Does my experience make me more qualified than the people at WoTC? Damn right it does!I don't really buy that either. These people will be game obsessives. They will ahve played loads. And they get to do it all day, everyday, because it is their job. So I suspect a certain amount of hubris in that comment. I find very little of the stuff coming out of WotC is particularly unbalanced, in my humble (no doubt, lesser than yours) experience, and an awful lot of knee-jerking to stuff on the boards.
My reacting isn't 'Knee Jerk', my reaction come because I own a buisness, and I know to listen to what my customers want. The custome decided what is right or wrong based on what they buy. I could care less it WoTC Playtests or not. It doesn't change the fact that most of the people I've talked to aren't impressed with their work. Also given that Hasbro is the parent company of WoTC, I somehow doubt that the execs over there get to sit around and play games as opposed to having other people playtesting for them. Don't assume that because Paizo spends so much time playtesting (WHich shows in the quality of their games) that Wizards does too.
The real issue here is that Wizards does not understand the nature of the customer service that their consumers wish them to provide.
In a constantly spiralling market, with more and more products, as Paizo has recently proven, it's customer service that makes the difference.
Now, if I was the only one griping about the retardedness about some of the prestige classes Wizards has published, I'd already be the first to reevaluate my opinion. But clearly, as evidenced by Blackdragon's business model, I'm not.
Wizards customer service isn't actually interested in addressing the needs of the customer. If they were, (And trust me, I work in retail and am VERY good at sales) they'd already be bending over backwards to accommodate the people who were angry and interested in keeping them as customers.
Large retail corporations have a rule. NEVER LOSE A CUSTOMER! DO WHATEVER YOU HAVE TO KEEP THEM! Most small corporations also accommodate the customer under these circumstances. Wizards has done nothing to foster good customer service relations in this situation, which means they don't understand the needs of the customer in the first place.
This is why we come back to Wizards not playtesting their products. As soon as Complete Mage came out, I got FIVE requests for characters to be redone with Abjurant Champion instead of what they currently had. THAT'S how I know that PRC wasn't playtested. Because if it was, everyone wouldn't be asking for it. SOMEONE would want to keep their levels.
So this is why I look at what Wizards did as a customer service failure.
|
I take your point to some degree, but running a small leathergoods business isn't the same as running a multinational corporation. The comparison to Paizo, or your own business, is a slightly false one because the questions of scale are different. Some of the WotC stuff is a bit hit and miss, but they produce far more content than most other rivals (Paizo effectively produced two mags a month, plus a few other things from time to time - and, personally, I found Dragon of decreasing interest and wasn't exactly bowled over by the Dragon Compendium) so there is much more to criticise. And it is very hard to consult thousands of customers (millions?) in a comprehensive way. Plus, as a subsidiary, Hasbro is entitled to control WotC as it sees fit, which will inevitably bring about a certain disconnect between the developers and Hasbro High Command, imposition of policies and procedures, and financial rigour and targetting. Finally, Hasbro is a public company, so it has to please its shareholders, who want a return on their money.
I also think that a lot of this "WotC bad quality, Paizo good quality" is unfair. I have a lot of the stuff WotC have produced and I am pretty happy with most of it. And even when I'm not overjoyed, I know that lots of other people are from reading boards, reviews and stuff. Personal taste is a big factor. And, until recently, WotC and Paizo haven't even really competed, and so each was able to develop its own expertise: one in producing settings and rules supplements, and the other in adventure design.
I get a little depressed by the anti-WotC sentiment expressed on these boards. D&D needs to be owned and managed by someone, probably a fairly large someone given that it is actually a well known international franchise. A big company isn't going to bend over and kiss the arse of every gamer with a gripe; it can't. D&D seems to have been fairly successful over the last few years, and WotC will undoubtedly be the major factor in that. Paizo may be less of a factor than people think - I play in a group of five, and I am the only one who subscribed to Dungeon and Dragon, or has anything to do with Paizo products. So I think a little credit where it is due would be reasonable.
Are the adventures in Paizo's Dungeon the best I have read, ever? Yes. But Paizo are not the entirety of D&D. And business is business, whatever way you look at it.
|
|
I also read somewhere that Paizo don't playtest anything much - they don't have time. And playtesting an adventure and playtesting a rule mechanic are a bit different, to say the least. How balanced was Dragon? I dunno, but there probably hasn't been much work on that because the stuff isn't used that much compared to a new product from WotC.
And I still remember the "Warlocks are broken" threads. "They aren't getting in my game!" "Have they been in your game?" "Certainly not!" "So how do you know they are broken?" And so on. My experience of warlocks is that they are no more broken than anything else.
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
My reacting isn't 'Knee Jerk', my reaction come because I own a buisness, and I know to listen to what my customers want. The custome decided what is right or wrong based on what they buy.
Anyone else ever notice that people with the customer is always right attitude are always the biggest pains in the ass. I'm not business owner (and apparently, was unaware that the cliched expression was only known to such persons), but I deal with clients all the time. Some of my clients haggle over my rates, second guess my drafting, fail to communicate important legal matters as they arise, and demand the absolute highest levels of service. Other clients pay their bills, listen to my advice, and help me in providing them the highest quality of legal service.
