SoW overview


4th Edition

51 to 100 of 153 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

Gotham Gamemaster wrote:

How much of the lack of story in WotC's 4e adventures is due to the Delve format? 4e is a resource hog on page count: breakable environments, mobs of monsters, and the subsequent need for multiple dungeon rooms in every encounter can't leave much space for anything else in something the size of a Pathfinder AP volume--let alone a Dungeon article!

Heck, I can't imagine the game designer who'd have much creative energy left to think of story after dealing with all of the elements listed above on top of his having to cook up new and improved monster role recipes for every encounter.

WotC can claim all it wants that the DM's role has never been easier---but I think their own adventures and editorial direction belie their words.

I run regular games, as do many of my friends. To a man, we all share the opinion that the DM's role has not only never been easier, but never been more fun as well.


Samuel Weiss wrote:
TommyJ wrote:
I agree with Scott. Some of you are overreacting.
My primary motivation at this point is pure schadenfreude.

He he - well at least you admit it :-)

I just think that comments like "I will never play this AP" is out of proportion. Because at some point in time, the whole thing will have been published, and the point of an overview will be moot.

But I totally see the problem about the lack of overview, and I am surprised that Wizards cannot see this.

Imagine if you will, that this was a published print adventure. Would you buy part one of a (say) 12 part series, if you had no idea in what direction the saga would take you? We should at least know what type of campaign it is! For example, Savage Tides AP clearly signalled "high seas" and "swashbuckling" as part of the themes. But Scales just doesn't tell me very much.

Like other posters, I would be curious to see if Erik or James has anything to say on this. You have managed several AP, so could their be valid reasons not to give us an overview?

Dark Archive

TommyJ wrote:
Like other posters, I would be curious to see if Erik or James has anything to say on this. You have managed several AP, so could their be valid reasons not to give us an overview?

James graced a similiar EN world threat with a comment.


Whimsy Chris wrote:

Frankly, they'd have to pretty much wow me over with the next few free adventures for me to decide to describe.

I was fully planning on describing, but a poor beginning and a lack of some idea where this is all going has me wavering. Dragon has been pretty good, so I may still describe for that and some of the other Insider stuff.

Everywhere I said describe, I meant, "Subscribe." I must have been seriously brain farting last night.

Move on, nothing to see here.

Liberty's Edge

TommyJ wrote:
Samuel Weiss wrote:
He he - well at least you admit it :-)

Heh. I just want it to be clear I am not leaping in to start an edition war.

TommyJ wrote:

I just think that comments like "I will never play this AP" is out of proportion. Because at some point in time, the whole thing will have been published, and the point of an overview will be moot.

But I totally see the problem about the lack of overview, and I am surprised that Wizards cannot see this.

Imagine if you will, that this was a published print adventure. Would you buy part one of a (say) 12 part series, if you had no idea in what direction the saga would take you? We should at least know what type of campaign it is! For example, Savage Tides AP clearly signalled "high seas" and "swashbuckling" as part of the themes. But Scales just doesn't tell me very much.

Which is essentially the problem.

WotC wants people to buy 12-15 parts of a pig in a poke. People are not going to be willing to do that.
That means even when the entire thing is available, with no overview existing anywhere for them to get a summary of the contents, the chance of them buying the back issues remains non-existent.
Combine that with the entire thing requiring 18 months to become available, players are likely to have significantly more material to use by then, and will likely not care to dig out all the pdfs.

I see very little overreaction in a simple statement that someone will not buy a product in its present format. It is quite likely WotC has structured themselves out of a sale to many people with this one. People are simply responding with feedback about that. There is an even greater uproar on the WotC forums about the lack of an overview, and more still about that stated reason for not providing one.


Grimsh wrote:

I posted this in the Dungeon General also, as I wasn't sure where to put this.

