can you specifically ask if it has the copy image capability, so I can populate my own (personal) documents? I like multiple monster stat blocks per page, coupled with a lot of other encounter-specific information. I use these sheets to run my encounters and 1 monster / page is a huge waste of paper.
I suspect that the answer is no, but I wanted to make sure.
Not in this tool. One stat block per page, but you can always print to PDF and then manipulate that...
I suspect that the answer is no, but I wanted to make sure.[/quote]Not in this tool. One stat block per page, but you can always print to PDF and then manipulate that...
Quick reply from a tiny hotel room in Paris: Export format: Just like the cb, it uses the XML monster format used by the old mb. This will enable full interoperability between the two tools. No RTF at the moment but it should not be a big pain for an enterprising developer to convert the exported XML to any other format...
RTF is really useful because it is the quickest way a DM can place several monsters onto one page in a common format used for adventures. It supports a better resolution than an image and it also allows for later quick edits. As a DM in my home campaigns and as an admin in organized play I use the RTF export extensively.
It would be incredible for authors of DDI and organized play (and I suspect for WotC staff) if the AT's MB could export a monster in a format that could be dropped into the Word format that WotC uses and meet those needs. Right now authors have to do a lot of tweaking to get things right... for DDI and LFR WotC can't allow the RTF export from the classic MB because it has so many differences from the standard. It would be a huge boon to everyone if that would change in the future. My main point: RTF is really desirable and if you implement it please work with someone like Perkins or Bilsland to use the format they desire and not just any RTF.
I suspect that is a pretty decent starting point. I have 78 custom monsters in my Dark Sun folder (some of which are from organized play). The RPGA had more than 200 custom monsters in the old tool, some of which I have exported. But, I'm a heavy users.
What most contributes to a high number for me are variations. I might take an existing monster and make it 2 levels lower. Then I might make another version a level higher with a monster theme. Those types of minor changes are enough work that I want to keep them as new monsters and this bumps up the number of monsters I would save in my cloud.
Math: as far as I can tell (bugs notwithstanding), it uses mm3 calculations and stat block.
This is a complex issue. Please bare with me.
My guess is that it uses the latest logic for initial creation. I would be curious what it does when you level a creature... does it use an old idea of, say, adding 1 to attack per level and then 1 to damage every other level? Or does it change the power to be in line with recent logic (itself complex)? Bumping up average damage every other level has changed to be every level for at-will powers, for example. And, the average damage has changed. Brutes gain a bump to damage at certain levels. Limited/encounter powers do extra damage and get bumps at certain levels. (Chris Perkins posted a chart recently).
There is also the question of how it behaves when you change an existing monster that uses old rules. If I take a level 1 MM1 non-brute monster that does 1d6+4 with an at-will attack and level it to 3rd level, do I get 1d6+6 (under old logic), 1d6+6 (using the new progression but not correcting for new expected average values), or do I get 1d6+8 (achieving the average of 11 expected by the new math for average damage of an at-will by a non-brute)? That difference is more jarring as you climb in level and with encounter powers. An old level 1 brute that might do 1d6+4 with an encounter power and is bumped up to 20th level would do 1d6+12 under the old rules, 1d6+48 with the new values.
It can be a bit of a philosophical question. Some monsters really are more or less damaging than others, even in the post-MM3 category. Should the software try to adjust that back to average levels when you edit them, or should it stay true to the source and just increase/decrease by level based on the new progression? A power that stuns might be great as 1d4+8 even on a high heroic creature, because the stun is so powerful. This is raised as an issue often on the forums and many posters are unclear on how the logic works for new vs changed monsters.
If I had to make a recommendation, it would be that leveling or de-leveling should add a bump based on the delta on the chart Chris Perkins posted. So, no matter the value you have, a brute encounter power going from 1st to 20th level would add 36 to the static damage (comparing the average values of 16 and 52 on the chart and adjusting for the difference). This seems to preserve the intent of the creature and still do a good job at the task of leveling/de-leveling.
A common request is a button that would adjust a power to the expected value for the level. This would be a good feature, because you could use that to update monsters. Take that old MM1 monster and click that button and a power is now at the new value. Because the DM controls this, you don't run into problems where the stun power is now stun plus lots of damage (unless the DM wants to make that adjustment). This kind of feature is, to me, far better than automatically imposing MM3 logic when you level (which would be wrong for powers that deliberately are written to do less or more damage).
Printing multiple stat blocks and laying out other things should be better left to a specialized tool. As a side note, a single stat block should not pose the same problems as a multiple full page output like the cb.
As noted above, I think the issue is really around usability. DMs need to be able to get several monsters onto a page, to put them in amongst their adventure notes, to incorporate them into organized play, etc. Printing one per page is just not useful. Yeah, the option should be there, but export should really support RTF so that we can bypass the issue (and the RTF format should match WotC guidelines).
RTF is really useful because it is the quickest way a DM can place several monsters onto one page in a common format used for adventures. It supports a better resolution than an image and it also allows for later quick edits. As a DM in my home campa
A common request is a button that would adjust a power to the expected value for the level. This would be a good feature, because you could use that to update monsters.
I think a better option is to just show the expected average damage right next to the actual calculated average damage and let the user decide. Provide the value so we don't have to go elsewhere looking for it.
I think a better option is to just show the expected average damage right next to the actual calculated average damage and let the user decide. Provide the value so we don't have to go elsewhere looking for it.
i dont think 50 is a "starting point". they havent added any cb slots and ive got over a 100 pcs on my cpu now, they havent added any vt slots and i have to delete adventures routinely, they dont add slots.
i dont think 50 is a "starting point". they havent added any cb slots and ive got over a 100 pcs on my cpu now, they havent added any vt slots and i have to delete adventures routinely, they dont add slots.
can you specifically ask if it has the copy image capability, so I can populate my own (personal) documents? I like multiple monster stat blocks per page, coupled with a lot of other encounter-specific information. I use these sheets to run my encounters and 1 monster / page is a huge waste of paper.
I suspect that the answer is no, but I wanted to make sure.
Not in this tool. One stat block per page, but you can always print to PDF and then manipulate that...
Very disappointing.
How can one transfer a monster stat block from pdf format? Will it print it in the annoying, full page width block?
Guess I'm sticking with the old MB that let's me export in image and rtf.
I suspect that the answer is no, but I wanted to make sure.[/quote]Not in this tool. One stat block per page, but you can always print to PDF and then manipulate that...[/quote]Very disappointing. How can one transfer a monster stat block from pdf f
OgreBane99, keep in mind that having any print functionality at all is an improvement over none.
You can always screen capture, paste into Word (or something like it), crop, and add another monster. I agree we do want an RTF format, but it isn't for me a giant deal breaker as was not being able to edit/create monsters.
OgreBane99, keep in mind that having any print functionality at all is an improvement over none. You can always screen capture, paste into Word (or something like it), crop, and add another monster. I agree we do want an RTF format, but it isn't for
How can one transfer a monster stat block from pdf format? Will it print it in the annoying, full page width block?
Guess I'm sticking with the old MB that let's me export in image and rtf.
Note that print to PDF is only one option. If the new builder doesn't have the bugs of the offline builder it will be a time saver just from the stand point of building the monsters correctly. Then you can print to PDF OR export to XML. Import in the offline builder and export to your choice of formats. It's an extra step that gets you everything after MM3 (DS CC, MV, and possibly others).
Note that print to PDF is only one option. If the new builder doesn't have the bugs of the offline builder it will be a time saver just from the stand point of building the monsters correctly. Then you can print to PDF OR export to XML. Import in
How can one transfer a monster stat block from pdf format? Will it print it in the annoying, full page width block?
Guess I'm sticking with the old MB that let's me export in image and rtf.
Note that print to PDF is only one option. If the new builder doesn't have the bugs of the offline builder it will be a time saver just from the stand point of building the monsters correctly. Then you can print to PDF OR export to XML. Import in the offline builder and export to your choice of formats. It's an extra step that gets you everything after MM3 (DS CC, MV, and possibly others).
You could also snapshot the stat block from the PDF and drop it into Word or something else as an image from the clip board.
Don't see any serious issues with this personally and I'm thoroughly impressed with what the screenshots show we are getting. Well done, Paulo and team .
Note that print to PDF is only one option. If the new builder doesn't have the bugs of the offline builder it will be a time saver just from the stand point of building the monsters correctly. Then you can print to PDF OR export to XML. Import in
can you specifically ask if it has the copy image capability, so I can populate my own (personal) documents? I like multiple monster stat blocks per page, coupled with a lot of other encounter-specific information. I use these sheets to run my encounters and 1 monster / page is a huge waste of paper.
