Website Content: My Sense of Entitlement

123 posts / 0 new
Last post
This is my reply, reprinted and expanded, from another thread.
Another member wrote:
I think they missed a chance here with having [a specific non-rules-related article] free to non-subscribers as well, 'cause they complain about how long combat takes as much as DDI folks, if not more.

Although this is not going to be a popular assertion...

I don't want any non-rule change articles to be made available to non-subscribers.

It is not that I have any disdain or contempt for non-subscribers. It is merely that I do have a sense of entitlement, because I am paying for it.

Since issue #20, I have been a subscriber or bookstand buyer of Dragon magazine. I am still a subscriber today (and my subscription comes with a lot more stuff, to boot). Dragon has always been the place were non-book content was made available, and it was NOT available to non-readers (until it was later published in a book). Dragon readers had exclusive content, and there was no other source for officially-published content (besides the books).

Until about 2000, very few people knew there was an official D&D website. Those that knew didn't expect to be spoon-fed anything through it. The website was more fan board than anything else, with normal corporate content -- product previews and promotion -- on the non-forum sections.

From 2000 on, more people assumed there is a company website with forums (everyone and their brothers have them). Still, the content offered on the site was limited to errata and the occasional treat*. Adventures and articles remained magazine content available only to subscribers. That is the benefit of subscribing.

Let the rest of the website content be corporate -- product promotion and rule updates. I want all other articles to be an exclusive part of my subscription. After all, I'm paying for it.

* edit
There were plenty of articles and adventures being released on the Official D&D website regularly. There were:


  • Free adventures that started coming out in 2003

  • Map a week, started in 2001

  • The Mind's Eye started in 2001

  • Viscious Venues and Elite Opponents started in 2003

  • Steal this hook, Rules of the Game, and Character Class started in 2004

  • Design and Developement, Save my Game, and Tactics and Tips started in 2005


Thank you, seTiny

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.
I concure.

Play whatever the **** you want. Never Point a loaded party at a plot you are not willing to shoot. Arcane Rhetoric. My Blog.

I do find it odd that the same people who claim DDI isn't worth the money and encourage others to quit subscribing also complain loudly when things they want are behind the DDI paywall.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
I agree.  I'm paying for a reason. 

Before posting, why not ask yourself, What Would Wrecan Say?

IMAGE(http://images.onesite.com/community.wizards.com/user/marandahir/thumb/9ac5d970f3a59330212c73baffe4c556.png?v=90000)

A great man once said "If WotC put out boxes full of free money there'd still be people complaining about how it's folded." – Boraxe

What about articles like the Class Compendium feats article from last month, which are somewhere between errata and new content - addressing basic intercompatibility issues between published books pre- and post-Essentials?  Paid or unpaid?

For most things, I won't gripe at it being paywalled, but for something like that which affects books I own, and probably should have been printed in them in the first place, I'd be a little ticked if it were paid-only (as, indeed, I was about the Ki Focuses article that was cut from HoS).

Content original to Dragon, sure, I don't object to it costing money.  When it's content that should have been in books I already paid for, I do.
Harrying your Prey, the Easy Way: A Hunter's Handbook - the first of what will hopefully be many CharOp efforts on my part. The Blinker - teleport everywhere. An Eladrin Knight/Eldritch Knight. CB != rules source.
I do find it odd that the same people who claim DDI isn't worth the money and encourage others to quit subscribing also complain loudly when things they want are behind the DDI paywall.



i find it hilarious
I agree.  If you don't want to pay that's fine.  But stop crying because you don't get the content that we are paying for.  Otherwise what's the point in even having a ddi sub?
To see my campaign world visit http://dnd.chrisnye.net My music -> www.myspace.com/Incarna My music videos -> www.youtube.com/Auticusx
I agree, when I don't have the subscription - I'm more than happy with what I can get for free: the CC articles, the updates to racial choices on stats.

