Is WOTC/Hasbro mismanaging D&D?

[Rune]

Re: A rebuttal to the 3E more creative crowd

A higher degree of codification of character abilities in 3E can spark ideas, but it can also focus more attention and time on the ruleset rather than the imagination. There's more time spent sweating over stat blocks this edition, which detracts from the creative element. Perhaps not much, but I know I'd rather run 1E on the fly than 3E....a lot less rules, skills and feats to worry about and know when improvising.

I think this illustrates my point. Yes, you may well rather have run 1E on the fly, but doing so is being creative outside the rules. 3E provides the tools to be creative within the rules. You can run 3e on the fly, too (I do it all the time), but you now have a pretty good incentive for not doing so.

 

[Rune]

Before you make any comments, maybe you should read posts more carefully. Those comments were made at different points of the poll. In the beginning, voters were evenly split, then "yes, WOTC/Hasbro is mismanaging" became the majority, and now they comprise nearly two-thirds of those who voted.

Anyhow, it wasn't I who said that the people who want the leprechaun and the nereid are a "vocal minority" that is "destroying the market". So, your analysis of my logic is faulty. Go back and re-read the posts, if you need to.

P.S. As for my joke list of names for Monster Manual 3, I'm not surprised at all.

This is the second time you have inaccurately accused me of not reading the posts providing context for your post and your post carefully.

I'm afraid that I have to respectfully disagree with your analysis of my logic.

I'll back up a little, here.

It seems clear to me that I need to explain that, in common symbolic logic parlance, "~" means "it is not the case that." Your statement was, essentially, "it is not the case that the people who want the leprechaun and the nereid are a 'vocal minority' that is 'destroying the market.'"

This conclusion is entirely unrelated to how many people believe that WotC/Hasbro is mismanaging D&D (your poll, which you've cited twice as a supporting argument for your conclusion).

 

[Sir Edgar]

It's cite not "site" and poll not "pole". So, yes, you've misread my posts.

 

[Dinkeldog]

One of the rules of the internet is that once you're just correcting someone's spelling and grammar, you've admitted that they've defeated your logic and have nothing else to fall back on.

 

[Sir Edgar]

Frankly, I don't even know what he's trying to say. It looks like he took posts I made at different points of the thread and tried to piece them together in a way that doesn't even make sense to me.

Anyhow, if you are going to completely discount my argument as well as the opinion of over 200 of your peers than I don't know what else to say. I know that I did not even expect a majority to agree with the question that I posted for the poll, but I would have respected their opinion anyhow.

 

[rounser]

Yes, you may well rather have run 1E on the fly, but doing so is being creative outside the rules.

You say this like it's a bad thing.

3E provides the tools to be creative within the rules.

It also provides a whole heap of rules-based distractions to soak time and thought away from the imaginative side of the game.

I don't think our points are diametrically opposed, but rather ships passing in the night, if you will.

 

[Rune]

It's cite not "site" and poll not "pole".

Can't argue with that! Bad typing-monkeys. Bad!

Actually, if I need an excuse, I'll provide one. I was in quite a hurry when I typed my response and didn't proof it. Sorry to offend.

So, yes, you've misread my posts.

Huh?

How is my grammar connected, in any way, to my reading of your posts?

Frankly, I don't even know what he's trying to say. It looks like he took posts I made at different points of the thread and tried to piece them together in a way that doesn't even make sense to me.

Are we just on totally different wavelengths, here?

I'm not sure how anybody could possibly not understand what I'm saying. In the cases that I've cited (and in the one above, in this very post) you've made arguments and arrived at conclusions that are completely unrelated and, therefore, not supported by your arguments.

Anyhow, if you are going to completely discount my argument as well as the opinion of over 200 of your peers than I don't know what else to say. I know that I did not even expect a majority to agree with the question that I posted for the poll, but I would have respected their opinion anyhow.

I am not discounting your argument(s). I've assumed it(they) was(were) true, for purposes of logical analysis, in both cases. Nor am I discounting the opinion of over 200 of my peers. All I'm baffled about is why you keep asserting that their opinion about one thing supports your unrelated argument(s).

I'm just really confused, here!

 

[Rune]

You say this like it's a bad thing.

It is bad, if the rules influence you to do so because they suck. It's not bad if you do it because you want to.

It also provides a whole heap of rules-based distractions to soak time and thought away from the imaginative side of the game.

Well, it can if you're inclined to be distracted by such things, but at least you have the option, now.

I don't think our points are diametrically opposed, but rather ships passing in the night, if you will.

You're probably right. And, to be honest, you sound like my kind of DM. Maybe someday we'll get a chance to compare styles in person.

 

[rackabello]

It looks like he took posts I made at different points of the thread and tried to piece them together in a way that doesn't even make sense to me.

I think what Rune is referring to the following statement, Sir Edgar:

Second, if they were taking the "middle of the road" as you say, then they would have included the more traditional monsters they left out and left out the freaky monsters they included. I don't think people who want the leprechaun and the nereid included in either MM or MM2 are a "vocal minority" that is "destroying the market". This is obvious because at this point in the poll, the people who have voted "yes" are in the majority.
(italics mine)

Your poll asks about the overall management of D&D by WotC/Hasbro. As it stands, the majority of voters believe that D&D is being mismanaged. However, it does not automatically follow that these voters believe that the nereid and leprechaun should have been included in WotC's monster books. Only if your poll had asked "Is the absence of the nereid and leprechaun a sign of WotC/Hasbro's mismanagement of D&D?" would the statement above be true.

For the record, I've abstained from said poll. I haven't given the matter enough thought and probably lack the business acumen to vote intelligently.

Also for the record: nereids and leprechauns? You can never have too many fey!

 

[Sir Edgar]

I see what he is getting at. Well, that A to B to C logic is based on the assumption that people who have voted "yes" generally agree with my opening statement.