I suspect that the answer is no, but I wanted to make sure.
Not in this tool. One stat block per page, but you can always print to PDF and then manipulate that...
I don't want to step on Paolo's toes here, but the answer to this question should be "yes." With open interoperability between the OMB and the CMB you could build monters in the OMB, export them, import them into the CMB and copy to image.
Just sayin'. It of course would be nice if the OMB provided this functionality directly, but it is technically possible.
I suspect that the answer is no, but I wanted to make sure.[/quote] Not in this tool. One stat block per page, but you can always print to PDF and then manipulate that...[/quote]I don't want to step on Paolo's toes here, but the answer to this questi
can you specifically ask if it has the copy image capability, so I can populate my own (personal) documents? I like multiple monster stat blocks per page, coupled with a lot of other encounter-specific information. I use these sheets to run my encounters and 1 monster / page is a huge waste of paper.
I suspect that the answer is no, but I wanted to make sure.
Not in this tool. One stat block per page, but you can always print to PDF and then manipulate that...
I don't want to step on Paolo's toes here, but the answer to this question should be "yes." With open interoperability between the OMB and the CMB you could build monters in the OMB, export them, import them into the CMB and copy to image.
Just sayin'. It of course would be nice if the OMB provided this functionality directly, but it is technically possible.
Until the old MB goes by the wayside, of course, which if they follow the pattern of the CB, will be sooner rather than later with the new functionality of the MB. That may not affect you or I, but most certainly the people that won't have access to the old MB.
I don't really understand why they simply don't give us the functionality up front. It's not difficult to implement and it saves the customer the inconvenience of navigating between two applications. Empower the DM! Anything that can shave off time is welcomed by all DMs! And if I am prepping 20-30 monsters at one sitting, that's at least 20-30 minutes saved (Load the monster in the online MB, export to XML, import the monster in the old MB, copy to RTF is at least 1 minute of time).
I suspect that the answer is no, but I wanted to make sure.[/quote] Not in this tool. One stat block per page, but you can always print to PDF and then manipulate that...[/quote]I don't want to step on Paolo's toes here, but the answer to this questi
Ultimately I am with you Jharii. I don't understand why this feature wouldn't be in by now. I figure there are two possibilities; 1) They had more pressing issues and thought it could wait, or 2) There are legal issues with allowing this kind of functionality.
Ultimately I am with you Jharii. I don't understand why this feature wouldn't be in by now. I figure there are two possibilities; 1) They had more pressing issues and thought it could wait, or 2) There are legal issues with allowing this kind of fu
Since they provided the functionality in the past (not to mention that it's a fairly common function throughout many utility programs), I don't see how it could be a legality issue.
Pressing issues? Maybe, but it is something that could be implemented in a couple of hours. I've already done similar functionality in my program and it only took me about 90 minutes. This was actually converting the NPC to HTML format, which is a bit more verbose than RTF.
I'm not upset or anything. I can make do. But I am just a bit disappointed that we don't have that basic functionality as of yet, especially since it's a pretty significant time saver.
Since they provided the functionality in the past (not to mention that it's a fairly common function throughout many utility programs), I don't see how it could be a legality issue.Pressing issues? Maybe, but it is something that could be implemente
can you specifically ask if it has the copy image capability, so I can populate my own (personal) documents? I like multiple monster stat blocks per page, coupled with a lot of other encounter-specific information. I use these sheets to run my encounters and 1 monster / page is a huge waste of paper.
I suspect that the answer is no, but I wanted to make sure.
Not in this tool. One stat block per page, but you can always print to PDF and then manipulate that...
Any chance we can get an encounter builder then, that allows multiple stat blocks per page? It seems this should have been built in from the get go....
I suspect that the answer is no, but I wanted to make sure.[/quote]Not in this tool. One stat block per page, but you can always print to PDF and then manipulate that...[/quote]Any chance we can get an encounter builder then, that allows multiple sta
Since they provided the functionality in the past (not to mention that it's a fairly common function throughout many utility programs), I don't see how it could be a legality issue.
Pressing issues? Maybe, but it is something that could be implemented in a couple of hours. I've already done similar functionality in my program and it only took me about 90 minutes. This was actually converting the NPC to HTML format, which is a bit more verbose than RTF.
I'm not upset or anything. I can make do. But I am just a bit disappointed that we don't have that basic functionality as of yet, especially since it's a pretty significant time saver.
Well you know there are legal issues, and then there are things the TSR, WotC, Hasbro lawyers build into legal issues. I'm not saying it would make any sense to us.
As far as pressing goes, I'm willing to give them the benfit of the doubt. We don't know what the production schedule and deadlines looked like. They may have gotten this build in with moments to spare for release next week and 90 minutes of additional coding would have meant another missed deadline.
Given the amount of people requesting this functionality though, I think it would be stupid for WotC not to get it in before too long.
Well you know there are legal issues, and then there are things the TSR, WotC, Hasbro lawyers build into legal issues. I'm not saying it would make any sense to us. :)As far as pressing goes, I'm willing to give them the benfit of the doubt. We do
OgreBane99, keep in mind that having any print functionality at all is an improvement over none.
Its quite true. We should be grateful for whatever we get with this free service. Oh, wait...
Yes, because everything I buy is perfect and does exactly what I want it to do always. Oh, wait...
Anyway, I've been considering making a quick little xml to html and possibly rtf converter for the monster builder. Should be pretty easy.
Its quite true. We should be grateful for whatever we get with this free service. Oh, wait...[/quote]Yes, because everything I buy is perfect and does exactly what I want it to do always. Oh, wait...Anyway, I've been considering making a quick little
can you specifically ask if it has the copy image capability, so I can populate my own (personal) documents? I like multiple monster stat blocks per page, coupled with a lot of other encounter-specific information. I use these sheets to run my encounters and 1 monster / page is a huge waste of paper.
I suspect that the answer is no, but I wanted to make sure.
Not in this tool. One stat block per page, but you can always print to PDF and then manipulate that...
I don't want to step on Paolo's toes here, but the answer to this question should be "yes." With open interoperability between the OMB and the CMB you could build monters in the OMB, export them, import them into the CMB and copy to image.
Just sayin'. It of course would be nice if the OMB provided this functionality directly, but it is technically possible.
Well if that's the case, I'll be very happy. I haven't done squat with the online MB as it doesn't do... squat. Can you import to xml from it now and import to the old MB?
I suspect that the answer is no, but I wanted to make sure.[/quote] Not in this tool. One stat block per page, but you can always print to PDF and then manipulate that...[/quote]I don't want to step on Paolo's toes here, but the answer to this questi
Math: as far as I can tell (bugs notwithstanding), it uses mm3 calculations and stat block.
Hi Paolo,
Again, my thanks for the upcoming changes. One thing I wanted to mention is that should your team add support for traps (which would be awesome), there seems to have been a recent change to the format. It isn't a big deal, but I know how companies can fail to communicate about changes in standards. If for some reason the team takes up traps, it would be great to have Adventure Tools use the latest format.
(The change is somewhat minor, but easy to tell because in the new format the first line after the name and type is usually "Detect", followed by the skill (if any) used to detect the trap. The old format usually lists skills in separate blocks.)
Hi Paolo,Again, my thanks for the upcoming changes. One thing I wanted to mention is that should your team add support for traps (which would be awesome), there seems to have been a recent change to the format. It isn't a big deal, but I know how com
Very nice, but what about copying and pasting to a word document? All the features in the world are meaningless if I cannot use it at the table.
You already have that functionality - Print Screen + MSPaint + Copy/Paste + Word.
Please stop pretending like that is the same thing. Thank you.
The importance of this functionality has already been discussed and agreed upon as being an important feature.
You already have that functionality - Print Screen + MSPaint + Copy/Paste + Word. ;)[/quote]Please stop pretending like that is the same thing. Thank you.The importance of this functionality has already been discussed and agreed upon as being an imp
Anyway, I've been considering making a quick little xml to html and possibly rtf converter for the monster builder. Should be pretty easy.
That would be really awesome. I'm glad to share what the format would ideally look like.
sure. pm me a pic if it's different than the formay in, say, the monster vault
That would be really awesome. I'm glad to share what the format would ideally look like.[/quote]sure. pm me a pic if it's different than the formay in, say, the monster vault
OgreBane99, keep in mind that having any print functionality at all is an improvement over none.
