D&D 4e Rules Compendium in online!

[Dire Bare]

News Release

I haven't read the entire thread yet, just the first few pages. So forgive if I am being redundant.

If you are concerned about the things missing from the D&D Compendium today, you should read the news release Wizards also put out today regarding the compendium:

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/insider/news&news=dnd_insidernews_20080623a

 

[Bagpuss]

A search for the letter "e" appears to find pretty much everything...

It would still be a lot of work to get something that isn't half as good as the leaked PDFs.

 

[Kristian Serrano]

Wizards won't be freely publishing other people's work in their database, requiring you to actually buy the third party product to get that material?

I see it, but I don't perceive it as a problem.

My concern is that with the OGL or even the d20 STL, 3pp applications could be created and distributed, and those applications allowed users to enter in 3pp data.

Under the GSL, there will be no legal means to allow 3pp GSL options in a software application.

 

[Scribble]

My concern is that with the OGL or even the d20 STL, 3pp applications could be created and distributed, and those applications allowed users to enter in 3pp data.

Under the GSL, there will be no legal means to allow 3pp GSL options in a software application.

Yeah under the GSL...

So publish your software rules free, and let people add their own stuff for WoTC as well as 3PP.

 

[Wisdom Penalty]

I haven't read the entire thread yet, just the first few pages. So forgive if I am being redundant.

If you are concerned about the things missing from the D&D Compendium today, you should read the news release Wizards also put out today regarding the compendium:

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/insider/news&news=dnd_insidernews_20080623a

Got it. Don't like it, though. Wanted the rules in there. And yes, yes - I understand that the rules were never supposed to be included. Doesn't change my opinion.

Personally, I feel that without the rules, this offering is of very, very limited utility.

Also, just to be an ass - it seems sorta dumb to call it the "Rules Compendium", no?

Wis

 

[nerfherder]

It looks like the structure is there, but the data itself is not up to date, and it only from the PHB.


From the structure you can tell it that (at least currently)...

a) No monster information will be in it, there isn't even a suitable tab.

b) No general rule information will be in it, things like a glossary of terms or what second wind is, etc. Again no tab.

From the out of date, database you can tell...

a) It's from a draft version of the PHB, there are place holders and character builds that were cut from the final PHB. For example: - Search for Warlord then click the Class Tab, and Warlord, scroll down to see the character builds.

b) Dragon information has not been added, no new wizard powers (from Class Acts) or the new paragon path (from The Wolves of Maldeen) or the Warforged article information. It needs this information to be as advertised.

c) Errata hasn't been taken into account.

Conclusions

It will be useful to players more than DM's when the data is up to date. To become useful to DM's it needs a glossary (expanded beyond the one in the MM), rules information and monsters. Even for players it needs the information in the back of the Monster Manual on playing monsters added.

I feel sorry for the person or persons that is responsible for checking the database and updating it as there is a lot of work to do.

I've said from the start that Configuration Management of the data will be a big issue.

 

[Vendark]

Also, just to be an ass - it seems sorta dumb to call it the "Rules Compendium", no?

If it was called the Rules Compendium, that would be dumb.

But it isn't called the Rules Compendium.

 

[Lazybones]

Funny. Keeping in mind that it's a beta, I think it compares well to d20srd. I like the layout, or at least what the layout suggests it will become, and the search is a lot faster.

I agree, though, with what a lot of people have said about the need for an index -- I think. For as fast as their search is, I can probably type in what I'm looking for faster than I could browse and click on d20srd.

It would be a lot more useful to me if I could access the info off-line. I used the 3.0/3.5 SRD all the time at work (where all games sites are blocked) to check something during a break, or even on the road from my PPC. I suppose a mass cut-and-paste could end up creating a good base document for portability.

 

[Henry]

My initial impression: I just plain don't like it. It's got lots of potential, but as used to the plethora of online tools as I have been over the last seven years, asking me to revert to something that looks less functional than the 2nd Edition Core Rules CD from almost fifteen years ago is a bit much. I completely understand that it has to have time to expand and grow, but as of right now, it has a LOT of growing to do -- a good 100%, at least as far as I'm concerned.

I'm hopeful that the tool will be expanded to cover rules and monsters before it will be of real use to me. Otherwise I'm sticking with fan made tools until such time as those are taken away, in which case it's probably back to some OGL-based game, likely, for its broader support.

 

[2WS-Steve]

And how long did it take for that linkable hypertext SRD to exist after the release of 3e? Note that the SRD came out in 2000. d20srd.org? Registered in 2004. It's been a whole 3 weeks since 4e came out. Cut them some slack. There's a lot of data there.

That was done by some unpaid guy on the internet in his spare time -- like, while working a real job.

Supposedly the DDI has been brewing up with a team of full-time professional programmers for a year or more and all they've got at launch + 3 weeks is a search box and copy and pasted text?