D&D 5E What does this photo say to you? [Project: Morningstar)

[Dannyalcatraz]

You're saying that, because 4E was regularly updated with errata, because the DDI was constantly improved and re-edited and so on (was it? apparently!), and so on, this made using the DDI "functionally" mandatory. Yes?

Here's my personal experience as someone who played 4Ed for a few years with a single group as the sole person who bought any books besides the DM, and the only one not using DDI: I played a different game, to a certain extent.

It was great that they updated the Errata for 4Ed. Every game needs to do that, since play testing and proof reading can only prevent so many errors. However, very little effort was put into making that errata available for non-subscribers.

Worse, some options were DDI only. It's all well and good to say you're trying to promote the DDI product, but is it really fair to non-subscribers that things like the Starpact Hexblade were only available to those willing to pay your monthly subscription fees? It feels like extortion, and I don't like being gouged.*









* When Deep Purple did something like this back in the 1990s, releasing an album with different tracks on the cassette, LP and CD, I only bought the CD.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

It was great that they updated the Errata for 4Ed. Every game needs to do that, since play testing and proof reading can only prevent so many errors. However, very little effort was put into making that errata available for non-subscribers.

"Very little" seems completely impossible to argue. More effort than any other edition and than most RPGs, was the reality:

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/updatesarchive

Remember this page? No other TT RPG or edition of D&D has been remotely as thorough, that I'm aware of (would have been even better with a free-to-access SRD though, if 4E had had that). We got constant updates, which happened BEFORE THEY APPEARED IN THE DDI (!!!!!!!!!!) too, and got discussion from the creators about why they happened which didn't require DDI access.

Worse, some options were DDI only. It's all well and good to say you're trying to promote the DDI product, but is it really fair to non-subscribers that things like the Starpact Hexblade were only available to those willing to pay your monthly subscription fees? It feels like extortion, and I don't like being gouged.*

I was unaware of that, but I don't find it much different to Dragon-only classes, and considerably better than classes only in small-production-run books. Plus, I don't get what prevented you guys from sharing the DDI access.

 

[Boarstorm]

I was unaware of that, but I don't find it much different to Dragon-only classes, and considerably better than classes only in small-production-run books. Plus, I don't get what prevented you guys from sharing the DDI access.

To be fair, the argument doesn't seem to be about sharing DDI access, but about whether DDI access was necessary in the first place.

 

[Nagol]

<snip>

I was unaware of that, but I don't find it much different to Dragon-only classes, and considerably better than classes only in small-production-run books. Plus, I don't get what prevented you guys from sharing the DDI access.

Terms of Service restrictions? Some of us abide by those.

 

[Boarstorm]

Terms of Service restrictions? Some of us abide by those.

Still being fair, the TOS did allow some account sharing, as I recall.

 

[Lanefan]

So when 5E comes out, and it turns out to need a big errata to run better/best, would you prefer that to happen or not happen?

I'd prefer it not need a big errata.

However, if it does that errata should be provided in an open environment (i.e. not behind a paywall) either in print (via a magazine...hey, like Dragon used to be) or online.

Lanefan

 

[Nagol]

Still being fair, the TOS did allow some account sharing, as I recall.

Don't think so. I think there may have been agents of the company who said it could be OK, but the terms are pretty clear.

"You agree not to use the account, screen name, or password of another Member at any time, and agree to notify Wizards immediately if you suspect any unauthorized use of your Accounts or access to your password. You are solely responsible for any and all use of your Accounts."

and

"The Sites and Services are for the personal use of Users and Members only ..."

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

"Very little" seems completely impossible to argue. More effort than any other edition and than most RPGs, was the reality:

http://www.wizards.com/dnd/Article.aspx?x=dnd/updatesarchive

Remember this page? No other TT RPG or edition of D&D has been remotely as thorough, that I'm aware of (would have been even better with a free-to-access SRD though, if 4E had had that). We got constant updates, which happened BEFORE THEY APPEARED IN THE DDI (!!!!!!!!!!) too, and got discussion from the creators about why they happened which didn't require DDI access.



I was unaware of that, but I don't find it much different to Dragon-only classes, and considerably better than classes only in small-production-run books. Plus, I don't get what prevented you guys from sharing the DDI access.

In response, I'd say that my personal experience was that I greatly preferred it when there was (seemingly) less need for extensive errata due to proof reading and play testing, and that when it was truly necessary, companies made it available in print. Game companies did this one of 3 ways: reprinting the books containing the erratad material; printing standalone errata (most similar in nature to the web page you cited); presenting the errata in a an appendix in a subsequent book.

Don't get me wrong- the website does have its advantages- but if you want a hard copy of the errata, it shifts the printing cost to the consumer...who will not have the same economies of scale as the game company.

As for Dragon material vs DDI, there IS a difference. Most gamers I know didn't use Dragon material at all- in the 30 years I was a subscriber, I was the only one in my circle of gamers (covering several groups in 5 cities in 3 states) who ever did. It was the definition of "surplus", easily ignored. Dismissed as optional, because, while "officially approved" it all was optional. The odds that a gamer you knew was using something out of Dragon were small.

In contrast, DDI blended everything together seamlessly. Since all options appeared on the tables when brought up, you might not notice that something used appeared in Dragon. With the design philosophy of "everything is core", that's great...as long as everyone has access to everything. And everything remains hosted online. In a supported format.

If & when 4Ed stuff disappears from the DDI servers, the only folks who will have access to the Starpact Hexblade (and similarly limited release options) will be those who downloaded it.

Meanwhile, those like me who never wanted to pay the monthly fee, but bought the physical books instead? We never got to see those rules. We never got those options. And like the Deep Purple album I mentioned, it seems like gouging to ask those loyal customers to buy stuff twice.

 

[billd91]

If people are going to be distracted, without electronics at least there's a chance their distractions will end up augmenting the game somehow:
- drawing character portraits
- painting character pieces
- rewriting character sheets so the rest of the world can read 'em
- looking over party's map and-or treasury for things missed or untested
- (if also a DM) working out ideas for one's own campaign

Lanefan

Huh. We do much of that stuff on our electronics including take notes on what's going on in the session, exploring the PDF copies of the rulebooks, and show off atmospheric art/music we've been able to find to increase immersion in the current game location.

Seriously, while some people may get distracted by the tech, it's also entirely possible to contribute more with it as well. 80% of us in our Sunday Pathfinder game are running characters off an iPad and the last 20% uses a laptop. And the distractions are not significantly different from when we used mainly paper a few years ago.

 

[Umbran]

As an example of how it would be used in-game, what is your initial reaction to this image? A group sitting round a table, a battlemap in the middle, each has a tablet rather than a character sheet.

The first thing that pops into my head is, "Too many tablets."

Despite having a table loaded with Masters' degrees and people in highly technical jobs, only one of my usual group of players typically uses a tablet much day-to-day. Between us, my wife and I own one, which we rarely use. I think one other player owns a tablet, but I think that's mostly for his daughter's use. I believe the others are tablet-free.

So, if this is the depiction of the primary use case, my group is unlikely to adopt it.