A nice start but needs a lot of work just to be up to snuff with the old monster tool. All that said at least they seem to have learned from the fracas of the release of the character builder. The old tools seem to work fine for the time being and they say they will remain until the new version is up to snuff. This I can live with.
Yep, seems like it was handled pretty cleanly. We get to see what the new tool looks like and try out some of its basic functions, we'll have it available to import from when the VTT beta goes live, and we can still grab the old Monster Builder when we need to actually build monsters. I expect that within a month or two we'll see it become a great deal more robust and capable of replacing the offline builder.
Me, I'm just itching to try out the VTT with integration switched on. :D
Allow me to be the voice of dissent:
No, they're pretty awful. For Monster Builder tools, they sure do suck at letting me built monsters.
Care to elaborate?Allow me to be the voice of dissent:
No, they're pretty awful. For Monster Builder tools, they sure do suck at letting me built monsters.
The new tools don't let me do anything.
Ok, I can level monsters using the old and wrong rules. I can rename powers that the players will never actually see. That's great.
What about building a new monster?
Care to elaborate?Allow me to be the voice of dissent:
No, they're pretty awful. For Monster Builder tools, they sure do suck at letting me built monsters.
You can only modify existing monsters, and only in very limited ways. The only reason I'm not really upset is that they're keeping the old Monster Builder available until the new one can replace it.
At least the new one is a start. If they put the same development into it that they did into the new Character Builder, it'll be awesome.
Oh, and the new Monster Builder/Adventure Tool's biggest working feature is a stealth feature: VTT integration. I'm pretty stoked about trying that out.
|
So at the moment it's more or less a database for which you can't change the data? Well, that's not useless but it's probably misnamed. On the other hand, I agree with Scott that the current version of the Character Bulder is very impressive so I'll wait and see (and carry on using the old version of Monster Builder in the meantime).
So at the moment it's more or less a database for which you can't change the data? Well, that's not useless but it's probably misnamed. On the other hand, I agree with Scott that the current version of the Character Bulder is very impressive so I'll wait and see (and carry on using the old version of Monster Builder in the meantime).
Technically, the program is the Adventure Tools, and there's a "Monsters" button you can click on to take you to the actual tool interface. It doesn't actually say "Monster Builder" anywhere. Everyone refers to it by that name colloquially, though, including WotC employees like Trevor Kidd.
Care to elaborate?Allow me to be the voice of dissent:
No, they're pretty awful. For Monster Builder tools, they sure do suck at letting me built monsters.
The new tools don't let me do anything.
Ok, I can level monsters using the old and wrong rules. I can rename powers that the players will never actually see. That's great.
What about building a new monster?
To make it worse, you cannot even update the old monsters (MM1+2) to the new damage targets from MM3 (which they should have done, anyway). But now it's not even possible to do it by hand.
And its laggy.
I am disappoint.
|
I haven't really, and likely won't, look into it much. It lacks a Copy as Image option so that I can take a stat block and paste it into my game documents without losing formatting (something that happens just copying the text from the Compendium).
Alas, I am alos not using the online character builder because it failed to load my existing players' characters.
So for me, the offline tools are the way to go for me :(
I renewed my DDi sub this month in order to patch up my HeroLab settings, and since the Monster "Tool" went live a few days before my access expires, I decided to give it a whirl. It's... well, pretty unimpressive, frankly, for being part of a pay subscription.
Luckily I still have the old Monster Builder and didn't drink the Kool Aid when the last update that fragged RPGA content went live, so I have a reasonably functional program for building creatures.
The really funny part is watching the WotC forums react to the release of the new Monster "Tool" - some of the most diehard, stand-by-your-man Wizards fans are baying for blood over there right now.
Me, I'm just glad I remembered to turn off auto-renew.
I think the main thing they need to keep working on is communication. I don't blame them for releasing a Monster Builder without full functionality. I do think it is their fault that they got people's hopes up and gave them false expectations, and the backlash could have been easily avoided if they gave more honest communication about what to expect.
Agreed. The issue for a lot of people isn't that the new MB is less than functional, but that much was promised and little was delivered. I sometimes think Wizards is deathly afraid that being honest about the various setbacks and growing pains with DDi is going to result in dwindling subscription numbers, and haven't quite figured out that the attrition would be hella lots lower if they'd just be more transparent about the process of getting the tools suite up to snuff and talk to their fans instead of erecting this wall of silence around every shortcoming and pretending the problems don't exist.
