How about a deadline to WotC?

[Fifth Element]

True. But I'm under no obligation to give them money either. They may want to think on that when wondering about expectations.

Indeed! It is your right to not buy things you don't want.

It is not your right to be able to buy things you wished you could, if only they existed.

 

[catsclaw227]

Hmmm...wow. Ok, so am I "childish" if the 7 Eleven I have been going to for years suddenly decides that my 1.99 Big Gulp now has an added surcharge of .25 cents for the cup... and I am not happy about that and feel it is wrong since the cups have been free up until now? Am I somehow more mature because I just accept it and pay it?

Oh, now come on.... there is a world of difference between 7-11 adding a $0.25 surcharge to a product they sell and WOTC deciding that they no longer want their IP, their 4e system (which cost them untold $$ in R&D), to be copied or changed in such a way that others can run and sell derivative products without any need for their core books.

Imaro, I may not often agree with your opinions about game systems, but I DO respect your reasoning for your arguments. But this one? It was a reach into the stratosphere.

 

[carmachu]

So the adventure is not up to your personal liking, so therefore the quality sucks? The first Rise of the Runelords AP adventure had print that was too small and the art wasn't to my liking. So does it suck? No, but it wasn't the quality that H1 was, for sure. The adventure was a PRE-RELEASE adventure designed for beginners and those new to 4e. Of course it wasn't going to have the story depth of P1 (which, BTW, is awesome). Comparing H1 to a Paizo AP is like comparing apples to oranges, they're both fruit, but if you cook with them, they accomplish different goals.

I said NOTHING about not liking it. I said its quality was bad. And it is. I'm not alone in that thinking.

Yes the first AP had small print and art that you didnt like. But you have said NOTHINg about the quality of the adventure, which was good.

Quality of H1 as an adventure? Not so good.

No its not. Its only apples and oranges to YOU. H1 isnt even the quality of Red Hand of Doom or Return to the temple of EE. YOU just dont wish to compare them. Both are adventures. Whether one is an adventure path or not is irrelevant. YOU just dont want to make any comparisons.

But irregardless.....H1 was poor quality adventure. Both RHoD and RtTEE both beat it in quality, as do many of the game mastery/pathfinder modules from paizo, as do more than a few Necros adventures.

Ahhhhhh.... so in business, if I need to put something off for a customer because I have other PRESSING priorities, then I don't care about my customer? That's highly simplistic and could be considered a downright strawman. Just because they haven't executed on the GSL yet, doesn't mean that they don't care about the 3PP. I am not a 3PP, I cannot speak for them, but the ones that have spoken out on the boards say that, while the current GSL doesn't meet their business goals for publishing 4e content (due to some restrictions, current OGL product lines, etc..), many have said, on this board no less, that the gang at WOTC does care and that when Scott get's it done, they'll look at it. Maybe not said in the same post, but said nonetheless.

Whats so pressing beyond DDI?

You keep saying that the gang at WOTC CARES. So again I'll reiterate my question: show me.

I can point to all Wotc's actions and inactions regarding to the GSL. The vast majority show the opposite in fact.

But lets go back to the pressin matters. Yes, it does show your lack of caring to my customers, when you put them off. YOu show them that their concerns arent a priority.

When I put off my customer to do something else, or help someone else....yes they do feel like I dont care. its business 101.

You can buy what you want. That is the nature of capitalism (unless you live in a country that tells you from whom to buy things). You can speak with your wallet. Excellent.

But that has nothing to do with whether Scott's priorities are such that the GSL revision takes second fiddle right now. It doesn't mean that he doesn't care about the 3PPs.

I absolutely believe that Scott cares. But Scott isnt WOtC. And Wotc as a whole? Doesnt care. Their actions and in actions show it.

 

[Fifth Element]

Oh, now come on.... there is a world of difference between 7-11 adding a $0.25 surcharge to a product they sell and WOTC deciding that they no longer want their IP

Exactly. The 7-11 example is just a price increase. If WotC increases their prices by 10% have they taken any rights away?

 

[catsclaw227]

Yes the first AP had small print and art that you didnt like. But you have said NOTHINg about the quality of the adventure, which was good.

I thought the adventure was just OK.

Quality of H1 as an adventure? Not so good.

No its not. Its only apples and oranges to YOU. H1 isnt even the quality of Red Hand of Doom or Return to the temple of EE. YOU just dont wish to compare them. Both are adventures. Whether one is an adventure path or not is irrelevant. YOU just dont want to make any comparisons.

I agree, path or not, that's irrelevant. I was very impressed with the materials, the maps, the way the adventure was designed physically. The adventure was very basic, very geared towards beginners. I ran it with some newbies, and they had a great time. RHoD, that would have much more difficult and would NOT have had the "fun" effect I was looking for for new players. For that purpose (and, quite frankly, the one that was intended), it was better than RHoD, which was an awesome adventure.... for experienced players and DMs.

But irregardless.....H1 was poor quality adventure.

Of course, this goes without saying that this is only your opinion, and not stated fact. My opinion differs.

