DDI, and more to come.
I would, because I do.
This I can't understand, because a subscription I've already found is an immensely useful resource. Firstly, the compendium allows me access to anything I want quickly and easily. In fact, I sometimes don't even pick up my books and instead I just look for whatever I want in the compendium. It's an immeasurably useful resource.
The character builder released recently is really very useful and my players (and me) are getting a great deal of worth out of it. I can say that's it's made my life much easier already.
Although varying in quality, I've found the articles in dungeon/dragon more than useful. Several of the adventures in Dungeon are very good and their policy of making tagless maps available for many of them equally as useful a decision.
Quite frankly, DDI is proving its worth easily for its cost and utility of what is in place right now. Where I am annoyed is their failure to really publish a good amount of articles per month, with a policy such as having at least one FR article per issue needing to be instituted a while ago. What they have published has been very useful at the table already.
At the very least it reads as extreme optimism to me.
Gotta know your people just as well as the subject matter before you parse what they say.
The knee-jerk negativity (not saying its coming from you Iluvrien, but from others) just shows people are willing to say whatever in order to argue or attempt to "counter" unsavory (to them) positiveness.
DDI has a wealth of resources for gamers to use. And let's not forget who that product group is for: Gamers.
Gamers like themselves a good story, mind, because it's not just about the mechanics. But insomuch as the mechanics are concerned, DDI's got it covered in spades.
DDI has a wealth of resources for gamers to use. And let's not forget who that product group is for: Gamers.
did you copy that line from some commercial
propaganda machine
Though really, DDI probably has a fairly good amount of stuff in it, but the quality and utility of that is going to heavily depend on the individual viewing it, and if its to their tastes or not. If its not, then saying there's a dearth of useful stuff is a pretty valid statement, at least from a subjective point of view. It if is to your tastes, then the same is true there as well. Like most things in life and gaming, it depends on how you view things.
I would, because I do. And at this time I would personally happen to agree with Rin. At the very least it reads as extreme optimism to me.
And besides, you don't have to actually subscribe to DDI to know what features it is currently offering. They even freely tell you what articles are forthcoming (you just have to pay to read them).I do push for more Realms articles at every opportunity--like you, I feel that we've been under-serving the Realms fans over the last few months, and I want to see more FR material included in our online magazines and articles. Here's the good news: I believe you'll see the pace picking up in another couple of months, and a steadier "support level" established. I can't really say any more than that, because plans can change sometimes, and it's not in my hands. But I like what I've been hearing lately.
...and...
Short answer: I don't know. I'm not really "up" on the dark elf story--my Realms expertise lies elsewhere. I suspect that we might devote some attention to that development sooner or later in a DDi/Dragon article or more fiction, but I don't know of any in the works.
However, if that's something you really want to see, don't be afraid to email Chris Youngs and ask him for that article. (It works better if a lot of you guys do it.)
*Bold was me*
So it should be beefing up and it helps if we send them what we want to hear.
That seems to be supportive, yes?
I'd call it encouraging more than supportive, but that's a bit semantical. ;)
lol, well I'm not one for pep talks... If it pans out, it will be good.
lol, if you knew me, you would not associate me with optimism...
There are a lot of perks with DDI, and more to come.
Indeed, I will take you at your word here as, let's face it, nobody here really knows anybody (apart from those people who came here as a Real Life group to begin with).
My query with your statement may well be semantic then. To me a "perk" is something that is positive in a situation or product that is extra, in excess of what you expected. In this case, what DDI is giving me is either exactly or somewhat below what I feel I have paid for. Thus I see few "perks". As this is based on a lingual assumption I apologise for possibly misunderstanding your meaning.
This I can't understand, because a subscription I've already found is an immensely useful resource.
Quite frankly, DDI is proving its worth easily for its cost and utility of what is in place right now. Where I am annoyed is their failure to really publish a good amount of articles per month, with a policy such as having at least one FR article per issue needing to be instituted a while ago. What they have published has been very useful at the table already.
