This Concludes My Subscription to D&Di

203 posts / 0 new
Last post
I am not sure where I should be posting this, so if there is a better forum please move it there.  I have been a subscriber to D&Di for several months, I am by and large thrilled with the character builder, although I was disappointed with the lack of features 2 years out that were showcased at launch.  As well, I have grown increasingly concerned with the seemingly unending errata that WoTC has been throwing at 4th Edition, for many reasons; in part because in many cases like the errata felt knee jerk and not well tested, it seemed heavily influenced by corner cases presented on the char-Op boards which are frequented by folks who specifically devote themselves to breaking the game, and hardly constitute typical/average players and dm's, because all of this errata literally does make the books worthless and gives the impression that you guys at WoTC were sloppy when you wrote them, and because I honestly don't want to deal with D&D being similar to WoW, in that consistency and game mechanics are in a constant state of flux, which I find annoying because its like never receiving a finished product in the first place, but constantly paying for it via D&Di.  

This is the first time I find myself disappointed with 4th Edition and WoTC, having more or less been a real fan, but after this recent errata, you guys gelded my favorite character, my pacifist cleric, which I am using in an official D&D Encounters game so the change can't simply be ignored.   Since I am only one poster and I don't think you guys are listening over there at WoTC, at least not very well, I am voting with my wallet, and canning my subscription to D&Di over this.  I am not going to pay you to make me unhappy.  I hope you guys get a clue and get a handle on all this retconning of your game every month or whenever something new comes out that the established rules "interfere" with, then maybe I will come back, but until then, you lost a customer.  

Sincerely, Dark
Can I have your stuff?

Oops, sorry, wrong game.
It is kinda weird that they put out a build made totally for healing ,then nerf the whole class bacause the build heals too good.

These new forums are terrible.

I misspell words on purpose too draw out grammer nazis.

So errata is cool unless it affects your character negatively?  Sometimes classes and abilities perform in unanticipated or unexpected ways, requiring adjustment to stop them from becoming runaway better options.  Simply giving up and runing away because your build got nerfed is immature at best and munchiny at worst.

The pacifist cleric is still the best healer in the game, even if Astral Seal no longer negates a round of attacks from mosters.

Good thing is, the errata is completely free and separate from the DDI, so you can still access it if you want to!


There was a sig here. It's gone now.
So errata is cool unless it affects your character negatively? .



well it affects the books negatively.  also, there is no pvp or ranking.

i think errata should be up to DMs.

Selling MTGO collection. Ends Aug 18 http://www.ebay.com/itm/Mtgo-magic-online-collection-4x-Domri-Garruk-caller-kalonian-hydra-more/111143412594?ssPageName=WDVW&rd=1&ih=001&category=49195&cmd=ViewItem
So errata is cool unless it affects your character negatively? .




i think errata should be up to DMs.




It is, that's what 'homebrew' refers to.
They have that auto renewal feature, they'll never let you go!
I survived Section 4 and all I got was this lousy sig Off-topic and going downhill from there
I am not sure where I should be posting this, so if there is a better forum please move it there.

If you want WotC to know your concerns, send a letter to Customer Service.

We, the players on the player forums, cannot really do anything to respond to the decision you have already made. Some may try to talk you out of it. Some may praise your decision to the heavens. But in the end, your announcement to us is no more productive than announcing you don't like the color green.
Here are the PHB essentia, in my opinion:
  • Three Basic Rules (p 11)
  • Power Types and Usage (p 54)
  • Skills (p178-179)
  • Feats (p 192)
  • Rest and Recovery (p 263)
  • All of Chapter 9 [Combat] (p 264-295)
A player needs to read the sections for building his or her character -- race, class, powers, feats, equipment, etc. But those are PC-specific. The above list is for everyone, regardless of the race or class or build or concept they are playing.
Can I have your stuff?
Don't let the door hit you on the butt on the way out.
You won't be missed.
Would you like a cookie?
In before lock.


Did I miss any of the classics?

-SYB
I am not sure that I understand the logic of cancelling DDI, a sevice that automatically updates and takes into account the rules updates because WotC is constantly evaluating the way that the game is being played and making sure that nothing is too overpowered, but to each their own.