Possibly I'm fine simply because I missed the hype - first time I new anything about this was when Stefen Hill posted and I went and checked it out.
The result is I did not really have expectations. Hence what I saw was the basic framework for the new monster builder - no real functionality but then the link below this leads to the old monster builder with words to the effect of here is the old tool which we eventually plan to replace when this is up to snuff.
In the end that methodology seems fine by me - Its pretty much a live preview, I can see where they are going and even use a slightly expanded search function if I'm just looking for a monster but remain using the old tools for any actual monster adjustments.
|
|
Really just playing so far, but seems the biz.
S.
No, its just simply an embarrassment.
As a real monster tool? It's pointless. The few 'features' you have access to do not help you.
Is it supposed to just be a library for the VTT until its up to snuff? Then don't release it until you release access to the VTT. Because it doesn't matter.
They shouldn't have released this at all. They should have kept working on it. In this case something is worse than nothing, as is usually the case in releasing software too early.
WotC needs to quit making the same mistakes with their software and DDI over and over and over again... *Sigh...*
Is it supposed to just be a library for the VTT until its up to snuff? Then don't release it until you release access to the VTT. Because it doesn't matter.
You do understand how a beta works, right?
Is it supposed to just be a library for the VTT until its up to snuff? Then don't release it until you release access to the VTT. Because it doesn't matter.You do understand how a beta works, right?
Aren't those most often things software companies release (for free) to the general public (or smaller, select group of interested persons) so they can get actual feed back to make the final, for-money product better?
I really don't think this is a beta version no matter what WotC says it is.
I too was disappointed with it. I was hoping it would have some capabilities for customizing monsters. Sure you can level them up or down, but I can't take MM 1 monsters and easily adjust the powers or damage expressions. I'm pretty much better off doing what I used to do, which was looking it up on the compendium and then cutting and pasting into a Word document and adjusting from there. The compendium runs faster too.
Aren't those most often things software companies release (for free) to the general public (or smaller, select group of interested persons) so they can get actual feed back to make the final, for-money product better?Is it supposed to just be a library for the VTT until its up to snuff? Then don't release it until you release access to the VTT. Because it doesn't matter.You do understand how a beta works, right?
Yes. How is this different from what we're seeing?
You do understand how a beta works, right?
Aren't those most often things software companies release (for free) to the general public (or smaller, select group of interested persons) so they can get actual feed back to make the final, for-money product better?
Yes. How is this different from what we're seeing?
I think the major legitimate complaint is that people are paying to beta the product. If you look at it that way, it sounds bad.
Of course, if the price for subscription is giving you enough value in other areas (character builder, online magazines, online compendium, etc) then getting to beta software as a perk on top of that is really is more of a plus than a drawback.
Yes. How is this different from what we're seeing?
Aren't those most often things software companies release (for free) to the general public (or smaller, select group of interested persons) so they can get actual feed back to make the final, for-money product better?
Are you serious? You are paying to "beta test" their product. If it was actually a beta test you wouldn't be paying. I mean I know you're an absolute raging WotC fanboy but that seems like a pretty simple point I was making.
|
|
I sympathize with those people who make/modify monsters. But I don't have the time or energy for such things. I pay WotC to gives me a range of critters that spark my imagination to create an adventure/story. One of the strengths of 4e is the low DM prep on details, creating/modifying sits with DM prep time to me. So I'm appreciating the current tool as is, other than the noted lagginess, as I it allows me to identify what I can populate my World with in an easy fashion.
I'm sure that even if WotC had a system that produced 123% of required gaming tools someone would complain it doesn't come with a free pony...
S.
|
|
Are you serious? You are paying to "beta test" their product. If it was actually a beta test you wouldn't be paying. I mean I know you're an absolute raging WotC fanboy but that seems like a pretty simple point I was making.Yes. How is this different from what we're seeing?
Aren't those most often things software companies release (for free) to the general public (or smaller, select group of interested persons) so they can get actual feed back to make the final, for-money product better?
We are ALL paying for 'beta' tests, remind me again if PF 1st printing is the same as the current 4th printing?
