The Paladin and the Stirges

[catsclaw227]

Who said this?

The way they're doing it now just feels like a PR nightmare...

Calling it a PR Nightmare is an overreaction. Instead you could have just asking a question in his blog and waited for a clarification. You made an assumption without any facts and then claimed WoTC had a PR Nightmare on their hands.

It's sad because other people might take it out of context and believe that you had all the facts at hand. This is how a lot of the ramp-up to 4e got out of hand -- misquoting WoTC blog posts, exaggerating a statement made by a developer, etc.

 

[Sigdel]

I am pretty sure Dave Chalker did make a statement in the comments section clarifying things.

We both know that most people will comment first, then go through the pages of comments.

I ran a poll a few years back asking if people would read an entire thread before commenting or just comment anyway, even if it risks restating some thing someone else may of said. The results were a majority in favor of commenting first and reading later. The info I brought back from that was that if it is not on the first page or to of a post, then most people wont read it.

Not many are willing to slogg through a many-page post to get to the kernel of truth or clarification from the OP. Thats why we have the edit button.

 

[nedjer]

It's only "obviously better" if the game is balanced and coherent for both including and excluding the module. If the Devs favor a certain ruleset as the baseline, and don't do a good job developing, testing, and balancing the alternative ruleset, then no, the game isn't "obviously better", to me, having that baseline ruleset instead of the one I want.

I'm suggesting having the choice in the first place is better, as one person's preferred baseline or default is another person's optional extra.

 

[Kynn]

Calling it a PR Nightmare is an overreaction. Instead you could have just asking a question in his blog and waited for a clarification. You made an assumption without any facts and then claimed WoTC had a PR Nightmare on their hands.

I think you need to rewrite what I wrote. I will spell it out even more clearly, in simple words, though:

The "PR nightmare" refers to the way that WotC has chosen, at this early stage in the game, to address giving out information about D&D Next. Not to anything that Dave did wrong, although obviously their decisions are part of what caused the ****storm that Dave and many others allude to.

Don't use profanity here, please. Thanks. -- PCat

I've leveled zero criticism at Dave. If you think "PR nightmare" is about his actions and not WotC's choices, you're very mistaken.

It's sad because other people might take it out of context and believe that you had all the facts at hand. This is how a lot of the ramp-up to 4e got out of hand -- misquoting WoTC blog posts, exaggerating a statement made by a developer, etc.

And you'd think that after the ramp-up of 4e went so poorly, WotC would try to do better, not worse, at getting the information out.

 

[nedjer]

The "PR nightmare" is not anything to do with Dave's actions at the game table or at the blog. It's to do with the way that WotC is handling release of information on 5e.

As with so many of these 'one true way' simulationist posts there's no explanation to go with the claims. A PR nightmare is Gerald Ratner saying his bling's crap or Perrier water with unhealthy chemicals in it.

So, let's be having it. What is so terrible about the handling of the release of information on 5e. Should it be gift-wrapped? Delivered by burlesque dancers? Dipped in chocolate and hand-fed through a strainer?

 

[Plane Sailing]

I think WotC made a bad choice in how they're handling the NDA and playtest issue. It seems they'd do better with either a more open playtest with open discussion, or a more closed NDA that prohibits random bloggers from dribbling out pieces that might color the expectations for the game.

The way they're doing it now just feels like a PR nightmare -- I've seen threads go on for dozens on pages based on the idea that the "paladin vs. stirge" scenario represented the 5e rules, when it doesn't seem to represent anything other than one particular DM's whim of the moment.

I'm afraid I completely disagree with you here.

I think the nda for the play test at ddxp has enabled a lot of ordinary people to express the fun they had with it (and indeed, a few people to say how it didn't work for them) which ordinarily wouldn't have been possible. And they are setting up an open play test later this year.

I think it is a pr triumph for the most part, with only a few people getting bent out of shape because they want to read too much into individual comments or reports.

Regards

 

[davethegame]

I think you need to rewrite what I wrote. I will spell it out even more clearly, in simple words, though:

The "PR nightmare" refers to the way that WotC has chosen, at this early stage in the game, to address giving out information about D&D Next. Not to anything that Dave did wrong, although obviously their decisions are part of what caused the ****storm that Dave and many others allude to.

I've leveled zero criticism at Dave. If you think "PR nightmare" is about his actions and not WotC's choices, you're very mistaken.



And you'd think that after the ramp-up of 4e went so poorly, WotC would try to do better, not worse, at getting the information out.

And I think you're very mistaken in using my post to represent a problem on WotC's part, especially without having all the facts.

Additionally, if writing about something as small as stirges constitutes a "****storm" WotC is not going to be able to do right by you no matter what they try.

Dave - no profanity here, please. -- PCat

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

So, let's be having it. What is so terrible about the handling of the release of information on 5e. Should it be gift-wrapped? Delivered by burlesque dancers? Dipped in chocolate and hand-fed through a strainer?

Merely a case of the gimme-gimmes. I ignore my children when they throw a tantrum over something they want right now. I try to do the same over the online equivalent.

Admin here. We're treading very close to personal insults, and it's not something we'll tolerate. It's fine if you don't agree with someone; just be respectful in the way you express your opinion. -- Piratecat

 

[D'karr]

I'm afraid I completely disagree with you here.

I think the nda for the play test at ddxp has enabled a lot of ordinary people to express the fun they had with it (and indeed, a few people to say how it didn't work for them) which ordinarily wouldn't have been possible. And they are setting up an open play test later this year.

I think it is a pr triumph for the most part, with only a few people getting bent out of shape because they want to read too much into individual comments or reports.

Regards

Bingo.

 

[catsclaw227]

I think you need to rewrite what I wrote. I will spell it out even more clearly, in simple words, though:

The "PR nightmare" refers to the way that WotC has chosen, at this early stage in the game, to address giving out information about D&D Next. Not to anything that Dave did wrong, although obviously their decisions are part of what caused the shitstorm that Dave and many others allude to.

I've leveled zero criticism at Dave. If you think "PR nightmare" is about his actions and not WotC's choices, you're very mistaken.

I understood very clearly that you were talking about it being WoTC's PR nightmare and not Dave's.

In the NDA, WoTC apparently gave some of the early players and DMs the right to talk about there experiences and the fluff of the game without divulging mechanics. What Dave did was exactly that. And yet, because you assumed that there had to be either a mechanical reason for the paladin to take a rest, or the DM winged it to make it fun for the players is a WoTC PR Nightmare. That is a massive disconnect unless you are purposefully looking to stir something up.

WE KNOW THERE AREN'T ANY MECHANICS YET. So just let the DDXP players and DMs talk about things, within the confines of their NDA, in a general way so we can hear the stories. That's all they are for now... stories.

Why go posting on EnWorld that WoTC has a PR Nightmare on their hands because a DDXP DM was cool enough to talk about how he handled a situation where he didn't have enough of the ruleset at hand.

If anything, I think it's good WoTC has been allowing this and now it's sad that someone like Dave Chalker may now be reluctant to talk about his experience for fear of someone blasting WoTC for it.