That being said, have you seen the article by Andy Collins discussing Rules updates?
Mudbunny SVCL for DDI Before you post, think of the Monkeysphere
Did I miss any of the classics?


So long and thanks for the fish?

Is this the first time there has been errata for the game, because it really seems like it with the way people are getting up in arms about it?  How many people post a message on the forum only to read it and discover that is not what they wanted to say at all?  It is not like you do not have the time to formulate your thoughts properly, yet it still happens.  Luckily you can go back and edit it.  The fast and prompt errata is WotC's way of doing this.  Will you always agree with the errata?  Probably not, but that is the way of the world.  I think it is great that they can address problems as quickly as they can.
People sleep peacefully in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf. --George Orwell There is no flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people. --Howard Zinn He who fights with monsters must take care lest he thereby become a monster. --Friedrich Nietzsche Devil\'s Brigade
Ibecause all of this errata literally does make the books worthless



The PHB1 has received the most errata of any book... which has invalidated, at most, perhaps 3-4% of the book. I don't think any have become worthless.

More than that, if you don't like the errata, you don't have to use it. Those of us who like a balanced game can go ahead and do so. Everyone wins!

I am not sure that I understand the logic of cancelling DDI, a sevice that automatically updates and takes into account the rules updates because WotC is constantly evaluating the way that the game is being played and making sure that nothing is too overpowered, but to each their own.

That being said, have you seen the article by Andy Collins discussing Rules updates?

 


While Elwyndas did post an excellent summary, viewing the complete, original article requires a DDI subscription.

I am also starting to feel like Dark Savior.   I play primarily LFR, so I am stuck with these changes.   My builds never feel safe.   I keep waiting for the next axe blow to land.   While some of these fixes are spot on, a majority are overkill.   I know that someone posted that it’s only a small percentage of things that get errata, but that’s misleading.   A majority of the books are filled with fluff, things that 99% of the players don’t touch.  

                               Lary Wesley

I am not sure where I should be posting this, so if there is a better forum please move it there.  I have been a subscriber to D&Di for several months, I am by and large thrilled with the character builder, although I was disappointed with the lack of features 2 years out that were showcased at launch.  As well, I have grown increasingly concerned with the seemingly unending errata that WoTC has been throwing at 4th Edition, for many reasons; in part because in many cases like the errata felt knee jerk and not well tested, it seemed heavily influenced by corner cases presented on the char-Op boards which are frequented by folks who specifically devote themselves to breaking the game, and hardly constitute typical/average players and dm's, because all of this errata literally does make the books worthless and gives the impression that you guys at WoTC were sloppy when you wrote them, and because I honestly don't want to deal with D&D being similar to WoW, in that consistency and game mechanics are in a constant state of flux, which I find annoying because its like never receiving a finished product in the first place, but constantly paying for it via D&Di.  

This is the first time I find myself disappointed with 4th Edition and WoTC, having more or less been a real fan, but after this recent errata, you guys gelded my favorite character, my pacifist cleric, which I am using in an official D&D Encounters game so the change can't simply be ignored.   Since I am only one poster and I don't think you guys are listening over there at WoTC, at least not very well, I am voting with my wallet, and canning my subscription to D&Di over this.  I am not going to pay you to make me unhappy.  I hope you guys get a clue and get a handle on all this retconning of your game every month or whenever something new comes out that the established rules "interfere" with, then maybe I will come back, but until then, you lost a customer.  

Sincerely, Dark



So if I got this straight you are cancelling you subscription because of erratas(like other people you don't have to use), but the erratas are free and you don't need a subscription to access it.

You don't like the balance and ongoing changes mostly for the better(which I will point out you don't have to use)

I like the way 4th is going instead of ignoring a problem they fix so if we want to use the fix we do.

This recent errata killed my friends pitfighter.avenger but he isn't crying about it.  He is still having fun and now because of this other options has opened for him

Oh yeah by the way let me add one more classic

Go ahead teach me a lesson and cancel you account
I am not sure that I understand the logic of cancelling DDI, a sevice that automatically updates and takes into account the rules updates because WotC is constantly evaluating the way that the game is being played and making sure that nothing is too overpowered, but to each their own.

That being said, have you seen the article by Andy Collins discussing Rules updates?