Its quite true. We should be grateful for whatever we get with this free service. Oh, wait...
Yes, because everything I buy is perfect and does exactly what I want it to do always. Oh, wait...
And if everyone just mindlessly lauded even the most mediocre of "accomplishments" wotc would assume it was doing well enough. its not. I'm sorry, but DDI is still a pretty a poor value. The virtual tabletop is a crappy version of maptools from several years ago, the character builder is less functional than the offline version with certain add ons, and now the monster builder doesnt really export with decent formating.
Anyway, I've been considering making a quick little xml to html and possibly rtf converter for the monster builder. Should be pretty easy.
Why the hell should this be necessary? Its like people building these programs have no idea how they will be used.
Its quite true. We should be grateful for whatever we get with this free service. Oh, wait...[/quote]Yes, because everything I buy is perfect and does exactly what I want it to do always. Oh, wait...[/quote]And if everyone just mindlessly lauded even
Anyway, I've been considering making a quick little xml to html and possibly rtf converter for the monster builder. Should be pretty easy.
Why the hell should this be necessary? Its like people building these programs have no idea how they will be used.
For me, I see it as, why should I have to come up with a work around or fix for something I'm paying for. The ability to use what I've paid for in a format that works for me should be part of the software.
Why the hell should this be necessary? Its like people building these programs have no idea how they will be used.[/quote]For me, I see it as, why should I have to come up with a work around or fix for something I'm paying for. The ability to use wha
Why the hell should this be necessary? Its like people building these programs have no idea how they will be used.
I have already agreed that we should get the functionality from DDI, but...
Add-on functionality for software is commonplace. There is not much software in existence that doesn't have some type of macro or feature that is added on by the community. If there is a hole somewhere, someone will fill it.
So let's have a little patience and see if they address it. In the meantime, if DrNick has a utilty that will streamline the process, even better!
I have already agreed that we should get the functionality from DDI, but...Add-on functionality for software is commonplace. There is not much software in existence that doesn't have some type of macro or feature that is added on by the community.
What you are both saying (although in different context) is that if the software doesn't have the specific feature that you want, they shouldn't release it. This is contrary to every software development ever. You pick target features for version x.x and when you have those features you release. You pick the features that you think will be the most useful to the most users. Or said the other way, it means some will not be happy about what you chose to not include.
@Dane and Grand_Theft_Otto:What you are both saying (although in different context) is that if the software doesn't have the specific feature that you want, they shouldn't release it. This is contrary to every software development ever. You pick ta
How can one transfer a monster stat block from pdf format? Will it print it in the annoying, full page width block?
Guess I'm sticking with the old MB that let's me export in image and rtf.
Import in the offline builder and export to your choice of formats. It's an extra step that gets you everything after MM3 (DS CC, MV, and possibly others).
Do we know for a fact that this is possible? Will the OMB monsters work in the CMB? If so, then it does seem possible that one could place a monster in RTF into a word document.
Import in the offline builder and export to your choice of formats. It's an extra step that gets you everything after MM3 (DS CC, MV, and possibly others).[/quote]Do we know for a fact that this is possible? Will the OMB monsters work in the CMB? If
How can one transfer a monster stat block from pdf format? Will it print it in the annoying, full page width block?
Guess I'm sticking with the old MB that let's me export in image and rtf.
Import in the offline builder and export to your choice of formats. It's an extra step that gets you everything after MM3 (DS CC, MV, and possibly others).
Do we know for a fact that this is possible? Will the OMB monsters work in the CMB? If so, then it does seem possible that one could place a monster in RTF into a word document.
We do. Paolo said that there is interoperability between the two.
Import in the offline builder and export to your choice of formats. It's an extra step that gets you everything after MM3 (DS CC, MV, and possibly others).[/quote]Do we know for a fact that this is possible? Will the OMB monsters work in the CMB? If
but if you import to the old one youre likely to lose triggers etc
I don't think so froth. The bugs in the offline builder seem related to the "Edit a copy" button. I never had any problems with custom built critters. Also, once I put the triggers, etc. back into the critters stat block it didn't go away again if I edited that same custom monster again. I believe it's either bad data transformation or bad original data.
I don't think so froth. The bugs in the offline builder seem related to the "Edit a copy" button. I never had any problems with custom built critters. Also, once I put the triggers, etc. back into the critters stat block it didn't go away again if
but if you import to the old one youre likely to lose triggers etc
I don't think so froth. The bugs in the offline builder seem related to the "Edit a copy" button. I never had any problems with custom built critters. Also, once I put the triggers, etc. back into the critters stat block it didn't go away again if I edited that same custom monster again. I believe it's either bad data transformation or bad original data.
I've only built one monster in the builder since that bug was introduced. I built it from scratch and got the error so unless they changed something in the more recent update, I'm guessing that's not entirely accurate.
I don't think so froth. The bugs in the offline builder seem related to the "Edit a copy" button. I never had any problems with custom built critters. Also, once I put the triggers, etc. back into the critters stat block it didn't go away again if
What you are both saying (although in different context) is that if the software doesn't have the specific feature that you want, they shouldn't release it. This is contrary to every software development ever. You pick target features for version x.x and when you have those features you release. You pick the features that you think will be the most useful to the most users. Or said the other way, it means some will not be happy about what you chose to not include.
What I'm saying is that the software should be designed with some common sense as to how it will actually be used. And people fight monsters in groups, so that means you want to design it with an eye towards encounter layouts. Its half assed, like pretty much everything WOTC does with the DDI. They toss soemthing out there, to say they accomplished it.
But hey, we can import character portraits now. Whoopty-doo. I might be impressed if we didnt already have this feature in the better functioning offline version.
What I'm saying is that the software should be designed with some common sense as to how it will actually be used. And people fight monsters in groups, so that means you want to design it with an eye towards encounter layouts. Its half assed, like pr
The ones that seemed to crash the original MB had trigger powers. Tried taking over monsters without and they transfer, but only bring across powers. HP, defenses, etc. don't come over.
The ones that seemed to crash the original MB had trigger powers. Tried taking over monsters without and they transfer, but only bring across powers. HP, defenses, etc. don't come over.
Damn! My subscription lapsed! My old CC expired last month! Arghhhhhh!
WOW!!!
Re-upped with my new CC and 7 min later...I'm in! Way to go WotC getting the subscription process streamlined! Not at all the horror stories I've heard or the one I lived last fall. I'm quite happy!
WOW!!!:OMG!: Re-upped with my new CC and 7 min later...I'm in! Way to go WotC getting the subscription process streamlined! Not at all the horror stories I've heard or the one I lived last fall. I'm quite happy!
Unfortunately it appears the old damage values are populating when creating a new monster. That is disapointing, this was one of the things I was really hoping would be updated.
Unfortunately it appears the old damage values are populating when creating a new monster. That is disapointing, this was one of the things I was really hoping would be updated.
Unfortunately it appears the old damage values are populating when creating a new monster. That is disapointing, this was one of the things I was really hoping would be updated.
Yeah, I thought the damage output seemed kind of low. That's a bummer, but until they get it fixed at least there are options to quickly adjust the damage by setting average damage and dice size. Using the numbers from this table you'll get the monster damage up to speed quickly.
Yeah, I thought the damage output seemed kind of low. That's a bummer, but until they get it fixed at least there are options to quickly adjust the damage by setting average damage and dice size. Using the numbers from this table you'll get the monst
What you are both saying (although in different context) is that if the software doesn't have the specific feature that you want, they shouldn't release it. This is contrary to every software development ever. You pick target features for version x.x and when you have those features you release. You pick the features that you think will be the most useful to the most users. Or said the other way, it means some will not be happy about what you chose to not include.
What I'm saying is that the software should be designed with some common sense as to how it will actually be used. And people fight monsters in groups, so that means you want to design it with an eye towards encounter layouts. Its half assed, like pretty much everything WOTC does with the DDI. They toss soemthing out there, to say they accomplished it.
But hey, we can import character portraits now. Whoopty-doo. I might be impressed if we didnt already have this feature in the better functioning offline version.
So all those masterplan (tm) users (and other 3pp software) don't count eh?
We're done with the core features and we have export to XML. If users have the offline tool they can import and convert to image, RTF, or plain text. Choice A: We should release now. Choice B: Let's push release back until we the other export formats "built in".
If my chioces are that I can have the tool now and have to take a few extra steps to get the format I want, I'll take the tool now as opposed to waiting another month or more.