When I see value I subscribe until I time I don't feel that I'm getting my value anymore.

Though, I agree on the HoS thing, to me that felt a bit "incomplete" without the magic items, that should have been a "bonus" type of thing.
Welcome to ZomboniLand - My D&D Blog http://zomboniland.blogspot.com/
Was there something specific put up outside the paywall that you feel shouldn't have been?  I have no quibbles at all with what I haven't been able to get, so far.  Was there a problem the other way about?
======= Balesir
Was there something specific put up outside the paywall that you feel shouldn't have been?  I have no quibbles at all with what I haven't been able to get, so far.  Was there a problem the other way about?



It always pops up every now and again. The current flavor of the week is the playtesting of the Warlock/Scoundrel and Templar. And that the Templar articles is coming with STR class stuff and they wants it.
"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move."-Douglas Adams
IMO the entilement is justified. Coming from someone who is no DDi subcriber.

If Wizards changes a power from a book I bought, I would expect to have access to the update for free, however if it is new content (even to fix what is perceived as a problem) I wouldn't.

I'd be even more happy if they were to make all epic errata and updates behind the paywall, those that change the game and make part of the books obsolete. Make them options to subscibers, different approaches to the game that DDI subcribers can try out. I would let you guys pay for that and not even seeing it would make me impervious to the temptation of trying to figure out why and trying to including them. I'd like a more stable game the next time around and would like DDI content to be optional (and creative and interesting, something that you put on top of your game, the cherry on a sundae).

-Realize You are your own source of all Creation, of your own master plan.
Was there something specific put up outside the paywall that you feel shouldn't have been?  I have no quibbles at all with what I haven't been able to get, so far.  Was there a problem the other way about?

It always pops up every now and again. The current flavor of the week is the playtesting of the Warlock/Scoundrel and Templar. And that the Templar articles is coming with STR class stuff and they wants it.

I don't understand you, sorry.  Who are "they" and what stuff outside the paywall is this that was problematic?  The CC Templar update?
======= Balesir
Was there something specific put up outside the paywall that you feel shouldn't have been?  I have no quibbles at all with what I haven't been able to get, so far.  Was there a problem the other way about?

It always pops up every now and again. The current flavor of the week is the playtesting of the Warlock/Scoundrel and Templar. And that the Templar articles is coming with STR class stuff and they wants it.

I don't understand you, sorry.  Who are "they" and what stuff outside the paywall is this that was problematic?  The CC Templar update?



They being people in general and the playtest articles being behind the paywall. So yes.
"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move."-Douglas Adams
Was there something specific put up outside the paywall that you feel shouldn't have been?  I have no quibbles at all with what I haven't been able to get, so far.  Was there a problem the other way about?

It always pops up every now and again. The current flavor of the week is the playtesting of the Warlock/Scoundrel and Templar. And that the Templar articles is coming with STR class stuff and they wants it.

I don't understand you, sorry.  Who are "they" and what stuff outside the paywall is this that was problematic?  The CC Templar update?



They being people in general and the playtest articles being behind the paywall. So yes.



Those particular playtest articles should be available to everyone, as they are "errata in the making" more or less. Since it impacts non-subscribers with updates to already published classes/powers, they need to have a voice in the changes.
I disagree.  One of the benefits of having DDi is you get a greater voice in shaping the game to come.

The only things that non-DDi players should get are (i) errata, (ii) promotions for upcoming products, or (iii) articles that encourage you to become a subscriber. 
I dont pay... I dont want right now... not a problem... heck updates could be behind the pay wall.

I think entitlement is a term bandied about too much.
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

I get the feeling updates and erata are not distinquished well by WOTC
  Creative Character Build Collection and The Magic of King's and Heros  also Can Martial Characters Fly? 

Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42
The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairness
Reflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character) 

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

 

All the more for subscribers, all the better. Even the errata.
I agree Seeker.  The word entitlement has become distorted over the last few years to always mean something negative when it applies to a person. It doesn't.  If you don't believe me, check out Malcolm Gladwell's book "The Outliers."  If you pay for something that promises exclusive content, then the expectation is rightfully to expect that the exclusive content will be of significant value for the money that you spend, AND that it would be desirable content to people who are not currently paying for it.  That is the main motivator in getting new people to sign up.  That sense of entitlement is perfectly justified and it does not make you a bad guy for acknowledging it.
I agree Seeker.  The word entitlement has become distorted over the last few years to always mean something negative when it applies to a person. It doesn't.  If you don't believe me, check out Malcolm Gladwell's book "The Outliers."  If you pay for something that promises exclusive content, then the expectation is rightfully to expect that the exclusive content will be of significant value for the money that you spend, AND that it would be desirable content to people who are not currently paying for it.  That is the main motivator in getting new people to sign up.  That sense of entitlement is perfectly justified and it does not make you a bad guy for acknowledging it.

I agree.  The stuff that angers me is the stuff that would be incredibly useful that WotC won't offer for any amount of money, not the stuff that they offer for money and I choose not to pay for.  If I wanted that enough, I'd pay for it, not mither about how I should get it for free.
======= Balesir
As someone who stopped subscribing almost a year ago, but who picked up a one-month subscription lately since there was a significant amount of good content, I am perfectly fine with the paywall. It IS unfortunate that the paywall means that the old freebie material that occassionally showed up is not as likely to appear, but WotC has been doing much more important stuff lately anyways. Once they get a good pace up on their content again, I'll be happy to resubscribe long-term.
Fire Blog Control, Change, and Chaos: The Elemental Power Source Elemental Heroes Example Classes Xaosmith Exulter Chaos Bringer Director Elemental Heroes: Looking Back - Class and Story Elemental Heroes: Complete Class Beta - The Xaosmith (January 16, 2012) Elemental Heroes: Complete Class Beta - The Harbinger (May 16, 2012) Check out my Elemental Heroes blog series and help me develop four unique elemental classes.
As someone who stopped subscribing almost a year ago, but who picked up a one-month subscription lately since there was a significant amount of good content, I am perfectly fine with the paywall. It IS unfortunate that the paywall means that the old freebie material that occassionally showed up is not as likely to appear, but WotC has been doing much more important stuff lately anyways. Once they get a good pace up on their content again, I'll be happy to resubscribe long-term.

Which is exactly how it's supposed to work.  The problem occurs when the content begins to become thin, consistently delayed, and not valued by the majority.  Thankfully, WotC are showing real effort lately and I for one appreciate it greatly.  I've got my fingers crossed that we'll be seeing many more issues of Dragon and Dungeon that resemble the upcoming Dragon #400!
DDi doesn't have a full enough package for me. I don't use Character Builders and I'm comfortable looking at all the books I have now. Even when I do have Dragon content at my disposal, I'm still comfortable with  looking up all my options and taking an hour or two making my character (because it's fun). I don't think I'd have the same experience if I used the Compendium instead. I'm not huge on adventures; so the Dungeon Magazines would likely be a place where I can find new monsters if I do DM again.
I think some of the challenge with exclusive content is how to handle it in organized play. I personally wouldn't mind if subscribers had exclusive access to certain feats/powers/PPs etc as part of being a subscriber. Same with adventures and item rewards needing "membership status" to participate or use. Just make it clear to non-subscribers what they are missing out on, and you might find more people signing up.

Considering how long 4e has been out now, there shouldn't have been the "need" for such major overhauls to the game. Additional options (skill powers, themes), sure. Changing fundamental game mechanics mid-edition was guarenteed to cause more issues than it solved. I'm thinking things like the erratas to stealth, and all the math feat fixes. Essentials introduced a whole new character design paradigm, and included a lot of tightly coupled errata that should have been separated out. IMO, WotC should have kept the AEDU design for every class, and introduced alternate class designs (such as monk full disciplines, psionics, and all essential classes) as optional variants or as playtests for future editions.

