Sunday, June 3, 2012, 2:51 PM
Why do I have to pay $2.99 for unlimited searches on the Compendium App? I'm an annual DDI subscriber. I can access the web based compendium from my iPad. The App would just be a slightly easier way to access the content I already pay for. I know it has likely been in place for a while, but I just got the iPad and was excited to incorporate it into my repertoire of gaming support.
You get 10 searches before they cut you off. Beginning with my second search I got a pop up ad encouraging me to buy the unlimited searches that also eliminated the advertising. I can only assume I get 10 searches a day, but I'd be guessing.
Like I said, I have a viable work around, I just don't get it. Assuming even with the $2.99 charge it only works with a current DDI sub, it is functionally a convenience tax on Wizard's most loyal customers.
Just seems... Wrong.
Saturday, April 14, 2012, 5:52 PM
I am hoping D&D next does not adopt 4E's approach to attributes.
More so than other editions, I felt the need to build an optimal character in 4E. Specifically, I am thinking of the need for an 18 in your key attribute. I know it's not mandated, but it's heavily suggested both by the base attribute arrays and by the core math that makes balanced encounters. I think the ramifications of this alone contribute to a system that more and more is about being fantastic at one thing, a cog in the combat machine that is the modern D&D group and takes us another step away from story telling/ role play.
The point buy necessity of having that critical 18 in your key attribute and the subsequent need for at least a 16 in your secondary ability, leaves the rest of your attirbutes under-served. Characters become a little more cookie cutter. Also, it is very hard to deviate from races that have an attribute bonus in your key attribute.
For example, I think the Half Elf has suffered in 4E. What used to be a decent go-to race for me when creating characters is now something I've only played once in 4E (my half-elf bard died in the first round of the first encounter of a Darksun game.) Being as old as I am, Tanis from Dragonlance is the penultimate Half-Elf for me. If memory serves he was a fighter (though he always seemed part ranger, but I digress), a class he would be woefully ill equipt to fullfill in 4E. He was the leader, an archer and a swordsman, so maybe in 4E a better fit would be the Hunter ranger? Regardless, half elves get neither Strength nor Dexterity bonuses. Con and Wisdome are okay, but Charisma is their true base attribute. The real point is that Tanis would not be maxed out in any of his attributes - he's more of a well rounded character. No dump stat and a good smattering of abilities that made him my second favorite character in that series (I threw Draongs of Winter Night across the room at the end - so if you've read it, you know who my favorite was.)
Genius fighters, charismatic rangers, warforged monks, dwarven artificers... it's often the contrast of skills within a character that makes them compelling, but the drive for an 18, 16 and the need for a counterbalancing dump stat make those kinds of choices a real sacrifice at the table. Go ahead and try to run that somehwat charming Dwarven thief alongside the other min-maxed in your party and see how much fun you have. Maybe it would be a blast, but my guess is it would only work if part of his schtick was that he was a bit incompetent.
Has anyone run a compaign in 4E where attributes were spread out in a more well rounded, less optimizer kind of way? Did you have to compensate mechanically in some other way to have balanced encounters? What effect, if any did it have on the dynamics of the game? Was player buy-in to the idea a key pre-requisite?
I wonder if this is a point of consideration for D&D next?