|
4 years ago ::
Feb 01, 2009 - 6:39AM
#51
|
Date Joined:
Oct 27, 2008
|
I think the major issue here is that errata is free and should be free we bought the books. Requiring people to have access to the compendium and search it at random times to assure that they have the most up to date rules is mind boggling.
If WOTC doesn't want to issue errata or allow some way for people to discover what is LFR legal without paying money, then people are going to get things wrong.
There is going to be endless table banter and debate over rules and in order to back it up someone is going to need to have a print out of the compendium, which won't have a date on it, or a laptop handy at the game to check over everything, which would destroy game time and fun.
This is no way to run a game and I for one will not put up with it.
If it is in the errata fine, if its in a player source fine.
If its not in a form easily accessible to me at the game without shelling out money and time to look up every single thing ever day to make sure nothing changed, then I will not be using it.
So What does 1.8 making the rules compendium a rules source mean to me? Nothing.
I will continue to go by the Preparing For Play section when I run each adventure. I will have the latest errata for PHB, DMG and Monsters manual. I will of course accept print ups from Dungon and Dragon Magazine and I have a few other player resources as well.
The rest of the rules I need will be provided in the adventure.
If I find a section where a player wants something to work differently because of the rules compendium, I will use DM empowerment to talk about it after the game and continue play using the rules listed in preparing to play.
If LFR tells me I need to become a D&D insider in order to run games, then they have lost a GM.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Feb 01, 2009 - 7:06AM
#52
|
- Senior Volunteer Community Lead
- Dragon Slayer
- D&DI News Guide
Date Joined:
Aug 31, 2005
|
I asked about the Compendium being an RPGA Legal rules source at the R&D Q&A on Friday morning.
Chris told me that the Rules Update team has actually revised their timetables so that discrepancies between the Compendium updates and official "published" updates become less of an issue.
If I were to try and read between the lines, I'd hope/assume/think that means that Rules Updates are going to be published at (or near) the same time as Compendium updates - keeping the two in sync from here out.
I'd suggest that if we're finding changes that are in the Compendium, but not in the Rules Update we contact Customer Service about those changes, requesting that they be forwarded to the Rules Update team.
The "gray area" will probably be Dragon Magazine articles, but it shouldn't be hard for them to add a "Dragon Magazine" PDF and each update published there simply list the page and issue# that's being updated.
Wolf Star76 Community Advocate (SVCL) for D&D Organized Play, Avalon Hill, and the DCI/WPN LFR Community Manager DDi Guide  Created by MyFitnessPal - Free Calorie Counter
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Feb 01, 2009 - 7:22AM
#53
|
Date Joined:
Jul 16, 2002
|
I think the major issue here is that errata is free and should be free we bought the books. Requiring people to have access to the compendium and search it at random times to assure that they have the most up to date rules is mind boggling.
No one is saying you have to pay for access to the compendium. It's simply a legal rules source. Any errata will be published in the updates on the website which are free. They will also be reflected int he compendium. As MwaO stated, the only things which won't see such updates are non-book items such as stuff from Dragon. In this case, the only places you will see the changes are int he Compandium. But if you're using Dragon content, you probably already have a subscription anyway.
If not, then someone somewhere will know about a change and will inform you at a game that the rules item you are using has been changed.
Sorry WOTC, you lost me with Essentials. So where I used to buy every book that came out, now I will be very choosy about what I buy. Can we just get back to real 4e? Check out the 4e Conversion Wiki. 1. Wizards fight dirty. They hit their enemies in the NADs. -- Dragon9 2. A barbarian hits people with his axe. A warlord hits people with his barbarian. 3. Boo-freakin'-hoo, ya light-slingin' finger-wigglers. -- MrCelcius in response to the Cleric's Healer's Lore nerf
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Feb 01, 2009 - 8:07AM
#54
|
Date Joined:
Aug 19, 2007
|
That's got to be wrong, because othewise WotC is saying that Dragon magazine is useless to LFR players unless they pay indefinitely.
No.
It means that if you're using a power from Dragon magazine and you're no longer a subscriber, there's the possibility that you've been errata'd and don't know about it. At which point, particularly if it is a broken combo, you'll probably get told about it.
Such as what is happening right now.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Feb 01, 2009 - 8:11AM
#55
|
Date Joined:
Aug 19, 2007
|
Come on MwaO... you know better than that.  New edition, different rules, different type structures. (all monstrous humanoids from 3.5 are now humanoids in 4e... just saying... )
Except there are now living constructs and constructs. Given "Living Construct" is a 'keyword', there should not be an assumption that you can therefore subdivide that keyword into parts.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Feb 01, 2009 - 9:50AM
#56
|
Date Joined:
Jun 10, 2004
|
As I mentioned in the other thread. The quote from Merls sounds like he didn't really know what he was talking about. It sounds like he just gave an answer when we was blind sided by this question.
It didn't sound affirmative at all.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Feb 01, 2009 - 5:14PM
#57
|
Date Joined:
Mar 26, 2008
|
It means that if you're using a power from Dragon magazine and you're no longer a subscriber, there's the possibility that you've been errata'd and don't know about it. At which point, particularly if it is a broken combo, you'll probably get told about it.
So I check the errata on the website to see if an item been erratad, discover it hasn't so I buy it and get told a week later it was updated in the compendium and now I am stuck with an item I wouldn't otherwise have bought.
The idea of WotC charging for errata is simply ridiculous and makes Dragon 100% useless for those not willing to pay for errata.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Feb 01, 2009 - 6:01PM
#58
|
|
|
It's kind of absurd to suggest that if a human NPC and a PC were standing side by side that the NPC would be a Medium Natural Humanoid that's alive and the PC isn't.
Welcome to 4e. The PCs are from a different world/universe from the NPCs.
-James
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Feb 01, 2009 - 6:29PM
#59
|
Date Joined:
Oct 20, 2008
|
Welcome to 4e. The PCs are from a different world/universe from the NPCs.
-James
Agreed! NPCs and MM creatures can have different abilities that PCs of the same race (or even class!) don't get.
|
|
|
|
4 years ago ::
Feb 01, 2009 - 6:45PM
#60
|
|
|
As I mentioned in the other thread. The quote from Merls sounds like he didn't really know what he was talking about. It sounds like he just gave an answer when we was blind sided by this question.
It didn't sound affirmative at all.
I agree. But what was said was said. That's not an official issue of errata though, so until warforged have a keyword: construct or similar (like eladrin and fey), that apparatus wouldn't work. I also feel comfortable doing that in RPGA games.
|
|
|
