Does Sean actually answer questions directed at him?
I don’t know, though I hope so! James has his own thread and Vic, Lisa, & Erik (among others) have certainly answered questions directed at them. Hopefully Sean doesn’t mind popping into the thread once in a while.
Trollthulhu wrote:
Nice attempt, brother. Next time work to 'honestly' establish the thread before tossing out such obviously inflammatory questions.
...said the dude with Troll in his alias. :)
No troll or inflammation is intended in my questions. Sean has posted a few statements in a public forum and I’ve asked for some clarification. Though, if you feel that my questions are inflammatory, please elaborate. I can always re-word my questions if they truly are trolly.
And if Sean can’t/won’t answer my questions, no harm done. I’m asking more out of curiosity than anything…
I was perusing your profile recently and came across a couple of interesting things that I was hoping you could elaborate upon.
For those not inclined to click the link above, here is the text of Sean’s profile:
Spoiler:
About Sean K Reynolds
I've been playing D&D since 1979.
I worked at TSR as the "online guy."
I worked at Wizards of the Coast as an online content manager and a game designer.
I worked at Interplay on what would have been Baldur's Gate III, what would have been Fallout 3, what would have been an Exalted Console game, and what would have been a spinoff of the Baldur's Gate franchise. Oh, Interplay, such madness in you....
I wrote books for AD&D 2nd edition and D&D 3rd edition (including Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk, Birthright, and Ravenloft). Now I'm a designer and developer for Pathfinder.
I was once the third-most hated man on the internet.
I've played a lot of World of Warcraft, and there are things tabletop RPGs can learn from WOW, but you can push that too far.
I play RPGs to have fun. I design RPGs so people can have fun playing a roleplaying game. I don't care if a new rule isn't the "optional choice," or if it is "only for roleplayers," or "only for GMs." There are other playstyles than the one you use, and I have to design for all of them. If you don't think an option is worthwhile to your character, don't take it--that's why we have hundreds of options in the game, some of which will be better or worse for your idea of a character. I don't care about "optimal builds." I don't care about maximizing damage. I do care about having fun.
The game is not a competition between you and the other players. It is not a competition between you and the GM. The game is about getting together with people and having fun in a shared fantasy world.
My two questions are:
”Sean K Reynold's profile” wrote:
I've played a lot of World of Warcraft, and there are things tabletop RPGs can learn from WOW, but you can push that too far.
What are some of the thing that tabletop RPGs can learn from WOW and what would be pushing it too far? I have never played WOW and don’t know much about it so could you kindly provide examples from tabletop RPGs that do these things?
”Sean K Reynold's profile” wrote:
I design RPGs so people can have fun playing a roleplaying game.
Since you put an emphasis on role, I’m guessing you didn't want readers to accidently read roll. Is this error common enough that it is necessary to distinguish between the two types of games? Also, I’m not quite sure about the meaning of rollplaying game. Are you referring to a game that has no story and the game is entirely resolved through dice rolls? Like Monopoly or other board games?
Thanks for your time. Looking forward to hearing from you!!
What with me adding my previous post on the weekend and Paizo being closed on Monday, this thread has moved down quite far in the Off-Topic list so I'm sure Sean hasn't seen it yet.
Sorry to resurrect this old thread; I was looking for an ‘Ask Sean K Reynolds’ thread to pose some questions but I couldn’t find one (admittedly, my search-fu sucks, so, you know...).
Anyway, I was perusing your profile recently and came across a couple of interesting things that I was hoping you could elaborate upon.
For those not inclined to click the link above, here is the text of Sean’s profile:
Spoiler:
About Sean K Reynolds
I've been playing D&D since 1979.
I worked at TSR as the "online guy."
I worked at Wizards of the Coast as an online content manager and a game designer.
I worked at Interplay on what would have been Baldur's Gate III, what would have been Fallout 3, what would have been an Exalted Console game, and what would have been a spinoff of the Baldur's Gate franchise. Oh, Interplay, such madness in you....
I wrote books for AD&D 2nd edition and D&D 3rd edition (including Forgotten Realms, Greyhawk, Birthright, and Ravenloft). Now I'm a designer and developer for Pathfinder.
I was once the third-most hated man on the internet.
I've played a lot of World of Warcraft, and there are things tabletop RPGs can learn from WOW, but you can push that too far.
