Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="redrick" data-source="post: 6670430" data-attributes="member: 6777696">I can't imagine a company of WoTC's size officially confirming or denying individual layoff decisions with the general public. New hires are one thing — that's a cause for celebration, but layoffs are painful for the company and the individual. I appreciate that Morrus sees part of his mission as shining a light on the interior workings of the companies that make our games, but I think it would set a bad precedent for Wizards to officially comment on that stuff. Let the individuals involved comment as they see fit (and, most likely, as decorum and confidentiality agreements allow.)Similarly, the idea of Wizards employees regularly wading into forum threads seems a tough task for said employee. I mean, it would be cool if Mr. Crawford decided to dive into a rules thread, or Mr. Perkins decided to dive into a DM advice thread, but we get that stuff through Twitter and their respective columns. What is really being asked is that Wizards dive into the speculation and criticism threads. That would mean reading through page after page of speculation from people who, ultimately, don't know what they're talking about, without actually being able to address any of it. Certainly not a fun &quot;coffee break&quot; task I'd volunteer for at my job.I think Wizards did a pretty good job at appropriately setting my expectations for this edition and its release schedule in the months leading up to the actual release. We get tons of informal communication from Mearls and Crawford, mostly about how to play the game that we have. I think that's the general message from Wizards — there might be some cool new stuff coming down the pipeline, but don't build your campaign around it. Build your campaign around the game that has been published and the material available for it. You'll be able to buy two Adventure Paths a year, if that's what you're into.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="redrick, post: 6670430, member: 6777696"] I can't imagine a company of WoTC's size officially confirming or denying individual layoff decisions with the general public. New hires are one thing — that's a cause for celebration, but layoffs are painful for the company and the individual. I appreciate that Morrus sees part of his mission as shining a light on the interior workings of the companies that make our games, but I think it would set a bad precedent for Wizards to officially comment on that stuff. Let the individuals involved comment as they see fit (and, most likely, as decorum and confidentiality agreements allow.) Similarly, the idea of Wizards employees regularly wading into forum threads seems a tough task for said employee. I mean, it would be cool if Mr. Crawford decided to dive into a rules thread, or Mr. Perkins decided to dive into a DM advice thread, but we get that stuff through Twitter and their respective columns. What is really being asked is that Wizards dive into the speculation and criticism threads. That would mean reading through page after page of speculation from people who, ultimately, don't know what they're talking about, without actually being able to address any of it. Certainly not a fun "coffee break" task I'd volunteer for at my job. I think Wizards did a pretty good job at appropriately setting my expectations for this edition and its release schedule in the months leading up to the actual release. We get tons of informal communication from Mearls and Crawford, mostly about how to play the game that we have. I think that's the general message from Wizards — there might be some cool new stuff coming down the pipeline, but don't build your campaign around it. Build your campaign around the game that has been published and the material available for it. You'll be able to buy two Adventure Paths a year, if that's what you're into. [/QUOTE]

Verification