July Errata is up

[Zaran]

This is a really bad reason to change the MM since it wasn't auto-hit from the start. AD&D had it as auto-hit but not OD&D or BECMI. 3.x being more of AD&D than BECMI went for auto-hit, but I was glad they went back to the original MM in 4e.

But most of all, you don't change a spell that's been in play for 25 months in such a fundamental way when there is no problem with it!

I think Magic Missile will be in the Essentials rules and they decided to make it auto hit there. So for new players it will always be auto-hit.

 

[webrunner]

They should, at least, make a "pastable" version of the errata: each one with cut-lines around it, made to fit exactly in the slot the old one fit, even if that means the font size has to be lowered.

 

[cmbarona]

It's more than that.

If the book grows by one page, that changes the page count. If I remember correctly, that means they'd need to add 3 more pages since it's done in multiples of 4. That means more changes to the book, which starts to add up. What began as the addition of errata has turned into more.

That is not going to happen.

Furthermore, paper publishing is a lot more complicated than it seems at first glance. Aside from formatting changes, which are much more daunting than they seem, there are a lot more factors that go into it. Just working as a bookstore clerk for a couple years and not knowing the full details, I can see that publishing a new printing every month would be disastrous for WotC's sales. If you want to keep bookstores sane, you'd need a new ISBN with every printing. That would complicate things considerably. If you don't get a new ISBN, sellers would be screaming at you to get one. There's some cost-benefit trade-off to consider, too. Once you publish a new printing, your entire last month's stock becomes obsolete. All of the investment you just put into that printing is essentially gone, and you not only have to replace the cost of that, but try to encourage people to actually buy the new book. And I'll go ahead and say that I still have a first printing PHB and don't see myself buying a new one any time soon. Maybe not the entire time 4e is around. Printing a new version every month could actually decrease sales as people wait for the "big" update months to buy a book and skip out on the "small" months. It's a very complicated process, so please cut WotC some slack. They are a business, after all, and one we like to see making wise business decisions.

Granted, digital publishing is another beast entirely. I'm not sure what sort of complications arise there, especially considering its interaction with paper publishing. However, no .pdfs are currently being published (unless they began again and I missed that bit of news).

Edit:

They should, at least, make a "pastable" version of the errata: each one with cut-lines around it, made to fit exactly in the slot the old one fit, even if that means the font size has to be lowered.

Yeah, this would be nice. They started printing updates in the standard book formats a little while ago. Cut and paste could work for a few things, like power blocks, but I'd love to see them do it for all updates. Maybe even make a separate "pasteable" version.

 

[DracoSuave]

Hang on a minute. The description in the errata sais "If the implement used with this power that has an enhancement bonus add that bonus to the damage". That means add the enhancement damage. The extra damage from a staff of ruin(above a different staff of the same enhancement level) in "Item" bonus...doesnt that mean that a staff of ruin is actually not a very good staff to use with MM.

The only staff that adds to Magic Missile damage with an item bonus is the staff of magic missile. Staff of Ruin adds to damage rolls with its item bonus, which Magic Missile doesn't then except. The same is with DIS (my mind was changed on this) because DIS doesn't allow you to be attacking with the off-hand implement with the MM power, so the MM power won't take -that- enhancement bonus.

 

[Steelwill]

I know, its like 4E has an identity crisis and is now trying desperately to figure itself out.

 

[Aegeri]

I don't think we're going to see the full logic of how things are going to work out until after essentials is released.

 

[Dice4Hire]

I know, its like 4E has an identity crisis and is now trying desperately to figure itself out.

Nah, it just means that WOTC does not see enough of a market in older players.

Which is not a surprise.

 

[Mithreinmaethor]

Nah, it just means that WOTC does not see enough of a market in older players.

Which is not a surprise.

I am an older player, been playing since fall of 1977, and I dont think that I agree with your statement.

 

[Festivus]

Nah, it just means that WOTC does not see enough of a market in older players.

Which is not a surprise.

I run a meetup (so this is just my experience, but it's sizable): 90% of my meetup is in the age bracket of 21-40. So of the 45 people who show up at my meetup monthly, only 2 or 3 fall outside that range.

The other 10% are comprised of older or younger than that... weighted on the older side.

D&D needs younger players to come in and start playing the game for it's long term survival.

 

[doctorhook]

Nah, it just means that WOTC does not see enough of a market in older players.

Which is not a surprise.

That's not really the issue. What WotC realises is that it needs to try to keep growing. It can't do that if it isn't catering to the largest reasonable target market that it can, older or younger. This is the factor behind most of the changes to D&D since WotC bought TSR in, what, 1997? Like it or leave it, WotC knows better than to pander to nerdrage.