Dragon Magazine Ampersand: Debut and Exclusive Content (Assassin Class)

[Dire Bare]

Originally Posted by guivre

Maybe you didn't see the part where I explained that. Books are convenient, I can lend them out, they are easy to access at the table. If a player sees something in a book I have and they want it, it's a simple matter to go buy the book for themselves. I find DDI unwieldy and inconvenient. It cannot be shared and I'll not have my game held hostage for a monthly ransom.

The hyperbole doth grow tiring.

I love my D&D books. Lurve them. But they are not convenient, even if I host the game at my house every week, which I don't.

D&DI is convenient, incredibly so! I can easily take my laptop to a game, and bring up my character, and look up any crunchy bits I need to lickity split! It's well worth the $5/month I pay now (soon to be $6/month, and later to be more, but with more tools).

If it does not suit you, that's fine. But to rant and rave on the corporate evil that is WotC daring to try and turn a nice profit . . . jeesh!

[GMforPowergamers]

Originally Posted by guivre

Maybe you didn't see the part where I explained that. Books are convenient, I can lend them out, they are easy to access at the table. If a player sees something in a book I have and they want it, it's a simple matter to go buy the book for themselves. I find DDI unwieldy and inconvenient. It cannot be shared and I'll not have my game held hostage for a monthly ransom.

In any event it depends on the book. At my table any WotC published book is legal, I own them all anyways (though I'm seriously considering dumping the whole system at this point). Third party supplements are not, nor are the power cards found in the minis packs, and now nor is DDI content.

wow...just wow...

I do have a DDI sub, and I own every book out todate...for 4e. My friend and DM doesn;t have all the books, or DDi (although he has most PC books) If I want to play a shadar kai avenger with the necromacy powers from dragon he lets me if I print out the powers so he can see (real easy useing the cuilder for power cards...) so I have no idea why you have a problem with it...can''t you just look at someones print out, or email, or lap top...

[mach1.9pants]

You could always sign up for the service in my sig!

[fissionessence]

Originally Posted by guivre

It's annoying as hell and it's playing fast and loose with their original claim that you wouldn't "need" DDI. When core races and classes are DDI exclusives you're missing part of the game if you don't subscribe. I'm fine with DDI when it is supplemental, but they are clearly trying to make it the core of the game. Screw that.

What!?!?

Would you rather be paying monthly for previews of future products? DDI should [IMO] be all exclusive content all the time . . . perhaps with the occasional preview.

~

[guivre]

Originally Posted by Dire Bare

The hyperbole doth grow tiring.

I love my D&D books. Lurve them. But they are not convenient, even if I host the game at my house every week, which I don't.

D&DI is convenient, incredibly so! I can easily take my laptop to a game, and bring up my character, and look up any crunchy bits I need to lickity split! It's well worth the $5/month I pay now (soon to be $6/month, and later to be more, but with more tools).

If it does not suit you, that's fine. But to rant and rave on the corporate evil that is WotC daring to try and turn a nice profit . . . jeesh!

Woo for you.

You're welcome to your opinion, however it is meaningless at my table or where my wallet is concerned. Whereas mine (and my players) is not.

Funny, I don't remember saying WotC was an evil corporation, nor do I care that they are trying to turn a profit. You decided that's what I meant because that's what you want me to mean. What other reason could I possible have for not liking DDI... oh.. other than those I actually stated instead of the ones you pretended I had.

I'm glad several of you like it, I thinks it's crap so I'm going to stop supporting it. I've laid out my reasons, if that bothers you... well tough. You just better hope they can get the subscriber base up. I'm willing to be that as DDI goes, so goes the whole game.

P.S. The word hyperbole doesn't mean what you think it means.

[guivre]

Originally Posted by Rechan

It's really easy to loan out a PDF too. It's called emailing it.

Yes, it's also called copyright infringement. Brilliant.

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Originally Posted by fissionessence

What!?!?

Would you rather be paying monthly for previews of future products? DDI should [IMO] be all exclusive content all the time . . . perhaps with the occasional preview.

~

I think he would rather just not pay for an online service at all and, if he wants material, he buys a book containing it.

