RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
Scott, you are the best argument for an ignore function on those boards. Your hypocritical and arrogant crusading for 4E and your inability to accept any critic of it - no matter how true - should be labelled as the trolling it is.You do realize that you have yet to give any concrete examples or evidence to support your claims?
True. I hate it when people say, "The math says it is broken" but don't show their math or link to other people who have shown the math. Show your work, Fuchs.
|
** spoiler omitted **Completely agree, I have no issue with the new game (4e). But I am sore about the pdf thing. Could have still been a little money spinner for them. Not like it costs them anything to sell a pdf. All they have achieved is increasing P2P traffic of 3e stuff and forcing those usually not willing to partake in illegal downloads to perhaps consider doing so.
S.
Which is the thing that leaves me scratching my head? Why would WoTC do away with the income from pdf sales of older product? It doesn't make financial sense to me and I was kinda expecting/hoping that someone on the boards might have something intelligent to say on that matter. Instead we got this "my favourite system is better than yours" pissing competition whose vitriol I find rather surprising if not shocking.
Scott, you are the best argument for an ignore function on those boards. Your hypocritical and arrogant crusading for 4E and your inability to accept any critic of it - no matter how true - should be labelled as the trolling it is.
Scott no troll. He need to open eyes and see thing plain as nose on Troll face.
Which is the thing that leaves me scratching my head? Why would WoTC do away with the income from pdf sales of older product? It doesn't make financial sense to me and I was kinda expecting/hoping that someone on the boards might have something intelligent to say on that matter. Instead we got this "my favourite system is better than yours" pissing competition whose vitriol I find rather surprising if not shocking.
Probably something re: the lawsuits currently filed in court against the pirates. Possibly done in combination with some future plans to either A) sell the PDFs themselves or B) work PDF access into some form of DDI subscription. But this is really for another thread ...
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
See this? This is juvenile behavior. It finds disagreement and instead of debating the merits of the argument resorts to rounds of vitriol like "anyone with a shred of intellectual honesty would admit that," and "no one is allowed to contradict Mr. High And Mighty."
Stay classy, Paizo fans.
True, it's not like he's saying that 4e defenders shouldn't post anywhere. I mean saying that about 4x critics would be juvenile and provoking, kind of like 'Stay classy, Paizo fans' is attempting to besmirch an entire community.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Which is the thing that leaves me scratching my head? Why would WoTC do away with the income from pdf sales of older product? It doesn't make financial sense to me and I was kinda expecting/hoping that someone on the boards might have something intelligent to say on that matter. Instead we got this "my favourite system is better than yours" pissing competition whose vitriol I find rather surprising if not shocking.
The most popular theory, barring the 'plot to take all the old stuff away beacuse the new stuff sucks' is that it was a heavy handed and overreaction to piracy. Without a statement from WotC, we won't know the real reason.
I know from personal experience that a) I won't be buying any WotC PDFs since I have all the dead trees I want. and b) I'm buying PDFs *now* to fill gaps in my library. Not just Paizo stuff, but older stuff like Swashbuckling Adventures. So I assume that WotC is losing sales but it's acceptable to them.
Seems to me most of the talk about who constitutes 'active D&D players' is nonsense. Saying it is 'almost certainly' one group or another while at the same time saying there is no way to know is poorly thought out.
The problem with saying there are more of one group than another is at least two-fold:
1. Many people play multiple editions; and
2. There's no way to quantify active groups.
I still play all of the editions. An interesting personal fact though - most of the people I started playing D&D with back in the 1980s still play actively and most of them never ventured past 1e and 2e. How do you quantify that?
The largest local game I'm aware of is a first edition game that has been running weekly (except for the occasional interruption) since the early 1980s. So that's the biggest single group of active D&D players I know around here (and I know quite a few groups) and none of them bought any product after 2e and most of them never bought any product after 1e.
Some of this group includes players who STARTED playing D&D well after the release of 3e, and yet have never played anything besides 1e.
I don't mean to imply that this group is representative of the norm, but I still know of a number of groups that I used to play with, spread out in California, Washington, and Missouri, who play 1e and have never played anything else. Apart from minis, these people haven't bought any D&D products since 1e.
So how do you quantify that? It's all very easy to say in a forum that it is 'almost certain' that most active D&D players are playing 4e, but the fact is the person who makes that statement has absolutely no idea if it is true or not. It may be true. It may not be.