So we finally have an answer from WotC about the overview of this AP:

Q: Can we get a copy of the Scales of War overview?
--AsmodeusLore

A: From Randy's latest Digital Insider:

The short answer to this question is “no.” The problem is that we’ve mapped out an elaborate plot that covers level 1 all the way through level 30 and there are a number of surprises along the way. Those “grand reveal” moments won’t be nearly as impactful if they’ve leaked out via plot summaries and/or an overview of where the Path is going. I can assure you that the current fears about the lack of a compelling archvillain, or a logically complete structure, or major NPCs, or a real hook are all misguided. Just wait and see!

This is from the D&D Q&A for the day.

Honestly...why not publish a rough outline like Pazio did for the STAP, just a quick paragraph about where it is going to take place or a villians name. A serious mistake on WotC part, and I am sure this will piss ALOT of people off. I myself was considering running it in time, but now there is a 0% chance I will, and I don't plan on subscribing if this is the crap we get.

I am a fan of 4e, and was excited to see the first AP, but now, not at all.

Oh well. Just thought I would share and see how you feel about it.

It's unfortunate that WOTC won't be making a brief overview outline; it certainly could help, specially for the folks that aren't too familiar with the "Red Hand of Doom" adventure that it's based off of. The synopises don't even have to be all that detailed or too spoilerish (nothing about game crunch, at the very least).

The only "Scales of War" supplement out there so far, the character backgrounds, does, however, have some things that do seem to be in the making for what might possibly show up in the adventures, even if it does seem kind of generic (ie, the lost clans, the exiled nobility, the thiefly and assassinly stuff, foresters, and scionage stuff, etc.)


Scott Betts wrote:

Some one suggests that you calm down and avoid overreacting and you call them the "thought police"?

Nice.

No, it's not nice at all. I gotta come in here and apologize to Mr. Betts and to anyone else unfortunate enough to read my invective tirade. That was frustration and thoughtless disregard talking. A couple of players I DM Scales of War for saw my comments above and had an "intervention" with me.

Yeah, it's frustrating to not have a campaign overview to help plan and execute this 'adventure path.' It has been a disappointment to DM Scales of War. But nothing justifies coming in here or anywhere and dropping names and labels on people.

I doubt if Mr. Betts will visit this thread again (I wouldn't). If anyone knows him, let him know I'm sorry and that I did overreact. He tried to be a calming voice and I was a jerk.

Back on topic. I'd still like a campaign overview. For now, however, I'm gonna take a step back and try to do what DMs do - tweak it, smooth it out and otherwise make it work. I thought my players saw every inconsistency and every blunder and shortcoming - and sometimes they did. But, they remembered it's a game when I got fixated on minutia and forgot.


Don Brown wrote:
Scott Betts wrote:

Some one suggests that you calm down and avoid overreacting and you call them the "thought police"?

Nice.

No, it's not nice at all. I gotta come in here and apologize to Mr. Betts and to anyone else unfortunate enough to read my invective tirade. That was frustration and thoughtless disregard talking. A couple of players I DM Scales of War for saw my comments above and had an "intervention" with me.

Yeah, it's frustrating to not have a campaign overview to help plan and execute this 'adventure path.' It has been a disappointment to DM Scales of War. But nothing justifies coming in here or anywhere and dropping names and labels on people.

I doubt if Mr. Betts will visit this thread again (I wouldn't). If anyone knows him, let him know I'm sorry and that I did overreact. He tried to be a calming voice and I was a jerk.

Back on topic. I'd still like a campaign overview. For now, however, I'm gonna take a step back and try to do what DMs do - tweak it, smooth it out and otherwise make it work. I thought my players saw every inconsistency and every blunder and shortcoming - and sometimes they did. But, they remembered it's a game when I got fixated on minutia and forgot.

Hey now, of course I'm not going away. This is the internet, and unfortunately it's pretty common for tempers to get out of control online. Much rarer, however, is the ability to come back and set things right and make an attempt to connect, and you did just that. I'm sorry for trying to marginalize your opinion on the subject, it's not something that should be done.

