hogarth wrote:Wasn't it the case that you could pay for one month's access to the on-line service and it would permanently update the locally installed version of the Character Builder? Changing it to a subscription-only program would be a definite downgrade, then.
..which is most likely one of the reasons that they implement this change.
1 or 2 months / year subscription just isn't as good as 12 month / year.
Also piracy is much harder if everything is stored in the cloud. And they will store everything (character files) on their server, and only allow you to print a pdf with all stuff filled out.
Also silverlight.
Last edited by malak on Wed Nov 03, 2010 3:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Fuchs wrote:Can you customize the current builder and use earlier (aka not yet nerfed) verisons of feats, powers etc. if you have the latest version?
No.
You can download older version from a torrent though. Obviously that's not legal.
They promised that the new builder will allow to make custom modifications to powers. But this is "not at release" and therefore to be taken with a grain of salt.
If it's a feature that's 'not at release' they probably won't fucking have the feature installed at all in the future.
Like the Monster Builder was great when we saw the previews. Another potential feather in 4E's cap. But then they released the product as-in and even tiny updates slowed to a halt. Fucking ridiculous.
And I'm still pretty sore about losing online tabletop.
That said, Doom, I don't think we'll ever get that Diary of Failure thread for Essentials. The only thing that actually warranted such an examination were skill challenges, which have been extensively deconstructed both here and elseboard.
Now while there are a bunch of fail subsystems, you can pretty easily see how they fail. For example, the role protection system. Unless you have a universal 'winner' class in your front pocket (like a Warlord or a Ranger or a Warden), the pattern is mostly-leaders at low levels, especially for short workdays, and mostly-controllers at high level. But that can be described in a couple of paragraphs at the most.
The only other subsystem that really deserves a diary is the magical item system (which I wrote about), but Essentials decided to go down the path of 'the DM decides what you get, fucknut'. Not really much to say about that, other than the D&D staff are a bunch of lazy hacks and/or control freak enablers.
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.
In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
Wow. I just read the interesting parts of that thread that lead up to that. You're not kidding.
Well that's Rpg.net, the place where mods not only will ban you for being systematically negative about one of their favorite games, but will seriously state this as an official reason for ban.
Oh well, at least this means someone will probably get off their ass and either finally make a homebrew 4E character builder or make the old CB their bitch and figure out how to make custom updates for it.
Lago PARANOIA wrote:The only other subsystem that really deserves a diary is the magical item system (which I wrote about), but Essentials decided to go down the path of 'the DM decides what you get, fucknut'. Not really much to say about that, other than the D&D staff are a bunch of lazy hacks and/or control freak enablers.
Didn't you know, Lago? In 4e items aren't necessary to the character (e.g. no 'Christmas tree effect'), so randomizing them adds excitement and old-school flavor without causing any harm to the game at all!
The law in its majestic equality forbids the rich as well as the poor from stealing bread, begging and sleeping under bridges.
-Anatole France
Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.
-Josh Kablack
Did Essentials include any rules for things like...lifting heavy things, or swording inanimate objects, or improvised weapons, or drowning/suffocating...?
Ferret wrote:Did Essentials include any rules for things like...lifting heavy things, or swording inanimate objects, or improvised weapons, or drowning/suffocating...?
Noob. Get back to farming with your toon and stop bitching about stupid stuff.
Draco_Argentum wrote:
Mister_Sinister wrote:Clearly, your cock is part of the big barrel the server's busy sucking on.
Can someone tell it to stop using its teeth please?
Juton wrote:Damn, I thought [Pathfailure] accidentally created a feat worth taking, my mistake.
Koumei wrote:Shad, please just punch yourself in the face until you are too dizzy to type. I would greatly appreciate that.
Kaelik wrote:No, bad liar. Stop lying.
Standard Paizil Fare/Fail (SPF) Type I - doing exactly the opposite of what they said they would do.
Standard Paizil Fare/Fail (SPF) Type II - change for the sake of change.
Standard Paizil Fare/Fail (SPF) Type III - the illusion of change.
Did Essentials include any rules for things like...lifting heavy things, or swording inanimate objects, or improvised weapons, or drowning/suffocating...?