What I'm saying is that the software should be designed with some common sense as to how it will actually be used. And people fight monsters in groups, so that means you want to design it with an eye towards encounter layouts. Its half assed, like pr
Opinion on first use: Very slick, very intuitive, fast and easy to use. It actually seems faster than the old MB. I built a level 14 solo in 10 minutes, using a mixture of powers and traits from other monsters as well as some homebrewed ones. No problems at all. There's a lot of advances options lurking under the surface, you just have to click on the right buttons to gain access to them.
Overall, I'm extremely happy with this. If they could sort out the use of pre-MM3 values and export options I'd rate this as a major homerun for DDI. As it is, it's a 8.5 out of 10.
Opinion on first use: Very slick, very intuitive, fast and easy to use. It actually seems faster than the old MB. I built a level 14 solo in 10 minutes, using a mixture of powers and traits from other monsters as well as some homebrewed ones. No pro
For your information, I've tried importing the .monster exports into Goathead's DM Minion 2.0, and so far it works. Sorry for Masterplan and DD4eCM users, though
For your information, I've tried importing the .monster exports into Goathead's DM Minion 2.0, and so far it works. Sorry for Masterplan and DD4eCM users, though :(
mb is repeatedly crashing when i try to edit damage lines for new artillery monster. the + sign freezes it then crashes
import to masterplan works, more or less
mb is repeatedly crashing when i try to edit damage lines for new artillery monster. the + sign freezes it then crashesimport to masterplan works, more or less
The dev team has been made aware of the crash bug and is working on a fix. They hope to have it ready this afternoon, but it's not yet ready as of this moment, which means nothing is certain. They don't expect that the tool will need to be pulled down for this fix, but that's not 100%, either.
FYI, the crash seems to be related to nonstandard entries; i.e., 1d2, 1d3, 1d5, etc. Avoid those and you should avoid the crash. If not, let us know.
Steve
The dev team has been made aware of the crash bug and is working on a fix. They hope to have it ready this afternoon, but it's not yet ready as of this moment, which means nothing is certain. They don't expect that the tool will need to be pulled dow
The dev team has been made aware of the crash bug and is working on a fix. They hope to have it ready this afternoon, but it's not yet ready as of this moment, which means nothing is certain. They don't expect that the tool will need to be pulled down for this fix, but that's not 100%, either.
FYI, the crash seems to be related to nonstandard entries; i.e., 1d2, 1d3, 1d5, etc. Avoid those and you should avoid the crash. If not, let us know.
Steve
actually it was typing a + sign that made mine crash, i didnt do non standard entries. i made it clear in my bug report
actually it was typing a + sign that made mine crash, i didnt do non standard entries. i made it clear in my bug report
Char Builder: Can't houserule-add feats. Still unusable.
Monster Builder: Pre MM3-stats. Power2ool.com still better. And has more storage space.
Getting closer I guess - it's just frustrating that the builder is still nowhere near the functionality of the one they took away.
Char Builder: Can't houserule-add feats. Still unusable.Monster Builder: Pre MM3-stats. Power2ool.com still better. And has more storage space.Getting closer I guess - it's just frustrating that the builder is still nowhere near the functionality of
New MB working great. Bug crash when i first tried to DELETE damage line of a New Utility Power. DID this twice. AFter that all worked fine. Been Customizing and creating a dozen new monsters and Imported then successfully into the VT
Damage expression pre-MM3 needs to be upped. Otherwise its very slick and i am quite happy to see this tool completed finally !
Hats to the crew
New MB working great. Bug crash when i first tried to DELETE damage line of a New Utility Power. DID this twice. AFter that all worked fine. Been Customizing and creating a dozen new monsters and Imported then successfully into the VTDamage expressio
Okay, maybe I am just being an idiot or maybe I am looking for a feature that isn't there, but how the heck do I Export a monster? If theres a button to do it, I can't find it.
Okay, maybe I am just being an idiot or maybe I am looking for a feature that isn't there, but how the heck do I Export a monster? If theres a button to do it, I can't find it.
Problem. Have only tested it with 1 moster at the moment.
Gray Wolf. I customized it. Changed the bite damage to 1d6+5, and it shows 1d6+5 in the window. As soon as I click "return" it goes back to 1d6+4. So I changed it to 1d6+7, and it changed it to 1d6+6. 1d6+15 became 1d6+14. So, regardless of what I changed the damage to, it subtracted 1 from the final result.
I have yet to test this out in other monsters.
Problem. Have only tested it with 1 moster at the moment.Gray Wolf. I customized it. Changed the bite damage to 1d6+5, and it shows 1d6+5 in the window. As soon as I click "return" it goes back to 1d6+4. So I changed it to 1d6+7, and it changed
Char Builder: Can't houserule-add feats. Still unusable.
Monster Builder: Pre MM3-stats. Power2ool.com still better. And has more storage space.
Getting closer I guess - it's just frustrating that the builder is still nowhere near the functionality of the one they took away.
#1 - Probably not high on the priority list to add house rule options.
#2 - Although I have not played with it much I have heard others say even creating a monster by scratch has the old values. Could juse be a database problem (i.e they didnt update the database or loaded the wrong database). From all the talk about it I am sure it has been reported.
#3 - I assume you mean the CB here which yes you could add a feat in it, but it never calculated that feat anywhere on the sheet. So it in essence was no different than you writing it in with a pencil.
#1 - Probably not high on the priority list to add house rule options.#2 - Although I have not played with it much I have heard others say even creating a monster by scratch has the old values. Could juse be a database problem (i.e they didnt update
The adventure tools are crashing for me with an "unknown error" at the loading screen. I've submitted a ticket to customer service with the error log attached. I'm curious to know if others are seeing this issue as well.
The adventure tools are crashing for me with an "unknown error" at the loading screen. I've submitted a ticket to customer service with the error log attached. I'm curious to know if others are seeing this issue as well.
Char Builder: Can't houserule-add feats. Still unusable.
Monster Builder: Pre MM3-stats. Power2ool.com still better. And has more storage space.
Getting closer I guess - it's just frustrating that the builder is still nowhere near the functionality of the one they took away.
#1 - Probably not high on the priority list to add house rule options.
#2 - Although I have not played with it much I have heard others say even creating a monster by scratch has the old values. Could juse be a database problem (i.e they didnt update the database or loaded the wrong database). From all the talk about it I am sure it has been reported.
#3 - I assume you mean the CB here which yes you could add a feat in it, but it never calculated that feat anywhere on the sheet. So it in essence was no different than you writing it in with a pencil.
You could at least add house rules like bonus feats, skills, etc. You could rename items, add languages and backgrounds. Moreover, you could actually get the math to work. People have added entire classes to the thing. The crowdsourced old builder is much better than the current online only builder. No surprise there.
#1 - Probably not high on the priority list to add house rule options.#2 - Although I have not played with it much I have heard others say even creating a monster by scratch has the old values. Could juse be a database problem (i.e they didnt update
What you are both saying (although in different context) is that if the software doesn't have the specific feature that you want, they shouldn't release it. This is contrary to every software development ever. You pick target features for version x.x and when you have those features you release. You pick the features that you think will be the most useful to the most users. Or said the other way, it means some will not be happy about what you chose to not include.
What I'm saying is that the software should be designed with some common sense as to how it will actually be used. And people fight monsters in groups, so that means you want to design it with an eye towards encounter layouts. Its half assed, like pretty much everything WOTC does with the DDI. They toss soemthing out there, to say they accomplished it.
But hey, we can import character portraits now. Whoopty-doo. I might be impressed if we didnt already have this feature in the better functioning offline version.
So all those masterplan (tm) users (and other 3pp software) don't count eh?
NO, YOU DONT. Not compared to the vastly larger number of people who use word.
We're done with the core features and we have export to XML. If users have the offline tool they can import and convert to image, RTF, or plain text. Choice A: We should release now. Choice B: Let's push release back until we the other export formats "built in".
You;ve got it backwards. Export to text should have been the first priority, the other second.
If my chioces are that I can have the tool now and have to take a few extra steps to get the format I want, I'll take the tool now as opposed to waiting another month or more.
The problem is WOTC drags its ass to fix anything. Case in point - we can just now import portraits. Which you could always do from the old builder. Its what, a year later, and they still havent even made the new builder as good as the old one? I sure am glad they wasted a bunch of resources to punish those who just subscribed for a month to update and cancel, as opposed to offering better functionality to encourage people to remain subscribed.