Magic Dual Color Test
I am White/Green
I am White/Green
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I am both orderly and instinctive. I value community and group identity, defining myself by the social group I am a part of. At best, I'm selfless and strong-willed; at worst, I'm unoriginal and sheepish.
Was there something specific put up outside the paywall that you feel shouldn't have been?  I have no quibbles at all with what I haven't been able to get, so far.  Was there a problem the other way about?

It always pops up every now and again. The current flavor of the week is the playtesting of the Warlock/Scoundrel and Templar. And that the Templar articles is coming with STR class stuff and they wants it.

I don't understand you, sorry.  Who are "they" and what stuff outside the paywall is this that was problematic?  The CC Templar update?



They being people in general and the playtest articles being behind the paywall. So yes.



Those particular playtest articles should be available to everyone, as they are "errata in the making" more or less. Since it impacts non-subscribers with updates to already published classes/powers, they need to have a voice in the changes.



Except that wizards has never done it like that from what I recall.... well.... every play test they have ever done pretty much. See the previous player handbooks.

I mean following your logic they should give the playtests to several blogs and mail it to gaming stores what with it being errata in the making and impacting essentially everyone who follows the eratta.  
"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move."-Douglas Adams
The reasoning of the OP is incomprehensible to me.

You're paying for exclusive access to most content of Dungeon and Dragon. And you're getting exactly what you're paying for.

You seem to think you're paying for exclusive access to all that content. But you never signed anything or checked "I agree" to anything that said that was what you were paying for. So whatever the source of your misunderstanding is, it is indeed your misunderstanding. You'reg getting nothing more nor less than what you've paid for.
Got no problem with the OP's stance on the matter. When I was a subscriber, I was pretty pissed off that the assassin crossed the exclusivity boundary.

Anyway, so, the specific complaint is about the Scoundrel and the Whatever-The-Warlock-Will-Be-Called articles? If those are like the previous class compendium articles, my position on it is they should be freely available, for consistency's sake (since they amount to errata/updates, except for the superfluous fluff).

On the other hand, if by placing "Playtest" in front of them, that makes them DDI articles that must be paid for, so be it. Seems to me that the hand-slap the devs got over the Templar still stings; if they feel the need to test the waters with DDI folks, more power to 'em. Hell, if they're just desperate for page-count, more power to 'em.

As a possible compromise, they could just write an actual errata document that is free, and give the full-length fancied up article to the people who are forking over green. But if they're not into that, it does not do any damage to me.
check out Malcolm Gladwell's book "The Outliers."

You are the second person in the last hour to recommend this book. Therefore, it now goes to the top of my reading list. Thank you! (All the more relevant, because I will be launching my own business at the end of this month.)

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.
I think some of the challenge with exclusive content is how to handle it in organized play.

For me, the Orgnaized play aspect is not one of restriction, but rather, one of awareness. In Organized Play, everything published by WotC should (IMHO) be permitted. It's just that not every player will know about every bit of the allowable content.
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.
To clear up a possible misunderstanding of my intent and purpose:

The original comment, quoted in the OP, was by another member. (The attribution did not carry over in the copy paste of the quote, but who said it is not important.) However, the specific article he was referencing is not the trigger for my replay. Rather, it is the sentiment itself -- that any content other than errata should be made available for free -- with which I take issue.

In the days when Dragon was in print form (by a third party, no less), anything that WotC published on its website was free. (I have amended my OP to reflect much of this regularly-appearing free content, thanks to a reality check from seTiny.) But the magazine went digital, published solely by WotC, available only on the WotC website.

As a subscriber, I want the vast majority of the WotC published material to appear either in a buyable book or in my subscription. If more and more of that material is available for free, then my incentive for maintaining a subscription is diminished. (Yes, I love the digital tools, and I value them greatly, but there is nothing in the tools that I cannot do on my own, for free.) The only stuff associated with DDI that I cannot legally get for no additional cost beyond the books I buy, is the magazine content. And when there is more free stuff than subscription stuff, the justification for my subscription is weakened.

