[BoVD]Well, since I can't seem to post this on Wizards forums...

[alsih2o]

son of thunder.

what do you recommend?

i am trying to state this in a way that shows the civility of my intent.


do you not want these things published?
published and kept behind the counter?
or do you not want to affect the publishing at all, and just want to air your opinion?

 

[angramainyu]

Finally, I have the right to share my opinion against the book and Wizards and anyone else who would print such stuff, as you have the right in supporting them. I just guess that everyone except Tracy Hickman and a small minority, such as myself, have a right to share their opinion.

Unfortunately this is where you are incorrect. Expecting something like a constitutional right to free speech within a private forum like this (or the WotC boards, or where ever) is simply... wrong.

We certainly try to keep things fair, but unfortunately some debates get rather heated, and the moderators must balance fairness with a non-inflammatory atmosphere.

And, unfortunately, this puts the moderators in a lose-lose situation where they must decided between fairness/freedom and the friendly atmosphere. It's long been the stance on these boards that keeping everything member-friendly is paramount.

That said, I find your point about Monte's project being "... something gamers have been wanting for a long time" most interesting. I wonder it it was just hype, or if the marketing machine changed the direction of the book itself.

 

[WayneLigon]

I didn't think the VC content of the sealed pages really even warrented a sealed section. With the exception of maybe one or two things, it wasn't really any 'worse' than things published earlier, even before 3E.

I'd say that in regards to the whole thing, it really just flew under my radar as far as any sort of strong response one way or the other. Personally, I just have a hard time believeing anyone could get upset about such things. (Obviously, they can but the reasoning behind it just escapes me.)

If it's really that offensive, then vote with your dollars.

 

[diaglo]

And, unfortunately, this puts the moderators in a loose-loose situation...

he wasn't commenting on your morals.

unless, of course, you meant lose-lose ...

 

[Arcane Runes Press]

Re: Well, since I can't seem to post this on Wizards forums...

Musings on Dragon #300 and the Industry



I have a friend who was posting legitimate concerns about the Scarred Lands setting over on Sword and Sorcery’s message boards. He riled up one of the authors on the game line, who also happened to be a moderator, and was subsequently banned for awhile. Are game companies today unable to take criticism? I know my friend wasn’t trolling or flaming, he had legitimate complaints. This same friend had complaints about another product by Necromancer Games, and he got into an argument with Orcus himself. Because of that instance I will choose not to spend money on anything published by Necromancer Games. Why? Because I don’t think the president of a company should get into shouting matches with a regular Joe gamer. That brings up a question I have; should game designers and authors post to message forums? I say yes, but not to get into a heated discussion with a poster.
Son of Thunder

Well, in reading through the post, this is the most interesting section to me.

My first question is "Have you considered that your friend might well be asking questions or making complaints in a way that is overly abrasive, too confrontation, or downright annoying?"

Honestly, no disrespect to you or your friend intended, but it seems a bit telling that the same person got into it with designers/owners of two different gaming companies.

Plus, message boards are far from the perfect medium for communication. It's easy to take things, on both ends of a discussion, much more personally than they are intended.

My second question is "Why do people hold game designers to a higher standard and yet simultaneously demand that they be regular joes in every other fashion?"

I understand the need for "customer service", and I agree that game designers/CEOs should put their best face forward as a matter of policy, but I also believe that game designers should have the right to call foul when they need/want to.

If you want a high degree of dialogue between fans and creators, then, IMO, you have to be prepared to take the a bit of salt with the sugar.

Patrick Y.

 

[BlackMoria]

Much Ado About Nothing....

I have read the sealed section and found nothing offensive or vile or questionable about it.

As a matter of fact, if there was no fanfare about the sealed section and all the hyperbole that went with it and Dragon published the articles 'normally', it would not have generated the controversy that it has now. The articles might have generated a complaint from a very small minority in that case - those outraged enough to write to the editor of Dragon, but nothing on the level of controversy that it has now.

I am more offended by Dragon magazine ads for computer games who show far to much gratitous blood and gore for my taste. The sealed section of Dragon 300 is postively 'tame' in comparison. So, where is all the outrage about these ads.

Tis much ado about nothing, IMO

 

[angramainyu]

he wasn't commenting on your morals

Heh... opps, fixed that... although, given some of the moderators... oh, I've said too much.

 

[Zappo]

I'd like to point out that the "vile" material in Dragon 300 (be it tolerable or not) is not representative of the BoVD. Monte stated on these boards that the BoVD doesn't contain anything more offensive than another product he co-authored, Hellbound. I have Hellbound and I guarantee that it doesn't contain anything more offensive than any other D&D manual.

 

[Bendris Noulg]

Having just gotten Issue 300, I have to say I'm not that impressed. Nothing in it I haven't already done during the past 10 years, nothing that would make my application of such more plausible or realistic. If anything, BoVD might likely be rather tame compared to what I have done and plan to continue doing.

I have higher hopes for Chains and Misery.

The most irritating thing about it was having to cut up a "collectors" issue in order to get at information that was only marginally inspiring and overall lacking in usefulness. I'd have been better off not cutting up the issue (for collectors value) and doing things as I always have done.

 

[SemperJase]

what do you recommend?

Not speaking of Son of Thunger here.

I recommend WotC stay with a marketing plan that this is a "family" game.

D&D 3E is by far the best selling RPG, it didn't need "vile" content to get to that point. In fact, I would make the case that it got there specifically because it did not focus on 'mature' themes. There are already products out there focusing on that market and they are not the #1 publisher.

As this hobby continues to mature and the demographic ages, the hobby's growth will rely on older generations passing it on to their children. Son of Thunder is already questioning if he will be able to do that if WotC (and Paizzo Publishing) continues their current direction. As someone planning on a family, I have that same question.

I would rather the hobby have a reputation for family entertainment rather than one as a 'mature' hobby. WotC (and Paizzo as a publisher of official material) has the biggest impact on that reputation and they are harming it right now.