What I'm saying is that the software should be designed with some common sense as to how it will actually be used. And people fight monsters in groups, so that means you want to design it with an eye towards encounter layouts. Its half assed, like pr
Grand_Theft_Otto, I wish I lived in your world where other software was so perfect. I've worked for years managing software projects and digital content projects, as well as implementing third party solutions into software. I haven't met a company/provider that didn't have to compromise on what they deliver, didn't have a shortage of resources (to some extent), didn't struggle to please users, and didn't have someone on forums telling them they take forever to fix things, miss obvious functional needs, have their priorities backwards, etc. I define this as the reality of the business space. If you've managed to solve those problems or know companies that have, please do share their names.
Example within the same industry: Paizo introduces a pdf sample of their new intro boxed set. One of the first forum posts is that the download link doesn't work. We would all agree broken links, in theory, should never happen. I haven't met a company where that is the case.
Grand_Theft_Otto, I wish I lived in your world where other software was so perfect. I've worked for years managing software projects and digital content projects, as well as implementing third party solutions into software. I haven't met a company/pr
What you are both saying (although in different context) is that if the software doesn't have the specific feature that you want, they shouldn't release it. This is contrary to every software development ever. You pick target features for version x.x and when you have those features you release. You pick the features that you think will be the most useful to the most users. Or said the other way, it means some will not be happy about what you chose to not include.
What I'm saying is that the software should be designed with some common sense as to how it will actually be used. And people fight monsters in groups, so that means you want to design it with an eye towards encounter layouts. Its half assed, like pretty much everything WOTC does with the DDI. They toss soemthing out there, to say they accomplished it.
But hey, we can import character portraits now. Whoopty-doo. I might be impressed if we didnt already have this feature in the better functioning offline version.
So all those masterplan (tm) users (and other 3pp software) don't count eh?
NO, YOU DONT. Not compared to the vastly larger number of people who use word.
Stop making this into personal attacks.
I don't use masterplan and I find it interesting that you automatically ASSUME that because I asked about "those users" you decided I was therefore one of them. I didn't even say "So all us masterplan..." thereby including myself in said group.
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and put you in the big chair. Let's pretend you're in change over at WotC. You only get one export format at launch because that's all you have time to implement. Here are your choices:
A) XML - This option integrates directly to other 3pp software that has been developed as well as importing into the old tool. From there your customers can use the old tool to create any of the old supported formats (RTF, plain text, image). This option (though needing extra steps) supports all currently supported formats at launch. B) RTF - This option doesn't work with 3pp software so a segment of your customer base will be completely unserved at launch. You also can't import to your old tool to generate images or plain text. C) Image - Well, we could do this, but anyone who wants an image can use "printscreen" and paste into their choice of software. Seems like a poor choice D) Plain text - Much the same as RTF.
We're done with the core features and we have export to XML. If users have the offline tool they can import and convert to image, RTF, or plain text. Choice A: We should release now. Choice B: Let's push release back until we the other export formats "built in".
You;ve got it backwards. Export to text should have been the first priority, the other second.
If my chioces are that I can have the tool now and have to take a few extra steps to get the format I want, I'll take the tool now as opposed to waiting another month or more.
The problem is WOTC drags its ass to fix anything. Case in point - we can just now import portraits. Which you could always do from the old builder. Its what, a year later, and they still havent even made the new builder as good as the old one? I sure am glad they wasted a bunch of resources to punish those who just subscribed for a month to update and cancel, as opposed to offering better functionality to encourage people to remain subscribed.
I'm not sure what any of this has to do with the issue at hand (which export format at launch), but what the heck. "Better functionality" was not going to solve the subscribe and cancel problem and if you think it would have then I have some swamp land in Florida I'd like to sell you.
If you're really this bitter and you feel WotC has no right to make a profit, I politely suggest you just cancel now and get your refund.
What I'm saying is that the software should be designed with some common sense as to how it will actually be used. And people fight monsters in groups, so that means you want to design it with an eye towards encounter layouts. Its half assed, like pr
B) RTF - This option doesn't work with 3pp software so a segment of your customer base will be completely unserved at launch. You also can't import to your old tool to generate images or plain text.
This is not accurate. There are a lot of 3rd party utitilies out there that parse monster data in RTF format right from the clipboard. Also, Word and Wordpad are 3pp as they pertain to the MB, and RTF works just great with them.
This is not accurate. There are a lot of 3rd party utitilies out there that parse monster data in RTF format right from the clipboard. Also, Word and Wordpad are 3pp as they pertain to the MB, and RTF works just great with them.
B) RTF - This option doesn't work with 3pp software so a segment of your customer base will be completely unserved at launch. You also can't import to your old tool to generate images or plain text.
This is not accurate. There are a lot of 3rd party utitilies out there that parse monster data in RTF format right from the clipboard. Also, Word and Wordpad are 3pp as they pertain to the MB, and RTF works just great with them.
Ok, then I stand corrected. RTF still doesn't support all existing formats at launch they way that XML does for the same reasons I laid out. Just there are a few options that use RTF that I wasn't aware of. Sorry I wasn't thinking of "Word" as 3pp - just masterplan et. al. I view 3pp as software written specifically for use with a given product. Word wasn't made specifically for DDI tools even though it can be used with them.
This is not accurate. There are a lot of 3rd party utitilies out there that parse monster data in RTF format right from the clipboard. Also, Word and Wordpad are 3pp as they pertain to the MB, and RTF works just great with them. [/quote]Ok, then I
Ok, then I stand corrected. RTF still doesn't support all existing formats at launch they way that XML does for the same reasons I laid out. Just there are a few options that use RTF that I wasn't aware of. Sorry I wasn't thinking of "Word" as 3pp - just masterplan et. al. I view 3pp as software written specifically for use with a given product. Word wasn't made specifically for DDI tools even though it can be used with them.
XML, as it has been provided, was not intended for use in 3pp. They provided it so people could import and export them into the new monster builder and the VT. Everything else, including importing it into the old monster builder, is tertiary, therefore your reasoning behind your A choice is faulty, especially the "supports all currently supported formats at launch" part. Initial testing and reports indicate that the new XML format isn't even entirely compatible with the old MB. Follow-up editing is still required.
Providing the RTF export and RTF To Clipboard functionality is a valid request, and should be a priority. You can act like it was not an oversight all you like, but it was an oversight. It is also an incredibly simple thing to implement.
It also stands to reason that more people know how to understand and manipulate RTF format than XML format, thus it is potentially more useful to the end user. It is as viable an option, if not more, than XML, except for how it pertains to importing to the online MB and the VT.
XML, as it has been provided, was not intended for use in 3pp. They provided it so people could import and export them into the new monster builder and the VT. Everything else, including importing it into the old monster builder, is tertiary, there
Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.
I’ve removed content from this thread because Baiting is a violation of the Code of Conduct. You can review the Code of Conduct here:wizards.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/wizards.cfg...Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain
Providing the RTF export and RTF To Clipboard functionality is a valid request, and should be a priority. You can act like it was not an oversight all you like, but it was an oversight. It is also an incredibly simple thing to implement.
It also stands to reason that more people know how to understand and manipulate RTF format than XML format, thus it is potentially more useful to the end user. It is as viable an option, if not more, than XML, except for how it pertains to importing to the online MB and the VT.
Please show me where I said RTF export was NOT a valid request and it shouldn't be a priority or stop using straw man arguements.
Please show me where I said RTF export was NOT a valid request and it shouldn't be a priority or stop using straw man arguements.
Providing the RTF export and RTF To Clipboard functionality is a valid request, and should be a priority. You can act like it was not an oversight all you like, but it was an oversight. It is also an incredibly simple thing to implement.
It also stands to reason that more people know how to understand and manipulate RTF format than XML format, thus it is potentially more useful to the end user. It is as viable an option, if not more, than XML, except for how it pertains to importing to the online MB and the VT.
Please show me where I said RTF export was NOT a valid request and it shouldn't be a priority or stop using straw man arguements.
As soon as you show me where I said that you said it was not a valid request or not a priority.
My response that "the RTF functionality is a valid request and should be a priority" does not in any way make any inference that you do not feel that way. I merely presented it as a point and I attached no connotations to it. The inference is of your own creation.
Please show me where I said RTF export was NOT a valid request and it shouldn't be a priority or stop using straw man arguements.[/quote]As soon as you show me where I said that you said it was not a valid request or not a priority. My response that
I use the MB mainly as a monster index. I filter the monsters based on a) The source. I only use data from the books that I possess. b) The keyword or the origin. The reason is that I want to design "theme" encounters (and not 2 treants, 2 demons, 5 serpents and a drow...) c) The XP.
