|
2 years ago ::
May 08, 2011 - 4:27PM
#31
|
Date Joined:
Jul 25, 2007
|
No, they didn't. They were cut in order, presumably, to flesh out Dragon - it wasn't for lack of space IMO, there was plenty of other material they could have got rid of instead. Which makes the Compendium's definition of their source a bit of a slap in the face to those who bought the book.
No, it was definitely for a lack of space. The fluff text wasn't going anywhere because that's an inherent, if annoying, part of Essentials design. The only other thing that could have been cut were the feats, and out of those feats at least 4 - 6 were absolutely necessary to stay in, which would have left a page and a half for Ki Foci at most, when there is a good 2.5 - 3 pages worth of Ki Foci material.
So yes, it was absolutely cut for space.
As for all of you complaining about fluff, get used to it. Fluff sells more than mechanics.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 08, 2011 - 4:28PM
#32
|
|
|
So yes, it was absolutely cut for space.
Agreed. Of course, they could have easily trimmed that many pages of the extraneous, unnecessary fluff out of the rest of the book ...
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 08, 2011 - 4:32PM
#33
|
Date Joined:
Jul 25, 2007
|
So yes, it was absolutely cut for space.
Agreed. Of course, they could have easily trimmed that many pages of the extraneous, unnecessary fluff out of the rest of the book ...
Again, no they could not. One, it is part of the Essetials design system, so until that changes it's not going to get cut, and two, fluff sells.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 08, 2011 - 4:43PM
#34
|
|
|
Sorry, but I'm sure they could have trimmed a paragraph here and there until they had enough room for crucial mechanical information.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 08, 2011 - 4:53PM
#35
|
Date Joined:
Aug 17, 2007
|
Going back to the OP. I entirely agree with him that Dungeon and Dragon Magazine are no longer worth the cost of the subscription. They haven't been for a long time. If not for losing the downloaded version of the character builder, I would not have resubscribed, but I do not plan on renewing my subscription after this month. Thusfar, Wizards has failed to deliver consistant content for more than a year.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 08, 2011 - 5:14PM
#36
|
Date Joined:
Nov 17, 2009
|
My response to the whole "bloat" thing:
As long as there are classes that could be improved by more mechanics, they should be supported in Dragon. The chance that a player might find a concept that they like or be able to play a concept better improves the more mechanics that come out. If you don't like what they're putting out, then let's use your Essentials argument: You don't have to use it.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 08, 2011 - 6:36PM
#37
|
Date Joined:
Sep 28, 2009
|
WotC seems to think that they can screw their paying subscribers because very few of them will actually quit.
Soon I'm going to send them an email demaning a partial refund.
My Twitter
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 08, 2011 - 6:52PM
#38
|
Date Joined:
May 14, 2006
|
IMO the magazines went down hill after they took them away from Paizo. To me, debating whether early DDI magazines are better than the latest ones is like debating which turd is more polished.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 08, 2011 - 6:57PM
#39
|
Date Joined:
Jul 30, 2003
|
IMO the magazines went down hill after they took them away from Paizo. To me, debating whether early DDI magazines are better than the latest ones is like debating which turd is more polished.
Thanks for not contributing to the actual topic.
My Blog, mostly about D&D. I imagine that Majestic Moose plays a more "A team" type game than most of us. By that I mean he allows his players to make tanks out of a backyard playground set since the players have more "fun" that way.
Actually I much prefer The Losers.Spoiler:
Show
When I and my friends sit down we want a game of heroic fantasy. Rare is the moment when I have cried out in a video game or RPG "that's unrealistic." (Unless there is no jump button. Seriously makes me mad, single handedly ruined the N64 zelda series for me, but that's a digression of a digression.)
I mean, we play games with the force in galaxies far, far away, with supernatural horrors, dragons and demi-gods, alternate cosmologies, etc.
Reality and it's effects hold little sway to what makes a Heroic fantasy game fun IMO.
Just repeat after me:
You are not a beautiful or unique snowflake.
You are not how much you've spent on WotC products.
You are not whatever RPG you play.
You are one of tens of thousands of people that spend money on a hobby.
You will not always get what you want
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
May 08, 2011 - 7:05PM
#40
|
Date Joined:
Jul 30, 2003
|
@Mr. C
It's all a measure of relative utility. I personally really dig the DS stuff, fluff and all. Especially the familiars, the genasi, the Dungeon article on the fey village that swaps from place to place.
It's completely objective that the magazine produces WAY less content than 2 years ago. WAY WAY less. But I look at it from this perspective. For $10 I get 30 pages of reasonably useful Player material, and 40-60 pages of useful GM material. a month. For the cost of a book ($30) I get access to the compendium, the CB, the magazine articles (which I can consolidate on my own) which total equal a book, maybe a book and a half.
If I were smart and did the bargain subscriptions It'd be an even better deal.
As it stands, the magazines are still more worthwhile than a printed book. But it's getting slim. This month for instance is a much bigger draw. The themes are awesome, if not quite as good as the DS themes (this isn't the place to discuss). There are 4 sections, which is great because it will give us a large variety of themes to flesh out multiple characters.
For the moment I chosoe to stand by the magazine, to see what it will become. Only then can I make a judgement. It's very difficult to qualify how useful something is until you read it. When I feel that I can't use the material made then I'll re-examine my membership.
My Blog, mostly about D&D. I imagine that Majestic Moose plays a more "A team" type game than most of us. By that I mean he allows his players to make tanks out of a backyard playground set since the players have more "fun" that way.
Actually I much prefer The Losers.Spoiler:
Show
When I and my friends sit down we want a game of heroic fantasy. Rare is the moment when I have cried out in a video game or RPG "that's unrealistic." (Unless there is no jump button. Seriously makes me mad, single handedly ruined the N64 zelda series for me, but that's a digression of a digression.)
I mean, we play games with the force in galaxies far, far away, with supernatural horrors, dragons and demi-gods, alternate cosmologies, etc.
Reality and it's effects hold little sway to what makes a Heroic fantasy game fun IMO.
Just repeat after me:
You are not a beautiful or unique snowflake.
You are not how much you've spent on WotC products.
You are not whatever RPG you play.
You are one of tens of thousands of people that spend money on a hobby.
You will not always get what you want
|
|
|