True. I hate it when people say, "The math says it is broken" but don't show their math or link to other people who have shown the math. Show your work, Fuchs.Scott, you are the best argument for an ignore function on those boards. Your hypocritical and arrogant crusading for 4E and your inability to accept any critic of it - no matter how true - should be labelled as the trolling it is.You do realize that you have yet to give any concrete examples or evidence to support your claims?
It's not my work, someone else did this:
At-Will Spell-like Abilities and Spell-like Abilities Per Day were used in 3.x as well as I seem to remember them being used in 2E. They have become more prevalent in 4E because they are more common.
Uh, yeah. I said as much.
I will also add that in the article linked Mr. Slaviscek is not quoted saying a thing about MMOs but the writer is saying it. Most of the MMO connections are in reference to the Digital Initiative and not the actual 4E ruleset.
From the article
Slaviscek doesn't deny the influence of video games on the direction of the new edition; he just says that the development team drew inspiration from all over the gaming world in addition to their own discussions with players.
OK, so if you really want to get into the semantics over it, according to the reporter, Mr. Slaviscek didn't say "Hey, we drew influence from MMO's for this game, yippee!" Though apparently when asked if they MMO's had some influence, he didn't deny it. Sorry that I wasn't specific, but either way there was MMO (among other sources) influence there.
When Bill said 4th Edition was influenced by WoW, he certainly didn't mean it played like WoW on paper, and that's what we're discussing.
Nope, I was talking about:
There is no "per encouter" mechanic. There is no "per day" mechanic. The idea that 4th Edition somehow stole these from the field of MMOs, or that it is somehow "MMO-style" is unsupportable
Now, as for what "we" were discussing (and pardon me for butting into it), "stole" is a inflammatory term and I doubt that anyone here believes that WoTC stole a mechanic. So hyperbole aside, feeling that 4th "is somehow MMO-style" is completely subjective. If it doesn't play like one to you, that's fine that's great, no one's telling you that it should, only that it does. To them.
Yes but a game that is influenced by something else will probably have specific parts that do play like the game it was influenced by otherwise it couldn't have been Influenced by it.Would you mind giving some specific examples?
Deadlands is influenced by horror/western and practicably every mechanic in the game shows this.
Call of Cthulhu is influenced by cosmic horror and has some of the best sanity mechanics in industry.7th Seas is influenced by swashbuckling so it uses action points and it's movement rules are very loose
Eberron has swashbuckling influence and it also uses action points to help mimic this
4th ed has some MMO influence and it has more clearly defined party roles then previous editions, healing surges, and cooldown style powers.
Practically every World of Darkness (reguardless of Old or New) has multiple mechanics based upon their influences (Humanity, Gnosis, Paradox, etc).
Now mind you in general, none of this is bad even if individually, it can be. If one doesn't like mechanics inspired by cosmic horror, one probably wouldn't like CoC, but that doesn't mean that CoC is a bad game. It just means it's not their cup of tea. There's not a problem with that.
True, it's not like he's saying that 4e defenders shouldn't post anywhere. I mean saying that about 4x critics would be juvenile and provoking, kind of like 'Stay classy, Paizo fans' is attempting to besmirch an entire community.See this? This is juvenile behavior. It finds disagreement and instead of debating the merits of the argument resorts to rounds of vitriol like "anyone with a shred of intellectual honesty would admit that," and "no one is allowed to contradict Mr. High And Mighty."
Stay classy, Paizo fans.
He may not and there may not be in this thread but in another thread it was certainly repeated that 4e defenders shouldn't post outside of our section.
Are you sure the issue wasn't HOW 4e folk should post outside of their threads? I certainly think 3e folk should only post in certain ways in 4e threads (otherwise, not at all).
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
He may not and there may not be in this thread but in another thread it was certainly repeated that 4e defenders shouldn't post outside of our section.True, it's not like he's saying that 4e defenders shouldn't post anywhere. I mean saying that about 4x critics would be juvenile and provoking, kind of like 'Stay classy, Paizo fans' is attempting to besmirch an entire community.See this? This is juvenile behavior. It finds disagreement and instead of debating the merits of the argument resorts to rounds of vitriol like "anyone with a shred of intellectual honesty would admit that," and "no one is allowed to contradict Mr. High And Mighty."
Stay classy, Paizo fans.
Cite please?
And when I comment on 4.x mechanics I do include the caveat that I do so as someone who doesn't play it. I've also complimented apparent business decisions that WotC seems to be making that I understand or agree with.