For me, the dividing line for what should be free is simple:


  • Rules errata (affecting everyone who bought the books and uses errata), and

  • Publication promotion (including sneak peeks)


Everything else should be behind the paywall. Someone mentioned offering a few things to entice others to get a subscription should be free as well. I disagree with this sentiment. I think the magazine Tables of Contents and the first paragraph of each article is all the incentive that is needed.

Selfish? Maybe. They say we get what we pay for. I believe we should also pay for what we get.
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.
For me, the dividing line for what should be free is simple:


  • Rules errata (affecting everyone who bought the books and uses errata), and

  • Publication promotion (including sneak peeks)


Everything else should be behind the paywall.

Selfish? Maybe. They say we get what we pay for. I believe we should also pay for what we get.




Seems reasonable to me, and not selfish in the least. For the sake of clearly distinguishing errata from things like the Class Compendium article, I think they should stick to their original method of a PDF with rule change, explanation, and reprinted rule, and be done with it.

In my opinion, nonsubscribers neither need (nor, most likely, want) full-on prettified articles in order to get concise, complete errata. I know I don't, at least - a page or two of Fighter errata would have been totally sufficient (especially if it didn't say "Weaponmaster" on it anywhere Innocent)

I agree with seeker's sentiment. It's kind of funny though: I don't care personally who gets content and who doesn't. It's just when people start complaining that something should be free that I get annoyed. It's their unjustified entitlement that does it.
Was there something specific put up outside the paywall that you feel shouldn't have been?  I have no quibbles at all with what I haven't been able to get, so far.  Was there a problem the other way about?

It always pops up every now and again. The current flavor of the week is the playtesting of the Warlock/Scoundrel and Templar. And that the Templar articles is coming with STR class stuff and they wants it.

I don't understand you, sorry.  Who are "they" and what stuff outside the paywall is this that was problematic?  The CC Templar update?



They being people in general and the playtest articles being behind the paywall. So yes.



Those particular playtest articles should be available to everyone, as they are "errata in the making" more or less. Since it impacts non-subscribers with updates to already published classes/powers, they need to have a voice in the changes.



Except that wizards has never done it like that from what I recall.... well.... every play test they have ever done pretty much. See the previous player handbooks.

I mean following your logic they should give the playtests to several blogs and mail it to gaming stores what with it being errata in the making and impacting essentially everyone who follows the eratta.  



Except anyone could come online and participate in the playtest. The errata is "free" and forced on people who dont hvae a DDI subscription, so this should be as well. Remember how well the templar changes went over? I imagine they do, hence this play test. This is their chance to prevent that fiasco.

Its one thing to offer a playtest to subscribers on future products and new classes. This is an errata playtest on already published material.

I have no problem with anything Wizards has behind the paywall. And if they can get people to pay to playtest Wizard's untested ideas? Well, good for Wizards. That's a bit of corporate legerdemain that stuns and impresses me and I work for an international corporation.

I wouldn't think us non-subscribers would be complaining about not playtesting. I'd think subscribers would be angry that they have to pay for the privilege of playtesting instead of getting actual new content. No other RPG makers actually charges playtesters; the playtesters are doing the company a favor by doing free work!

I just can't imagine any other company being able to 1) get away with charging playtesters to do work for them and 2) making the paying playtesters feel entitled to it! Pretty cool, actually. Wizards is happy, the subscriber is happy, and if I'm not paying well who cares what I think? My money isn't on the table.