I'll agree with you that Wizards probably ought to publish a summary. It would certainly be helpful, even if it wouldn't kill the AP not to have it. I'd cut them some slack, though. They're swamped right now and are still recovering from the launch of an entire edition. On top of that, they've never done an adventure path in-house before. They'll get better at it just like Paizo got better at it. Who knows, maybe one of the guys at WotC will take note of the fan outcry and publish an outline in the future. For now, you're exactly right: do what DMs do.


Arnwyn wrote:
Yet another gem of irony from Scott Betts. Color. Me. Shocked.
Scott Betts wrote:
Again, civil discussion is really appreciated. If you don't think that's something you can manage, you probably want to consider thinking twice about posting.

Says Mr. Pot to Dr. Kettle. Way to make Arnwyn's point for him.

Perhaps we should stick to calling people immature, and accusing them of wearing tinfoil hats?

:/


Tharen the Damned wrote:
TommyJ wrote:
Like other posters, I would be curious to see if Erik or James has anything to say on this. You have managed several AP, so could their be valid reasons not to give us an overview?
James graced a similiar EN world threat with a comment.

Thanks a lot Tharen! James pretty much ecco my thoughts on the matter, and as he says, it's hard to plan and manage an AP. Wizards are just learning, so hopefully they will pick up the ball eventually.

The Exchange RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Headnote: I remember a thread here about a year ago. Pathfinder 2 has just been published, and some people were looking to monkey around and shift some things in Sandpoint from under one building to under another. And James popped up to say, no, that'll mess up Issues 4 and 5. If he hadn't said that, there would have been no way to know that.

crosswiredmind wrote:
Well, if you need to know what the whole path holds just run it once the whole thing has been released. ... I don't plan on running SoW until more material is released anyway. I don't want to run out because WotC missed a month.

I concur, absolutely. Once CotCT wrapped up, I cracked open Volume 7 and began reading. There are too many details, surprises, and twists in any good Adventure Path to start running players through it without knowing the details about how it's going to end.

Dark Archive Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

You're all overlooking a major issue here:

"Impactful"

WTF? Learn to speak English WotC. It's bad enough that everyone has decided that "impact" is the new "affect", but for christ's sake, "impactful" is not even in the neighborhood of being a legitimate word. Put down the corporate buzzwords, WotC, and back away from the keyboard.

Dark Archive

Sebastian wrote:

You're all overlooking a major issue here:

"Impactful"

WTF? Learn to speak English WotC. It's bad enough that everyone has decided that "impact" is the new "affect", but for christ's sake, "impactful" is not even in the neighborhood of being a legitimate word. Put down the corporate buzzwords, WotC, and back away from the keyboard.

I blame Buffy for the decline in people being all literary and stuff.

'Impactful' just reminds me of my wisdom teeth.


Sebastian wrote:

You're all overlooking a major issue here:

"Impactful"

WTF? Learn to speak English WotC. It's bad enough that everyone has decided that "impact" is the new "affect", but for christ's sake, "impactful" is not even in the neighborhood of being a legitimate word. Put down the corporate buzzwords, WotC, and back away from the keyboard.

Now you're just being argumentativeful.


Set wrote:

I blame Buffy for the decline in people being all literary and stuff.

'Impactful' just reminds me of my wisdom teeth.

HEY! Read the sticky at the top of the page:

Note: Talk about 4th Edition here. Politely. Personal attacks or insults directed at other members of the Paizo community, Buffy the Vampire Slayer , or other companies in the industry, will not be tolerated.

Lay of the slayer, man!

(Note: This is the way it reads in my head :) )


Sebastian wrote:

You're all overlooking a major issue here:

"Impactful"

WTF? Learn to speak English WotC. It's bad enough that everyone has decided that "impact" is the new "affect", but for christ's sake, "impactful" is not even in the neighborhood of being a legitimate word. Put down the corporate buzzwords, WotC, and back away from the keyboard.

Dude, I hate to be the bearer of bad news but 'impactful' is a word. It is in the current edition of Webster's Dictionary of English.

So it is a legitimate word (according to Webster's).