If I could lose the former and just have the later, I'd do it in a heartbeat. There are only so many hours I can bill in a day and I'd rather spend my time on someone who appreciates my work than someone who's going to haggle over how much time I spent producing it.
I could care less it WoTC Playtests or not.
That's fascinating. Considering its what I was talking about in the first place when you decided to tell me how smart you are and how long you've played, you'll forgive me if that is the subject in which I am interested.
It doesn't change the fact that most of the people I've talked to aren't impressed with their work.
Oh wait, you have anecdotal evidence to back up your point?!?!? Holy s$&~, that's impressive. Wow. I know some people too, and they like WotC's products, but I guess you know smarter and more experienced people than me. WotC has market research and sales figures telling them what's popular, but I guess they should just flush that down the toilet and ask you and your extremely well informed friends. Especially since, given that you all still play 2e and thus don't buy a lot of 3e books, you're probably WotC's target audience.
Also given that Hasbro is the parent company of WoTC, I somehow doubt that the execs over there get to sit around and play games as opposed to having other people playtesting for them. Don't assume that because Paizo spends so much time playtesting (WHich shows in the quality of their games) that Wizards does too.
Paizo doesn't spend much time playtesting, they've said so themselves. I doubt WotC spends all that much time playtesting. That doesn't change the core of my argument; that if you don't playtest and WotC doesn't playtest, I'm going to bet on WotC being closer to achieving balance than you.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Now, if I was the only one griping about the retardedness about some of the prestige classes Wizards has published, I'd already be the first to reevaluate my opinion. But clearly, as evidenced by Blackdragon's business model, I'm not.
Yeah, his staggering mountain of anecdotal evidence totally blew me away too. I was like "nuh-uh, your 2e playing friends think WotC is on the wrong track? Shocking!"
Wizards customer service isn't actually interested in addressing the needs of the customer. If they were, (And trust me, I work in retail and am VERY good at sales) they'd already be bending over backwards to accommodate the people who were angry and interested in keeping them as customers.
Maybe you're not the customer they want to keep. How much are you spending on their products each month? Maybe if they cater to you they risk alienating other, more profitable clients.
Large retail corporations have a rule. NEVER LOSE A CUSTOMER! DO WHATEVER YOU HAVE TO KEEP THEM! Most small corporations also accommodate the customer under these circumstances. Wizards has done nothing to foster good customer service relations in this situation, which means they don't understand the needs of the customer in the first place.
Neh. Some customers you can do without.
This is why we come back to Wizards not playtesting their products. As soon as Complete Mage came out, I got FIVE requests for characters to be redone with Abjurant Champion instead of what they currently had. THAT'S how I know that PRC wasn't playtested. Because if it was, everyone wouldn't be asking for it. SOMEONE would want to keep their levels.
No. That shows that you and your players think the class is not balanced. You may also think the world is flat, and all your best friends may think so too, but that doesn't make it true. To actually prove it's not balanced, you would need some sort of objective method to test the balance. Playtesting is the closest thing we've got to an objective method.
Anyway, I give up on the playtesting thing. It's a pretty simple argument, but apparently not simple enough. I'd make one more note though, which is that I'm not actually saying you need to playtest to determine that something is unbalanced (though it's the best way to make such a determination), all I'm saying is that claiming WotC failed to objectively test their products assumes that if they had, they would have discovered the unbalancing element that you allegedly discovered. If you don't playtest though, it's impossible to say whether you actually discovered an unbalanced element or whether WotC did playtest and did discover that it was not unbalanced.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
And I still remember the "Warlocks are broken" threads. "They aren't getting in my game!" "Have they been in your game?" "Certainly not!" "So how do you know they are broken?" And so on. My experience of warlocks is that they are no more broken than anything else.
Not only that, I remember the uproar over item cards. "These suck, I'd never buy them." "How dare you even sell them randomzied, this product will fail." "No one wants these, just sell us the individual cards we want."
And look at that, they went on to become one of Paizo's most successful products.
Morale of the story: you're emotional reaction is not necessary an accurate representation of the factual situation. Or, more simply, if you don't know what you're talking about, show some f!@#ing humility.
Morale of the story: you're emotional reaction is not necessary an accurate representation of the factual situation. Or, more simply, if you don't know what you're talking about, show some f*@@ing humility.
::shows Sebastian a double handful of his f*@@ing humility::
Check that s#!t out, bro! I'm dancin', I'm dancin'!
Nah, they're still evil. At least in a diet Coke sort of way.
Thats funny
Paizo Publishing spun off from Wizards of the Coast's periodicals department in 2002. In its five years as publisher of DRAGON and DUNGEON, Paizo introduced popular features such as The Shackled City, Age of Worms, and Savage Tide Adventure Paths, the Demonomicon of Iggwilv, Core Beliefs, and Critical Threats. Paizo published three official DUNGEONS & DRAGONS hardcover books—The Shackled City Adventure Path, The DRAGON Compendium, and The Art of DRAGON Magazine. In five years of publishing DRAGON and DUNGEON, Paizo received twelve Gen Con EN World RPG Awards (ENnies) and the 2004 Origins Award for Best Gaming Related Periodical.