But for me? I'm not going to buy some playtest material and test it for Wizards. I couldn't do that. I wouldn't do that. I wouldn't want to encourage Wizards in a practice that I don't agree with (not that is wrong or illegal, but really charging playtesters and making them feel good about it? Really? ) I'm honestly impressed that Wizards can pull it off.
and you would have a point, except subscribers are getting new content

as for playtesting being 'free work', i dont call playing dnd work. i wish i could. it helps the game be better, which helps everyone. i think youre the only poster ive ever seen construe a negative view out of getting to  playtest new dnd content.

wait werent you the guy that didnt want dnd to have to have errata? i figured you would be for vigorous playtesting of the material.
and you would have a point, except subscribers are getting new content

as for playtesting being 'free work', i dont call playing dnd work. i wish i could. it helps the game be better, which helps everyone. i think youre the only poster ive ever seen construe a negative view out of getting to  playtest new dnd content.

wait werent you the guy that didnt want dnd to have to have errata? i figured you would be for vigorous playtesting of the material.



No other RPG company in the world that I have ever heard of charges playtesters to access playtest documents. You sign a NDA (like I did for Warhammer 2E or One Ring) or the stuff is just free (like Pathfinder Ultimate Combat or the upcoming Dungeon Crawl Classics) to playtest. You think it is okay that Wizards charges you to playtest and you're right--it's your money. I think Wizards is wrong to charge and I don't buy it and I'm right. Wizards does something that no other RPG producer does and that is a fact. If another company charges for playtesting and I was unaware of it I'll admit I was wrong, but I've never heard of any company other than Wizards trying it.

I do want errata. I don't want rewrites of the entire rulebook (like 2/3 of the MM or the entire skill challenge debacle that is in the DMG). A book shouldn't go out that has that extensive of errors in it from a company of Wizards' size and caliber.


No other RPG company in the world that I have ever heard of charges playtesters to access playtest documents.



i guess being the biggest rpg in the history of the world means you dont have to do things the exact same as fledgling gaming companies and/or compaines whose entire purpose, their entire way of making money is keeping an old version of dnd going. like a bottom feeding fish

For me, the dividing line for what should be free is simple:


  • Rules errata (affecting everyone who bought the books and uses errata), and

  • Publication promotion (including sneak peeks)


Everything else should be behind the paywall. Someone mentioned offering a few things to entice others to get a subscription should be free as well. I disagree with this sentiment. I think the magazine Tables of Contents and the first paragraph of each article is all the incentive that is needed.

Selfish? Maybe. They say we get what we pay for. I believe we should also pay for what we get.


While I agree with the general thrust of what you're saying, I disagree with the scope, as there's another category that you are missing: Stuff that makes the game work.

I'm not talking about errata. I'm talking about a known issue that is broken in the product people have purchased, such as the OP's complaint of combat length. If an article comes along and actually does provide an excellent solution to the problem that exists in the published books, it better be provided for free, because the people who purchased the books did so under the reasonable assumption that the product worked. People should not have to subscribe to a seperate service just to make the material they bought functions properly.

There are other things too, like published classes that have no support, such as the Seeker and Runepriest, as well as the omitted ki focuses from Heroes of Shadow (because, let's face it, a class without items to support it is half a class). But, you say, such support includes lots of crunch, which is the reason you have subscribed to DDI, so it shouldn't be given out to non-subscribers for free! And I agree with you. But, that material should also be available in printed form. Locking it behind the DDI paywall is a big, giant, FU to those of us who are wedded to book purchases for whatever reason.
Please direct me as to where I should look on my credit card statement for "Playtest Access" because I'm pretty sure I'm getting it for free with my DDI subscription.


It's entirely reasonable to restrict access to DDI subscribers.  The alternative is no playtests at all, and my subscription wouldn't change.  We'd just get the final, un-playtested article, and we'd accept it.  Playtests are a bonus, not something we're "charged" for.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
No other RPG company in the world that I have ever heard of charges playtesters to access playtest documents.


Go log on to the Singularity playtest server for Eve Online. Oh wait, you have to pay for that...
stop making sense mand, rpgs youve never heard of wouldnt dare do that