If you don't use the SC math what are you using from teh SC then? Some clumsy railroady system that would better be replaced by a more flexible approach formed and shaped by players, not pressed into a framework of - stupid and arbitrally - successes and failures.
Sorry, I am not quite sure what you were getting at here. What do you mean by SC Math? Do you mean the DMG math or the "Hard Math" argument? I use the math has presented in the DMG with no changes and I do not believe the "Hard Math" arguments to be accurate due to varies circumstances from group to group or even Skill Challenge to Skill Challenge.
Opinions are like b***-holes. Everyone has one and they usually stink. No one cares to see yours.Ah. An insult. I know those.
I love you, too, man.
No insult. I was just pointing out what they say about opinions and you asked for clarification. If anything I am sure it was only in the same vein as Pax Veritas poem in the other thread which I am sure wasn't intended as an insult to 4E players.
Cite please?
And when I comment on 4.x mechanics I do include the caveat that I do so as someone who doesn't play it. I've also complimented apparent business decisions that WotC seems to be making that I understand or agree with.
If I wasnt Convinced Before... Page 3
aylengyr mistakenly assumes the thread title to be obviously anti-4E. Quote: "Ok check it out, the title of the thread is obviously uh not so friendly to 4.0/wotc. So why come post here at all? Clearly you were looking for trouble and you found it."
On page 4: Pax Veritas has a nice poem comparing 4E defenders to the thought police and saying we threadcrap... riiiiight.
On page 4 also seekerofshadowlight says "If this thread hurts you that bad DO NOT POST IN IT"
On page 5 GentleGiant says that the Paizo staff has told us repeatively to ignore posts we don't like and says we are policing the boards and have been told to quit by staff.
There is atleast one more on page 5 but could be more in the remaining pages... I think I cited enough though and I don't feel like reading the whole thread again looking for them, it is one example but it is the first time I was really involved in an out of 4E section thread so it may be more common or not.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
Ah yes the one where Scott shows up and has a go at someone not Exactly a prime example.[Q
Kevin, the problem is, Scott's normal tone aside, the thread wasn't about 4e bashing, it was about shoe bashing. The 'if you like 4e, leave' was not justified. Whether you believe that Scott's reply was offensive or not, the point is you can't tell by the title. For all the casual reader could guess, it could have been a thread about innuendo in Death in Dehli and "...now I'm convinced EGG was a dirty old man."
It's not my work, someone else did this:
This guys math is better at seeing variables then Stalker0's math which only takes into count benefits in all or none format. However I do dispute the view that the system is broken just using this format that was linked. A level 1 skill challenge assumes DC 20 (Moderate DC for 1-3 plus 5 for skill checks). That is a -11 if we assume trained and +4 ability mod on the chart, these may seem unacceptable and for argument sake I will say they are.
However as I have said the reason I dispute the "Hard Math" approach is that it doesn't take into consideration variable change. Example being the fact that within a five man party there is likely going to be a number of +2 skill modifers for racial skills. How can we average this? We can't but if everyone isn't human then that is upto 10 different skills with a +2 and with only 17 skills in the 4E skill list that makes a significant chance that a skill will be covered with another +2 bringing our Skill Mod-DC down to -9.
I won't use the aid another argument because I just don't see a bunch of people bunching together for it as you have to be adjacent to use Aid Another. It maybe reason for one or two people but another variable in the equation. However most skill challenges do have a skill that gives +2 to another skill when used so that could bring us down to -7 on the chart. Which I think alot of people would agree that a 50-60 chance is a reasonable percentage of success vs failure.
He is right that the base assumptions of the SC systems math don't hold up at higher levels. If we compare a level 30 SC we got DC 34. Trained +5, +15 level, +8 ability mod, and under the assumption above +2 for race. Which is a -4. Which is 85% 83.5% 89.5% 93.1% 95.3% 96.8% before any other variables though that is assuming the character used all of their ability score increases in two stats. Better use the "Hard DC" column which would put us at -9. With an aid another or a skill that gives a +2 we are back to -7.
This doesn't include variables of automatic successes or automatic failures that the Skill Challenge system suggests. Nor any rewards and penalties that could be in play or assigned during the challenge based on the system.