Till now, I had to find the monster, then write the name in Compendium, and then copy - paste the stats in my text editor, in order to have everything I need in a single file during the gameplay. I was more than happy when I saw that there is a direct link to the compendium... But, then I couldn't find the monsters I was searching for! I searched for Kobold Quickblade in the MV, and the result was 0. I noticed that the number of monsters in the MV was only 159 and that the Kobold had as it's only source Dungeon Magazine 182...
As it is right now, MB is useless to me, because I can't filter the monsters, based on the source... Please fix it! And please, allow us to choose from a number of sources, instead of only 1...
I use the MB mainly as a monster index. I filter the monsters based ona) The source. I only use data from the books that I possess.b) The keyword or the origin. The reason is that I want to design "theme" encounters (and not 2 treants, 2 demons, 5 se
I use the MB mainly as a monster index. I filter the monsters based on a) The source. I only use data from the books that I possess. b) The keyword or the origin. The reason is that I want to design "theme" encounters (and not 2 treants, 2 demons, 5 serpents and a drow...) c) The XP.
Till now, I had to find the monster, then write the name in Compendium, and then copy - paste the stats in my text editor, in order to have everything I need in a single file during the gameplay. I was more than happy when I saw that there is a direct link to the compendium... But, then I couldn't find the monsters I was searching for! I searched for Kobold Quickblade in the MV, and the result was 0. I noticed that the number of monsters in the MV was only 159 and that the Kobold had as it's only source Dungeon Magazine 182...
As it is right now, MB is useless to me, because I can't filter the monsters, based on the source... Please fix it! And please, allow us to choose from a number of sources, instead of only 1...
I use the MB mainly as a monster index. I filter the monsters based on a) The source. I only use data from the books that I possess. b) The keyword or the origin. The reason is that I want to design "theme" encounters (and not 2 treants, 2 demons, 5 serpents and a drow...) c) The XP.
Till now, I had to find the monster, then write the name in Compendium, and then copy - paste the stats in my text editor, in order to have everything I need in a single file during the gameplay. I was more than happy when I saw that there is a direct link to the compendium... But, then I couldn't find the monsters I was searching for! I searched for Kobold Quickblade in the MV, and the result was 0. I noticed that the number of monsters in the MV was only 159 and that the Kobold had as it's only source Dungeon Magazine 182...
As it is right now, MB is useless to me, because I can't filter the monsters, based on the source... Please fix it! And please, allow us to choose from a number of sources, instead of only 1...
Providing the RTF export and RTF To Clipboard functionality is a valid request, and should be a priority. You can act like it was not an oversight all you like, but it was an oversight. It is also an incredibly simple thing to implement.
It also stands to reason that more people know how to understand and manipulate RTF format than XML format, thus it is potentially more useful to the end user. It is as viable an option, if not more, than XML, except for how it pertains to importing to the online MB and the VT.
Please show me where I said RTF export was NOT a valid request and it shouldn't be a priority or stop using straw man arguements.
As soon as you show me where I said that you said it was not a valid request or not a priority.
My response that "the RTF functionality is a valid request and should be a priority" does not in any way make any inference that you do not feel that way. I merely presented it as a point and I attached no connotations to it. The inference is of your own creation.
Then my apologies. The correct assessment is that you claim that "it was an oversight" (implied meaning of "it" from context is not adding export to RTF) which is unprovable. You further claim that my comments are based on said unprovable premise "You can act like it was not an oversight" which is most certainly false. My premise is that they "chose" not to implement said feature for this version.
Since the XML export was a pre-existing feature I would have to amend my earlier choices:
A) Release "fully functional" (put in quotes so as not to imply bug free) with no new export formats (just the current XML) OR B) Don't release.
I'll chose A.
Please show me where I said RTF export was NOT a valid request and it shouldn't be a priority or stop using straw man arguements.[/quote]As soon as you show me where I said that you said it was not a valid request or not a priority. My response that
You further claim that my comments are based on said unprovable premise "You can act like it was not an oversight" which is most certainly false. My premise is that they "chose" not to implement said feature for this version.
Based upon the apparent demand for RTF functionality, I would say that "choice" was a bad one. It was almost as if they underestimated the need for it.
Accepted. Based upon the apparent demand for RTF functionality, I would say that "choice" was a bad one. It was almost as if they underestimated the need for it.
You further claim that my comments are based on said unprovable premise "You can act like it was not an oversight" which is most certainly false. My premise is that they "chose" not to implement said feature for this version.
Based upon the apparent demand for RTF functionality, I would say that "choice" was a bad one. It was almost as if they underestimated the need for it.
I'll go with that. It wouldn't be so bad if the offline tool were able to do the conversion. Then it would just be "inconvenience" which I'd live with till next month.
Based upon the apparent demand for RTF functionality, I would say that "choice" was a bad one. It was almost as if they underestimated the need for it.[/quote]I'll go with that. It wouldn't be so bad if the offline tool were able to do the conversi
You further claim that my comments are based on said unprovable premise "You can act like it was not an oversight" which is most certainly false. My premise is that they "chose" not to implement said feature for this version.
Based upon the apparent demand for RTF functionality, I would say that "choice" was a bad one. It was almost as if they underestimated the need for it.
I'll go with that. It wouldn't be so bad if the offline tool were able to do the conversion. Then it would just be "inconvenience" which I'd live with till next month.
Oh, I definitely would love that. DrNick hinted at one earlier in the thread.
4eTurnTracker does not yet support the XML import, only the RTF one, and it seems like it may be the best combat tracker to date (opinion, of course).
I will probably do some testing tonight with the various 3pp to see how they handle the OMB exports.
Based upon the apparent demand for RTF functionality, I would say that "choice" was a bad one. It was almost as if they underestimated the need for it.[/quote]I'll go with that. It wouldn't be so bad if the offline tool were able to do the conversi
You further claim that my comments are based on said unprovable premise "You can act like it was not an oversight" which is most certainly false. My premise is that they "chose" not to implement said feature for this version.
Based upon the apparent demand for RTF functionality, I would say that "choice" was a bad one. It was almost as if they underestimated the need for it.
I'll go with that. It wouldn't be so bad if the offline tool were able to do the conversion. Then it would just be "inconvenience" which I'd live with till next month.
Oh, I definitely would love that. DrNick hinted at one earlier in the thread.
4eTurnTracker does not yet support the XML import, only the RTF one, and it seems like it may be the best combat tracker to date (opinion, of course).
I will probably do some testing tonight with the various 3pp to see how they handle the OMB exports.
I written parsers before and it seems like with XML you wouldn't have to do localization crap like you would with RTF so I guess that's why I'm partial to importing XML instead. I remember when the offline tool first came out and ppl were having issues parsing the RTF and it turned out to be localization issues.
Based upon the apparent demand for RTF functionality, I would say that "choice" was a bad one. It was almost as if they underestimated the need for it.[/quote]I'll go with that. It wouldn't be so bad if the offline tool were able to do the conversi
You further claim that my comments are based on said unprovable premise "You can act like it was not an oversight" which is most certainly false. My premise is that they "chose" not to implement said feature for this version.
Based upon the apparent demand for RTF functionality, I would say that "choice" was a bad one. It was almost as if they underestimated the need for it.
I'll go with that. It wouldn't be so bad if the offline tool were able to do the conversion. Then it would just be "inconvenience" which I'd live with till next month.
Oh, I definitely would love that. DrNick hinted at one earlier in the thread.
4eTurnTracker does not yet support the XML import, only the RTF one, and it seems like it may be the best combat tracker to date (opinion, of course).
I will probably do some testing tonight with the various 3pp to see how they handle the OMB exports.
I'm partial to Dungeon Master's Battle Screen which imports .monster files, but I'm gonna have to check this new one out...it certainly looks pretty!!
Based upon the apparent demand for RTF functionality, I would say that "choice" was a bad one. It was almost as if they underestimated the need for it.[/quote]I'll go with that. It wouldn't be so bad if the offline tool were able to do the conversi
Math: as far as I can tell (bugs notwithstanding), it uses mm3 calculations and stat block.
Just wanted to clarify... In no case does it use the MM3 math. It neither uses the MM3 math when making a new monster, nor when up/down-leveling an existing monster.
This is the #1 issue that's not crash-related, IMO. It's basically the whole point of using a monster builder - getting the math done for you rather than by hand. The formatting is pretty much secondary.