I play RPGs to have fun. I design RPGs so people can have fun playing a roleplaying game. I don't care if a new rule isn't the "optional choice," or if it is "only for roleplayers," or "only for GMs." There are other playstyles than the one you use, and I have to design for all of them. If you don't think an option is worthwhile to your character, don't take it--that's why we have hundreds of options in the game, some of which will be better or worse for your idea of a character. I don't care about "optimal builds." I don't care about maximizing damage. I do care about having fun.
The game is not a competition between you and the other players. It is not a competition between you and the GM. The game is about getting together with people and having fun in a shared fantasy world.
My two questions are:
Sean K Reynold's profile wrote:
I've played a lot of World of Warcraft, and there are things tabletop RPGs can learn from WOW, but you can push that too far.
What are some of the thing that tabletop RPGs can learn from WOW and what would be pushing it too far? I have never played WOW and don’t know much about it so could you kindly provide examples from tabletop RPGs that do these things?
Sean K Reynold's profile wrote:
I design RPGs so people can have fun playing a roleplaying game.
Since you put an emphasis on role, I’m guessing you didn't want readers to accidently read roll. Is this kind of error something that happens frequently enough that it’s necessary to distinguish between the two types of games? Also, I’m not quite sure about the meaning of rollplaying game. Are you referring to a game that has no story and the game is entirely resolved through dice rolls? Like Monopoly or other board games?
Thanks for your time. Looking forward to hearing from you!!
Yay "Festivus for the Rest of Us!". Is it time for the feats of strength?
I lost the Feats of Strength this year, but I lose every year, so that's ok. My Rust Monster ate the Aluminum Pole so that was number one on my list during the Airing of Grievances. Then I remembered that I don't have a Rust Monster and it turns out that the Aluminum Pole was in the closet all along. It was a Festivus Miracle!!
When 4th edition came out Gary Gygax tried to bust out of his grave.
He probably heard that 4e was a great game and wanted to try it out.
Imagine his disappointment. :p
Hmmm...that's an interesting point to ponder. As someone pointed out above (and provided links to the interviews), Mr Gygax was not at all enamoured with 3e. Some have argued that he was bitter at the treatment he received from his partners at TSR and was dead set against any future editions of D&D. Perhaps he was, I don't know. But it is true that 3e was (in some ways) a radical departure from 1e & 2e, so I'll take his opinions of 3e at face value and not apply some hidden agenda to his comments.
Having said that, what would Mr Gygax think of 4e? Far be it from me to invent someone else's opinion (especially since that individual is no longer around to give their true opinion) but I think it would be safe to say certain aspects of 4e would be to Mr Gygax's liking. 1e & 2e were largely run on DM fiat and 4e does as well, as an example.
And at the very least, if one were to chuck out all the role-playing and simply use 4e as a table top skirmish rules set, it could used as an advanced version of the old Chainmail rules.
Of course, this is all my opinion of Mr Gygax's hypothetical opinions and I'm willing to admit that my assessment is way off. Sadly, we'll never know for sure.
Ah, see, this makes more sense. What you’re saying, and correct if I’m wrong, is that if a significant portion of the 4e fanbase is offended by the notion that 4e has its roots in contemporary video game design, then maybe WotC would not be so keen on creating video games based on 4e?
If this is indeed your point, then it’s certainly an interesting topic to explore. Though, the discussion can be had, I think, without trying to prove that the developers of 4e definitely 100% did have video games in mind while creating 4e.
For the record, I don’t care one way or the other if future video games were a design choice when 4e was in development. Having said that, I do hope that a 4e video game comes out soon as I haven’t been involved in a regular game (4e or any other RPG for that matter) in more than 2 years and a 4e video game could/would fill my desire to play with the 4e ruleset.
So to WotC I say, get off your fat asses and make me a 4e video game so I can give you my $$$ and sit on my fat ass playing your video game. ‘Nuff said.
Now back to my original post and your reply. I agree that cross platform fertilization is important and it’s gonna happen regardless of what anyone wants. But my question is, why do you belabour the point that, even though you have no evidence, 4e was designed with computer games in mind? I’m not saying it was, I’m not saying it wasn’t. In fact, I don’t care either way. Why do you? You state that it’s an important discussion to have. Possibly so, but it seems like no one here wants to discuss it with you. Perhaps you could start a thread specifically for that discussion and let folks that want to join in do so, and those that are offended by the very notion can stay away from your thread.
Anyway, it’s none of my business and I’m gonna go back to lurk mode.
I don’t normally get involved in these types of discussion (don’t you love it when someone starts their post with I don’t normally post in these threads...but...), lurking is usually good enough for me. However, after reading your attempts for the past several pages to prove your point that the design philosophy of 4e, at least nominally, was to facilitate the translation of the 4e P&P RPG to a CRPG I gotta ask (sorry for being rude), what’s your point?
