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.
Maybe I'm crazy, but how do you make another monster after you've made one? I just close it and open it again (after saving) because I haven't spotted a way to just make another monster or edit one.
Edit: Also, is there a way to apply a template to a monster? Sometimes you just really want to make a lich that is also a camel.
? Sometimes you just really want to make a lich that is also a camel.
Ah, yes. The camel template. One of my favorite parts in Sandstorm.... I didn't know it had been converted to 4e.
__________________ 'Can a magician kill a man by magic?' Lord Wellington asked Strange. Strange frowned. He seemed to dislike the question. 'I suppose a magician might,' he admitted, 'but a gentleman never could.'
Just because technology is out there to do stuff like this doesn't mean it's easy
In 20 years as a businessman, I've never held a position of fiscal responsibility in which executive management or shareholders accepted "it's not easy" as an excuse for leaving 10% of the revenues behind.
Computer game studios at least have an justification: For decades, Apple actively discouraged computer game development for the platform, and the PC gamer audience was trained away from Macs. But outside of that, and the realm of some high-end business software, almost every major software package is available cross-platform. Certainly Office and Photoshop have development costs that dwarf DDI, but they somehow find it worthwhile for that "negligible" user base.
Unlike computer game developers, WotC wouldn't be delving into the unknown by developing for the Mac. There's no question a Mac audience exists; there's no reason to believe or suspect that Mac users don't play D&D, unlike with computer games. This is not a speculative audience--it's an audience that currently exists, currently plays D&D, and currently wants to pay for DDI.
You can quibble over percentages (and I do: I buy the 3.36% number only if you count every cash register and business server in the country as a personal computer), but the bottom line is the number of Mac users is pretty analogous to the number of women who game. Sure, they're a distinct minority, but would anybody really argue that it makes good business sense for WotC to tell each and every existing female player to go take a flying leap?
Any smart businessman will tell you it costs many, many more times to regain lost business in the form of new customers than it does to keep it in the form of existing customers. Even if it's only 5% or 10%, the business is worth keeping, even if it costs a bit of money to keep it.
I have no special insight into why DDI has gone this route. (Well, I have my hypotheses, but since that's all they are I'll keep them to myself.) I do know that I'm very seriously disappointed, and I want WotC to know it. It may not be "easy" to program for the Mac, but it shouldn't be easy not to, either.
In 20 years as a businessman, I've never held a position of fiscal responsibility in which executive management or shareholders accepted "it's not easy" as an excuse for leaving 10% of the revenues behind.
Apple must be a pretty irresponsible company, then, they way they leave 90% of the market behind for so many of their software products
But anyway, WotC still gets revenue from this Mac user.
I installed Virtual Box and Windows 7 (both currently free) on my MacBook just to run the Monster Builder. It was totally worth the effort.
Computer game studios at least have an justification: For decades, Apple actively discouraged computer game development for the platform, and the PC gamer audience was trained away from Macs. But outside of that, and the realm of some high-end business software, almost every major software package is available cross-platform.
Which is pretty much a roundabout way of saying Microsoft Office exists on the Mac.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesRyan
Certainly Office and Photoshop have development costs that dwarf DDI, but they somehow find it worthwhile for that "negligible" user base.
True, but they do for very different reasons.
In Office's case, Word, Excel, and PowerPoint started out on the Mac. The rest of the Office suite -- Outlook, Access, Project, Visio, SharePoint Desinger (formerly FrontPage) and OneNote (and I may be forgetting something) -- is Windows-only. And it's likely Microsoft would be hit with an anti-trust lawsuit if they discontinued Office:Mac.
In PhotoShop's case, again it originally was a Mac exlusive program. And the graphic designer market has always skewed very heavily to the Mac. Despite that, it wasn't until the most recent version that Adobe had a 'pure' OSX version (and the same was true of Office, and most large Mac apps).
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesRyan
I have no special insight into why DDI has gone this route. (Well, I have my hypotheses, but since that's all they are I'll keep them to myself.) I do know that I'm very seriously disappointed, and I want WotC to know it. It may not be "easy" to program for the Mac, but it shouldn't be easy not to, either.
I've spent all my profesional life working on Microsoft platforms, so my opinions on the matter are likely highly skewed, but I just don't think any development tools for desktop or web app development even come close to what Microsoft has done with the post-.NET versions of Visual Studio. Add in that WotC is in Seattle (i.e. not very far from Microsoft's HQ), so Windows developers are likely much easier to find than Mac developers... and I pretty much think that doing a Mac version would cause both versions to be lower quality and cost more to develop, probably by a large enough margin to eat the extra revenue from Mac users who don't have a Windows dual-boot or VM set up on their Mac.
II have no special insight into why DDI has gone this route. (Well, I have my hypotheses, but since that's all they are I'll keep them to myself.) I do know that I'm very seriously disappointed, and I want WotC to know it. It may not be "easy" to program for the Mac, but it shouldn't be easy not to, either.
The stated reason was that they had an engine already built that would be the core of the application and it only worked on Windows. They felt it wasn't worthwhile spending the extra development time and money to redeveloping what they already had to include the Mac market at launch.
Now, there certainly could be questions about whether that is relevant given the twists and turns development has had since then. However, my understanding is that Windows only applications are still an important part of their programs.
Maybe WotC should find a way to focus on the Mac market without easy access to PCs. It doesn't seem smart to do it at the expense of slowing work on PC tool development, since that will hurt the largest part of their market. I doubt that WotC will be able to pour more resources into the program just for Mac development, since they seem focused on running a very tight ship right now.
__________________ David A. Blizzard
"The only constant I am sure of is this accelerating rate of change" - Downside Up by Peter Gabriel
Last edited by Glyfair; 6th August 2009 at 02:15 AM..
I created one of my favorite (read obscure) NPCs from Birthright. He's a metal humanoid leader of Orogs and his body becomes white hot during battle. It would be nice to have a place for Lore rolls and to add custom keywords as well. Page numbers and references would also be helpful.
I would really like to see a power builder as well. I've tried using some of the free ones out there, but they are all lacking so far.
__________________ Respect the narrative! Tame the plot!
In 20 years as a businessman, I've never held a position of fiscal responsibility in which executive management or shareholders accepted "it's not easy" as an excuse for leaving 10% of the revenues behind.
You are not following the argument to its conclusion. "It#s not easy" means "It will cost more money". And then it stops being 10 % of the revenues, it becomes a lot less, possibly even a negative number - you make less money because you spend more money.
Quote:
Unlike computer game developers, WotC wouldn't be delving into the unknown by developing for the Mac. There's no question a Mac audience exists; there's no reason to believe or suspect that Mac users don't play D&D, unlike with computer games. This is not a speculative audience--it's an audience that currently exists, currently plays D&D, and currently wants to pay for DDI.
You can quibble over percentages (and I do: I buy the 3.36% number only if you count every cash register and business server in the country as a personal computer), but the bottom line is the number of Mac users is pretty analogous to the number of women who game. Sure, they're a distinct minority, but would anybody really argue that it makes good business sense for WotC to tell each and every existing female player to go take a flying leap?
There might be only 10 % of gamers that are women, but about half of the total population are women. Anything that is designed to appeal to women also is a hope to tap into that half of the population, and attract a larger audience.
But Mac users are just 10 % of the already existing gamers and maybe less percentage of the total population. You don't really get to grow your audience, and that audience even has access to the software, if they jump through some hoops - hoops that they have to jump through for a lot of other software, too, so it's not like you need to buy Parallels and Windows XP just for DDI. (It's not like you need Parallels at all, in fact, Bootcamp will do.).
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?>
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