True, it's not like he's saying that 4e defenders shouldn't post anywhere. I mean saying that about 4x critics would be juvenile and provoking, kind of like 'Stay classy, Paizo fans' is attempting to besmirch an entire community.See this? This is juvenile behavior. It finds disagreement and instead of debating the merits of the argument resorts to rounds of vitriol like "anyone with a shred of intellectual honesty would admit that," and "no one is allowed to contradict Mr. High And Mighty."
Stay classy, Paizo fans.
That's not what I said, and you know it. If you really want to stomp on my reputation some more, Matthew Morris, do so in context.
And no, "Stay classy, Paizo fans," is a reminder to everyone that you represent a community. Your behavior helps determine this community's reputation.
It would be really awesome if you would stop interpreting everything I say in the worst light possible. I haven't personally insulted you, kicked your dog, or any other such slight. I'm tempted to say that the only reason you have chosen to repeatedly single me out is because I dare to be just as confrontationally defensive about 4th Edition as others are confrontational about attacking it (though, quite often, I am much less confrontational, and always less vitriolic).
Scott, I can sympathize with you through most of this, but one thing to remember is that Paizo has set themselves up, more or less, as a "haven for the disaffected." In a sense, Pathfinder is a blantant anti-4e. Unfortunately, that means that almost any mention of 4e is met here with cries of "blasphemy!" -- and why wouldn't it be? -- that's the target audience of the company, people who don't like 4th edition. It's kind of unreasonable to expect, well, reasoned argument about it.
The logic seems to be that if someone equates computer games with "no roleplaying" and says that's bad, well, then 4e must be based on computer games, because 4e is bad: QED. (Personally, it reminds me more of Magic: The Gathering for some reason, with the monster card layouts, but I don't personally have enough experience with either game to really support that statement.)
Ah yes the one where Scott shows up and has a go at someone not Exactly a prime example.[Q
I think it was a perfect example. I "showed up" (as though I need justification for participating in a thread; this only makes it appear even more that WotC supporters are regarded as a kind of second-class messageboard citizen here) because a very negative, very ridiculous (and I am far from the only one who considered it ridiculous) reaction was being had to a WotC marketing decision, and I wanted to counteract that negative reaction by a) pointing out that it was ridiculous and expressing my disappointment with the way the community continues to react to even innocuous WotC moves, and b) share my own positive thoughts on the contest, and c) share some more details about the contest that had not been mentioned yet.
We were then treated to a few hundred posts wherein I was told that criticizing someone's argument was bad treatment, but that criticizing WotC is totally cool and poems should be written to commemorate it (and I am not even joking about that last part).
Scott, I can sympathize with you through most of this, but one thing to remember is that Paizo has set themselves up, more or less, as a "haven for the disaffected." In a sense, Pathfinder is an anti-4e.
The Paizo staff does not want their game to be seen in this light, though the general perception seems to be that it's accurate.
Unfortunaterly, that means that almost any mention of 4e is met with cries of "blasphemy!" And why wouldn't it be -- that's the target audience of the company, people who don't like 4th edition. It's kind of unreasonable to expect, well, reasoned argument about it.
Reasoned argument would be far preferable to the behavior witnessed in the last few days.
And you're right, mere mentions of 4th Edition provoke this reaction. The worst part is that there does not seem to be any real desire within the Paizo community to change this behavior. Its reputation has already suffered; the other big RPG online communities have a solid view of the Paizo boards as hostile and insular. I think Paizo needs a strong online community to survive, and I think that the larger RPG community's aversion to what they might experience on these forums is preventing this community from becoming as strong as it might be (to say nothing of reducing exposure to Paizo products).
Reasoned argument would be far preferable to the behavior witnessed in the last few days.
Well, yes. But as my wife rightly reminds me, we live in the world of "is," not the world of "should be." ;)
Reasoned argument would be far preferable to the behavior witnessed in the last few days.Well, yes. But as my wife rightly reminds me, we live in the world of "is," not the world of "should be." ;)
That doesn't mean some of us can't work towards the "should be".
Spitting into the wind, I fear.
I don't wear a Yankees cap into Fenway Park, because I know in advance some yahoo will dump beer on my head, at the least.
So, who wants to help me smurf this stupid f~@&ing thread?
Seconded. All in favor?
I hereby declare personal victory in the edition wars. Henceforth, all games will use the Bella Sara rpg.
So, who wants to help me smurf this stupid f!~@ing thread?
I for one welcome our new magical horse overlords?
