Unearthed Arcana!

[Fifth Element]

Although obviously we've only seen one article, this is the kind of stuff it seems to me like 3pp should have been doing if they wanted to make stuff for 4e...

Don't try to compete with the CB. I don't need your book of powers/feats and classes.

Make stuff that doesn't need to be in the CB at all- like these curses.

Right on. I'm already working on a curse to incorporate into my game, they're a good idea. The lack of CB support for these curses is completely irrelevant, since they wouldn't be in there anyway.

 

[Scribble]

Right on. I'm already working on a curse to incorporate into my game, they're a good idea. The lack of CB support for these curses is completely irrelevant, since they wouldn't be in there anyway.

I think for Curses I would add some knowledge stuff to any I put in the game, to give the players clues on how to go about getting rid of the curse.

 

[JoeGKushner]

Please, WotC, please don't the character builder not being able to support a new design idea prevent you from publishing said idea. New ideas are good, and they're what I give you money for.

Interesting that people seem to be standing up for this when 3rd party publishers like Goodman languished and people pointed to the DDI as the biggest impedenement.

But Fifth Element, I'd suggest you do as I did and write WoTC to tell them of your joy of paying for content that's replacing content that will be supported in the DDI. Perhaps that's all we'll get from them and then it'll be just like the old cancelled paper version. Some good ideas worthy of campaign inclusion and no way to do it with the tool we're paying to do it with.

 

[Squire James]

If I were the DDI Dictator, I would never have spent programmer effort to put Dragon, Dungeon, module, and RPGA content in the Character Builder at all. New books with extensive content would still had been entered "in house".

Instead, I would have had tools made that allowed a sufficiently smart person to enter their own custom entries that (mostly) worked within the current rules. Then let the fans design and enter the Dragon, Dungeon, module, RPGA, and homebrew content themselves!

Some of the content will be bad, yes, but chances are certain fans will gain a reputation for releasing accurate and/or good content to the point their content becomes "semi-official". Meanwhile, the programmers are free to do other stuff.

I think this is the real key to the Character Builder's future viability. They should loosen their vise grip on the builder a little and let other people do some of their work.

End rant.

 

[Hussar]

If I were the DDI Dictator, I would never have spent programmer effort to put Dragon, Dungeon, module, and RPGA content in the Character Builder at all. New books with extensive content would still had been entered "in house".

Instead, I would have had tools made that allowed a sufficiently smart person to enter their own custom entries that (mostly) worked within the current rules. Then let the fans design and enter the Dragon, Dungeon, module, RPGA, and homebrew content themselves!

Some of the content will be bad, yes, but chances are certain fans will gain a reputation for releasing accurate and/or good content to the point their content becomes "semi-official". Meanwhile, the programmers are free to do other stuff.

I think this is the real key to the Character Builder's future viability. They should loosen their vise grip on the builder a little and let other people do some of their work.

End rant.

Oh god, no thank you. Data Entry is not how I want to spend my free time. I do enough of that prepping for online play. Forcing me to input entire classes? No thanks. Gimme a complete program and let me deal with the outliers.

Why are people acting like not having something in the CB means that it can never be used? Seriously? You refuse to use anything at your table that's not in the CB? That's just sad.

I remember the bad old days of Code Monkey and the like. Never, ever do I want to go back to that.

 

[Scribble]

Interesting that people seem to be standing up for this when 3rd party publishers like Goodman languished and people pointed to the DDI as the biggest impedenement.

DDI isn't really an impediment so much as a reason I didn't buy the things they were offering. It sounds kind of similar, but it's not.

DDI is more of a draw then using a random book of power/classes/feats- so don't try to sell me that stuff.

Stuff that a DM can use outisde of the CB? Count me in. No one was really making that stuff though.

But Fifth Element, I'd suggest you do as I did and write WoTC to tell them of your joy of paying for content that's replacing content that will be supported in the DDI. Perhaps that's all we'll get from them and then it'll be just like the old cancelled paper version. Some good ideas worthy of campaign inclusion and no way to do it with the tool we're paying to do it with.

You're assuming that if this article didn't exist that more articles that would be included in the CB would exist.

Were you in on a staff meeting or something where they said this?

 

[JoeGKushner]

Gets back to another thread talking about the thinning content of Dragon magazine.

I'll be glad to revisit the topic in the future and we'll be able to tell by the page count and article content if this has indeed supplemented the current dragon magazine or replaced it.

In the past, I've felt that the various 'preview' material we've gotten has replaced real content but not enough to make it bothersome.

 

[thewok]

I think this is the real key to the Character Builder's future viability. They should loosen their vise grip on the builder a little and let other people do some of their work.

This needs to happen. Badly. Back when I played 3.5, I used RPGXplorer as my character generator of choice. The main reason I liked it so much was because I could add my own stuff (i.e. the stuff my friends made up for the campaign) and add it to the program's database. The 4E character builder needs that kind of customizability.

I should be able to have renamed feats, especially in regards to the Channel Divinity feats devoted to specific gods. I should be able to make my own magic weapons and equip them on my characters. Right now, I have to add a simple magic weapon to my sheet in the CB then make a special card for the weapon's power and properties in another utility I have. Having to do such a workaround really is unacceptable.

There is no reason why these features shouldn't have been in the builder from the start. It already has a houserule check for RPGA games. Expand that to check everything. Any houseruled feat, weapon, etc. would flag a character as houseruled.

It needs to be done, or Wizards needs to allow 3rd-party software to be made again, and just leave the CB for RPGA-sanctioned games only.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Not everything needs to be in the character builder.

I still wouldn't mind the option to enter powers and even entire classes on my own there, but don't expect it from me.

The first UA example is also material that would never be put into character builder or the monster builder. Fundamentally, it could just as well be a regular Dungeon article.

 

[Fifth Element]

But Fifth Element, I'd suggest you do as I did and write WoTC to tell them of your joy of paying for content that's replacing content that will be supported in the DDI.

I'm paying for content. Period. I'm getting content. Not every bit of content they've produced for Dungeon and Dragon has been useful to me, but I realize that's just part of the deal. Some things just won't be for me, and there's no reason to complain about that.

Many things "supported" in DDI I have no use for. I'm okay with that. Vice-versa is alright as well.