-O
Just wanted to clarify... In no case does it use the MM3 math. It neither uses the MM3 math when making a new monster, nor when up/down-leveling an existing monster. :)This is the #1 issue that's not crash-related, IMO. It's basically the whole po
I'm actually a bit surprised that it is as big an issue for so many. For me it was a far bigger issue to see the editing capability and proper screens so we could quickly edit and modify. I can easily look up expected values and I tend to play with damage based on the encounter I'm designing, so it wasn't a big deal for me what era damage it used. I can see how you all feel, but it surprised me that it was so big a deal for so many.
As I wrote earlier, it is tricky to really nail down how the logic should work. I agree that we want the latest logic for new monsters (if I add a power to a level 20 brute, it should have the correct average damage as a suggestion). It becomes trickier when we talk about leveling a previously made monster upwards. Say you make a custom monster and you deliberately set a power to do low damage because you want it to stun. Now you change your mind and bump it down a level... if the program is too strict about using MM3 damage, it could end up placing the average damage (a huge increase beyond what you wanted). Or, take an MM2 creature that actually works ok as designed. Should the program change those values when you pull it up for editing?
I personally would like to see the program set average values for any new power, but use scaling math (based on the chart Chris Perkins posted) to just adjust for the difference in levels. If you deliberately set low damage and you go from level 13 to 20, the program would figure out what that damage difference (based on monster role) would be and applies it. For guidance (as kenjoon suggested), the program could just display the expected average so the user can see it and be aware of it.
But, the RTF export (in the right format for DDI and LFR authors) is a far bigger priority for me. For me the goal is RTF to get monsters into Microsoft Word or equivalent, and secondarily to have an XML output that third parties could use. Without an RTF export (or the ability to use the XML export to open the monster in the CB) I have issues as an Organized Play author. I don't want to get this close to being able to edit a monster for organized play and then have to repeat my work in the old MB. For a home DM this is likely not as big an issue, since you can screen print just about as quickly as you can adjust a copy-paste result from RTF.
My second priority would be traps/hazards and monster themes. I want to be able to consider traps as part of my options for encounter design and I want to be able to edit them. I absolutely want to take a trap and add a monster power to it and then rename the power to sound like a trap attack. I want to up and down-level a hazard. And, I really want to quickly search through monster themes and apply some to a monster I am customizing. Terrain is of some interest, but that would be better in an encounter builder than here. Also, while I have heard of some wanting templates, I really don't use them in my game (I use monster themes exclusively). Templates are thus a nice-to-have for me.
Monster damage is probably my third priority after the two above.
I'm actually a bit surprised that it is as big an issue for so many. For me it was a far bigger issue to see the editing capability and proper screens so we could quickly edit and modify. I can easily look up expected values and I tend to play with d
Math: as far as I can tell (bugs notwithstanding), it uses mm3 calculations and stat block.
Just wanted to clarify... In no case does it use the MM3 math. It neither uses the MM3 math when making a new monster, nor when up/down-leveling an existing monster.
This is the #1 issue that's not crash-related, IMO. It's basically the whole point of using a monster builder - getting the math done for you rather than by hand. The formatting is pretty much secondary.
-O
I'm a big fan of this new and improved MB. The dev team did a lot of great work. But... the math issue is something that really has to be resolved for this product to live to its potential.
I find PaoloM's statement to be a point of concern. It implies a real disconnect between the game designers and the DDI development team if they think the numbers used are post-MM3 values. Hopefully this gets resolved soon.
Just wanted to clarify... In no case does it use the MM3 math. It neither uses the MM3 math when making a new monster, nor when up/down-leveling an existing monster. :)This is the #1 issue that's not crash-related, IMO. It's basically the whole po
I find PaoloM's statement to be a point of concern. It implies a real disconnect between the game designers and the DDI development team if they think the numbers used are post-MM3 values. Hopefully this gets resolved soon.
I thought that as well. PaoloM's statement makes it seem that outside of some mistakes, it uses the MM3 math. But lots of people are saying it doesn't.
I thought that as well. PaoloM's statement makes it seem that outside of some mistakes, it uses the MM3 math. But lots of people are saying it doesn't.
I'm actually a bit surprised that it is as big an issue for so many. For me it was a far bigger issue to see the editing capability and proper screens so we could quickly edit and modify. I can easily look up expected values and I tend to play with damage based on the encounter I'm designing, so it wasn't a big deal for me what era damage it used. I can see how you all feel, but it surprised me that it was so big a deal for so many...
It's a matter of consistency more than anything else - the new rules are the new rules, and the policy from on high has been that the tools (whether offline or online) adhere to the most recent rules updates. So, aside from the fact that it will be quite a bit of hard work to update the monsters already extant, there's no good reason I can see for the Monster Builder not be using the official rules for monster design.
That does mean that if there was a good MM2 monster, the tool should change it anyway, because functional or not, the monster is not in conformity with the official rules. It would be nice to have some real smarts embedded so that it tried to look at the delta for custom monsters and guess what you were trying to do, but otherwise (and especially for non-custom monsters), it should simply update the monster, and perhaps flag the updated values for your attention, or perhaps not (the CB and previous MB never did, as best I can recall).
It seems like perhaps this ultimately stems from miscommunication between R&D and software development, which maybe will be corrected in the next update. But I think it's a surprising oversight given how long its taken to release a functional Monster Builder, and how long people have been hoping for an MM3 update sweep.
Which is not to say RTF export is minimal; but IMO the monster mechanics take precedence.
It's a matter of consistency more than anything else - the new rules are the new rules, and the policy from on high has been that the tools (whether offline or online) adhere to the most recent rules updates. So, aside from the fact that it will be q
My BIGGEST gripe about Adventure Tools is that it isn't. It is AN Adventure Tool. Monsters. That's all I have.
I'd like RTF export. I use Masterplan and D&D4e Combat Manager. I'd prefer not to constantly use the old character builder, entering a monster I want from a new source, then exporting that way when I'm paying for DDI/Compendium.
As a secondary, I'd like to see a button that you can press on all pre-MM3 monsters that will automatically update the attack bonuses and damage. That way, if I want to use a pre-MM3 the way it was originally written, awesome. But if I want it to be updated, I make the decision.
My BIGGEST gripe about Adventure Tools is that it isn't. It is AN Adventure Tool. Monsters. That's all I have.I'd like RTF export. I use Masterplan and D&D4e Combat Manager. I'd prefer not to constantly use the old character builder, entering a
My opinion on the MM3 math is to keep all monsters' numbers as they were originally published, but use the MM3 math if any monster is created or edited. That's all I want. No need to update all the older monsters because the user can do that if they want - but it should be made easy to do just by sliding the level slider up and down or something, and NOT modify the original copy of the older monster. Or even better yet, click a button to convert your copy of the monster to the MM3 math.
Updating the numbers is still the biggest time sink for me using the MB, since I rarely make monsters from scratch but instead modify existing monsters.
So please, WoTC, don't update the old monsters, but DO set it up so that new monsters and edited monsters use the new math automatically.
My opinion on the MM3 math is to keep all monsters' numbers as they were originally published, but use the MM3 math if any monster is created or edited. That's all I want. No need to update all the older monsters because the user can do that if the
My opinion on the MM3 math is to keep all monsters' numbers as they were originally published, but use the MM3 math if any monster is created or edited. That's all I want. No need to update all the older monsters because the user can do that if they want - but it should be made easy to do just by sliding the level slider up and down or something, and NOT modify the original copy of the older monster. Or even better yet, click a button to convert your copy of the monster to the MM3 math.
Updating the numbers is still the biggest time sink for me using the MB, since I rarely make monsters from scratch but instead modify existing monsters.
So please, WoTC, don't update the old monsters, but DO set it up so that new monsters and edited monsters use the new math automatically.
I'll disagree. I want the MB to show the new MM3 math numbers, and maybe have a "reset" button that adjusts a given entry to MM3 standards, but I want to be the one in control. I reject software that "automatically" makes decisions for me and I'm sure if you think about it you'll feel the same way.
I'll disagree. I want the MB to show the new MM3 math numbers, and maybe have a "reset" button that adjusts a given entry to MM3 standards, but I want to be the one in control. I reject software that "automatically" makes decisions for me and I'm s
I'll disagree. I want the MB to show the new MM3 math numbers, and maybe have a "reset" button that adjusts a given entry to MM3 standards, but I want to be the one in control. I reject software that "automatically" makes decisions for me and I'm sure if you think about it you'll feel the same way.