Lifting heavy things: Strength x 20 is your maximum.
Swording inanimate objects: up to DM discretion.
Improvised weapons: not seeing anything.
Drowning/suffocating: not seeing anything. There's mention of it under the Endurance skill, but no actual skill check listed. It might be in the Rules Compendium.
Count Arioch wrote:I'm not sure how discussions on whether PR is a terrible person or not is on-topic.
Ant wrote:
Chamomile wrote:Ant, what do we do about Psychic Robot?
malak wrote:Also piracy is much harder if everything is stored in the cloud. And they will store everything (character files) on their server, and only allow you to print a pdf with all stuff filled out.
Why they didn't do it as a web application in the first place always amazed me.
malak wrote:Also piracy is much harder if everything is stored in the cloud. And they will store everything (character files) on their server, and only allow you to print a pdf with all stuff filled out.
Why they didn't do it as a web application in the first place always amazed me.
Because they are WotC. They need a little longer until they grasp concepts.
Yeah. I found that out when I asked if I could use something if I gave him credit, and I've seen him and others say the same thing on multiple occasions.
Ferret wrote:Did Essentials include any rules for things like...lifting heavy things, or swording inanimate objects, or improvised weapons, or drowning/suffocating...?
Noob. Get back to farming with your toon and stop bitching about stupid stuff.
Your commentary is biting and insightful!
Lick my ass, Roy, these were specific complaints my group had with 4e when we playtested it after it came out. Sorry our questions aren't 'leet enough for your rarefied tastes.
Thanks for the feedback, PR.
Last edited by Ferret on Sat Nov 06, 2010 12:27 am, edited 1 time in total.
Lick my ass, Roy, these were specific complaints my group had with 4e when we playtested it after it came out. Sorry our questions aren't 'leet enough for your rarefied tastes.
I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic. Although it can be hard to tell around here.
On the "swording inanimate objects" front, the game doesn't actually define "creature" in any appreciable way and so "creature" in game terms is really just "individual" or "thing" and can totally target doors, chairs, stalactites, and what have you.
The only other options are to get into insane semantic arguments about whether or not an animated chest is "alive" and so counts as a creature, or get super gameist and define "creature" as "thing out of the monster manual".
Sashi wrote:On the "swording inanimate objects" front, the game doesn't actually define "creature" in any appreciable way and so "creature" in game terms is really just "individual" or "thing" and can totally target doors, chairs, stalactites, and what have you.
It's way worse than that. The errata includes a definition of creature. It's all the red dots and green dots, plus any objects that Mister Cavern agrees you can attack. So if you dump a fireball in an area, the door will take damage because it is destructible, but the walls won't because they are indestructible.
Fireball attempts to destroy all items on a character's body (allowing save for each though)... And every potion, leather sack, pants, shirt, boots, etc.
It's well within the implied rules.
Think DBZ when clothing shreds every time someone is hit with a blast.
So. This is just a personal anecdote, but I think that the decision to switch to online-only is shaping out to be a bad idea.
I used to think that Frank was full of shit when he said that piracy actually helps the game, but both with my online and face-to-face D&D group people are fucking paralyzed at the fact that the character builder is online-only. Nobody wants to pay money for a DDI subscription for an unknown product, but no-one wants to pick up a book not knowing if they're the 'real' rules are not. So as far as face-to-face go we just play completely without errata. As far as online goes, we ignore every change that happened after the October character builder. If you want Dark Sun material or whatever you have to do it by hand.
This is actually a pretty major fuckup. WotC might have been able to pull this off if they weren't so errata-happy with their books. But the fact that my two groups are playing wildly different games can not be good for the product. I mean, seriously, how do you get people onboard with this? The character builder was a great piece of marketing; I have had more than a handful of people on the fence about 4E deciding to give it a shot after an hour or so on the character builder.
I think that my estimate of the game collapsing in Winter 2012 was too optimistic.
Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.
In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.
So D&D essentials came out a few months ago, has it saved the game or doomed it? I'm not familiar enough with any of the 4e forums to be able to take the pulse of the game, what is its outlook?