Both RHoD and RtTEE both beat it in quality, as do many of the game mastery/pathfinder modules from paizo, as do more than a few Necros adventures.

I love Necro products, I own almost all. I own the first 2 Paizo APs fully, and MANY of their products. The physical quality of H1 was superior than any Necro adventure, and better than the first RotR adventure, again, in my opinion. As for the gaming quality, I already stated that it was full of win for the new people I gamed with.

Whats so pressing beyond DDI?

You keep saying that the gang at WOTC CARES. So again I'll reiterate my question: show me.

I can point to all Wotc's actions and inactions regarding to the GSL. The vast majority show the opposite in fact.

But lets go back to the pressin matters. Yes, it does show your lack of caring to my customers, when you put them off. YOu show them that their concerns arent a priority.

I am not going to dig around for the threads where Clark and many others have stated that the people at WoTC care about the 3PP. Just ask the publishers themselves.

When I put off my customer to do something else, or help someone else....yes they do feel like I dont care. its business 101.

Again, this is an over-simplistic view of things. Running a business for the past 15 years has proven this to me.

I absolutely believe that Scott cares. But Scott isnt WOtC. And Wotc as a whole? Doesnt care. Their actions and in actions show it.

Well, for what it's worth, I disagree. Scott represents WOTC, he speaks for them. So when he says that they care about the 3PP, then it is WOTC saying it. Let's not dance around semantics.

 

[Fifth Element]

I said NOTHING about not liking it. I said its quality was bad. And it is. I'm not alone in that thinking.

Okay, you're going to have to define "quality" for us. You and everyone you know not liking something does not make it low quality. You're taking0 your subjective opinion and using it as fact. If I told you that I like H1, and so does everyone else I know, and we think it's a great adventure, does that mean it's high quality?

I absolutely believe that Scott cares. But Scott isnt WOtC. And Wotc as a whole? Doesnt care. Their actions and in actions show it.

Again, you're going to have to be more specific. WotC is a fiction, an entity only in the legal sense. It cannot care about anything. Who, specifically, within WotC do you need to "care" about the GSL in order for you to think the company as a whole does? Le Rouse is in charge of the D&D brand. That's a darn good start on the "who cares?" roster. Who else do you need, and how do you know they don't care?

 

[Imaro]

Oh, now come on.... there is a world of difference between 7-11 adding a $0.25 surcharge to a product they sell and WOTC deciding that they no longer want their IP, their 4e system (which cost them untold $$ in R&D), to be copied or changed in such a way that others can run and sell derivative products without any need for their core books.

Imaro, I may not often agree with your opinions about game systems, but I DO respect your reasoning for your arguments. But this one? It was a reach into the stratosphere.

Exactly. The 7-11 example is just a price increase. If WotC increases their prices by 10% have they taken any rights away?

Hey, guess what... you guys are both right, my example is as absurd as Moruss's blanket statement on people who feel entitlement towards things they were given for free and then had taken away being "childish".

WotC fostered this sense of entitlement in it's consumers and it is the direction many believed they would take, as they supported their product. (Of course this was in no way helped by WotC's "super secrecy" around the GSL during the release of 4e, which in turn leads me to believe they knew many fans and companies would not be happy with the changes). To then turn around and say they are childish for feeling anger about this is ridiculous. especially when presenting the case that WotC themselves hold no fault or blame in the ill will their reversal of direction fostered.

 

[El Mahdi]

And as far as feelings of entitlement... Who exactly fostered these "feelings". Shouldn't they have a certain amount of responsibility for the effect of years of conditioning those feelings, only to abruptly end them?

Simple answer, NO!


WoTC did not "foster" feelings of entitlement, neither did they imply or state that said entitlement existed, except as far as the original OGL grants. The OGL did not imply, state, or grant that all WoTC products, in prepetuity, would be Open Content. From this interpretation, it sounds like you are saying that WoTC gave up all of their current and future rights to any IP they have, or may develop in the future. That is an absurd assumption, one that seems to be based in an immature sense of entitlement. Just because some chose to view it as entitlement, even when it wasn't, does not ascribe resonsibility for those feelings to WoTC.

 

[El Mahdi]

Hey, guess what... you guys are both right, my example is as absurd as Moruss's blanket statement on people who feel entitlement towards things they were given for free and then had taken away being "childish".

Except Morrus didn't say this.

1. The OGL was free, AND STILL IS FREE. It hasn't been, and can't, be rescinded. All Open Content from the OGL, is still Open Content, and therefore is still free and will be FOREVER.

2. 4E is a completely new product. One which WoTC is under absolutely no moral, ethical, or legal requirement to release as Open Content. Just as you have every right to create content or products that are Open Content or not, at your discretion and pleasure.

 

[Fifth Element]

Hey, guess what... you guys are both right, my example is as absurd as Moruss's blanket statement on people who feel entitlement towards things they were given for free and then had taken away being "childish".

I agree with the first part, but not the second. Morrus' 'childish' comment was a cheap shot, I think. It wasn't called for, and I never said I agreed with it. The rest of his post was relevant though.