In fairness, you're not in control for the Character Builder (in the sense that, if a rule changes, the CB just changes it; you don't get an option). This is in fact the gist of my comment earlier - not automatically updating monsters to the new rules is inconsistent in terms of how rules updates propagate between the tools. Of course, it's been consistently inconsistent...but the point remains.
Which is not to say I don't understand or respect your preference - I would personally rather have it fix the math for me without my active involvement, but it's simply preference.
In fairness, you're not in control for the Character Builder (in the sense that, if a rule changes, the CB just changes it; you don't get an option). This is in fact the gist of my comment earlier - not automatically updating monsters to the new rule
I'll disagree. I want the MB to show the new MM3 math numbers, and maybe have a "reset" button that adjusts a given entry to MM3 standards, but I want to be the one in control. I reject software that "automatically" makes decisions for me and I'm sure if you think about it you'll feel the same way.
In fairness, you're not in control for the Character Builder (in the sense that, if a rule changes, the CB just changes it; you don't get an option). This is in fact the gist of my comment earlier - not automatically updating monsters to the new rules is inconsistent in terms of how rules updates propagate between the tools. Of course, it's been consistently inconsistent...but the point remains.
Which is not to say I don't understand or respect your preference - I would personally rather have it fix the math for me without my active involvement, but it's simply preference.
While I understand the desire to "just fix it", there isn't going to be any "good" way to have hard and fast rules that will achieve the desired result consistantly. There are too many scenarios where having it do that will be the opposite of helpful. * Attacks with ongoing damage * Attacks with daze/stun at-will * Attacks with other status effects The one thing the MB has been (mostly) consistant about is showing all printed monsters with their most up to date errata. I don't want to edit a creature (with or without errata) and have the builder execute some voodoo magic code without telling me exactly what it did. I'd say the old builders "reset" buttons are the best option since you get to see what the before and after are before you do anything with a single click to "commit". For the kind of functionality you want, I'd prefer a button "Update all attacks to MM3 math" so that at least you have the choice (if the suggested "reset" buttons aren't fast enough for you).
In fairness, you're not in control for the Character Builder (in the sense that, if a rule changes, the CB just changes it; you don't get an option). This is in fact the gist of my comment earlier - not automatically updating monsters to the new rule
I have to agree with Kenjoon. As a DM I have been adjusting to the MM3 and MV standard (as best I can) since it came out. There is fudge and wiggle that I would not trust to a script. A lot of the items that must be considered are not even values in the builder, but part of text strings.
Best just to have the most recent printed version available and new math available, ether displayed or calculated upon request.
I have to agree with Kenjoon. As a DM I have been adjusting to the MM3 and MV standard (as best I can) since it came out. There is fudge and wiggle that I would not trust to a script. A lot of the items that must be considered are not even values in
That is a good point - reflecting on that, I think I would have to go to option 2: take one of the team aside (maybe the guy who does the articles on this), and say "Hire 2 interns. Their job, and yours, is to update all of the pre-MM3 monsters to MM3 stats. You've got (insert timeframe here). Godspeed."
I'm dead serious about the fact that I don't want to have to do anything to get appropriately updated monsters. I understand that automatic updating is sub-optimal*, though, and I recall the designers saying in the past that it's as much art as science. To that, I say, "get painting."
Now, I highly doubt that will happen. It is my assumption that they will not make any changes to pre-MM3 monsters, except for the ones that show up in the occasional Monster Manual update articles. This is a purely academic discussion in that sense, and I'm not angry or anything about it. However, if nothing else, I think they should focus on getting the MM3 standard properly implemented for new (i.e., newly created) monsters soonest.
* I mean, I can think of ways to approach it that would be pretty successful, but it really depends on how finely granulated the monster data is.
That is a good point - reflecting on that, I think I would have to go to option 2: take one of the team aside (maybe the guy who does the articles on this), and say "Hire 2 interns. Their job, and yours, is to update all of the pre-MM3 monsters to MM
I agree with Wizards that you want a guy like Logan Bonner, not two random interns, updating monsters. It isn't as easy as it looks. And, it isn't as if pre-MM3 monsters are useless. It can work very well to mix post and pre MM3 in an encounter. You just want to note the damage levels. For example, take MM1 monsters and put them in a room with terrain that damages only players until they best a skill challenge - perfect!
My point being that we don't need this done automatically for us. Leave the monsters as they are and just show us a clear reminder of the average damage expected for such a power (based on level, monster role, limited vs at-will). Maybe also have a single-click button that would "update monster damage to average values", though I would hesitate to do even that because not all DMs understand what this would do. "Sure, stun plus your bloody value in damage to everyone in the room... what's the problem? Ok, now these monsters get to go..."
I agree with Wizards that you want a guy like Logan Bonner, not two random interns, updating monsters. It isn't as easy as it looks. And, it isn't as if pre-MM3 monsters are useless. It can work very well to mix post and pre MM3 in an encounter. You
The use of the pre-MM3 math seems to have been the result of a failure to communicate, as Strother Martin would say. Calculations will be updated to the MM3 algorithm in the October update.
Steve
The use of the pre-MM3 math seems to have been the result of a failure to communicate, as Strother Martin would say. Calculations will be updated to the MM3 algorithm in the October update. Steve
The use of the pre-MM3 math seems to have been the result of a failure to communicate, as Strother Martin would say. Calculations will be updated to the MM3 algorithm in the October update.
Happens!
Can you share with us how you will handle existing monsters or the user going into edit mode for an existing monster? We have some worries around scenarios:
Monster is paragon, but has encounter power that does low damage plus stun. MB should probably not update the power's damage.
Monster is pre-MM3, but works well and user wants to edit it (say, to change a power that pushes to have it instead pull) but not have damage be updated.
New Monster, user wants it to have lower or higher damage than usual.
Editing monster, user wants to change the damage but be able to reference expected average damage values.
What happens when I take a monster and raise or lower the level? Does the program use Chris Perkins' chart to figure out the delta, regardless of what this power is, and then apply the delta? Or, does it change the average each time you change the level? (The later is worse, since it would change a stun+low damage power in a way that would likely be undesirable).
What happens if I raise/lower ability scores? The newer logic seems to be that this only affects skills and does not affect defenses. Current logic probably is changing all sorts of things (attacks, defenses, skills, etc.). Also, current logic probably bumps ability scores when you level a monster, further creating changes.
My personal feeling is that the math should be MM3 for anything new (any new power). For level changes, it should look at Chris Perkins' chart and apply the delta (regardless of what damage is done, increase or lower the static damage portion by the change in average damage on the chart). Ability scores should increase as you level, but only impact skills.
In addition, we have more than a few sources of "what is post MM3 damage". The best place to turn to is probably what is given to DDI adventure authors, which includes how defenses and damage scale. Chris Perkins' spreadsheet on average damage (which has average values for monster role and at-will vs encounter attacks) should be used for damage.
Summary: this is a complex one and someone with knowledge of the subject should be working closely with the Dev team. This is worth a smart WotC person's time, because it will be useful internally for DDI, organized play, etc.
The Playtesters would be glad to playtest this!
Happens!Can you share with us how you will handle existing monsters or the user going into edit mode for an existing monster? We have some worries around scenarios: Monster is paragon, but has encounter power that does low damage plus stun. MB shou
All I want to know is when it will be up. I have been looking at the "Unholy Hourglass of Time Stop" for too long. Updates are good, please keep them coming that is what I am paying for. However please understand that there are DM's in need of access to this tool.
All I want to know is when it will be up. I have been looking at the "Unholy Hourglass of Time Stop" for too long. Updates are good, please keep them coming that is what I am paying for. However please understand that there are DM's in need of access
I agree with Wizards that you want a guy like Logan Bonner, not two random interns, updating monsters. It isn't as easy as it looks. And, it isn't as if pre-MM3 monsters are useless. It can work very well to mix post and pre MM3 in an encounter. You just want to note the damage levels. For example, take MM1 monsters and put them in a room with terrain that damages only players until they best a skill challenge - perfect!
Although the explanation has been posted, I just want to say - I didn't mean "two random interns." I meant "Logan Bonner supervises and guides the projects, along with some help in the form of interns."
But anyway, the point being I may not need it done for me, but I want it done for me. That is vanishingly unlikely to happen, I know, but it's not about feasibility at this point. It's about my laziness.
Although the explanation has been posted, I just want to say - I didn't mean "two random interns." I meant "Logan Bonner supervises and guides the projects, along with some help in the form of interns."But anyway, the point being I may not need it do
.
