So No Feat/PrC Compendium eh?

[wildstarsreach]

$10 a month (less than the cost of both the Dragon and Dungeon magazines combined) is not extortion. I don't know if I will sign up or not (don't know if I will play 4e or just stay with 3.5e) with D&D Insider, but charging for a service is hardly extortion. If the books were online only and you had to pay a monthly fee to use them, then you might have a point.

I buy a program or a game and I have it. I'm not the kind of gamer who likes MMO's or other reccurring costs. Otherwise I might have considered something like bowling which is between 10-15$ a week. I like to game at no cost after my initial investment. That is the kind of extortion. Yes I know it really isn't extortion but to me it is a sign of the times in which this ancient gamer is resisting.

 

[blargney the second]

I understand what you mean, wildstarsearch. You're right that extortion isn't the right word for it - it's more like a payment model that you're just not comfortable with. I'm not too keen on monthly payments either, but if the content's good enough it might be worth striding over my discomfort. I spend a decent amount on gaming most months anyways, so it's just a matter of examining my financial reality.

 

[delericho]

I buy a program or a game and I have it. I'm not the kind of gamer who likes MMO's or other reccurring costs. I like to game at no cost after my initial investment.

You do know that the DI is an optional extra to the game? WotC have stated that the game will be fully playable with just the core rulebooks. (Good for me, since I'm not planning on signing up.)

That is the kind of extortion. Yes I know it really isn't extortion but to me it is a sign of the times in which this ancient gamer is resisting.

It's not extortion, and wouldn't be even if you needed the DI to play, or if they charged $500 per month or more. It's just a matter of offering a service for a fee - we can take it or leave it. It is absolutely your prerogative to not spend the money. It's absolutely your prerogative to dislike the entire idea for whatever reasons you see fit (or even no reason at all). Calling it 'extortion', though, goes a bit far, don't you think?

 

[Jhaelen]

You do know that the DI is an optional extra to the game? WotC have stated that the game will be fully playable with just the core rulebooks. (Good for me, since I'm not planning on signing up.)

Well, I am a bit sceptical about this. It reminds me of the minimum requirements listed on software packages:

Typically, if your system is identical to the minimum requirements the software takes about 15 minutes to start, has intermittent pauses of about 2 minutes to reload something whenever you hit a key or move the mouse and the rest of the time you get about 1 frame every 2-3 seconds. In other words: It cannot really be used in any meaningful way.

I'm wondering if something similar might be the case when trying to use D&D 4th.ed. without a D&D Insider subscription.

 

[delericho]

Well, I am a bit sceptical about this. It reminds me of the minimum requirements listed on software packages:

I'm wondering if something similar might be the case when trying to use D&D 4th.ed. without a D&D Insider subscription.

I suppose that's a possibility. I would be absolutely astonished if it were the case. Given the number of gamers who don't have access to the internet, or don't have easy access to the internet, or who want to play in a location where internet access is curtailed (with the most obvious such group being gamers in the military), I would strongly suspect that the business case is overwhelmingly in favour of "will run just fine without the Digital Initiative".

I think there may well come a day when a new edition requires that sort of a service. I also suspect that that edition will be wholly-online. But I don't think we're even close to there yet.

In any case, we're way off topic for this thread, so I'll stop there.

 

[Mighty Halfling]

Maybe, just maybe they could pop out a quickie softcover or PDF for each. No new art. Just updated errata. I would totally buy that.

 

[Mercule]

If you'd asked me two months ago, I'd have said that a feat/PrC compendium would have completed my collection and cause me to root for the advent of 4E to end it all.

Over the summer, though, planning the next arc of my primary campaign (levels 12-16), I've come to hate 3E. I'm at the end of the "sweet spot", especially with a couple of rules from UA added in. I'm also getting to a point where the human/classed opponents are going to be really important. That last is probably the biggest, as it's not possible to find the time to do two or three humanoid of that level, let alone the couple dozen that I want.

The 3E system has become so top-heavy, that I would probably just end my campaign and move to nWoD or Fantasy Hero if I hadn't already invested so much into this one (it's supposed to be a send-off of my original homebrew).

4E can't come fast enough for me.

 

[knight_isa]

I've yet to play or DM a game past 13th, for that very reason. Still, I enjoy the lower levels, especially the 5-9 range, a lot.

I am still hoping to run an E6 or E8 game, since that addresses the level concern, and the feat-heavy nature of E6/E8 would make a Feat Compendium very valuable.

If Wizards made a Feat Compendium, I would still buy it. I would probably even buy it if it were PDF only.

 

[drdevoid]

The other thing I'm surprised we're not getting is "Complete Warrior II".

I believe their inability to come up with a suitable synonym for warrior is what truly lead to 4.0 ;-)

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Agree -- I think I'd buy a Feat Compendium, too.

I tried to research some character options last ngight, and boy what a pain leafing through multiple books. It really tempts me to stick to core-only play.