Honestly, the perception I've have (for some time) is that my books are becoming increasing worthless as rules-reference material at the table because of the constant errata.  It's necessary, but please understand that the current pace is seriously alienating some of your customer base.

Personally, I agree that it's more a reason to buy DDI (for Char Builder) and not buy books again (which is what I've done).

As for Andy's article, perhaps it's me being sensitive, but he and Gregg come off as being awfully condescending to the customers especially those that probably analyze the game the most and spend the most effort tying to get it to work without pay (yes, I mean the Char-Op people).

-Polaris

We've had one 4e game or another running since the edition was launched and in that time I've seen 20+ characters at the table for extended play (i.e. not just a one-off fight night) and only one has ever received an errata change that's impacted the character in any severe way, and it was the Battlerager change which actually made the character better since the player could now keep track of what was actually going on (not a problem for the vociferous forums, but a lot of people I know read that original block once and said "I have no idea how that works.")

Maybe I'm just oblivious to it, or maybe you're overreacting, but the idea of your build not feeling "safe" seems a bit extreme. You'd have to have your character hinging on several elements that were completely altered and not just toned down.


We've had one 4e game or another running since the edition was launched and in that time I've seen 20+ characters at the table for extended play (i.e. not just a one-off fight night) and only one has ever received an errata change that's impacted the character in any severe way, and it was the Battlerager change which actually made the character better since the player could now keep track of what was actually going on (not a problem for the vociferous forums, but a lot of people I know read that original block once and said "I have no idea how that works.")

Maybe I'm just oblivious to it, or maybe you're overreacting, but the idea of your build not feeling "safe" seems a bit extreme. You'd have to have your character hinging on several elements that were completely altered and not just toned down.




You've obviously never played an Orb-Wizard.  That entire concept has been essentially destroyed and it's not the only one.

More to the point, the other day at the table, the question came up as to "how long can we hold our breath" (Astral Ship crashlanded and we needed to dive to get necessary supplies) and the rules in the PHB were not only misleading but WRONG.  We've had similiar problems with adjuciating Stealth and other in game circumstances.  The rules as written in the PHB have become a bit of a running joke.

-Polaris

Well Polaris, the whole point of a rules update is to...update the rules.  Of course, the old PHB rule is wrong.  If you don't have the updated rules taped in your book, printed out, or (my favorite) on your dm screen/laptop, then just use the rules you do have as written.
Just a little note in the margins about what changed, or if significant that you should look up the change, is all it takes to handle a book with errata.  90% of the content  not only is unchanged but has no reason too be changed since it's already well balanced, the books aren't becoming worthless, they are becoming MORE valuable since the rules they represent are improving.
Just a little note in the margins about what changed, or if significant that you should look up the change, is all it takes to handle a book with errata.  90% of the content  not only is unchanged but has no reason too be changed since it's already well balanced, the books aren't becoming worthless, they are becoming MORE valuable since the rules they represent are improving.



I disagree.  If it's becoming problematic to know at a glance to know what's been changed in the PHB and what's not, you stop relying on it as a resource.  In both my groups that has happened.

-Polaris
I will bring up that you don't have to use the errata.  It maybe me, but I don't get when people cry foul when erratas come out.  Use them or don't use them the option is up to you.

I still think most d&d players don't know about erratas.  Hell I don't think most have a DDI account and there games seem to be running fine. I guess ignorance is bliss.

I think the OP problem is his DM is running by the most current corrections and his PC get nerfed( can I still say that or will wotc get sued?)

So he came here to get attention saying he is ending his DDI account, but that really doesn't stop his DM from using the most update rules, which he can access without a DDI account.

If you were not happy with services, email wizard and cancel your account in peace.
I will bring up that you don't have to use the errata.  It maybe me, but I don't get when people cry foul when erratas come out.  Use them or don't use them the option is up to you.



There are those of us, however, that want to use the errata and generally do, but it's also at my tables (and I expect at many) considered rude to bring your laptop to the table.   If it weren't for DDI/Char-Builder I'd have given up on 4E a long time ago.  The problem is that in game, the massive amount of errata (and it is massive if you look at the March errata and then tack on the additional May errata) makes it inconvenient and troublesome to keep your game updated without electronic support that not everyone has...and even if you do have it, IMX and IMHO your old books wind up gathering dust because they are no longer reliable news sources.