Whew! Good thing they pulled that license -- who knows how much more Paizo would have outshone WotC's support of D&D!
Maybe you're not the customer they want to keep. How much are you spending on their products each month? Maybe if they cater to you they risk alienating other, more profitable clients.
I buy two copies of every rulebook, Sebastian.
I make sure there's one for the DM (me) and one for the players to borrow if they can't afford their own. Once a year, I buy a sourcebook for all my players (And there are TWENTY of them in various games) out of my own pocket.
So trust me. I AM the customer they want to keep. I'd say I probably spend about 4-5 grand a year on their merchandise.
As for objective method, like I said. If it made five characters outright BETTER in terms of powers, abilities, and hit points, then you don't NEED an objective method because it radically improved the power level of five totally different characters and races.
Your argument doesn't hold water. It's nasty, sarcastic, and outright rude.
If you can't post without constantly putting people down, perhaps you should consider not posting.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
As for objective method, like I said. If it made five characters outright BETTER in terms of powers, abilities, and hit points, then you don't NEED an objective method because it radically improved the power level of five totally different characters and races.
Yet you still haven't shown that it makes them BETTER. Putting the word in all caps doesn't prove it to be true. See also: THE WORLD IS FLAT! The fighter has a better BAB, HD, and Fort Save than the wizard, I guess that means the fighter is BETTER than the wizard.
Your argument doesn't hold water. It's nasty, sarcastic, and outright rude.
My argument is correct. The nastiness, sarcasm, and rudness makes it more entertaining for our listeners at home.
If you can't post without constantly putting people down, perhaps you should consider not posting.
Like it says in my profile, I hate everyone, don't take it personally.
|
If you can't post without constantly putting people down, perhaps you should consider not posting.Like it says in my profile, I hate everyone, don't take it personally.
Dude. He's a lawyer. It's hard to shut that crap off. He's okay, though.
And he doesn't whine when you jack slap him right back. Which is hard.Cos he's a lawyer, and they talk a good game.
I don't get it; can you explain?If I understood that last post, I suspect I'd be scared.::shows Sebastian a double handful of his f*@@ing humility::
Check that s#!t out, bro! I'm dancin', I'm dancin'!
In the name of clarity, I was manhandlin' my own bidnith, grapple style. This was not in relation to any points made in any other posts, I merely victimized Sebastian's train of thought with my deviance because I tend to read his posts, and that was the one I was one when I went insane. Doctor says I need time in the country...
If you can't post without constantly putting people down, perhaps you should consider not posting.Like it says in my profile, I hate everyone, don't take it personally.Dude. He's a lawyer. It's hard to shut that crap off. He's okay, though.
And he doesn't whine when you jack slap him right back. Which is hard.
Cos he's a lawyer, and they talk a good game.
He's our own H.L. Mencken. It's artistically sporting curmudgeonliness is all.
Like it says in my profile, I hate everyone, don't take it personally.
Dude, the next time you see one of my post, do us both a favor and scroll right past it. It will save us both the stress.
My argument is correct. The nastiness, sarcasm, and rudness makes it more entertaining for our listeners at home.
And don't think it goes unappreciated, keep up the good work.
I wish I had a comment either way on all the hubub, but I can't really. I've never held a discription to dungeon or dragon (although with the new goblins I'm looking forward to pathfinder). I just rifled through them on the shelf, checked to see if they had anything in them, maybe I'd buy them maybe not.
I can understand the hurt of loosing something that has been a celebrated part of your hobby for 30 years, and that does kinda suck.
But things change. I trust the guys at paizo to make quality products that I will gladly buy. Wotc I have much less faith in, but if they put out a good product I can use then I will gladly buy it as well. Admittedly I do not have a firm grasp of the corporate machine but I think the loyal D&D loving crafters of Wotc's products will suffer from any hostile action far more quickly than a decision making executive.
My advice, keep your remaining dungeon and dragon mags close and in good condition.
Remember the good times.
|
|
Minor thread jack
About the whole playtest thing....I believe it was Monte Cook that stated flat out most of the WotC products were never playtested except for the core books. As for Paizo stuff, I duno about Dragon, but the writers guidelines for Dungeon recommends that you playtest your submissions before you submit them to Paizo.
Also somebody mentioned something about pleasing the Hasbro shareholders...well I was up until a few days ago and their annual report stated basically the WotC was under performing and that Hasbro was looking to Transformers, Star Wars 30th anniversary stuff, and the Spiderman products to be the big money maker this year.. "Hasbro said it had growth in core brands such as Littlest Pet Shop, Nerf, Play-Doh, My Little Pony and Playskool. Its games business rose 8 percent this quarter, with top performer Monopoly up 22 percent."