[Cadfan]

Originally Posted by guivre

Maybe you didn't see the part where I explained that. Books are convenient, I can lend them out, they are easy to access at the table. If a player sees something in a book I have and they want it, it's a simple matter to go buy the book for themselves. I find DDI unwieldy and inconvenient. It cannot be shared and I'll not have my game held hostage for a monthly ransom.

In any event it depends on the book. At my table any WotC published book is legal, I own them all anyways (though I'm seriously considering dumping the whole system at this point). Third party supplements are not, nor are the power cards found in the minis packs, and now nor is DDI content.

No, no, I totally get that you personally like books, and I totally get that you prefer to buy books. But you're taking a certain approach to this like WotC did something bad by making content "DDI exclusive," which of course is a fancy way of saying "published on the DDI and not in a book." Its not any different from "published in a magazine and not in a book," or even "published in this book that you want to purchase and not in that one that you don't."

I'm just curious how you feel that you've been wronged. Things are always published in one place and not another. Why is this one uniquely bad? Just because you personally don't like it? If that's the case, that's fine for what it is- you don't have to like things you don't like. But the negative commentary on WotC's management seem to imply that you feel the decision to favor one publication method over another for this particular article is somehow objectively wrongful. And I can't figure out why you think that.

[CubeKnight]

Originally Posted by guivre

Yes, it's also called copyright infringement. Brilliant.

Then print it and loan it, as you would with a standard book. Any better?

[Piratecat]

Enough, folks. Stop telling other people what they think, and stop being condescending.

[catsclaw227]

I would consider Michael from Burn Notice an assassin, and though spy might be better we don't have a spy yet.

He knows lots of ways to kill things, set up traps, bluff and charm and work his way into a mark's environment, then take him out.

Maybe "taking someone out" can be what an assassin does, even if it doesn't include killing?

Oh, and I really dig that DDI has this content exclusive. If someone want's to back out of DDI because of this, and I personally don't understand why, then that's their prerogative.

[jonshaft]

I think the assassin will be exclusive content because its name contains a naughty word 2 times in a row.
Think about it.

[Rechan]

Honestly, "Assassin" is just the name of the class. Any class can be an assassin (Kill for hire). Assassin is just the class name. I don't expect that every Assassin has to kill for hire. They'll just be Magic Rogues.

Sort of like how every Warlord isn't a lord of war, or the tyrant of an area. It's just an idea of what the class does.

Originally Posted by jonshaft

I think the assassin will be exclusive content because its name contains a naughty word 2 times in a row.
Think about it.

You mean like bastard sword?

[Dire Bare]

Originally Posted by jonshaft

I think the assassin will be exclusive content because its name contains a naughty word 2 times in a row.
Think about it.

I'm mostly upset at WotC over the change in the 4e Deva race . . . I won't be able to create an official Aasimar Assassin!!!

[Mouseferatu]

Originally Posted by Dire Bare

I won't be able to create an official Aasimar Assassin!!!

No, but you could create a warforged warlock/warlord.

And if they ever come out with a way to add epic destinies to NPCs, then with the use of the right templates and monsters, you can have a duergar demagogue demigod of Demogorgon.

[Dire Bare]

Originally Posted by Mouseferatu

No, but you could create a warforged warlock/warlord.

And if they ever come out with a way to add epic destinies to NPCs, then with the use of the right templates and monsters, you can have a duergar demagogue demigod of Demogorgon.

Sorry Ari, it's not so much the alliteration that excites me, but the triple ass in there. I'd have to have my character dual wield two bastard swords as well, I suppose. In some ways, I never left junior high . . .

[lutecius]

Originally Posted by Rechan

Honestly, "Assassin" is just the name of the class. Any class can be an assassin (Kill for hire). Assassin is just the class name. I don't expect that every Assassin has to kill for hire. They'll just be Magic Rogues.

Sort of like how every Warlord isn't a lord of war, or the tyrant of an area. It's just an idea of what the class does.

Yep, "warlord" was a roaring success. Everyone loves misleading class names

[Rechan]

Originally Posted by lutecius

Yep, "warlord" was a roaring success. Everyone loves misleading class names

Didn't say it was a SUCCESS, or well liked. Just that it's similar to the Warlord.