Does anyone know what happened to the "My Little Death Ponies" on YouTube?
|
Hey Scott,
For the record, I don't see much wrong with your point. The shoes have nothing to do with 4e, per se. They're shoes. And, yes, there are quite a few misconceptions about 4e floating around. Nothing wrong with the system, not at all, but it doesn't work for everyone's concept of fantasy roleplay. Too "cinematic" perhaps, or too bound to the tabletop battle mat (which is a strange criticism for a 3.5 player to make, as it seems to be nearly, but maybe not quite as, mini-dependent as 4e) for some players. But then, there's no one forcing anyone to play 4e either.
But still, casting a shadow on a whole community because some fools can't let it go is bad form, imo. And you know this place is lightly moderated (at best), so you just kind of have to ignore the people who seem to enjoy baiting you.
I do want to see some links where you tell the EnWorld/RPGNet/WotC-Gleemax crowd to act right, though. Seriously, they're just as bad as the worst 4e haters here, just in the other direction. And where, exactly, IS the Pathfinder sub-forum on Gleemax again?
And to the 4e haters. Um, it's June, '09, not June '08. Please get over it. Paizo took up the mantle to keep the OGL going, there's an alternative to 4e in existence (several, in fact, if you consider Mongoose and Green Ronin as well). Continuing to cap on 4e serves little to no purpose any more. It isn't the only game in town.
;)
|
|
That doesn't mean some of us can't work towards the "should be".Reasoned argument would be far preferable to the behavior witnessed in the last few days.Well, yes. But as my wife rightly reminds me, we live in the world of "is," not the world of "should be." ;)
Man, you make it sound like you are fighting for human rights here or something. It's a game. We all love this game, sometimes too much. But it is only a game, and we can hate 4th Edition if we want. I have nothing personal against you, but we all know the story of Don Juan Quixote, right? You are trying to get 4th Edition to an even footing on the site of a company that is staking its financial survival on folks that are disenfranchised by it. Not going to happen. You'd be better served charging at those windmills with Don Juan.
You aren't going to change the minds of those like myself that think 4th edition stinks. And I'm not going to try to change your mind that it is the ultimate version of D&D. Unless you thrive on the chaos of Edition Division (and perhaps you do); maybe you could relax a bit and not be so reactionary?
Man, you make it sound like you are fighting for human rights here or something. It's a game. We all love this game, sometimes too much. But it is only a game, and we can hate 4th Edition if we want. I have nothing personal against you, but we all know the story of Don Juan Quixote, right? You are trying to get 4th Edition to an even footing on the site of a company that is staking its financial survival on folks that are disenfranchised by it. Not going to happen. You'd be better served charging at those windmills with Don Juan.
You aren't going to change the minds of those like myself that think 4th edition stinks. And I'm not going to try to change your mind that it is the ultimate version of D&D. Unless you thrive on the chaos of Edition Division (and perhaps you do); maybe you could relax a bit and not be so reactionary?
I'm not looking for the two games to have equal footing here. That would be ridiculous. I am looking for opinions to be treated equitably, and I am looking to be allowed to defend one of the games I am a fan of from criticism that is unjustified without having what often seems like the entire community come down on me for getting uppity.
But still, casting a shadow on a whole community because some fools can't let it go is bad form, imo. And you know this place is lightly moderated (at best), so you just kind of have to ignore the people who seem to enjoy baiting you.
In my view, this community has a problem, and it's one that the community needs to work on, even if a select few are the genesis of that problem.
I do want to see some links where you tell the EnWorld/RPGNet/WotC-Gleemax crowd to act right, though. Seriously, they're just as bad as the worst 4e haters here, just in the other direction.
I disagree with that.
Scott, as a fellow 4E fan, my advice to you would be to mostly walk away. It sucks but Paizo chose their direction, and neither me or you is going to be able to affect that. Walk to friendlier pastures and let those who want these boards have them.
I hereby declare personal victory in the edition wars. Henceforth, all games will use the Bella Sara rpg.
So, who wants to help me s/\/\urf this stupid f&@#ing thread?
What did you argue? and, what did you win?
|
|
I do want to see some links where you tell the EnWorld/RPGNet/WotC-Gleemax crowd to act right, though. Seriously, they're just as bad as the worst 4e haters here, just in the other direction.I disagree with that.
Of course you do. You're on the other side of the equation in those forums. Those forums aren't at all Paizo friendly, not that I've noticed, and moderation there is decidedly one-sided. But then, that's my interpretation as someone who isn't fond of the direction WotC has taken their marketing (game's fine, but some of their business decision and marketing rubs me the wrong way).
