What, no DM love?

[highbulp]

So the first version of the Rules Compendium is up. It has more than just crunch, it looks like the full racial and class descriptions are there. Not bad, though the interface could definitely use some work.

But the RC doesn't have any monsters, or traps, or action lists, or any other rules for adjudicating the game. And the news article lists no plans for including this information.

Where's the DM love?

Sure, looking for character information is nice. But as a DM I'd much rather be able to search for a monster that would fit my Dungeon, or be able to look up the rules for Stealth without needing to flip through the book. That's what I use the 3.5srd for. So where's that information?!

I've been holding out hope that the RC would make up for the other crap on D&DI (well, except the magazines, which are surprisingly high quality IMO). A full database of all the crunch in books that come out is still compelling if it shows up (the question then becomes if its worth spending $10 a month for the crunch of all those $20 books), but without the look-up functionality to speed up my game-play, I'm not really sure I'd be wanting to pay. And I've been intending to get D&DI the whole time...

[heffroncm]

I think that this first version we're seeing only has the PHB material in it.  For example, try looking up kobolds or warforged.  We know there is player info for these races, just isn't in the compendium yet.

I'm rather a fan of the compendium thus far.  I was expecting it to be more stripped down, to make one want the books for full reference.  I'd hate to try to learn to play from the compendium, but it's perfect for looking up real quick that you don't want to drag the books out for.

The one thing I'd love to see added would be the combat rules from the PHB.  Being able to search, say, Bull Rush and see all the possible info on it (bonuses, rolls, penalties, OA's, etc) would be phenomenal.

[chibishuffle]

Lest my reference fu be weak the OP is a gully dwarf, so I have to ask why would you need this information everyone knows gully dwarves can't read  But in all seriousness I agree a RC no matter how limited should be focused on the DM and have information relevant for him/her and not focused on the players.

[highbulp]

I think that this first version we're seeing only has the PHB material in it.  For example, try looking up kobolds or warforged.  We know there is player info for these races, just isn't in the compendium yet.

I'm rather a fan of the compendium thus far.  I was expecting it to be more stripped down, to make one want the books for full reference.  I'd hate to try to learn to play from the compendium, but it's perfect for looking up real quick that you don't want to drag the books out for.

The one thing I'd love to see added would be the combat rules from the PHB.  Being able to search, say, Bull Rush and see all the possible info on it (bonuses, rolls, penalties, OA's, etc) would be phenomenal.

Yes, I noticed the Dragon content isn't there yet. What I'm curious about is that their "future plans" includes adjusting the interface, and makes no mention of adding future content. I think I'd have been happier if they just made an login-required website (a la d20srd.org) with the information hyperlinked, rather than requiring a search/browse function to sort information by type. But I guess we shall see--it's free for now (nice for my players who don't own the books), and it uses GET variables for searching so you can easily add the search term into the URL. Quicksearch bookmarks FTW! Plus, we can use it for linking references... at least while it's free to the public.

[Kuroimaken]

Yes, I noticed the Dragon content isn't there yet.

One of the things I never really liked about Dragon is that it was about as official as the Burger King Simpsonizer. Seems like the trend will continue that way. And without 'officiality' to back it up, DDI suddenly becomes just DI, and since I never DM, it loses its appeal really quickly.