2/7 DDI Update

[Peraion Graufalke]

There hasn't been any clarification, explanation, or apology over at the official D&Di General board. I don't expect anything of that sort unless, say, mudbunny uses his poking stick of sharpness +6 to whack some sleeping mages.

And as I'm typing this, I'm ninja'd by Nullzone, sort of.

 

[twilsemail]

He confirmed it on Twitter:

https://twitter.com/#!/Trevor_WotC/status/35093505185415168

That doesn't really confirm anything other than the fact that he made the first post. I'm still sticking with the assumption that he's been misinformed or just plain didn't bother to read about the Executioner since November.

Someone should poke the team with a stick ( [MENTION=56746]mudbunny[/MENTION] ?) to ensure that they're not just making assumptions or that there's not another failure in communication.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I seem to remember the Barbarian ending up in the CB months before the release of PHB2...

 

[mudbunny]

I will be poking. The Executioner Assassin is one of the points I will be bringing up to WotC this week in my report. It will mention on how the change, without any indication to the customers, is extremely disappointing. I feel that, had they said "this is only testing for book X, and will not be added to the CB until the release", a lot of the (fairly justifiable IMO) anger would have been avoided.

 

[GameDoc]

I will be poking. The Executioner Assassin is one of the points I will be bringing up to WotC this week in my report. It will mention on how the change, without any indication to the customers, is extremely disappointing. I feel that, had they said "this is only testing for book X, and will not be added to the CB until the release", a lot of the (fairly justifiable IMO) anger would have been avoided.

Thanks.

I think we were doubly mislead in that (1) there was no indication that the Executioner as published in dragon was a playtest or a preliminary version, and (2) the opening chapter of both Essentials player's books cite it as a class option (which, to me anyway, reinforces the notion that it's compete and finalized).

 

[GameDoc]

[Deleting double post]

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

Yeah, I have to say, that was a fairly rotten move on their part.

It kind of smacks of a last-minute change to HoS, perhaps crammed in to fill space when they made the decision to shift format to hardcover. Just speculation; I don't know.

I don't even particularly care for assassins as a class, but this was still a heck of a way to treat loyal customers.

 

[WalterKovacs]

Executioner thing is a mega bummer. So after the playtest article, and the accidental early posted article and the 'final' article, it's still not going into the CB until it gets the full book treatment ... thus making irrelevant what little of the constantly shrinking article content that is of any interest. Here I thought with the books being cancelled they would be canibalizing those books to actually have something to add to the CB, but instead they are taking stuff from DDi for their books. So, with barely anything coming out in the magazines AND needing to handbuild the class I actually want to play, I'm starting to question if I want to even bother with my sub.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Thanks.

I think we were doubly mislead in that (1) there was no indication that the Executioner as published in dragon was a playtest or a preliminary version, and (2) the opening chapter of both Essentials player's books cite it as a class option (which, to me anyway, reinforces the notion that it's compete and finalized).

and yet, has not WoTC, thro0ugh it's own repeated actions, not demonstrated that they will change course on a dime if they think it will benefit them?

In my experience, the answer is yes. They have repeated shown that in terms of customer service, they are bound by their own inability to do things in a clearly stated manner due to the quick back and forward they are undergoing at this time.

 

[RangerWickett]

Thanks for being a friendly voice between us and WotC, Mudbunny.

But please, please, please ask them to add a toggle for inherent bonuses. We know that they work if you import a character who had them in the old CB, so please, just put a toggle in there somewhere. It's easy for players to kludge around it, but it's just irksome.