Dark Archive

Larry Latourneau wrote:

Note: Talk about 4th Edition here. Politely. Personal attacks or insults directed at other members of the Paizo community, Buffy the Vampire Slayer , or other companies in the industry, will not be tolerated.

Lay off the slayer, man!

I would like to offer my heartful and sincerified apologies to any 98 lb. Slayers who could snap me in half like a twig. Unless it's Faith, because it might be worth it to be maimed at her hands...

Dark Archive Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

The Last Rogue wrote:
Sebastian wrote:

You're all overlooking a major issue here:

"Impactful"

WTF? Learn to speak English WotC. It's bad enough that everyone has decided that "impact" is the new "affect", but for christ's sake, "impactful" is not even in the neighborhood of being a legitimate word. Put down the corporate buzzwords, WotC, and back away from the keyboard.

Dude, I hate to be the bearer of bad news but 'impactful' is a word. It is in the current edition of Webster's Dictionary of English.

So it is a legitimate word (according to Webster's).

Bah. Using the word "impactful" makes you a moron. The fact that a mass of morons are incorrect in sufficient numbers to get Webster to conform does not somehow transform the word from empty corporate speak into a valid method of human communication.


Sebastian wrote:


Bah. Using the word "impactful" makes you a moron. The fact that a mass of morons are incorrect in sufficient numbers to get Webster to conform does not somehow transform the word from empty corporate speak into a valid method of human communication.

Nevertheless, it is a legitimate word. That is all I am saying. However, I must admit it is nice to see that my knowledge is impactful -- especially in regards to your vocubulary.

;)


Unfortunately, I'm going to have to go against Sebastian here. Common usage is how a word becomes a word, regardless of whether idiotic usage made them commonplace. It's how, "got," became a legitimate word. In fact, it's how most words became words - i.e. I'm arguing that most words are variants of other words.

Still, any journalist worth his salt will use, "with impact," or, "effective."


Sebastian wrote:
The Last Rogue wrote:
Sebastian wrote:

You're all overlooking a major issue here:

"Impactful"

WTF? Learn to speak English WotC. It's bad enough that everyone has decided that "impact" is the new "affect", but for christ's sake, "impactful" is not even in the neighborhood of being a legitimate word. Put down the corporate buzzwords, WotC, and back away from the keyboard.

Dude, I hate to be the bearer of bad news but 'impactful' is a word. It is in the current edition of Webster's Dictionary of English.

So it is a legitimate word (according to Webster's).

Bah. Using the word "impactful" makes you a moron. The fact that a mass of morons are incorrect in sufficient numbers to get Webster to conform does not somehow transform the word from empty corporate speak into a valid method of human communication.

Language is a cow path. There is nothing sacred about it.

Dark Archive

Scott Betts wrote:
Language is a cow path. There is nothing sacred about it.

Still, it's hard to criticize Sebastian for not wanting to be a cow.


Sebastian wrote:

You're all overlooking a major issue here:

"Impactful"

WTF? Learn to speak English WotC. It's bad enough that everyone has decided that "impact" is the new "affect", but for christ's sake, "impactful" is not even in the neighborhood of being a legitimate word. Put down the corporate buzzwords, WotC, and back away from the keyboard.

Its in the online dictionaries I've just gone and glanced at.


I think we are digressing (is that the correct term?) from the OP here :-)

Does anyone have any thoughts as what eager Scales of War GM's should do to compensate for lack of an overview?

Some obvious answers could be:
1) Wait till the whole thing is out (but thats gonna take like forever)
2) Use some of Paizos excellent AP (but conversion might be daunting a task for some...)

So what would you recommend for those eager to try out the only currently available 4e AP ?

Should we be afraid of improvising, fearing that som NPC might turn out to have whole different role to play later? Should you just stick to the plot? Should we maybe not worry so much, since whaveter problems arise we can just fix it as we go along?

What do you all think?

Dark Archive

TommyJ wrote:

I think we are digressing (is that the correct term?) from the OP here :-)

Does anyone have any thoughts as what eager Scales of War GM's should do to compensate for lack of an overview?

