Ampersand: Debut and Exclusive Content (Assassin Class)

[D.Shaffer]

I suppose. But that's not how I imagine either. I suppose it's in part because I've never thought of ninjas as magical or assassins as particularly gentlemanly. When I think of assassins I think of black-robed killers who kill others for a profit, a cause, or out of loyalty to a lord.

When I think of ninjas... I think of basically the same thing. Except they're using a katana instead of a dagger or short sword.

Thanks to a steady supply of anime, the media depiction of ninja, and what various people call to mind when the term is brought up, has drifted a bit from the old depiction from bad 80's ninja movies. When people think ninja, they tend to think about people leaping from tree to tree, feet a blur when they run, smoke bombs, mystical powers, and shuriken/kunai everywhere. They're more like wuxia style fighters focusing on ranged, throwing weapons in the common depictions, these days.

You say assassin, and people tend to think about more...mundane powers and feats. Ninja doesnt seem to have the same stigma attached to it as assassin does either.

 

[Cam Banks]

Ever since I saw the cover for PH3 with the minotaur as a player race I was guessing Dragonlance. I am stoked by this (do kind of wish for Dark Sun still but we can't have everything. Loved playing Dragonlance as a child)

Are you aware of all of the Dragonlance material that was produced for 3.5 D&D? Or the Dragonlance fansite at Dragonlance Nexus: Unofficial Dragonlance Lexicon, News, Fan Art, Gaming Rules, and Product Information Or the forums at Dragonlance Forums.com - Community Message Boards of the Dragonlance Nexus

I do sometimes wonder how under the radar we were apparently flying despite the dozens of sourcebooks and adventures we published under the official license.

That said, I don't think 2010 is Dragonlance. But, hey, player-character minotaurs. Yet another gift of Krynn to the broader D&D universe.

Cheers,
Cam

 

[CelticMutt]

It wouldn't make the race or class underpowered. Not to put words into his mouth, but what he's probably talking about is this: some race/class combinations are better suited for one another than others. Some people believe that WotC tries to ameliorate this by making extra strong feats to accomodate the unsuitable combinations. For example, tiefling and fighter is a weak combination, and WotC has made feats specifically for tieflings who are fighters. These are unlikely to exist in the original article (and if they do they definitely won't cover unpublished classes), which means that over time we'll have more and more combinations for these races and classes that just don't quite work.

Yup, that's pretty much what I mean.

An assassin player class may also be a bit too controversial for a book aimed in part at young gamers. I don't know the ddi terms of agreement but I assume the average subscriber is somewhat older.
At any rate, the books' default assumption so far is that PCs are the good guys.

Assassins can be the good guys too - James Bond, Jason Bourne

 

[lutecius]

I dont see this being a big issue as 3e had the assassin PRC and there was no trouble.

I don't have any issue with the assassin or its being ddi exclusive. I just think the classe's negative connotation is one of the reasons why it won't appear in print.

The 3e assassin was an evil-only PRC in the DMG. In 3e, you needed classes for bad guys. In 4e you need a "human assmurderer" in MMx.

Assassins can be the good guys too - James Bond, Jason Bourne

Good guys aren't called assassins even when that's technically what they do. James Bond is generally described as a spy/secret agent.

"Jason Bourne" or even David Webb before amnesia isn't what I'd call a good guy.

 

[guivre]

FWIW, I feel the same way about the "exclusive" content, and would feel exactly the same way if the *books* had "exclusive" stuff not available in other formats. I just do not get the idea of limiting access to material based on the distribution medium.

Your note about making books less useful is correct-- but I really hope that is *not* "the idea." Some of us still prefer print. I would think the Dungeon/Dragon outcry last year would have driven that point home...

I'm not happy about it either.

It's desperation. They need DDI to have subscribers, they're banking on it. They weren't able to deliver on their promises so they're trying to find other ways to gain subscribers.

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.

None of my players subscribe. I'm the only one and I'm canceling. It's not worth it to me anymore. It's much more convenient for me to have a book with classes/races etc in it that I can lend to players that don't subscribe than to log in and have them wade through DDI to find something.

Anything DDI is banned from my table at this point, so I suppose that means no Revenant and no Assassin.

I liked 4E, it has it's faults but it's a decent game. The way it's being managed as a whole, however, leaves a bad taste in my mouth. It may be time to start looking to switch.

 

[Cadfan]

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.

Do you also ban books that you do not personally own?

Because I mean... imagine a world without the DDI. In this world the Avenger is "exclusive" to the PHB II and I don't own the PHB II.

Is there any meaningful difference between my relationship to the Avenger in that world and your relationship to the Assassin in this one?

 

[guivre]

Do you also ban books that you do not personally own?

Because I mean... imagine a world without the DDI. In this world the Avenger is "exclusive" to the PHB II and I don't own the PHB II.

Is there any meaningful difference between my relationship to the Avenger in that world and your relationship to the Assassin in this one?

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.

 

[Rechan]

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

 

[Mouseferatu]

Edit: Nevermind. Not worth the blood pressure.

 

[Dire Bare]

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.

Er, to play and enjoy D&D you do not need D&DI. And you never will. If you want the assassin class and revenant race, well, then you need D&DI. But it's within the realms of possibility to play without the exclusives.