Basically with the rate of errata the way it is now, I can't imagine trying to play DnD 4E in it's most current (IMO overall the best) version without electronic support....and my statement to Mudbunny that hopefully (albeit informally) gets back to Wotc is that this extremely rapid pace of errata is starting to alienate significant chunks of their customer base.  What Wotc does about this is up to them.

-Polaris

Edit PS:  Yes it's true that 3E also had errata and much of it was significant, but there wasn't the volume and rate of errata (not nearly!) that we are seeing now.  Even at the very end, you could memorize about a page's worth of errata for the PH and DMG and you'd be copesetic in 3.5 in almost all cases.
...in many cases like the errata felt knee jerk and not well tested, it seemed heavily influenced by corner cases presented on the char-Op boards which are frequented by folks who specifically devote themselves to breaking the game...

Astral Seal + Healer's Lore is not a corner case.  Without stretching, it's 9 points of surgeless healing at first level.  That's more than the surge value of most PCs, and it's silly.  The same goes for Beacon of Hope: it doesn't take any obscure combination of rules to give the equivalent of a healing surge to every ally within 3 squares--and, as a bonus, your Astral Seal healing just went up to 14 points!

For purposes of comparison, that's more than my 2nd-level rogue's bloodied value.  It's more than my 3rd-level Con-based warden's surge value.  It is, to be frank, a silly amount of healing.

...you guys gelded my favorite character, my pacifist cleric, which I am using in an official D&D Encounters game so the change can't simply be ignored.

He lost a bonus to some of his healing.  Since Encounters PCs just hit 2nd level, this can't possibly impact more than a couple of your powers.  Since those powers were so good that it was hard to justify taking anything else (particularly for a pacifist cleric), and are still so good that your PC will keep all of them, I have a hard time accepting "gelded" as the appropriate term for what happened to your PC.

...I am voting with my wallet, and canning my subscription to D&Di over this.  I am not going to pay you to make me unhappy.

You're cancelling what you admit is a valuable service in a fit of pique over your character being changed from really, really good to merely really good.  Um... okay?  But you might want to look over the "gelded" version of your Encounters PC, compare his healing ability to that of any other class, and think again.
You've obviously never played an Orb-Wizard.  That entire concept has been essentially destroyed and it's not the only one.


Wrong, had an Orb Wizard for... 18 months of play time and counting. By and large her OoI has been used more to extend at-wills and for enchants like Inevitable Continuance. This kind of extends to an overarching issue that I already mentioned: you'd have to have built your character entirely around a whole bunch of elements that all got changes concurrently, with save penalty stacking being one of the few examples. She wasn't stacking save penalties so the end result for her character is a nominal change.

Of course your rubric says her character has made "unacceptable trade offs" and should be, I dunno, dead several times over (you've never actually qualified what makes them "unacceptable" in terms of consequences) but that's just further proof that your rubric is out of touch with how little is actually required to succeed in the game.

She is thinking about switching to Tome of Readiness, though, mostly because she's been Orb forever and is the only player who didn't rebuild when the relevant Power book came out (minus our Sorcerer who only joined three months ago.)
While I agree that the Pacifist Cleric needed to be nerfed, I do think that Wotc went a bit too far.  IMHO they should have left prayers that "heal as though you spent a healing surge" alone in the errata.  Astral Seal, Beacon of Hope and other such powers were the problem.  Cure Light Wounds and it's relatives emphatically were not.  I know at my tables I intend to ignore this errrata when it comes to CLWs (and it's relatives) but apply it in all other cases.

-Polaris
You've obviously never played an Orb-Wizard.  That entire concept has been essentially destroyed and it's not the only one.


Wrong, had an Orb Wizard for... 18 months of play time and counting. By and large her OoI has been used more to extend at-wills and for enchants like Inevitable Continuance. This kind of extends to an overarching issue that I already mentioned: you'd have to have built your character entirely around a whole bunch of elements that all got changes concurrently, with save penalty stacking being one of the few examples. She wasn't stacking save penalties so the end result for her character is a nominal change.