Some obvious answers could be:
1) Wait till the whole thing is out (but thats gonna take like forever)
2) Use some of Paizos excellent AP (but conversion might be daunting a task for some...)

So what would you recommend for those eager to try out the only currently available 4e AP ?

Should we be afraid of improvising, fearing that som NPC might turn out to have whole different role to play later? Should you just stick to the plot? Should we maybe not worry so much, since whaveter problems arise we can just fix it as we go along?

What do you all think?

or

3) Create your own AP.

In fact, as 4th encounter creation is so easy, preconstructed encounters are not as IMPACTFUL (take this Seabstian!) on preparation time as in 3rd.
IMAPCTFUL (I did it again!) on your time ressources is creating the AP story. Not just a few short stories that can be connected (as WoC did so far) but one whole story that progresses from chapter to chapter.

Dark Archive Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

Tharen the Damned wrote:

In fact, as 4th encounter creation is so easy, preconstructed encounters are not as IMPACTFUL (take this Seabstian!) on preparation time as in 3rd.

IMAPCTFUL (I did it again!) on your time ressources is creating the AP story. Not just a few short stories that can be connected (as WoC did so far) but one whole story that progresses from chapter to chapter.

You're on the enemies list.

Anyway, setting aside "impactful", which is a douchebag word and should not be tolerated among civilized humans, another thing that irritates me about this is the fact that the delve format adventures are not nearly as interesting to read as non-delve format adventures. If Paizo did this, I'd be irritated, but at least the story content of the adventures is high enough that I'd probably pick up the twists and turns from reading them. The delve format adventures aren't all that exciting to read, so to try and insert cliffhangers in them is...well...like putting cliffhangers on the side of a box of mac & cheese.


Soooo, about Wizards being that horrible evil corporation that never listens to the people?

Yeah.

Enjoy your overview.

Dark Archive Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

Scott Betts wrote:

Soooo, about Wizards being that horrible evil corporation that never listens to the people?

Yeah.

Enjoy your overview.

It's a trap!

Edit: And more importantly, it's not very good. What a s~#*ty outline. The paragon tier and epic tier paragraphs tell us that the adventurers will face paragon tier and epic tier challenges. What an insight.

Weak.

Paizo Employee Director of Brand Strategy

Scott Betts wrote:

Soooo, about Wizards being that horrible evil corporation that never listens to the people?

Yeah.

Enjoy your overview.

They call that an overview? I can't imagine one any more vague, except possibly "your PCs will fight some monsters" or "there will be challenges." What kind of 30 level campaign doesn't include a ramping up of stakes, shifting alliances (I love how they won't tell us who the allies and enemies are going to be, too) ,and saving the world.

I seriously doubt that the first kind of DM they mention, you know, the ones who like to read along and be surprised, is either very large a group or very experienced, and the second type of DM can't be satisfied with this. It's a half-assed attempt to placate an overwhelming response to another botched WotC decision, and I don't think it's going to fly with the community.


Sebastian wrote:
The delve format adventures aren't all that exciting to read, so to try and insert cliffhangers in them is...well...like putting cliffhangers on the side of a box of mac & cheese.

I agree completely. While the delve format is helpful at the actual game table, I have yet to read a 4e adventure that was a page turner. I can't imagine caring about the "big reveal" of the BBEG of the tier path while reading the adventure.

I will say thought that the side of a box of mac & cheese can sometimes have interesting reading. I personally couldn't wait to find out that Yellow #5 was the pigment added to the cheese.


Sebastian wrote:
Scott Betts wrote:

Soooo, about Wizards being that horrible evil corporation that never listens to the people?

Yeah.

Enjoy your overview.

It's a trap!

Edit: And more importantly, it's not very good. What a s%*@ty outline. The paragon tier and epic tier paragraphs tell us that the adventurers will face paragon tier and epic tier challenges. What an insight.

Weak.

(edited)

Disappointing that they apparently do not even have the names yet for more than the next couple of episodes. Very vague. The blurb on the back of most book covers in Borders tells me more about a book than those individual segment descriptions. If I were running Scales of War, there is very little there to tell me which NPCs (if any) I need to keep alive for the future, or any information I need to foreshadow/connections to play up.