Indeed. And what you seem to have found it a useful resource for is for gaming. Since my approach is not the gaming approach many of the things you seem to have enjoyed and found useful are not so useful to me at this time. Hence the statement of my own subjective opinion on the matter.
For example, the Character Builder, it is indeed an impressive program (although more portraits would be nice)... but continuously building characters and character concepts when you:
a) don't have experience of how particular builds and powers work "on the ground", so to speak, makes building intelligently difficult and
b) you don't have any expectation of being able to use them any time soon
It starts to take the edge off the enjoyment after the 10th character or so.
And for the record, I agree with you about the number of articles. My opinion on the quality of some of them has already been stated.
Hi Iluv,....
Hey Misc,
Well, as I said above, it is pretty hard to "know" anyone here, but after you comment I reconsidered Krownhunter's phrasing and my interpretation of it. You will, I hope, forgive me for not engaging the positvity/negativity matter but I see what little that might I have to say on the matter to be entirely pointless in the scheme of things.
The product is for gamers? Then I am disappointed. I had personally hoped that it would be for the people who enjoy (and more importantly buy) WotC products in whatever form. I do agree, however, that DDI is indeed full of mechanics.
That all said, my general view of DDI stands. I went in as a paying customer with bright hopes. Those hopes have not been met. As a paying customer I am giving WotC the benefit of the doubt but that benefit goes without trust in the improvement of the materials. I do expect them to do better. And soon.
The product is for gamers? Then I am disappointed. I had personally hoped that it would be for the people who enjoy (and more importantly buy) WotC products in whatever form. I do agree, however, that DDI is indeed full of mechanics.
For me this all sort of begs the question: Who else would it be for?
On the Dungeon Magazine side it's all about the adventures.
On the Dragon Magazine side, it's about playing D&D.
That doesn't mean those products are chock full of mechanics only. Just as when they were printed on paper, each online magazine brings a blend of all the good stuff that makes the game whole.
However, they are in my opinion short on pure fiction, which was an important part of Dragon Magazine.
I hope you are not under the mistaken impression that gamers care only about game mechanics and stats.
Indeed, I will take you at your word here as, let's face it, nobody here really knows anybody (apart from those people who came here as a Real Life group to begin with).
My query with your statement may well be semantic then. To me a "perk" is something that is positive in a situation or product that is extra, in excess of what you expected. In this case, what DDI is giving me is either exactly or somewhat below what I feel I have paid for. Thus I see few "perks". As this is based on a lingual assumption I apologise for possibly misunderstanding your meaning.
I see, it would seem to be a miscommunication then...
A perk, to me, is something that benefits someone. Simple reasoning, partly to do with being a Soldier I suppose...
For example, the Character Builder, it is indeed an impressive program (although more portraits would be nice)... but continuously building characters and character concepts when you:
I am running three campaigns with eighteen different players. Rebuilding their characters in the CB makes them easy to keep track of and makes running absentee players much easier. It provides me with a solid record of what they have and I can play with their equipment on my end to best decide what magical items and similar to hand out. I find it invaluable as a DM because it lets me run the game much more smoothly, keeps character powers and similar up to date with errata easily and more.
So I find it invaluable and to me, with the time and effort it has already saved me it's worth the subscription alone.
Howdy, For me this all sort of begs the question: Who else would it be for?
See my original response. Anyone who buys and enjoys their products.
On the Dungeon Magazine side it's all about the adventures.
On the Dragon Magazine side, it's about playing D&D.
I would certainly agree with the Dungeon side, I tend to only pick through that for tidbits of stories that are used to frame the adventures within. So to be clear, I don't expect much in my kind of enjoyment from that Magazine.
Dragon, on the other hand, may well be about playing D&D now. What I feel it should be about is enjoying D&D. Why pitch a magazine solely at one aspect (and not the most profitable if the anecdotal evidence is to be believed) of your community when you have no limit on page count through printing costs? Not least because then you have the chance of drawing Narrative Fans into the game and Game Fans into the Narrative by exposing them to both.
As you said in your post, Dragon is seriously short on "pure fiction" and it was an important part of Dragon for me.