The Paizo boards have no obligation to be 4e friendly outside of the specific 4e sub forum (and again, they really have no obligation to host a sub forum for their competition, but they're cool like that; again, where's the Pathfinder sub-forum on the Wizards site?). In that sub forum, you are absolutely, 100% correct that trolling should not be tolerated and 4e (or WotC) hating should be moderated.
However, anywhere else on these boards that is not correct. The REST of the boards are for 3x/Paizo partisans. They can have and voice whatever opinions they want, as long as they don't attack anyone personally. (And, yes, I do think the Paizo peeps maybe should bring the hammer down a bit more when things get too personal).
As Kirth pointed out, this is one of the very few sanctuaries left for people who aren't playing 4e. Let them have their "whine and cheese" parties as long as they stay out of the corner reserved for 4e discussions. Let them compare 4e to WoW. Let them say 4e doesn't support "roleplaying" (whatever that means). Who cares? You know it isn't the case. Arguing the point isn't goping to change anything. it just takes time away from the cool stuff you're doing with conversions and answering questions for those genuinely interested in learning the nuances of 4e. It isn't a productive use of time to go back and forth with people who aren't going to be persuaded to your way of thinking.
Just sayin'
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I hereby declare personal victory in the edition wars. Henceforth, all games will use the Bella Sara rpg.
So, who wants to help me s/\/\urf this stupid f&@#ing thread?
What did you argue? and, what did you win?
I didn't argue, I swooped into a conflict and declared victory by operation of divine mandate.
As for my prize: the internet!
Now, everyone get off my internet. I'm turning it off and going to bed.
Wait! I recently won YOU in another thread, so this means I own the internet! I never thought having a multi-colored war pony of my own would pay off like this!
It was Heathy's STFU thread, if I recall. I was given a reward, and the choice was between you and a can of creamed corn. I almost went with the creamed corn, but at the last second, pulled back.
Man this is great!
Does this mean Al Gore is your groom? Oh, I've got so many people to thank!
|
|
It's easy to see why a lot of people have generally more goodwill towards Paizo than they do toward wotc. Even people who play 4e.
If wotc wants to stop being perceived as the bad guys they need to start mending bridges imo.
I agree yet again, but should the hard working game designers be tarred by the same brush as their marketing and communications people? I have first hand knowledge of the difference between those "doing the work" and "those marketing the work" and its not pretty. I respect the game designers, its hard work and at the end of the day thankless most of the time. Once PFrpg is released the complaints will roll in from all corners mark my words. Nature of the beast. Everyone can do it better, but we would rather someone else do the work actually.
WotC D&D marketing division perhaps needs a few of those "Xmas lay offs" that WotC are famous for. 4e is a reasonably sound system while not perfect its "perfectly fine" to use for a roleplaying game (if you like miniatures in your games) or I will also say just as a small scale tabletop wargame.
In this case I think "shoot the messager"...
S.
|
|
It's easy to see why a lot of people have generally more goodwill towards Paizo than they do toward wotc. Even people who play 4e.
If wotc wants to stop being perceived as the bad guys they need to start mending bridges imo.
I agree yet again, but should the hard working game designers be tarred by the same brush as their marketing and communications people? I have first hand knowledge of the difference between those "doing the work" and "those marketing the work" and its not pretty. I respect the game designers, its hard work and at the end of the day thankless most of the time. Once PFrpg is released the complaints will roll in from all corners mark my words. Nature of the beast. Everyone can do it better, but we would rather someone else do the work actually.
WotC D&D marketing division perhaps needs a few of those "Xmas lay offs" that WotC are famous for. 4e is a reasonably sound system while not perfect its "perfectly fine" to use for a roleplaying game (if you like miniatures in your games) or I will also say just as a small scale tabletop wargame.
In this case I think "shoot the messager"...
S.
Well, it's almost like WotC became the RPG company equivalent of an HMO. You know, doctors (game designers) aren't making the decisions, the bean counters (bean counters) are.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
It was Heathy's STFU thread, if I recall. I was given a reward, and the choice was between you and a can of creamed corn. I almost went with the creamed corn, but at the last second, pulled back.
Man this is great!
Does this mean Al Gore is your groom? Oh, I've got so many people to thank!
You didn't know? I am Al Gore!
I'm confused now...on multiple levels.
Why would you want/need to win your invention back?