General RPG DiscussionDiscussion of all RPGs and non-system-specific topics. DM/GM/player issues, settings, etc. Rules discussion belongs in one the forums below.
View Poll Results: Which of the following best describes you? Read carefully.
I play 4E. I have a year-long subscription to D&DI, and I think it's worth it
justanobody - I think munchkin is actually the word you are looking for (much more than CoDzilla, which refers more to the characters created by powergamers, rather than the powergamers themselves.) People aren't objecting to it because it is the wrong word, but because you seem to be throwing it about without any real support. Your earlier post implied that everyone who likes having expanded options is doing so because they have to make the best characters available - rather than, say, enjoying the use of a diverse range of options to make a variety of interesting characters.
Which is, of course, another favorite line of attack he uses.
"4e sucks because it doesn't have the build options of 3e."
I don't think you could call that a personal attack, nothing is hyperbole or made up there. Both of those are positions expressed by the poster in question.
For $5/month it would be something I subscribed to if I played 4E.
Once the price point increases, the decision gets hazy.
Would I pay $10/month if this were for 3.5/Pathfinder?
Not too sure - that would be pushing the edge of what I'd be willing to pay. I think the Dragon articles might be better as free web enhancements (I wouldn't pay for them alone). The adventures, though, might be worth the money - it would depend on quality. The character builder - presuming it allowed access to all abilities in all released supplements - would be nifty, but it seems this would be more useful in 3.x than in 4E, where it has been reported it's much quicker to roll up a PC.
I'm not sure Dragon/Dungeon would be worth it entirely on their own. I think if that happened they'd fall into the trap the print mags fell into for me:
If the article happens to be soemthing I can use right then and there for my current game cool... If not, then even if it's something I like and think I can use later, it goes on the shelf, destined to be forgotten about.
Since the new monsters/feats/powers/classes/items/rituals/etc are tied into the compendium/characetr builder/encounter builder/ etc I'll never loose them. I get the "good read" as they come out that month, but then I get the info when it coems down to designing adventures, and stuff.
Plus since it's auto archived one click lets me bring up the original source, so I can review all the other info in the article.
DDI has come far from those dark days early in this year. I don't know if we will get everything we have been promised*, but it is much better, even worth paying for.
Better yet, you can still access it from: www.tsr.com
4E has rituals, use them, they're magic; Want to see the greatest thing you will ever see? then click; You can use “Earth” as a D&D setting; Origins of The Rouse; (look for it) The Rouse responds; (look for it) One can appreciate both old and new D&D.
Okay, not really. My group is always power-gaming, but there are certain... limits. If there is actually someone that ever played pun-pun, it couldn't have happened in our group.
Thoughts of the Arch Chancellor - My weblog on EN World - containing game related material, like: house rules, design theories, reviews, play reports, adventure ideas
Secret Member of <Think we would just hide our secret with a spoiler tag, eh?>
Dragon alone is worth the price I paid for the yearly subscription. The Compendium and Encounter Tools are also worthwhile.
I've heard good things about the character builder from my group, but until I get Vista for my iMac (hopefully for this holiday season) I can't comment.
No, munchkin is, by what you mean, the word you are looking for. My point was just that, the fact that a person wants all that is published does not make him a munchkin, which was what you were saying.
CoDzilla is short for cleric-or-druid-zilla and refers to how broken those two classes were in 3.x.
Last thing first...well someone else can fix the right term in, it took so long for anyone to answer the question which was the correct term, I no longer care to try to edit in the correct one.
I was not saying that a person wanting all that was published is a "munchkin" if you read the thread and the one it replies to as well as the other posts asking what the term was; I was saying I was not. It was implied to me in the post I originally responded to that for some reason I needed all that DDI offered in order to play when I have clearly stated otherwise. So I repeated my reason yet again. In my experience, those scouring every book to make a character out of are just that...munchkins. I have never personally seen someone who did that and was not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thasmodious
Which is, of course, another favorite line of attack he uses.
"4e sucks because it doesn't have the build options of 3e."
Here's a ton of options!
"Munchkin..."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thasmodious
I don't think you could call that a personal attack, nothing is hyperbole or made up there. Both of those are positions expressed by the poster in question.
Except where you commit libel.
I have no love or like for 3rd edition. So your assertion is made up. I can only guess the reason is you personally want to start some war with people who like 3rd and hate 4th, but sadly here you fail, because I do not care for 3rd edition. So you will have to take your intent to start some war elsewhere that you CAN find someone who liked 3rd or something from it and uses that as a reason for not liking 4th.
Also you may wish to read up to find out there was D&D prior to WotC or 3rd so you do not make this error again in the future and accuse someone else of something due to lack of information of the subject matter or the person, in the case that this was an error on your part.