I do agree with you to an extent that certain aspects of the 4e rule set would make for an easy conversion to a CRPG. (Please note that I am not a programmer and know nothing about it so this is just my opinion and certainly not rooted in fact or experience.) Having said that, why bother to continue to make these claims? What are you trying to achieve? What if tomorrow someone high up in the echelons of D&D, WotC, and/or Hasbro said something like, “Hey guys, guess what? 4e has finally come to fruition! We are now officially announcing the 4e CRPG containing rules exactly like those in the books you’ve been using for years. AWESOME! BTW, this was our plan all along. Hope you guys like the computer game!”
What then? A bunch of 4e naysayers jump out of the woodwork (how does one jump out of woodwork anyway?), point their fingers at D&D and shout, “AHA! I knew it!”
Haters continue hating, then the rest of us say, “Cool.” And go back to enjoying the 4e P&P RPG.
According to Rear Admiral Norah Satie on stardate 44769.2, Jean-Luc Picard had violated the Prime Directive a total of nine times since taking command of the USS Enterprise-D three and a half years prior. (TNG: The Drumhead)
I cannot possibly do the book justice, so I have included the description from the back cover:
Spoiler:
When thirty-eight jetliners bound for the United States were forced to land in Gander, Newfoundland, on September 11, 2001, due to the closing of United States airspace, the citizens of this small community and surrounding towns were called upon to care for the thousands of distraught travelers.
Their response to this challenge was truly extraordinary. Oz Fudge, the town constable, searched all over Gander for a flight-crew member so that he could give her a hug as a favor to her sister, who managed to reach him by phone. Eithne Smith, and elementary-school teacher, helped the passengers sheltered at her school fax letters to loved ones all over the world. And members of the local animal protection agency crawled into the cargo holds of the jets to feed and care for all of the animals on the flights.
These stories and hundreds more are beautifully rendered in The Day the World Came to Town, the true account of a community that exemplifies love, kindness, and generosity.
When reading this book (I have done so four times now), it brings tears of joy, tears of sadness, anger at those that committed the atrocities on that day, but it also reminds me that there are truly good people in this world. That there are people who will give all they have, ask for nothing in return, not expecting recognition for doing what they consider to be their duty as a human being. These are the people of Gander.
Ezekiel 37
The Valley of Dry Bones
1 The hand of the LORD was on me, and he brought me out by the Spirit of the LORD and set me in the middle of a valley; it was full of bones. 2 He led me back and forth among them, and I saw a great many bones on the floor of the valley, bones that were very dry. 3 He asked me, “Son of man, can these bones live?”
I said, “Sovereign LORD, you alone know.”
4 Then he said to me, “Prophesy to these bones and say to them, ‘Dry bones, hear the word of the LORD! 5 This is what the Sovereign LORD says to these bones: I will make breath[a] enter you, and you will come to life. 6 I will attach tendons to you and make flesh come upon you and cover you with skin; I will put breath in you, and you will come to life. Then you will know that I am the LORD.’”
7 So I prophesied as I was commanded. And as I was prophesying, there was a noise, a rattling sound, and the bones came together, bone to bone. 8 I looked, and tendons and flesh appeared on them and skin covered them, but there was no breath in them.
9 Then he said to me, “Prophesy to the breath; prophesy, son of man, and say to it, ‘This is what the Sovereign LORD says: Come, breath, from the four winds and breathe into these slain, that they may live.’” 10 So I prophesied as he commanded me, and breath entered them; they came to life and stood up on their feet—a vast army.
11 Then he said to me: “Son of man, these bones are the people of Israel. They say, ‘Our bones are dried up and our hope is gone; we are cut off.’ 12 Therefore prophesy and say to them: ‘This is what the Sovereign LORD says: My people, I am going to open your graves and bring you up from them; I will bring you back to the land of Israel. 13 Then you, my people, will know that I am the LORD, when I open your graves and bring you up from them. 14 I will put my Spirit in you and you will live, and I will settle you in your own land. Then you will know that I the LORD have spoken, and I have done it, declares the LORD.’”
Footnotes:
a.Ezekiel 37:5 The Hebrew for this word can also mean wind or spirit (see verses 6-14).
Am I taking this out of context or was there really a zombie army back in the day?
This has been a good discussion, I’ve read some interesting opinions here. I’m still on the fence as to whether or not a pharmacist could decide not to fill a prescription for birth control pills solely based on his or her religious beliefs.
