DDXP characters - unexpected tactics?

[The_Baldman]

My take on the Paladin issue:

I wonder if WotC is not being a bit disingenious on this issue. If they really knew about this and other rules changes pre-DDXP, doesn't it make sense for them to fess up, print out a single Errata sheet for DDXP, and hand it out with the packet? This takes virtually no effort.

I knew about the change pre-DDXP so by default they had to know about the change and tell me about it. The rules went out to judges over a month before the show and there are lots of little changes that happened during that time and impossible to get every judge up to speed on every change in the limited time we had. So it's better to have them all run it the same way and say 'Yes we know there are some small things and most we've fixed' then for everybody to be on here ranting about different judges with different rules and such things.

 

[helium3]

"Our product has problems, we're aware of them, here's how to fix them." is, IMHO, a better message than "Either we are unaware of our product's problems, or we assume you won't notice them."

Well, if you haven't noticed, the default message is pretty much, "Oi!! We're so BUSY!!! We don't have time to do EVERYTHING!!" That generally seems to be the blanket response for any "oopsie" that gets noticed by the "public."

Not that this isn't a legitimate reason for things not getting done or being done as well as they could. I seem to have an irrational problem with organizations that use that particular excuse. It's one of the reasons that I tend to view Paizo in a less favorable light than a lot of folks around here.

 

[Dausuul]

Well, if you haven't noticed, the default message is pretty much, "Oi!! We're so BUSY!!! We don't have time to do EVERYTHING!!" That generally seems to be the blanket response for any "oopsie" that gets noticed by the "public."

Not that this isn't a legitimate reason for things not getting done or being done as well as they could. I seem to have an irrational problem with organizations that use that particular excuse. It's one of the reasons that I tend to view Paizo in a less favorable light than a lot of folks around here.

*shrug* To me, it's a question of priorities. Some things you dot every i and cross every t on. Some things you don't. I've yet to see the company that put finishing touches on absolutely every project and still managed to stay in business.

Dotting the i's and crossing the t's on the core rules is vitally important, since these are the rules millions of people will be playing with for the next 8-10 years. Making sure that the small group of people that attends DDXP gets the absolute latest up-to-date version of everything with all known exploits fixed? Not so important. Yeah, it resulted in a few issues, but in the grand scheme of things, the impact of the Cowardly Paladin exploit still being usable at DDXP will be minimal.

 

[helium3]

Dotting the i's and crossing the t's on the core rules is vitally important, since these are the rules millions of people will be playing with for the next 8-10 years. Making sure that the small group of people that attends DDXP gets the absolute latest up-to-date version of everything with all known exploits fixed? Not so important. Yeah, it resulted in a few issues, but in the grand scheme of things, the impact of the Cowardly Paladin exploit still being usable at DDXP will be minimal.

Fair enough. If it had been me, I would've wanted my first public unveiling of 4E in action to be as utterly flawless as possible. But, I'm known amongst my cohorts as being the guy with the often unreasonable expectations.

But yeah, minimizing the eratta needed for Core Rules I definitely takes priority.