Of course your rubric says her character has made "unacceptable trade offs" and should be, I dunno, dead several times over (you've never actually qualified what makes them "unacceptable" in terms of consequences) but that's just further proof that your rubric is out of touch with how little is actually required to succeed in the game.

She is thinking about switching to Tome of Readiness, though, mostly because she's been Orb forever and is the only player who didn't rebuild when the relevant Power book came out (minus our Sorcerer who only joined three months ago.)



If you weren't stacking save penalties then you were wasting your orb and playing a weaker wizard then you had to....in which case your case doesn't really count when discussing errata.

-Polaris

One thing about using or not using errata, it isn't about nerf of powers or clarifications that bothers me. It's the rewrites of core rules like skills and combat. Maybe I should just get the Rules Compendium like what WOTC intended us all to do...
I will bring up that you don't have to use the errata.  It maybe me, but I don't get when people cry foul when erratas come out.  Use them or don't use them the option is up to you.




I see this argument all the time, and quite frankly, it's bunk.

If your DM is using the errata, you have to use it.

If you're playing RPGA, you have to use it.

Telling people that if you don't like it, don't use it, isn't helpful at all unless you know their situation, and if they didn't have to use it, then they most likely wouldn't be complaining about the frequency of it in the first place.

One thing about using or not using errata, it isn't about nerf of powers or clarifications that bothers me. It's the rewrites of core rules like skills and combat. Maybe I should just get the Rules Compendium like what WOTC intended us all to do...



Indeed.  A simple charge from a 5' tall platform is complelely different now than it was 4 days ago and unless you know about the errata, you'd have no way to know about it if the situation came up in play and you had to reference the books....it's this which makes the books largely useless IMHO.

-Polaris
You've obviously never played an Orb-Wizard.  That entire concept has been essentially destroyed and it's not the only one.


... snip ...
If you weren't stacking save penalties then you were wasting your orb and playing a weaker wizard then you had to....in which case your case doesn't really count when discussing errata.

-Polaris





Ah, so the "concept" was to be exceedingly powerful...?

"At a certain point, one simply has to accept that some folks will see what they want to see..." Dragon 387
I will bring up that you don't have to use the errata.  It maybe me, but I don't get when people cry foul when erratas come out.  Use them or don't use them the option is up to you.




I see this argument all the time, and quite frankly, it's bunk.

If your DM is using the errata, you have to use it.

If you're playing RPGA, you have to use it.

If you want to play the same game as everyone else on the forums, you have to use it.




sooo those are the two times you have to use erratas.

To fix the second problem first don't go to those events.

getting back to the first, how much will it really impact your game.  I think most erratas are hardly noticeable even when you play by them or you can DM your own game
I will bring up that you don't have to use the errata.  It maybe me, but I don't get when people cry foul when erratas come out.  Use them or don't use them the option is up to you.




I see this argument all the time, and quite frankly, it's bunk.

If your DM is using the errata, you have to use it.

If you're playing RPGA, you have to use it.

If you want to play the same game as everyone else on the forums, you have to use it.




sooo those are the two times you have to use erratas.

To fix the second problem first don't go to those events.

getting back to the first, how much will it really impact your game.  I think most erratas are hardly noticeable even when you play by them or you can DM your own game





So basiclly, if you don't like it, pack up your toys and go home? Nice, really helpful.
You've obviously never played an Orb-Wizard.  That entire concept has been essentially destroyed and it's not the only one.


... snip ...
If you weren't stacking save penalties then you were wasting your orb and playing a weaker wizard then you had to....in which case your case doesn't really count when discussing errata.

-Polaris




Ah, so the "concept" was to be exceedingly powerful...?




Not at all...at least not more than any character dreams of being exceeding powerful.  I had the concept of a wizard that would inspire dread in his enemies by making it impossible for them to suceed.  In short,  wanted what Treantmonk20 once called a Master of Puppets and there is nothing wrong with that.

My point about the Orb is this:  If you are going to take the Orb of Imposition over another Arcane Mastery, then you have an obligation not just to yourself but the rest of your party to pull your weight, i.e. be as effective as possible in whatever it is you want to do well (which varies greatly from character to character).  LFK's wizard was clearly (by his own statement) not pulling his weight. 