I hope you are not under the mistaken impression that gamers care only about game mechanics and stats.
Dear gods no. I think most gamers are in the game for the excitement of the adventurous tale. I do, however, feel that the editorial staff of Dragon are more interested in providing new mechanical options (classes, feats, powers) than they are in providing (even fragmentary) narrative.
I see, it would seem to be a miscommunication then...
In which case I apologise for the confusion. DDI does have many positive aspects for many people. I, personally, am not finding what I have paid for to be what I had expected; an adequate successor to the print versions of the Dragon magazine.
DDI should be an aid to gameplay, in this it has been generally extremely successful. Where it hasn't helped is that it hasn't provided things that, IMO are useful for gameplay like maps of places like Waterdeep, Baldurs Gate, Suzail etc etc. This is what I want and DDI IMO has been lacking on, because this is the material most useful to me and assists me in running my games.
DDI should be, and is, and aid to gameplay. Do I think it should be confined to that? Nope. DDI is to replace the sourcebooks that would be published for a setting. Were those sourcebooks comprised purely of the elements we have now? I don't think so. Now if they provided the maps you wanted, as well as story fragments (they used to be presented in sidebars, I enjoyed them greatly) and local history then I would be more than happy with the content.
So I find it invaluable and to me, with the time and effort it has already saved me it's worth the subscription alone.
Just to make sure this is clear, I spoke positively about the Character Builder, but as you point out it effectively only has a single use. As it is effectively a freebie with the magazine subscriptions at this time I don't really consider it a part of "My DDI".
Indeed, I will take you at your word here as, let's face it, nobody here really knows anybody (apart from those people who came here as a Real Life group to begin with).
True, although in my case I met some of the posters here after coming here first.
I too interpret "perk" the same way you did--by definition a perk is an incidental benefit that is beyond what is generally expected.
but as you point out it effectively only has a single use.
Except it doesn't in my opinion quite frankly.
I use it for building my PCs characters so I have an efficient record of them and so I can clearly see what they are wanting to ask about in relation to rules and their characters. It's also invaluable for making the process of creating characters for new players much easier. It has literally saved my sanity in 3 campaigns as a full 50% of people I've got in my campaigns have never ever played DnD before or have limited experience.
I use it for quickly finding out what they have and fairly assigning treasure, something that until now has been a bit harder. This is because I can look at the direct effect of items I hand out for the party and see how it will affect things more easily (rather than having to fish through a bunch of excel spreadsheets). Again, I manage 3 different campaigns and 18 total PCs, so this has actually become quite annoying keeping track of the monty haul 4E magical item system (one of the things I dislike most about this edition, but I do understand why it works like it does).
I use it for a convenient source of power cards with up to date errata that makes my life a lot easier (Power cards make playing 4E significantly easier and faster when players can easily tell what powers they've used etc). I do still play with people "in real life" and for my online games I find it superior to have a CB version over using traditional sites like Myth-weavers and similar.
As far as I'm concerned, I would pay for the character builder first based on the utility I've got from it, dungeon closely afterwards and dragon a distant third. Writing it off as a "perk" is just being utterly ridiculous. You can buy a DDI subscription and not have to buy many of the books because the compendium and character builder give you complete access to nearly everything (except art and a bit of fluff). Calling this a "perk" as if it is of incidental value is so utterly absurd I find such reasoning impossible to take seriously as it indicates expectations that are themselves, pretty absurd (in the opposite direction to Wizards immense over-optimism about what they could achieve with DDI).
Edit: And again, if I was playing in anyones game I would most certainly be making my own character in it.
Actually...now I think about it...
Except it doesn't in my opinion quite frankly.
The single use to which I was referring was to being an in game tool. It can have a hundred uses in that game but there is a single gateway to those uses.
As far as I'm concerned, I would pay for the character builder first based on the utility I've got from it, dungeon closely afterwards and dragon a distant third. Writing it off as a "perk" is just being utterly ridiculous.