My first thought was that a legally license doctor has written a legal prescription for a legal drug and therefore the pharmacist in under obligation to fill that prescription – barring the oft mentioned situation where the prescribed drug may have harmful interactions with another medication the patient is currently taken. But that particular objection to filling the prescription would be based on medical conditions and not religious beliefs, so it doesn’t really fall into the scope of this discussion.
However, as someone else pointed out previously (sorry, I don’t recall who you are), every pharmacy cannot be expected to carry at all times every legally available drug. Especially the hypothetical mom & pop pharmacy that was mentioned earlier in the discussion. As such, a pharmacy owner could decide to not carry certain drugs that he or she did not feel jived with their personal philosophy.
I know my comments here haven’t added much to the discussion but since it was my post that sparked this discussion, I figured I should chime in with my opinion.
Thanks for the lively debate!
Above is what I was going to post – and just did – but as I was reading further down the thread, AvalonXQ posted this:
Quote:
Freedom to do something does not create in anyone else (even the government) a responsibility to help you do it. All it means is that if you can manage to do it on your own, or find someone else willing to do it with you, no one is allowed to act to stop you.
I bolded the relevant part. If no one is allowed to act to stop me from buying contraceptives, then isn’t the pharmacist that refuses to sell me contraceptives acting to stop me? Just a thought...
An interesting discussion over here about the U.S. federal government mandating that insurance companies offer birth control pills with no co-pay.
I'm especially intrigued by the poster who is an employer that will most likely be stopping the benefits he has been offering his employees for 30 years because, as a Catholic, he cannot allow for someone else to sin by using contraceptives.
The counter argument being made in the thread is that since it is up to the individual whether or not they acquire contraceptives through the insurance plan, the employer cannot be held responsible for the employees actions. Or something like that.
But for an employer to state that he/she will stop providing all benefits simply because some employees may choose to use the benefits for something that goes against the employers personal faith seems...a bit ridiculous. I mean, could the employer state that he will no longer pay his employees because they may use the money he paid them to buy contraceptives?
I would also second the Black Sun possibility. Unlike the Hutts, Prince Xisor (sp?) had ambitions beyond merely having the most powerful criminal syndicate. If memory serves, didn't he ultimately face off against the Empire as well as the Rebellion?
It's been a while since I've read Shadows of the Empire, however, if memory serves...
Spoiler:
Xizor was attempting to replace Vader as the Emperor's second in command. To accomplish this, Xizor had to discredit Vader in the Emperor's eyes. I don't recall the specifics, but needles to say, Xizor failed and Vader had his revenge against Xizor...and the thousands of unlucky sentients that happened to be in Xizor's skyhook at the time...DOH!
I haven't read through the previous 200+ posts, so I apologize in advance if this question has already been asked.
From what I understand, there will be two Superman titles: Action Comics & Superman. Will the stories in each title be seperate (as if in two seperate worlds) or would one need to collect both titles in order to follow the story?
Thanks!
Hi Galdor,
DC's still being kind of sketchy. At least to start, it's my understanding that Action Comics and Justice League both at least start 'in the past' Which explains
** spoiler omitted **
After the initial Justice League arc, it will shift to 5 years later (again, AFAIK).
I think Action will be 'early Superman' and Superman will be 'modern superman' That doesn't mean they won't cross over. ("Superman must confront an enemy from his past! Read their first encounter in Action, and the rematch in Superman!")
Hi Matthew,
Thanks for the interesting info. If I'm understanding you correctly, Action Comics will take place in the past of the Superman comic? If so, I wonder what will happen if/when the Action Comics timeline catches up with the beginning of the Superman comic timeline. Will Action Comics end or start over or diverge from the Superman comic timeline?
Anyway, just some odd questions from a comics noob.
I haven't read through the previous 200+ posts, so I apologize in advance if this question has already been asked.
From what I understand, there will be two Superman titles: Action Comics & Superman. Will the stories in each title be seperate (as if in two seperate worlds) or would one need to collect both titles in order to follow the story?
6 For who in the skies above can compare with the LORD?
Who is like the LORD among the heavenly beings?
7 In the council of the holy ones God is greatly feared;
he is more awesome than all who surround him.
Who are the heavenly beings in verse 6 and the council of holy ones in verse 7?
I'm assuming angels...
Thanks for the replies everyone, quite interesting!
Psalm 89:6-7 6 For who in the skies above can compare with the LORD?
Who is like the LORD among the heavenly beings?
7 In the council of the holy ones God is greatly feared;
he is more awesome than all who surround him.