It's not up to me, the player, to balance the game.  It's up to Wotc to do that, and the DM to step in when Wotc falls down on the job.

-Polaris
There is no conflict between being as effective as possible and having an class ability nerfed. You're still as effective as you can be.

It's like saying the entire concept of healing clerics has been destroyed because Healer's Lore was nerfed.

(edit) Both the penalty inflicting Wizard and healing cleric concepts exist. They have just been reduced from their excessive levels. 
"At a certain point, one simply has to accept that some folks will see what they want to see..." Dragon 387
I will bring up that you don't have to use the errata.  It maybe me, but I don't get when people cry foul when erratas come out.  Use them or don't use them the option is up to you.




I see this argument all the time, and quite frankly, it's bunk.

If your DM is using the errata, you have to use it.

If you're playing RPGA, you have to use it.

If you want to play the same game as everyone else on the forums, you have to use it.




sooo those are the two times you have to use erratas.

To fix the second problem first don't go to those events.

getting back to the first, how much will it really impact your game.  I think most erratas are hardly noticeable even when you play by them or you can DM your own game





So basiclly, if you don't like it, pack up your toys and go home? Nice, really helpful.



I did say DM your own game.  and I did say how much do the erratas affect your home game
because all of this errata literally does make the books worthless and gives the impression that you guys at WoTC were sloppy when you wrote them



So all you care about is the impression that they were sloppy?  You realize that the inherent quality of the original material isn't changed by later errata, right?  If it really was sloppy and they didn't errata it then it would still be sloppy.
because all of this errata literally does make the books worthless and gives the impression that you guys at WoTC were sloppy when you wrote them



So all you care about is the impression that they were sloppy?  You realize that the inherent quality of the original material isn't changed by later errata, right?  If it really was sloppy and they didn't errata it then it would still be sloppy.



The problem is that there were blatently obvious errors that a trained monkey that actually played DnD could have seen on a simple first read....and WERE SEEN on a simple first read once the game was released publically.  In fact if I am to believe some in Brilliant Gameologists, they were caught significantly before release and Wotc told them to take a hike (paraphrasing).

Fixing errata that is due to an unforeseen consequence of a serious of events is one thing.  All games (or logical constructs) will have such holes.  Fixing errata that should have been caught by a simple proofread months if not more than a year later (Blade Cascade, Orb of Imposition, etc) are indications of sloppy work the first time.

-Polaris
I believe a lot of the changes that have taken place since 4E released (especially in errata) is because of the lack of playtesting WotC did with 4E before it was released.

Simple.

Now, you have two choices.

Accept this and consider the new errata improvements to the system and adapt them in your game. You can easily download and print out errata to keep with your PHB and PHBII (since a lot of errata was published in there too...). Use sticky notes for errata'd items so you can reference the errata doc for the latest version of the rule.

Or,

Ignore the changes entirely and run the game by the book. It's still your choice.

You can still have fun with the game either way.
If you weren't stacking save penalties then you were wasting your orb and playing a weaker wizard then you had to....in which case your case doesn't really count when discussing errata.

-Polaris


There you go again, there's your bullshit margins dictating not only what you consider to be a worthy character but now what you consider to be a worthy experience. The concept of the Orb Wizard has changed very little. Your implementation of the orb wizard (and by extension what you consider to be the concept given that your brain has little room for anything that isn't l33t enough and considers them one and the same) is what got hashed, not the basic concept.

My player has been playing an effective off-the-shelf Orb Wizard for 18 months and has felt only minor impacts from errata. The change of Orb of Inevitable Continuance from an Encounter to a Daily was noticed but after a "aw shucks" moment it didn't actually change that much. The party didn't die on their next encounter as a result; the normal margins of the game shifted very little. If anything the changes have improved the party because they don't feel as locked in to specific enchants and powers. The experience didn't change, not much at all, but the perception sure did.

Stamping your feet and insisting that the impact on you is worth more because you spend your free time crunching numbers is both misguided and selfish. The very fact that you have to spend so much of your time complaining about people who are happy with un-l33t choices, who aren't looking to burn their books on Wizards' lawn because something was altered, who don't even notice that errata was issued, should be a solid indicator that you're in the minority.