Last edited by justanobody; 28th November 2008 at 02:34 AM..
Last thing first...well someone else can fix the right term in, it took so long for anyone to answer the question which was the correct term, I no longer care to try to edit in the correct one.
I was not saying that a person wanting all that was published is a "munchkin" if you read the thread and the one it replies to as well as the other posts asking what the term was; I was saying I was not. It was implied to me in the post I originally responded to that for some reason I needed all that DDI offered in order to play when I have clearly stated otherwise. So I repeated my reason yet again. In my experience, those scouring every book to make a character out of are just that...munchkins. I have never personally seen someone who did that and was not.
This thread is replying to another thread?
Additionally, what's wrong with wanting a breadth of options? I say this speaking primarily as a DM, because I rarely get to be a player.
EDIT: I suddenly remember that we've already been though this, to no avail.
Additionally, what's wrong with wanting a breadth of options? I say this speaking primarily as a DM, because I rarely get to be a player.
EDIT: I suddenly remember that we've already been though this, to no avail.
As I said, I am a player only for 4th, so that is what I was basing my decision and opinion on. I only need the PHB for 4th to play.
I haven't really looked at DDI from a DM perspective because I know I would never DM it, and cannot evaluate it under those circumstances for that perspective.
Personally I grab bits from all over when DMing, and not limit myself to jsut officially licensed product, as they only comprise maybe 5% of the total design when I DM. Other things come directly from history books, mythology books, or other sources of that nature where I can farm for ideas to link together something that my players have not read, seen, or done before.
Otherwise I just pull stuff out of my @$$ as a DM and create on the fly any small thing that is needed during play or grab something from the DMG/MM and rename it and tweak it to make it look different until a return to what the story was prior to the sidetrek.
Last edited by justanobody; 28th November 2008 at 04:16 AM..
As I said, I am a player only for 4th, so that is what I was basing my decision and opinion on. I only need the PHB for 4th to play.
I haven't really looked at DDI from a DM perspective because I know I would never DM it, and cannot evaluate it under those circumstances for that perspective.
Personally I grab bits from all over when DMing, and not limit myself to jsut officially licensed product, as they only comprise maybe 5% of the total design when I DM. Other things come directly from history books, mythology books, or other sources of that nature where I can farm for ideas to link together something that my players have not read, seen, or done before.
Otherwise I just pull stuff out of my @$$ as a DM and create on the fly any small thing that is needed during play or grab something from the DMG/MM and rename it and tweak it to make it look different until a return to what the story was prior to the sidetrek.
I think I see where you're coming from, at least with regards to D&DI's usefulness to DMs:
You're saying that since you don't DM 4E, and since when you do DM (anything) you normally invent your own material anyway, there's no utility to D&DI for you as a DM's tool.
I suppose that's a fair judgement. I disagree with your opinion, but that's significantly because A.) I do DM 4E, and B.) I prefer using published materials (it gives me more opportunity to prep the session rather than the adventure). Given these fundamental differences in utility, D&DI is obviously more worthwhile to me as a DM than you as a DM.
We now have ONE person who has voted that they play 4E, have a year-long subscription, and that it's NOT worth it. Unfortunately, they voted anonymously.
To be honest, I wasn't even aware it was possible to vote anonymously in a non-anonymous poll.
That result will likely be thrown out as the next maintanence to prevent from poll spamming. Most forums do that so people don't just anonymously vote from varying IPs to pad the votes. So by this time tomorrow, that one vote will likely be expunged from the system if the poll is still alive at that time.
We now have ONE person who has voted that they play 4E, have a year-long subscription, and that it's NOT worth it. Unfortunately, they voted anonymously.
To be honest, I wasn't even aware it was possible to vote anonymously in a non-anonymous poll.
I think you can vote if not logged in, for bizarre reasons.
Thoughts of the Arch Chancellor - My weblog on EN World - containing game related material, like: house rules, design theories, reviews, play reports, adventure ideas
Secret Member of <Think we would just hide our secret with a spoiler tag, eh?>
I play 4e, I'm not a subscriber, and I haven't yet decided whether it's worth it, though I'm currently leaning "yes". But I've been waffling back and forth for months.
The problem for me isn't the content; it's the format. Are these articles something that I'll ever use if I don't print them out? And how much of a printing cost am I looking at to use what I find worthwhile, on top of the subscription cost?
I continue to waffle. But damn, DDI seems to have a lot of good stuff in it.
4E has rituals, use them, they're magic;
Want to see the greatest thing you will ever see? then 
You can use “Earth” as a D&D 
The Rouse 
One can appreciate both old and new D&D.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