We are ALL paying for 'beta' tests, remind me again if PF 1st printing is the same as the current 4th printing?
Is it? I have no idea. Who cares about pathfinder? I guess people are willing to just take whatever is shoved at them and call it wonderful. I'm just not one of those people (but I was for 2 years).
And I didn't even need a pony.
|
|
We are ALL paying for 'beta' tests, remind me again if PF 1st printing is the same as the current 4th printing?Is it? I have no idea. Who cares about pathfinder? I guess people are willing to just take whatever is shoved at them and call it wonderful. I'm just not one of those people (but I was for 2 years).
And I didn't even need a pony.
PF was just an example, perfection is very unlikely, well in anything. The term 'beta' test has taken on more meaning than it's probably worth. I'm still 'beta' testing my iPhone 3GS - they keep updating the iOS with 'fixes' - and I paid for that.
I firmly disagree with your statement regarding people blindly accepting any old rubbish. It's a fact that RPG's attract the upper part of the IQ world (not that I believe IQ actually relates to anything useful) and this board shows that people aren't backwards in being forwards when it comes to critical thinking - in the form of discussion/critique. Perhaps I have more faith in people? IF I were give an opinion, it would be the A.D.D. generation wants everything NOW and it had better be AWESOME. So I'm sorry on behalf of WotC to you and all other aggrieved individuals, I'm sure they aren't on purpose withholding AWESOME things from DDI subscribers.
For me the Monster Tool presented things I can use for my adventure/story writing - again I DO NOT MAKE MONSTERS, I use and abuse WotC's constructs. As more features come out I may or may not find these useful, others will differ. So for my cash I get Dragon, Dungeon, Character Builder, Compendium (which I don't really use - at table NO technology more complicated than a pen...) and some beta Monster Tools. I'm finding it difficult to complain too much about the 'beta' tag in all honesty.
S.
I think the major legitimate complaint is that people are paying to beta the product. If you look at it that way, it sounds bad.
In what sense is anyone paying to beta test the product? People are paying for the actual advertised features of DDI. If you go to the Subscribe to DDI page, it even explains that the Monster Builder is currently in beta. You're not getting into anything you didn't sign up for, unless you signed up a long time ago, in which case you're getting more than you originally signed up for.
No one is paying to beta test the product. You're paying for the advertised features of DDI, and you are being included in the beta test group as a perk of being a subscriber.
To put it another way, imagine being a subscriber to World of Warcraft (or any other MMO). Imagine that the publisher of that game released a World of Starcraft beta, however limited, and made it available only to World of Warcraft subscribers. Would it be reasonable to complain that you are paying to beta test the new game?
I think the major legitimate complaint is that people are paying to beta the product. If you look at it that way, it sounds bad.I guess. Though, you're paying the same amount whether or not they released the beta, yes? It's not like the price went up whether they released it or not.
This is key. This complaint did not exist before people had access to the beta. Before the beta, they had the suite of DDI tools. After the beta's release, they had the suite of DDI tools, plus access to a beta. The cost of subscription before the beta was the same as the cost of subscription after the beta is. At no point are you being asked to pay anything more to participate in the beta. It's just a perk of being a subscriber, nothing more.
|
We are ALL paying for 'beta' tests, remind me again if PF 1st printing is the same as the current 4th printing?Are you serious? You are paying to "beta test" their product. If it was actually a beta test you wouldn't be paying. I mean I know you're an absolute raging WotC fanboy but that seems like a pretty simple point I was making.Yes. How is this different from what we're seeing?
Aren't those most often things software companies release (for free) to the general public (or smaller, select group of interested persons) so they can get actual feed back to make the final, for-money product better?
It is; there have been only about 10 pages of errata, but it's still the same rules set (most of that errata consists of minor polishing or clarifications). And I only paid once -- for the 1st printing -- and the errata is free.
How is your example related to betatesting? I know plenty of PF fans who neither participated in the playtest nor contributed to errata by posting the errors they've found on this forum.
|
|
How is your example related to betatesting?
Because my example is EXACTLY the same as the Monster Tool that was being complained about. In any living-system, PF, iOS, whatever, there is change that comes about because a proportion of the users suggest issues that the developers believe should be addressed. Beta-testing in the greater sense continues over the products life, whether formally called a beta or not.
S.