Brilliant Gameologists Forum
Play Like You Have To! => D&D 4e => : Gojirazard June 12, 2008, 02:15:14 AM
-
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/updates (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/updates)
Just bringing it to peoples' attention. What do people think of it?
-
Happy they are getting on it quickly. Really, 3 business days after release? Not too shabby. We'll see how well they keep up with it over the next month, then I'll draw a firm opinion on if WotC is changing for the better.
-
Happy they are getting on it quickly. Really, 3 business days after release? Not too shabby. We'll see how well they keep up with it over the next month, then I'll draw a firm opinion on if WotC is changing for the better.
The books have been printed for a while, 3 days after release is...adequate. But I expect better than that from WotC.
-
The books have been printed for a while, 3 days after release is...adequate. But I expect better than that from WotC.
Given their track record, and the way it's easy for those who know what something is supposed to say to overlook such errors, I really didn't expect them to get anything out this fast.
-
Aw, they fixed the Conjuration thing.
-
I've seen companies publish errata as pdfs of the effected pages, with corrections included. I really would have preferred if WotC would do that so I could tape those into my books instead of having to cover the pages with postits.
Also, most of the errata I was really looking for isn't here, like clarification on how multiclassing into ranger works for paragon paths, or how wizard spell preparation works, or a fix for Avalanch of Blades.
Still though, I'm impressed with how quick it is. It's a great start.
-
The books have been printed for a while, 3 days after release is...adequate. But I expect better than that from WotC.
Given their track record, and the way it's easy for those who know what something is supposed to say to overlook such errors, I really didn't expect them to get anything out this fast.
I wouldn't either, but real book companies(text books or reference books) often put errata in with the book as an insert.
While it is good that they are getting errata out, it's their job.
-
I don't see how they can fix seal of binding or avalanche of blades (or whatever that ranger ability is called) short of revising the exploit altogether. Their job seems more to correct printing errors, and less so to maintain game balance, since dnd is not a competitive game like M:TG.
Still a good effort on their part. Certainly more expedient than was the case for 3e.
In the very least, they never bothered revising any of the so obviously broken material in 3e. And I am still waiting for my Tome of Battle errata... :review
-
I don't see how they can fix seal of binding or avalanche of blades (or whatever that ranger ability is called) short of revising the exploit altogether. Their job seems more to correct printing errors, and less so to maintain game balance, since dnd is not a competitive game like M:TG.
Still a good effort on their part. Certainly more expedient than was the case for 3e.
In the very least, they never bothered revising any of the so obviously broken material in 3e. And I am still waiting for my Tome of Battle errata... :review
They did for some of it, they just never came close to keeping up with it. Recall the massive number of Wild Shape/Polymorph changes? Or Divine Metamagic being changed to requiring the feat you want to DMM?
-
Hmm, the errata needs an errata too. The following note is correct in the PHB errata, but it's a bit odd in the errata for the MM and DMG...
Have other questions about the Player’s Handbook?
Go to http://wizards.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/wizards.cfg/php/enduser/std_adp.php?p_faqid=1394
to see the FAQ or to contact customer service.
-
I just checked the PHB errata, since thats the book I've been looking at almost exclusively. They fixed some things, but they've still got a long ways to go before all the book's errors are fixed.
-
They did for some of it, they just never came close to keeping up with it. Recall the massive number of Wild Shape/Polymorph changes? Or Divine Metamagic being changed to requiring the feat you want to DMM?
The irony then comes when you realize that the polymorph errata did absolutely nothing to balance out those powers. Wildshape arguably became stronger, because your hp remains unchanged despite any changes in your con score. I think the only reason why they were not abused more was because few people actually understood how they worked! :lol
-
I must not move in the right circles, academically. I've never seen a textbook with an eratta insert on the first print run.
What it comes down to, for me, is they have admitted there are mistakes, and they are trying to fix them. That's better than any other tabletop rpg company I've been a customer of.
-
A lot of the errata strikes me as being of the Polymorph variety, where they try to fix one problem and wind up breaking something else.
Take the conjuration thing, for instance. As it stands right now, the best way to deal with a Flaming Sphere is to step into the space with it. It doesn't block movement, and it only damages adjacent spaces.
Yes, I know that that can be fixed by DM's fiat, but it shouldn't have to be.
-
any creature that starts it's turn next to the flaming sphere! I would say creatures in the square are certainly next to it. but it does need to move out of the square to attack them lol.