D&D 5E cancelled 5e announcement at Gencon??? Anyone know anything about this?

[Then]

You quoted me on the hypothesis of 5e been announced sometime in the near future. This year, or next year I guess.

No I bolded and underlined what I was responding to from your post.

The source was obviously misinformed but no one was blowing smoke.

Did the announcement take place? Nope. You of all people confirming the text? Yeah no appearance of collusion there at all. Then the convenient "it was pulled at the last minute" line. Yeah sorry dude, but that smacks of desperation.

Knowing full well that the announcement didn't take place, Morrus still felt obligated in 'reporting' it? For what reason? Reporting a rumor that wasn't accurate(3 days after the fact) and not stating that in the tweet, but forcing people to respond to the tweet for more information?

But heck it sure got people talking though didn't it?

 

[Umbran]

Here's the thing, though: I'm a customer. I can voice what I think is stupid. That should give the company some direction. The developers of the hobby, though, should be diplomatic during transition periods, not saying something is stupid. They don't have the freedom of voicing their preferences without people feeling alienated from the entire brand, whereas you and I do.

The developers should have been more diplomatic.

In most industries (like, say, software), customers rarely, if ever, get to talk directly to developers. Communication with the company is through customer representatives who get paid specifically for their ability to be diplomatic and control customer reactions.

Developers get paid to develop. If you want the information straight from developers, you are asking for removal of that layer of people who are skilled at being diplomatic.

You generally cannot have it both ways - either you get candid information from the developers directly, or you get diplomacy.

 

[JamesonCourage]

In most industries (like, say, software), customers rarely, if ever, get to talk directly to developers. Communication with the company is through customer representatives who get paid specifically for their ability to be diplomatic and control customer reactions.

Developers get paid to develop. If you want the information straight from developers, you are asking for removal of that layer of people who are skilled at being diplomatic.

You generally cannot have it both ways - either you get candid information from the developers directly, or you get diplomacy.

Be that as it may, there's a basic level of diplomacy that should be present if the developers are out talking up the new edition / game / system. If they're the ones that are taking information to the public, they're PR. They should at least have basic diplomatic ability.

You can be candid and diplomatic. You can say, "we didn't see much positive feedback about, say, the Plane of Vacuum, and so our plans for the future don't involve it." You don't have to say, "Of course, these planes don't hold a candle to 2E's hilarious Plane of Vacuum, which is truly the antithesis of fun."

For me, at least, there's a basic level I expect from those who are the voice of a company supporting a new product. The above statement, by Chris Perkins, falls far short of my expectation. Now, he seems like a nice guy, and he definitely cares about the game, and the customers. But that statement shouldn't be made, and it's really not hard to say, "based on feedback, we're going a different direction."

The other statements that were linked in this thread also fall well short of my expectations of basic diplomacy.

"Guardinals - Bullet in the Head." - Mike Mearls
"What's a guardinal???" - Dave Noonan
"They're outsiders from the plane of neutral good!" - James Wyatt
"There's a plane of neutral good? Which one was that again?" - Dave Noonan
"...Bytopia? Maybe?" - James Wyatt
"I'm probably going to offend a bunch of Planescape fans, but Bytopia sounds like a place where you'd go to buy a gimmicky hamburger..."

Bottom line, I can -and do- expect developers to have basic diplomacy, even when giving me their unfiltered opinion. Telling me that "player feedback indicated that a lot of people weren't having fun with, say, the Plane of Vacuum, as so we're going to be moving away from that type of play" is very much "candid information" put diplomatically. Again, you don't need to say, "Of course, these planes don't hold a candle to 2E's hilarious Plane of Vacuum, which is truly the antithesis of fun."

Just my thoughts, of course. I think our expectations might diverge on this issue. As always, play what you like

 

[technoextreme]

The developers should have been more diplomatic. Saying something is stupid when a sect of your players uses it is not diplomatic

Honestly, I remember listening to this podcast. I never actually realized they were referencing something in game. I thought they just made up the stupidest sounding thing imaginable.

