Industry Information Influx?

[atom crash]

Even when everyone is being civil, this can often be an unfriendly place for a WotC employee. We as a community can sometimes be very harsh and critical of WotC. I'm always amazed at how quickly some members can post when any new product is announced or released how disappointed or uninterested they are in that product. Reviews of the latest releases can be harsh at times as well. I wish I could search to drag up a few examples.

Maybe they get the harsh spotlight because they're the 800-pound gorilla. I don't know.

Maybe WotC staffers read the boards and take note, but they could also have decided that regardless of what they do there will be a few threads hailing the decision and a dozen threads decrying it as the deathknell for the game.

I also agree with Umbran that a WotC staffer can't just post here like the rest of us can. We read their posts as different, as somehow more "official," so when they log on and browse the boards they do so as a representative of their company, not as some guy who likes to play D&D and has a few minutes to spare as he sits at his workstation. What's worse, we as a community sometimes expect them to justify or clarify the business decisions of their company. That's a great deal of pressure to deal with.

But as to whose responsibility it is? That's a tough one. Ultimately everyone is responsible for their own posts, but I can see how a few hot topic threads can quickly make it feel like entering enemy territory for someone who works for Wizards.

 

[Jdvn1]

Yes, but generally not in the middle of a major controversy.

One of us has misinterpreted the point of the thread, I think. I'm not referring to posting 'in the middle of a major controversy' but posting in EN World in general.

Because, quite simply, the relationship is different. A talk gamer-to-gamer is much different than a talk gamer-to-one-who-speaks-for-the-mind-of-WotC. The very fact that we have to consider them as something separate admits this fact. They have privileged information, and special insights, and (perhaps most importantly) particular responsibilities that your fellow board member doesn't have.

I'm not looking for a relationship from someone who speaks for the mind of WotC, but for posts from people who have a lot of hands-on experience with the nuts and bolts of the system. As a matter of fact, I'd rather they avoid speaking the mind of WotC!

One thing I have learned is that it can be pointless to discuss how great vanilla is to someone who does not like it. Some, perhaps most, of the people who don't like 3.5 or certain aspects of it have already made up their minds. Perhaps WotC people read the postings and take note of the things people complain about (I willing to bet they do), but they don't want to actively discuss it, because they don't want to be forced into having to defend the decisions already made, and don't feel they should have to justify them.

Admitting mistakes: how does someone admit a "mistake" unless it was their own personal screw up? Would you appreciate it if a coworker of yours was posting about work you did and talked about how you screwed up? Unless you get the person in charge of the work in question, you probably won't see any apologies.

Do you think they all play the rules as written? I'd be interested to hear what houserules some of them use. I don't think they should convince everyone their rules system is the best possible system, because they probably don't believe that themselves. Different games have different requirements, and I'm sure they'd be in agreement with a lot of EN Worlders who say that if you're not having fun because of how something works, you should make it so it you are having fun. It'd be neat if they helped people with their houserules, though, just like many EN Worlders give comments on houserules.

Admitting mistakes: Haven't they done that already? At the very least, I mentioned poorly worded rules. Haven't they admitted that some rules are poorly written by virtue of their having Errata or a FAQ, or any of their other clarification sources? And, of course there alternate rule that can be used that they're happy with--isn't Unearthed Arcana proof of this? I'm sure they agree system has issues--isn't this obvious with some of their online content--Dead Levels and so on?

Fact is, WotC dudes--just like the rest of us--come up with other ways to do things. WotC dudes, though, publish them as books. They don't have to name a person who made a mistake, and I don't want them to. I'm sure a lot of the individual rules had a bunch of people go over them and give comments on them anyway. Naming someone who made a mistake would be inherently flawed. Regardless, as professionals in the industry, they seek improvement. Does the release of a 3rd edition imply that the 2nd edition was a mistake? Not necessarily, but no system is perfect and they tried to improve upon it. Did the release of 3.5 imply that the 3rd edition was a mistake? It had its flaws, I'm sure, but I'm sure they'd regard 3.5 as an improvement. Can the system be further improved? If they said no, not only would they be wrong, but they'd be foolish to come out with a 4th edition.

No one wants a scapegoat, but we do all want the best game possible.

Anyway, don't we have a lot of non-rules threads here too? If they kept out of rules threads, would that be kosher?

I'm wondering, if part of the problem is that WotC is not a hivemind, but people seem to think they are. They are individuals, with different opinions but who also need to maintain their professional relationships with each other at work. They don't want to risk being perceived as bashing a colleague's work behind their backs, airing their dirty laundry about how the rest of the team disagrred with them, or possibly having a confrontation about it on a public board if a coworker comes to defend themselves. Better to keep it private.

I'm not sure where you got this idea that they're a hivemind. I don't think they all agree all the time, and I'm sure each WotC employee could come up with a different fix for a possible issue. I do think they'd all agree that the game isn't perfect. I don't want to hear, nor do I expect to hear, about disagreements in the team. That's their own private laundry. Going to a public forum and talking about that is just as bad as going to any public place and talking about that. Very unprofessional.