Further Edit:
Still, it is kind of them to put something out, belatedly, for which someone should get credit.


Scott Betts wrote:

Soooo, about Wizards being that horrible evil corporation that never listens to the people?

Yeah.

Enjoy your overview.

I can't actually read it as I am a player but I suspect that any effort in this direction will help out my poor neophyte DM


Jeremy Mac Donald wrote:
Scott Betts wrote:

Soooo, about Wizards being that horrible evil corporation that never listens to the people?

Yeah.

Enjoy your overview.

I can't actually read it as I am a player but I suspect that any effort in this direction will help out my poor neophyte DM

lol...actually, I think you would be pretty safe in reading this as a player. (Actually..don't...I don't want to be held responsible in case there is something there that you may consider spoilerish)

Points for effort, not so much for execution.

Scarab Sages

Adventure Path Charter Subscriber

Seems like they have a handle on on the Heroic section, but haven't fully realized the Paragon and Epic tier adventures.


"E" for effort.

Scott Betts wrote:
Soooo, about Wizards being that horrible evil corporation that never listens to the people? Yeah.

Who said that?


Arnwyn wrote:

"E" for effort.

Scott Betts wrote:
Soooo, about Wizards being that horrible evil corporation that never listens to the people? Yeah.
Who said that?

Not you, I'm sure.

Scarab Sages

Wow...you want to know something, the 15minutes it took me to type up a blurb detailing my new campaign was more detailed then that.

If that is what they call an overview that is sad. Reading that makes me strongly think they are piecing it together as they go.

Well back to converting Paizo modules, or heck even ditch 4e all together. Thanks for that sad excuse for an 'overview' with its modules titles not finished yet.

Yet another blunder by WotC.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

My comment might be regarded as a

Spoiler:

WotC Overview wrote:


Episode #5
The heroes are summoned back to Brindol by an unexpected source. Their new ally then guides them to a long-lost fortress now inhabited by all manner of foul creatures.

Errr... all jokes aside, but... honestly, folks. Isn't that pretty much the "The PCs meet someone who sends them somewhere. They slay monsters while there" plot overview some have joked about? I... must admit i am a bit speechless right now. Compare that to the AoW Overload, or Savage Tide preview... wow.

Scarab Sages

TerraNova:
Episode #5
The heroes are summoned back to Brindol by an unexpected source. Their new ally then guides them to a long-lost fortress now inhabited by all manner of foul creatures.

Errr... all jokes aside, but... honestly, folks. Isn't that pretty much the "The PCs meet someone who sends them somewhere. They slay monsters while there" plot overview some have joked about? I... must admit i am a bit speechless right now. Compare that to the AoW Overload, or Savage Tide preview... wow.

ahahaha yes. That is why WotC has stumbled again. They can count myself and my 10 gamers out of the DDI. If that is the crap that they are producing, why waste money.

The thing is, I would have been happy with a quick synopsis of each adventure, maybe sneak a NPC name in or organization name, but no that would ruin the surprise. Basically all they did was re-word the original message. They didnt spoil anything for us, they just wasted my time. There was nothing gained from that PoS overview. I would have been much happier not reading this.

Well I have supported 4e since they announced it. Now, I will buy my Adventurers Vault and Manual of the Planes, and go back to playing core and 3.x.

Sovereign Court

We still don't know who the Big Bad is. What its goals are. What it and its agents are doing in pursuit of those goals.

We simply know the AP is about "war, on a REALLY BIG scale!!!" Oh, and scales, perhaps.

A half-hearted attempt to placate. I agree, it convinces me they're putting it together as they go along. They don't seem to have an end-game in mind - or at the very least, they're still not revealing what it is, which doesn't make sense to me.

Scarab Sages

Adventure Path Charter Subscriber

Or, instead of giving up on 4e, you can wait for 3PP to put things out.

for example...http://www.the-conclave.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=28

I'm looking forward to this AP. Small company..responds to feedback from potential customers...

