Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Mistwell" data-source="post: 6554022" data-attributes="member: 2525">Yes, it's very clear that's all you want to talk about.&nbsp; What's not clear is why.&nbsp; If what matters to you is having stuff to play with, it should not matter if it is from WOTC or not.&nbsp; The reasons given by you and others for making that distinction are pretty weak.&nbsp; To know if a release schedule is slow or not, you have to know what people need.&nbsp; To know what people need, you have to address the entire context of what people have - not just what WOTC puts out.&nbsp; If people have access to 64 adventures right now at the 3 month mark, it's hardly fair to call an adventure release schedule too slow.&nbsp; So, WHY are you only willing to talk about WOTC stuff? What's the justification for limiting discussion to that, other than to limit discussion?Are the articles usable? I think they are, many others do as well, how is not not usable?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Mistwell, post: 6554022, member: 2525"] Yes, it's very clear that's all you want to talk about. What's not clear is why. If what matters to you is having stuff to play with, it should not matter if it is from WOTC or not. The reasons given by you and others for making that distinction are pretty weak. To know if a release schedule is slow or not, you have to know what people need. To know what people need, you have to address the entire context of what people have - not just what WOTC puts out. If people have access to 64 adventures right now at the 3 month mark, it's hardly fair to call an adventure release schedule too slow. So, WHY are you only willing to talk about WOTC stuff? What's the justification for limiting discussion to that, other than to limit discussion? Are the articles usable? I think they are, many others do as well, how is not not usable? [/QUOTE]

Verification