|
6 years ago ::
Aug 24, 2007 - 12:27PM
#451
|
Date Joined:
May 21, 2003
|
Two major inaccuracies here - you can't start new threads in this forum, and D&DI doesn't, at the moment, cost a penny, and won't for a few months yet.
Thank you. Your post was quicker than mine. I haven't tried starting a new thread, but I suspected that you couldn't, and I figured out about logging in with my existing (free) account. I was just taken aback that the "guest" login suddenly disappeared sometime between this morning and this afternoon.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Aug 24, 2007 - 12:28PM
#452
|
Date Joined:
May 21, 2003
|
Already done. The Insider is a free website for now, and from what they have said the areas that have their articles about whats going into the game will remain free even after the pay part of the website kicks off. Head over to www.dndinsider.com and sign-in using your forum account and read the articles that are already there. Also, I highly recommend going over to gleemax and subscribing to the Developers Blogs threads. A lot of good info is showing up there, also the FAQ here on the forums is a must subscribe thread as well.
As for your post not getting read, they have already said that every thread that WotC started in here gets read and kept up with every day by someone. several someones actually.
Good to know. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Aug 24, 2007 - 1:36PM
#453
|
Date Joined:
Mar 15, 2001
|
Group and Club Accounts
And I'm blanking out on the wording of the rest of this post. I'll edit later, but I thought I'd get the idea out there.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Aug 24, 2007 - 2:29PM
#454
|
Date Joined:
Feb 17, 2005
|
WoTC has repeatedly said that D&DI will be your online kitchen table. They also emphasize that groups that played in college, will be able to continue to play when they move appart physically.
For this to be true, online gaming groups should be able to share their online material.
WoTC can maintain their sales levels by limiting the number of people in a group and placing some kind of limit on the number of groups someone can participate in. I would rather see a 3 group limit per subscriber account or have my players paying a small fee to join groups, than to have us all needing to buy our own libraries.
Also one of the key things about attracting new players, is by DMs lending out their books.
It is a gaming tradition and norm for the DM to own most of the books a group uses to create all of their characters.
D&DI will not do well (outside of those seeking Dragon/Dungeon subscriptions) if the online groups can't continue with this tradition.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Aug 24, 2007 - 4:33PM
#455
|
Date Joined:
Aug 10, 2009
|
I generally disagree with you Wenin, along with the others who've been calling for "group" accounts. The way I see it, every player should have access to a PHB (it doesn't need to be their PHB, but it should be where it's easy to reference. Heck even the SRD would be sufficient), and the DM should have all three of the main "Core" books. Beyond that, if a player wants to use this or that {insert dealibopper here} from "Book X" there are plenty of ways the DM can check it out that doesn't require access to the whole book. The player could write it out and e-mail it to the DM before the game even starts, for example (something I've even done in the past for online games as a DM when using non-standard rules, whether they're house rules or from a non-core book).
It just seems to me that those clamoring for such sharing accounts wants something for nothing or wants WotC to put otherwise unneeded limits on accounts, even if the owner of the account wouldn't make use of such book sharing.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Aug 24, 2007 - 8:06PM
#456
|
Date Joined:
Jun 24, 2007
|
I generally disagree with you Wenin, along with the others who've been calling for "group" accounts. The way I see it, every player should have access to a PHB (it doesn't need to be their PHB, but it should be where it's easy to reference. Heck even the SRD would be sufficient), and the DM should have all three of the main "Core" books. Beyond that, if a player wants to use this or that {insert dealibopper here} from "Book X" there are plenty of ways the DM can check it out that doesn't require access to the whole book. The player could write it out and e-mail it to the DM before the game even starts, for example (something I've even done in the past for online games as a DM when using non-standard rules, whether they're house rules or from a non-core book).
It just seems to me that those clamoring for such sharing accounts wants something for nothing or wants WotC to put otherwise unneeded limits on accounts, even if the owner of the account wouldn't make use of such book sharing.
My arguement for a shared account was before they clarified what every account holder would have access to. The problem was making everyone buy a copy of the book so that no-one got left behind when making characters. Problem solved.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Aug 24, 2007 - 8:14PM
#457
|
|
|
And in the interim, the Mac and Linux advertisers proudly proclaim their virus immunity due to their obscurity ("Hi, I'm a Mac". "And I'm a PC. *cough, cough*"). It's a bit irritating to listen to the holier-than-thou attitudes that Mac and Linux users sometimes use when some of their "virtues" are due to a lack of market penetration.
I've got no doubt that there are tools that would make it easier for Mac and Linux uses to access this site. But look at the demographics, folks. You're a tiny minority of the PC user base... and that's a point of pride for you. Is it worth the extra money to rebuild just for you? Don't act so startled when that "elite minority" status you treasure has a downside as well.
Bud... get over yourself. You don't like Macs or Apple technology, so what? You don't like Linux... who cares? These guys and gals have the right to be able to get into the DI just like you and I do. So lay off.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Aug 25, 2007 - 12:33AM
#458
|
Date Joined:
Mar 16, 2006
|
Also one of the key things about attracting new players, is by DMs lending out their books.
It is a gaming tradition and norm for the DM to own most of the books a group uses to create all of their characters.
yeah, um, no.
not everywhere does this. my books are not your bathroom reading material nor your coaster to spill a drink all over. get your own books to destroy.
the key to attracting new players is word of mouth. if it sounds good enoguh to try then people will want to try it. the books themselves are just crunch to get to the game at hand.
if i just handed a book to someone to read before playing agame they would say no thanks i will pass on D&D.
but if they heard about the game and things about it they may want to read a book.
and a DM that just loans out books to new players may never see the book again or may not have it in time to play the next session.
and as for your tradtion that is also wrong.
many gaming groups may share the DMs books, but lots others get their own books. some even share all the books to a group.
anyway sharing books via onlie tabletop would not work for the company wanting to make money even if it would help gamers jsut bring their games online.
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Aug 25, 2007 - 12:34AM
#459
|
Date Joined:
Aug 13, 2001
|
Bud... get over yourself. You don't like Macs or Apple technology, so what? You don't like Linux... who cares? These guys and gals have the right to be able to get into the DI just like you and I do. So lay off.
They don't have a right to that. Talking like that trivializes the whole notion of rights, and is flat-out wrong besides; we're talking about something being provided by a private company for the sole purpose of entertainment here. Nobody has a right to anything that fits that description.
Moreover, I saw a lot more substance in his post than just that he doesn't like Apple or Linux. He pointed to a legitimate drawback of those systems, even if it's one that a large and growing number of people are quite willing to live with.
Jeff Heikkinen
DCI Rules Advisor since Dec 25, 2011
|
|
|
|
6 years ago ::
Aug 25, 2007 - 12:34AM
#460
|
Date Joined:
Mar 16, 2006
|
My arguement for a shared account was before they clarified what every account holder would have access to. The problem was making everyone buy a copy of the book so that no-one got left behind when making characters. Problem solved.
where did they announce what each account holder will have access to?
|
|
|