Scarab Sages

Mactaka wrote:

Or, instead of giving up on 4e, you can wait for 3PP to put things out.

for example...http://www.the-conclave.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=28

I'm looking forward to this AP. Small company..responds to feedback from potential customers...

Thats what I meant, I would use the core 4e stuff and if I find some 4e stuff that looks good by 3pp, then I would use it. But until that happens...

That does look really good, and I am intrigued now...lol

WotC has lost me though, unless they can you know, figure out what the F*** they are are doing, or print Greyhawk and not in 4e :P


Mactaka wrote:
Seems like they have a handle on on the Heroic section, but haven't fully realized the Paragon and Epic tier adventures.

Thats probably good enough for now.

Now if they'll just cave and give us a backdrop with some really interesting and juicy details about this valley and I'll be really happy.


Grimsh wrote:

TerraNova:

Episode #5
The heroes are summoned back to Brindol by an unexpected source. Their new ally then guides them to a long-lost fortress now inhabited by all manner of foul creatures.

Errr... all jokes aside, but... honestly, folks. Isn't that pretty much the "The PCs meet someone who sends them somewhere. They slay monsters while there" plot overview some have joked about? I... must admit i am a bit speechless right now. Compare that to the AoW Overload, or Savage Tide preview... wow.

ahahaha yes. That is why WotC has stumbled again. They can count myself and my 10 gamers out of the DDI. If that is the crap that they are producing, why waste money.

The thing is, I would have been happy with a quick synopsis of each adventure, maybe sneak a NPC name in or organization name, but no that would ruin the surprise. Basically all they did was re-word the original message. They didnt spoil anything for us, they just wasted my time. There was nothing gained from that PoS overview. I would have been much happier not reading this.

Yes, give them a reason not to waste the effort on the unappreciative, enjoying a freebie preview. I will never understand this mentality. It is, simply, alien.

Dark Archive Bella Sara Charter Superscriber

Scott Betts wrote:


Yes, give them a reason not to waste the effort on the unappreciative, enjoying a freebie preview. I will never understand this mentality. It is, simply, alien.

Two things:

1. My time is not free. It is a valuable commodity. If I go some place, and find that my time is wasted, I am likely not to return to that place again. Which brings us to my next point.

2. If they expect anyone to purchase a product, the preview should be sufficiently good to justify said purchase. That outline was a waste of my time to read, I sure wouldn't pay them any money in addition to wasting time.

There's no free lunch. The previews are designed to whet your appetite, to show you that WotC is producing products that you would want to purchase. They are not provided to us out of the goodness of WotC's heart, they are advertising designed to get us to spend our money. The quality of Dragon and Dungeon have improved dramatically in the past few months, but this lame-ass, thrown together outline is something they should be ashamed of. It makes them look incompetent. It's poor advertising. It fails to communicate anything of value. All it does is give people who already are predisposed to not liking WotC a reason to b@!+$, and it gives people like me, who most likely will subscribe to DDI, pause. WotC blew their reputation for quality with me when they launced the original versions of eDragon and eDungeon. They have only recently rebuilt that reputation due to the recent spike in quality, but s&!@ like this reminds me of how bad it has been for most of the past year. When I see stuff like this, I am forced to ask "which is the product I can expect as a DDI subscriber - this s++~ty outline or the high quality Dragon articles?" I'm only going to pay for one of those two.

Yeah, it's free, but it's still well below the quality that I demand before I will spend time on something, much less spend money and time.


Scott Betts wrote:

Soooo, about Wizards being that horrible evil corporation that never listens to the people?

Yeah.

Enjoy your overview.

Enjoy it? I feel sympathy for the 4e DMs that were hoping for an overview. This weak attempt is a far cry from the gold standard fans should expect, scratch that - demand, from the 800-lb gorrilla of the RPG industry.

Are you really suggesting that that weak-a$s overview deserves to even be in the same room as an introduction from a TSR Module from the 80s, let alone a Pathfinder AP overview?