And yet what we are being charged for at the moment is just the magazines. So when I am evaluating my experience of DDI, I must consider the "what I am paying for" and the "what is currently a freebie but won't be soon" issues seperately. Only on that basis can I work out what I am and am not happy about paying for. So it is not a case of dismissing it as a "perk" and as of incidental value (and thank you for your kind use of "ridiculous" once and "absurd" twice while misunderstanding my meaning), but working out whether what I am currently paying for, the magazines, are worth my continued subscription when they become the only thing I am paying for. I am taking the long view. Of course I will remain subscribed while I am getting one or even two of the tools free, whether I am using them or not... but this is about whether I stay attached to the major (and possibly) only point of support for the Setting on a timescale of years.
Any chance you could set about finding that out before casting aspersions on my reasoning next time?
I am taking the long view. Of course I will remain subscribed while I am getting one or even two of the tools free, whether I am using them or not... but this is about whether I stay attached to the major (and possibly) only point of support for the Setting on a timescale of years.
And that is again, where I agree they have completely failed.
To write things off like the CB as "freebies", "perks" and similar however to me is utterly ridiculous. Such tools are late and underdeveloped, so they naturally at the moment should be a part of the magazine subscription until such time WotC delivers on everything they promised (which IMO is going to take "years" as well BTW). Considering that several of my players are doing the complete inversion here, subscribing to the CB and not bothering with the magazines, I feel the CB is actually worth it more than the magazines personally.
Hence why I view such statements as absurd and ridiculous: the CB is almost certainly worth it for many people including myself (and IMO, more so than the magazines have proven to be since the free period ran out). What articles have been published IMO have been generally good, but there has been a slight slide in content amount since the free subscription and the occasionally just plain bad article (the recent Dungeon adventure, which is two encounters and two encounter maps comes to mind instantly). I am only not baying for WotCs blood that much because the CB has shown a degree of worth for my subscription.
I give credit where credit is due.
Any chance you could set about finding that out before casting aspersions on my reasoning next time?
Here is what I wrote:
I am running three campaigns with eighteen different players. Rebuilding their characters in the CB makes them easy to keep track of and makes running absentee players much easier. It provides me with a solid record of what they have and I can play with their equipment on my end to best decide what magical items and similar to hand out. I find it invaluable as a DM because it lets me run the game much more smoothly, keeps character powers and similar up to date with errata easily and more.
So I find it invaluable and to me, with the time and effort it has already saved me it's worth the subscription alone.
Here is your response:
Just to make sure this is clear, I spoke positively about the Character Builder, but as you point out it effectively only has a single use. As it is effectively a freebie with the magazine subscriptions at this time I don't really consider it a part of "My DDI".
Here is what you wrote just now, so you may compare:
The single use to which I was referring was to being an in game tool. It can have a hundred uses in that game but there is a single gateway to those uses.
The second quote follows from what I wrote in my post and yours, namely where you ever said in your response your single use referred only to being "in game". I am curious, because I cannot see it unless you are making a point I never made in my own writing anywhere (I never said it only had an in game use, only gave an example of how I had used it to which you replied as if I had pointed out it had a single use....)
To write things off like the CB as "freebies", "perks" and similar however to me is utterly ridiculous. Such tools are late and underdeveloped, so they naturally at the moment should be a part of the magazine subscription until such time WotC delivers on everything they promised (which IMO is going to take "years" as well BTW). Considering that several of my players are doing the complete inversion here, subscribing to the CB and not bothering with the magazines, I feel the CB is actually worth it more than the magazines personally.
Yes. The point is that it is useful for you. I took pains to point out that the rationalisation described in my post is the one that I undertake at this time when considering the future of my subcription. You talk about your usage; why or how should I know what that is? And more importantly why or how should it affect my decision? It is your usage. I made it patently clear that I was talking about my feelings with respect to DDI and was not making a general point. I was presenting the point of view of one non-gamer with respect to DDI. This is a valid action.
The CB is very useful for you at the moment. Good. It isn't useful for me at the moment. Why would I consider something that a) Will not be part of my subscription in the long term and b) that is currently fun, but not useful for me at the moment (and for a while, it seems) when making decisions about my future spending with respect to DDI?
