Will the Wizards Digital Initiative still be around in 5 years?

[Zaruthustran]

I voted yes.

I think it is about time that a real digital initiative got off the ground.

In this day and age, we *should* have a character generator that includes access to current and future materials. As of right now, the sheer volume of material makes utilizing much of it difficult. We need some modern tools. D&D needs to grow. The 'next big thing' is making D&D easier to play without dumbing it down.

We should also be able to play D&D with distant friends using the internet. The technology needed to make the game much easier to prepare/play exists.

Change is in the air and I'm ready.

Worth repeating. Man, just the other day I set out to create a character--a 300-style Spartan--for a campaign starting at 8th level. I wound up moving from the table to the floor, because the table wasn't big enough to hold all the books spread out before me: PHB, PHB II, Eberron CS, Races of Eberron, Complete Warrior, Complete Adventurer, Complete Divine, Book of Exalted Deeds, Complete Mage, Complete Arcane, Complete Scoundrel, Races of Destiny, Heroes of Battle, Miniatures Handbook, Book of Nine Swords, and Unearthed Arcana*.

It was a horrible, exhaustive experience. It took, oh, three hours to finish making that guy. I had two pages of scribbled notes, because I'd jot down the name of a feat and then forget the exact details of the bonuses and requirements, and so would have to go back, flip through multiple books (is Phalanx Fighter in CW, HoB, or Miniatures Handbook?), and then through multiple pages (some books put the feats after the PRCs, some before--it's a mess). It took a solid 20 minutes or so to calculate everything for a test build, in order to see how it compared to others and fully check out feat interactions. Ugh.

I just kept thinking about creating a guy in D&D Online, and how simple and easy it was via a simple menu-driven interface: click, click, click, done. I finally had to bring my laptop over, so I could access the Feat Index on WotC's site (it only provides feat name and source book, but that helps a little) as well as the primitive grey market tools that actually collate the full feat descriptions.

Talk about user-unfriendly. Sheesh.

As it is, the game can't support the weight of it's current horde of supplements. Given that more supplements will be released, the completist player *needs* some kind of online resource. Sure, one could play D&D with just the PHB, but I'm not that player. I want good tools--tools that make my collection of content actually usable--and I'll gladly pay for the privilege of a better experience.

-z

* I was only looking at feats, really, so each book had about 10-15 pages of actual usable material. The rest was essentially worthless. If I have to create another character any time soon, I'll first make photocopies of the feat indexes and descriptions, and just reference those. But holy cow, what a chore. The last time I photocopied something out of a gamebook was in middle school in the 1980s! I'd feel ridiculous walking into Kinkos with a backpack full of books.

 

[EricNoah]

They spent years on eTools. And even to the bitter end it was buggy, incomplete and incorrect.

Yet it's the most important tool in my DM's kit. I can fold in all of the feats, classes, spells, monsters, skills, items, etc. and use them together just as you describe (except for the newest books that never got put in to etools).

If they could do it right I'd be all over it. I've just seen them botch this exact same thing before...

 

[Zaruthustran]

They spent years on eTools. And even to the bitter end it was buggy, incomplete and incorrect.

Yet it's the most important tool in my DM's kit. I can fold in all of the feats, classes, spells, monsters, skills, items, etc. and use them together just as you describe (except for the newest books that never got put in to etools).

If they could do it right I'd be all over it. I've just seen them botch this exact same thing before...

Didn't they farm out eTools to a third party contractor?

-z

 

[Vigilance]

They spent years on eTools. And even to the bitter end it was buggy, incomplete and incorrect.

Yet it's the most important tool in my DM's kit. I can fold in all of the feats, classes, spells, monsters, skills, items, etc. and use them together just as you describe (except for the newest books that never got put in to etools).

If they could do it right I'd be all over it. I've just seen them botch this exact same thing before...

And yet, they probably can reach more than 50,000 per month online, which was Dragon's circulation. Dungeon was 40K.

The idea that Wizards can't do this and reach more people, while probably making more money, stretches the mind.

And oh yeah, I voted yes.

I realize Dragon and Dungeon were institutions, but they reached 90,000 total, out of a player base of 4-5 million (these are Paizo's own numbers).

Sounds like something that could be improved a bit, no?

 

[EricNoah]

A couple of them, actually. While in development under Fluid's control, Master Tools/eTools was closely overseen by a WotC manager (Jim Bishop to start with, then later a Byrt Martinez if I'm getting the name right, and if I'm not forgetting an intermediate step in there like a Ryan Dancey). Whether you hire your own people or hire someone else's people, you need to get the job done. And the job never did get done, in my opinion.

 

[Zaruthustran]

A couple of them, actually. While in development under Fluid's control, Master Tools/eTools was closely overseen by a WotC manager (Jim Bishop to start with, then later a Byrt Martinez if I'm getting the name right, and if I'm not forgetting an intermediate step in there like a Ryan Dancey). Whether you hire your own people or hire someone else's people, you need to get the job done. And the job never did get done, in my opinion.

This is a good point, but also a point in favor of WotC's DI. When a company farms out a project it doesn't have direct control over the subcontractor's employees or processes. WotC got to say "Produce product X", and that's it--the sub had to determine how to accomplish X. It determined who to hire, how to test, how to build, and so on. WotC could check in on the progress but was always at least one step removed from the actual work.

That arrangement is inherently inefficient. If the sub had a rules question it had to fire a request up its chain of contact, who then forwarded to the WotC contact, who then had to track down the appropriate person and send all the way back. With in-house, the programmer can walk down the hall and knock on the door of the resident rules guru. Done.

Again, good point that the job didn't get done. That's ultimately WotC's fault. But come on, a lot of the blame lies at the feet of the people who did (or didn't) do the actual work.

-z

 

[Templetroll]

It depends on whether it is any good or not. They have some good people and, I think, Paizo gave them a clue on how to work the material to a successful product.

Paizo will likely continue to do well because they are already on top of their game and just need to revamp how it is presented and marketed. I'd subscribe to an Adventure Path if i like it. The idea of the campaign world being built through those products is a cool kind of idea.

WotC needs to get up to speed quickly. I preferred the magazines, online material needs to be presented well to be up to magazine flash and style.

As it is now, I have a great FLGS, All Fun & Games, here and I also have Paizo as a FOGS (favorite online gaming store). WotC has my favorite game, we'll see how they do.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

What, exactly, is this "Digital Initiative?"

 

[Nifft]

Ask me in four and a half years.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Hussar]

The level of pessimism here is amusing.