"Guardinals - Bullet in the Head." - Mike Mearls
"What's a guardinal???" - Dave Noonan
"They're outsiders from the plane of neutral good!" - James Wyatt
"There's a plane of neutral good? Which one was that again?" - Dave Noonan
"...Bytopia? Maybe?" - James Wyatt
"I'm probably going to offend a bunch of Planescape fans, but Bytopia sounds like a place where you'd go to buy a gimmicky hamburger..."

Now you are just grasping for insults.

 

[xechnao]

No I bolded and underlined what I was responding to from your post.

That was a conditional sentence. If you accept the second part of the sentence(clause), you have to accept the first part too(condition).
This is what I am saying to you.

 

[MrMyth]

Right. Just like Forgotten Realms had a majority of people that wanted it changed. The fans did not want it changed. Only people that did not care about it.

Nothing in the above quote is substantiated in any way shape or form.

Your opinion is very nice, but you cannot claim it is shared by the majority.

On the one hand, he can't prove that his claim is true or false. On the other hand, your claim ("Only people that did not care about it") is outright false. Since, well - I was a fan of the Forgotten Realms, and I also wanted to see it changed.

Does that mean I agree with every change? Of course not. But I did feel there was room for improvement on the setting to make it more accesible as a locale for gaming.

As with every other change they made in 4E, they made it because they felt it was an area where there was room for improvement, and they genuinely felt the changes they were making were for the better.

You can absolutely feel they were wrong about that. But sticking with this "no true FR fan" fallacy... dismissing that anyone out there could have been a fan of the setting while also wanting some amount of change... sorry, not really a reasonable argument to make.

Of course, I'm not going to claim that thecasualoblivion's claim about who was or was not a minority of fans for Planescape is any more true. Honestly, I wish in general we had more folks willing to just offer their own feelings and leave it at that, rather than constantly claiming that their opinion is, inevitably, representative of the majority.

 

[Tilenas]

They should at least have basic diplomatic ability.

I'd call it common courtesy not to badmouth anything that you know a lot of people enjoy.

But since they're basically slamming their own work or that of former colleagues, they seem to think that courtesy isn't called for.
Kind of ties in with loudly complaining about how ridiculously broken 3rd edition was when it was time to promote 4E.

 

[Crothian]

You of all people confirming the text? Yeah no appearance of collusion there at all.

What does that mean me of all people? Aside from meeting him like three times at Gen Con I really don't know the guy.

 

[JamesonCourage]

Honestly, I remember listening to this podcast. I never actually realized they were referencing something in game. I thought they just made up the stupidest sounding thing imaginable.
Now you are just grasping for insults.

I'm really not looking to be insulted by them. I liked 3.X when I played it. I never played 4e, but it didn't look appealing to me (I can't comment on actual gameplay, since I didn't play).

However, based on the context that the quote of the developers, it's pretty dismissive. That's not diplomatic. When you're dismissive of part of your base that's been simply enjoying your game, that's a red flag for me. There's no reason to be insulting or dismissive of that group of people. When you openly insult their style of play, call their style of fun "the antithesis of fun", and dismiss your own past product as somehow lacking, it's not approaching things diplomatically. This isn't a huge problem with the company now or anything, but it's understandable that more people than just the one's being dismissed were upset by it.

As always, play what you like

 

[Mark CMG]

"Guardinals - Bullet in the Head." - Mike Mearls
"What's a guardinal???" - Dave Noonan
"They're outsiders from the plane of neutral good!" - James Wyatt
"There's a plane of neutral good? Which one was that again?" - Dave Noonan
"...Bytopia? Maybe?" - James Wyatt
"I'm probably going to offend a bunch of Planescape fans, but Bytopia sounds like a place where you'd go to buy a gimmicky hamburger..."

For a while after that exchange the DDM Soldier of Bytopia mini was available for about twenty-five cents apiece. I picked up a pile of them for a miniatures wargame battle. (Thanks, Designers! ) They're back up to about a buck each at Auggies now.

Blood War #11 Soldier of Bytopia UNBAGGED