Did I post my thought process on a public forum? Yes.
Did I expect people to disagree with me because their experience would be different? Yes.
Did I expect that someone to use inflammatory language about my own subscription decisions while I thought I had made it obvious through rampant use of the first person pronouns that I didn't expect it to apply to anyone else? No.
So in future, if you want to discuss the generalities of DDI and DDI subscription, feel free to bring it up here. If you want to go into why you think my personal and extremely subjective opinions are in error I would be grateful if you could do it in private as it has little place in this thread.
The second quote follows from what I wrote in my post and yours, namely where you ever said in your response your single use referred only to being "in game". I am curious, because I cannot see it unless you are making a point I never made in my own writing anywhere (I never said it only had an in game use, only gave an example of how I had used it to which you replied as if I had pointed out it had a single use....)
I specified it as single use in the collective sense of being "in game" in as far as it pertains specifically to the management and running of a campaign. I wasn't reproducing a point of yours, I was using your example as the basis of a description of my own. Hence my "gateway" remark. I should have phrased that better, my original description should have gone along the lines of
"Just to make sure this is clear, I spoke positively about the Character Builder. However, the example you provided deals only with matters specific to running the game. I cannot, personally, think of many uses the CB would have outside of running or participating in a campaign therefore, I consider it to be a freebie, an extra to the magazine subscriptions at this time to be enjoyed until it no longer is free... but not used as part of the basis for my descision about whether to retain my subscription"
It would seem my haste is causing all sorts of problems these days, not having written this out long-hand may have caused problems. Or maybe you still don't agree. At least in this case it can't be read in a way that suggests that you said something you didn't. My apologies on this matter and for using a fair amount of emphasis in this post.
As you said in your post, Dragon is seriously short on "pure fiction" and it was an important part of Dragon for me.
Wouldn't it be cool if the DDI Team could work with the books dept. to get fan ideas for stories the fans want to see in short fiction format, then books could assign some of thei regular novel authors to pound out the stories?
Then they could collect them in an anthology and publish it, like a Best of the Realms but instead Best of Dragon Short Fiction or something.
I'd buy that.
I'd buy that.
So would I. In a second.
It would also lead to me looking forward to the publishing of a new Editorial Calendar for Dragon. It would lead to great enthusiasm on my part for that section of the DDI offering.
How about posting this up on the Dragon forums? Or would you suggest a concerted e-mailing effort in the direction of...um... Chris Youngs?
Although D&D might not accept unsolicited manuscripts, maybe the could solicit some short fiction. True, I would imagine a portion would be dross but you never know, they might discover a new author... while still gaining material to publish in their magazine.
(Now if only I could insinuate myself into a position where I got to read it all :evillaugh)
Although D&D might not accept unsolicited manuscripts, maybe the could solicit some short fiction.
Are they even accepting queries for DDI articles rather than it being in-house and solicited freelancers (Schwalb, etc)?
Are they even accepting queries for DDI articles rather than it being in-house and solicited freelancers (Schwalb, etc)?
-There's a link to how to submit things on their DRAGON/DDI page. It was a pain in the ass to find, because I remember going looking because someone mentioned something. As to what they want to accept is a whole different matter...
-There's a link to how to submit things on their DRAGON/DDI page. It was a pain in the ass to find, because I remember going looking because someone mentioned something. As to what they want to accept is a whole different matter...
Oh, that I've seen, I just wonder if it's currently being used rather than it just being in-house or solicited. I don't know of a single person who has submitted a query and gotten a positive response beyond the form 'we received your email and may or may not respond' email. There used to be lots of chatter from people who had submitted ideas back when Dragon and Dungeon were actual magazines, but there's nothing even remotely similar now, on this or any other messageboard.
I don't know of a single person who has submitted a query and gotten a positive response beyond the form 'we received your email and may or may not respond' email. There used to be lots of chatter from people who had submitted ideas back when Dragon and Dungeon were actual magazines, but there's nothing even remotely similar now, on this or any other messageboard.
-I haven't either, and don't know.