Who are the heavenly beings in verse 6 and the council of holy ones in verse 7?
Yeah but it got clobbered the second time with only 38% supporting the idea, meanwhile a similar proposal failed in Ontario and that was before we had years of minority governments that seemed to frustrate the voters.
Can anyone explain that to me? I mean, why does a minority government frustrate voters? I see it as the best possible outcome of any election. It means that no one party can run roughshod over what we have, and requires some measure of compromise with parties of other ideologies in order to get soemthing done. Yeah, we have to vote every 2-3 years, big deal. Its only a month long. It's not like the Americans who start 2 years before the actual election date.
The downside of too many elections in a short period of time is voter apathy and the cost to taxpayers.
I read that this last election cost $288 million. If the average election costs taxpayers about $250 million on average (speculation on my part), then we're looking at around $1 billion dollars wasted. While it's true we could have reasonably expected two elections during that time at a cost of maybe $500 million, then, well, we've spent an extra half billion dollars because a bunch of politicians can't work together.
But then, I am a glasses-wearing, tall, (formerly) skinny brown-haired and brown eyed guy who was somewhat introverted and had trouble relating to people
I've read in various places on the trusty ol' interwebz (occasionally this very thread!) that Richard Dawkins is a jerk. My exposure to his work & writing is limited so he may be, for all I know, a raving lunatic that spews forth offensive drivel on a continual basis. Can someone please be specific about any comments he's made or passages he's written that is especially rude? Hopefully any examples will be kept in context of the entire message, rather than a sound bite extracted and twisted to prove a point*...
*Not sayin' that anyone here has/will done/do this, just that some folks on the internet don't know how to play nice!
I’m adding this post to the religious thread as from what I’ve heard, when it comes to biology, Dawkins really knows his stuff and communicates it very well. But when it comes to religion, some are of the opinion that he should just keep his mouth shut!
Thanks in advance for your insight!
If someone has replied to my inquiry, I have missed it...please kindly point out your reply.
Otherwise, would someone care to enlighten me on this question? Thanks!
Specifically, how do they film it? I mean the credits list 4 camera-men, but I find it hard to believe that a pair of trained men couldn't follow two normal people, plus two people lugging around full camera gear.
I do enjoy it even if I have to tie my disbelief up in the back room while watching it. Gives me ideas for a ranger or at least how to describe using the survival skill.
According to Wikipedia...
Quote:
In past interviews, [Mantracker] has indicated that the camera crew has him stop to prove where he sees tracks, and also has at times sent out false Prey and production staff to prevent him from just looking for the actual camera crew. Additionally, the Prey's camera crew often change footwear, and are expert woodsmen who often mask their presence in various ways.
I've read in various places on the trusty ol' interwebz (occasionally this very thread!) that Richard Dawkins is a jerk. My exposure to his work & writing is limited so he may be, for all I know, a raving lunatic that spews forth offensive drivel on a continual basis. Can someone please be specific about any comments he's made or passages he's written that is especially rude? Hopefully any examples will be kept in context of the entire message, rather than a sound bite extracted and twisted to prove a point*...
*Not sayin' that anyone here has/will done/do this, just that some folks on the internet don't know how to play nice!
I’m adding this post to the religious thread as from what I’ve heard, when it comes to biology, Dawkins really knows his stuff and communicates it very well. But when it comes to religion, some are of the opinion that he should just keep his mouth shut!
I'm not currently in an ongoing 4e campaign so it wasn't worth it for me to buy a full year subscription, however, I wanted to keep up to date with new content so I used the only legal available method for me to get that content: the occassional one month subscription.
With the offline CB no longer supported past Novemebr 16, I'm thinking of getting one last month long subscription to get the latest (October 12, I think) updates.
**STUPID QUESTIONS ALERT**
As long as I get my update prior to November 16, can WotC activate some sort of code within the offline CB to render it uselsss once the web-based CB goes online?
I know that if my comptuer crashes I won't be able to get the offline CB back, but I'm just wondering if I should still be able to use the content I've paid for.
Also, I'm planning on getting a new computer in the next few months. Is it both feasible and legal to transfer the offline CB software to my new computer? I have never, and would never, allow someone else illegal access to the offline CB files...I just want to know if I can use it on my new computer.
When the next update does arrive, will it also include the new options from Psionic Power in addition to Dark Sun & Essentials?
Also, will any changes between existing rules & Essentials become the new cannon? For example, I heard that in Essentials, Magic Missile is changing slightly. If so, will the new version become offical and the old version will disappear from the CB?
