My concerns for D&D Insider

[Bagpuss]

It's been mentioned that D&D Insider contains...

D&D Insider
* It contains a "Dungeon Master's Kit" that includes the following:
o dungeon builder (map tool)
o adventure builder
o PC generator
o other things (Source)
* "Character Generator"
o character sheets
o character visualizer (Source)

My concern is that 4E will end up more tied to it because players and DM's will want to use these facilities.

The characters will all start looking the same because the visualizer will only have a limited range of body types and costumes.

DM's and players will be tied to the character sheet the PC generator uses, so no room for house rules like insanity rules or your own version of action points, etc.

The dungeons will start looking the same because they are made with the dungeon builder that is likely to be more limited than paper and pencil (most likely just lets you lay down Dungeon Tiles).

God knows what the adventure builder is like...

 

[takasi]

Characters, adventures and campaigns appearing similar isn't necessarily a bad thing. Uniformity builds a common experience.

Also, I've noticed that sometimes it's better to sacrifice creativity and imagination in exchange for practicality. Many people don't play simply because they can't find a talented DM to run a game for them.

Right now we have no support for online play; if we want to game, we have to pretty much do everything ourselves. My group sends me their characters in stat block format through email and I run games through MapTool, a very simple chat program. It would be nice if we could use a "character vault", and a dungeon/adventure builder could be better than what I do now (draw them by hand or use pregenerated maps).

 

[Zaukrie]

The characters will all start looking the same because the visualizer will only have a limited range of body types and costumes.

All the characters in your game group will look the same!

Really, you are concerned that players across groups, who will never meet, will play characters that when visualized in their mind, look similar?

Wow.

Anything that makes the game easier to enter is good for the growth of the game. Anything that makes it easier for us 40+ year olds with other hobbies and kids and work to generate games and play with less prep time is a good thing. I find all the negativity on these boards depressing.

 

[TerraDave]

Some of that stuff could be good.

My concern: having to pay for stuff we get for free right now on the Wizards website.

 

[finarvyn]

I've noticed that sometimes it's better to sacrifice creativity and imagination in exchange for practicality. Many people don't play simply because they can't find a talented DM to run a game for them.

Please don't confuse DM talent with creativity. Being able to run a module may be a swell talent, but ultimately it comes down to the abiltiy to be creative. I want my players to be imaginative and I would hope that a DM would have that ability as well. Otherwise, why not read a book together or watch a movie?

 

[DaveMage]

I'm all for making the DM's job easier.

D&D Insider will probably be great - unless 4E sucks, in which case it won't matter.

 

[Raven Crowking]

It's been mentioned that D&D Insider contains...

D&D Insider
* It contains a "Dungeon Master's Kit" that includes the following:
o dungeon builder (map tool)
o adventure builder
o PC generator
o other things (Source)
* "Character Generator"
o character sheets
o character visualizer (Source)

My concern is that 4E will end up more tied to it because players and DM's will want to use these facilities.

Think about it this way. You can buy the books. Then you can pay the monthly subscription fee to use certain aspects of the DI, which is likely to include the aforementioned goodies. Then you can read the Gleemax TOS that say you cannot republish anything created using their IP, and make damn sure that there isn't something that makes those maps and characters WotC's IP. Then, if they want, WotC can republish whatever you create on that site, and they don't have to pay you a cent. And even if you trust the current crew not to do this, the right to do this lasts forever.

No thank you.

Maybe my hackles are up a bit too much, but the same folks who said "don't worry about that sort of thing" are the ones who said "4e isn't coming any time soon".


RC

 

[Bagpuss]

All the characters in your game group will look the same!

Really, you are concerned that players across groups, who will never meet, will play characters that when visualized in their mind, look similar?

Well I currently play in a group of 7, of which there are 3 D&D games. Several of the people in this group play on a different day of the week and have another 4 players with another 3 D&D campaigns. So that's over 40 active characters just within our group, considering that characters die, or retire and get replaced, add in DM's using it for NPCs, we are looking at significant number of characters I've encountered with a year.

If it has the flexibility of something like City of Heroes it might not be a problem (although even with this can bump into a lot of very similar heroes), if it is as limited as something like Guildwars character design model then it will be.

Besides it's only one concern, part of the general concern that we'll have increased uniformity at the expense of originality and player created content.

 

[Bagpuss]

Otherwise, why not read a book together or watch a movie?

Or play World of Warcraft?

 

[Zaukrie]

I don't know what will happen, but I prefer not to assume the worst. As for uniformity, I think on-line tools will make it easier for the more casual player to have a character that is different, as they won't need to go through lots of books to find some interesting feat - it will just be there for them to use.

I look forward to seeing what these tools offer us, though I am skeptical about their ability to deliver what I'd consistently pay for...