Some D&D Insider bits (Update 9/13: Lots of new info)

[Glyfair]

But this got me thinking: If they're going with virtual boosters and go to all this effort to create virtual gaming tables, I think they should think about a virtual skirmish table, too.

I've thought of this, too and would be very surprised if they don't go that route.

 

[Irda Ranger]

On a related note, from Monte Cook :

But [WotC sources] have specifically said that they want the gametable to be generic so that it can be used with ... games [other than 4e].

Well, yes and no. If you're a d20 company, and you put out a book of monsters, you won't be able to provide virtual miniatures of your monsters to use. If you've got variant races, you won't be able to make those available to PCs. If you've got variant weapons, the PCs won't be able to be shown with them, and so on.

So while you could play a game set in Freeport (using only D&D monsters), you'd have a difficult time playing [Arcana Evolved] or Dragonmech.

And in reply to a quote from Mr. Didier Monin's blog, ...

I have no idea what they're saying in their blogs. I don't read them. I'm just saying what I was told when I asked this very question point blank when I was out in Seattle a few weeks ago.

It looks to me like you cannot use any house rules which include races, classes, equipment or any other feature/rule in your D&D game, if such was published by any publisher other than WotC.

DDI is a walled garden. Anything published by any other publisher is not welcome. Sure, it's OGL, but that doesn't mean you can actually use OGL published materials in your (online) D&D games.

Once again, some short-sighted interests at WotC have taken a great idea, and pooped on it. I'm not a WotC only player or GM, and never have been. Frankly, I don't even know anyone who is. Although it's only my opinion, I believe that the number of people who will be totally happy with DDI is a far smaller number than the people who are present / potential future WotC customers. Just because we buy a D&D PHB doesn't mean we're exclusive, but it sounds to me like WotC wants more control and ownership over your game than most people are going to want to give them.

Unless these details change, and drastically, I expect DDI to be far less successful than it could have been, or as WotC hopes.

 

[Morrus]

It looks to me like you cannot use any house rules which include races, classes, equipment or any other feature/rule in your D&D game, if such was published by any publisher other than WotC.

DDI is a walled garden. Anything published by any other publisher is not welcome. Sure, it's OGL, but that doesn't mean you can actually use OGL published materials in your (online) D&D games.

The reference was merely to virtual miniatures, unless I'm mistaken. Just means you have to use a different mini. But the tabletop doesn't adjudicate rules.

 

[hexgrid]

DDI is a walled garden. Anything published by any other publisher is not welcome. Sure, it's OGL, but that doesn't mean you can actually use OGL published materials in your (online) D&D games.

Once again, some short-sighted interests at WotC have taken a great idea, and pooped on it.

I don't think they should be faulted much for this. Creating an easily usable interface to enter 3rd party material and house rules would at least double the complexity of the project. There's always a trade-off between options and usability.

 

[Nebulous]

Personally, i'm not pleased with the idea of collectible digital miniatures. I've already spent tons of $$$ on the plastic versions, and this seems like more pressure to populate an online scenario with additional digital figures. Since i'm the one that typically DM's, it would fall on me to purchase this stuff. The final price would probably be the deciding factor, but still, having to buy new boosters all over again just to play something as a back up to the table game doesn't sound enticing. I'm up for the changes they're making in 4e, they sound great, but the DI is sounding less and less interesting.

 

[Glyfair]

The reference was merely to virtual miniatures, unless I'm mistaken. Just means you have to use a different mini. But the tabletop doesn't adjudicate rules.

Yup, that seems to be it. They have been perfectly clear that the tabletop doesn't adjudicate rules.

It's completely unclear how the tokens will work and how customizable they will be. I imagine if they go the "collectible virtual miniature" route then that will be the option most choose.

 

[Morrus]

Personally, i'm not pleased with the idea of collectible digital miniatures. I've already spent tons of $$$ on the plastic versions, and this seems like more pressure to populate an online scenario with additional digital figures. Since i'm the one that typically DM's, it would fall on me to purchase this stuff. The final price would probably be the deciding factor, but still, having to buy new boosters all over again just to play something as a back up to the table game doesn't sound enticing. I'm up for the changes they're making in 4e, they sound great, but the DI is sounding less and less interesting.

I dont think you have to buy them in order use the tabletop, any more than you have to buy plastic minis in order to use your dining room table. Just do what you do at home - use the "wrong" mini, or a token.

 

[HeapThaumaturgist]

I would totally not mind the collectible online miniatures linked off of the collectible physical miniatures they already have. That would be a great value-add and a way to keep people buying the plastics, giving More Options of what they bring to the table (the plastics are then a wargame, minis for home use, and minis for online use, and maybe minis for online wargame use).

But ONLY if there is a way to add miniatures of your own making. If I have to buy every single mini I use from WotC and I can't use any house rules or anything like that in my minis collection because it is blocked off, I'm far far less likely to start using them at all. If I can pay Paizo for a Pathfinder Goblin 3D model for my game table and use it on DDI, that will be where the money hits the road. If I know a guy that starts a home business doing 3D models of people's custom monsters for DDI games, I'll be signed up and waiting when the doors open. And I'll be buying the WotC minis too (probably singles like I have been, but possibly some boosters, if I have so many ways I can use them. If I get physical and digital minis from a box of WotC minis, even if I can buy digital minis from Bob The Mini Man and physical minis from Mongoose, I'm going to be forking over at WotC as well.

If I'm hamstrung by their sandboxing, I'm not going to use it at all.

This is why I didn't buy a lick of music online when it was all copyprotected. The first time I tried to build an opening scroll for my SWRPG game in a movie-maker and found I couldn't use the Star Wars Theme I bought off of iTunes, I never gave them another dollar. Just me and my vote.

--fje

 

[Mercule]

The D&D game table and the character builder are windows applications driven by a 3D-engine (DirectX based)
The character sheet, dungeon builder and encounter builder will be standard windows application.

Best news of the day! I was really dreading the idea of an Internet-based chargen tool. The fact that it's Direct-X means it isn't Java, which is also welcome news.

For the minis, my hope is that they come with your "digital content" for buying the appropriate Monster Manual, etc.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

You can make a virtual mini of your character. It was even in the demo.