BPorter wrote:
Enjoy it? I feel sympathy for the 4e DMs that were hoping for an overview. This weak attempt is a far cry from the gold standard fans should expect, scratch that - demand, from the 800-lb gorrilla of the RPG industry.

A gorilla that is creating an adventure path on its own for the first time, and is still getting used to the process.

Cut the phony sense of entitlement. We're talking about a company you pay pennies on the hour in terms of the amount of entertainment you enjoy as a result of their work. The guys behind the development desks at WotC work their butts off for this hobby, and are every bit as much a fan of role-playing games as you are.

People will complain about anything because people love being able to express outrage at something. The same people who were "outraged" at not having an outline are the ones who are now "outraged" about the outline that they're given - including the handful that said they'd be happy with just a couple paragraphs on where the AP was headed.

This isn't how mature adults should be acting.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

Scott Betts wrote:
People will complain about anything because people love being able to express outrage at something. The same people who were "outraged" at not having an outline are the ones who are now "outraged" about the outline that they're given - including the handful that said they'd be happy with just a couple paragraphs on where the AP was headed-

Ok, where is it headed, then? What's the overarching theme? Right now we know it is going to be epic, and involves slaying monsters to some degree. Oh, and it's "about saving the world".


Scott Betts wrote:
BPorter wrote:
Enjoy it? I feel sympathy for the 4e DMs that were hoping for an overview. This weak attempt is a far cry from the gold standard fans should expect, scratch that - demand, from the 800-lb gorrilla of the RPG industry.

A gorilla that is creating an adventure path on its own for the first time, and is still getting used to the process.

Cut the phony sense of entitlement. We're talking about a company you pay pennies on the hour in terms of the amount of entertainment you enjoy as a result of their work. The guys behind the development desks at WotC work their butts off for this hobby, and are every bit as much a fan of role-playing games as you are.

People will complain about anything because people love being able to express outrage at something. The same people who were "outraged" at not having an outline are the ones who are now "outraged" about the outline that they're given - including the handful that said they'd be happy with just a couple paragraphs on where the AP was headed.

This isn't how mature adults should be acting.

(edited)

Hmmm. I'm fairly certain that some of the names at Wizards of the Coast worked on the Dungeon adventure paths (David Noonan wrote Zenith Trajectory and Test of the Smoking Eye in Shackled City, Chris Thomasson Wrote Thirteen Cages also in Shackled City and one Mike Mearls wrote The Three Faces of Evil in Age of Worms, for example), so it's misleading to imply that Wizards of the Coast is devoid of staff with experience of working on adventure paths if they look around. Whether or not those staff have been 'prioritised' to other projects is another question altogether...

Paizo Employee Director of Brand Strategy

Scott Betts wrote:

Cut the phony sense of entitlement. We're talking about a company you pay pennies on the hour in terms of the amount of entertainment you enjoy as a result of their work. The guys behind the development desks at WotC work their butts off for this hobby, and are every bit as much a fan of role-playing games as you are.

People will complain about anything because people love being able to express outrage at something. The same people who were "outraged" at not having an outline are the ones who are now "outraged" about the outline that they're given - including the handful that said they'd be happy with just a couple paragraphs on where the AP was headed.

This isn't how mature adults should be acting.

Your first statement assumes that one gets enjoyment out of their products. As it currently stands, I have gotten next to none from anything they have put out for almost a year. Given that a lot of that has been "free" I can't complain on the money issue, as it hasn't cost me anything, but it has certainly cost WotC something, as I haven't spent a dime on anything they have released since December and don't plan on changing that until the quality does provide me at least a little enjoyment.

And your second statement reeks of hypocrisy, since you are taking every opportunity to complain and express your outrage that some fans (or non-fans, as the case may be) are not happy with the product. If you place yourself in the category of a mature adult, it seems to me that live and let live might be the best policy henceforth, lest other posters incorrectly place you among the immature children who can't stand to have others not like what they like.

51 to 100 of 153 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Gaming / D&D / 4th Edition / SoW overview All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.