Is Ghostwalk any good?

[Iron_Chef]

Some pretty stupid random musings. By definition name recognition would not have caused wotc to lay of those designers, because, though they would expect more money by virtue of it, they would probably be worth it. Now if the designers thought they were worth more money than they actually are, then that could result in a parting, but that wouldn't be Wotcs fault, and i seriously doubt that is what happened.

Well, that was lovely. And a big warm hello to you, too, mister.

I theorized that maybe the "big names" were let go since WoTC had to "chop x number of heads" and thought the "big names" might be more problematic to retain, despite their proven ability. How is this kind of seeming (il)logic so hard to understand coming from a corporation, when corporations are rarely known for making decisions in the best interest of their consumers or employees all the time?

Why not fire the people who helped make you rich? It's their fault for not owning a piece of the pie. You can always try to find more creative types later, ones who will work for peanuts while you get richer. And then you fire them, and move on. You own everything, so screw 'em. Creative types are a dime a dozen. It's all about stockholder's meetings and boardrooms, and how many estates and frikkin' yachts you own.

It's all about money and control. Saying a corporation (subsidiary or not) isn't willing to sacrifice certain talents in order to retain greater control and pinch a few pennies is hardly "stupid." Does it suck? Is it mean-spirited? Maybe, but welcome to capitalism and corporate America, where everybody gets the shaft sooner or later (unless you're rich enough to be relatively unaffected by other people's screw-ups and shaft-jobs, which are happening more and more frequently and to greater effect, every day). *cough* Enron. *cough* indigestible plastic fiber instead of real cream filling in Hostess snack foods. * cough*

 

[jasamcarl]

Well, that was lovely. And a big warm hello to you, too, mister.

I theorized that maybe the "big names" were let go since WoTC had to "chop x number of heads" and thought the "big names" might be more problematic to retain, despite their proven ability. How is this kind of seeming (il)logic so hard to understand coming from a corporation, when corporations are rarely known for making decisions in the best interest of their consumers or employees all the time?

It's all about money and control. Saying a corporation (subsidiary or not) isn't willing to sacrifice certain talents in order to retain greater control and pinch a few pennies is hardly "stupid." Does it suck? Is it mean-spirited? Maybe, but welcome to capitalism and corporate America, where everybody gets the shaft sooner or later (unless you're rich enough to be relatively unaffected by other people's screw-ups and shaft-jobs, which are happening more and more frequently and to greater effect, every day). *cough* Enron. *cough* indigestible plastic fiber instead of real cream filling in Hostess snack foods. * cough*

No, I'm saying its illogical because it would damage a corporation to have a cap on how much they can pay for 'talent'. And i seriously doubt that Wotc R&D payrolls lack any variation. And quite frankly, how much name recognition do you think rpg designers have?

It could be about stability and such, but I think that has more to do with the attitudes and future plans of those layed off that determined their fate than any sudden irrational development from inside Wotc/Hasbro.

 

[Iron_Chef]

No, I'm saying its illogical because it would damage a corporation to have a cap on how much they can pay for 'talent'. And i seriously doubt that Wotc R&D payrolls lack any variation. And quite frankly, how much name recognition do you think rpg designers have?

It could be about stability and such, but I think that has more to do with the attitudes and future plans of those layed off than any sudden development from inside Wotc/Hasbro.

Okay, but a salary cap can be a good thing from a corporate perspective: "Anybody who wants more than we're willing to pay can go take a flying leap." It's needed in most businesses to keep salaries from escalating out of control (sports, movies, TV, etc.). It's a way to control the bottom line.

I think the OGL suddenly made it possible for these "boy geniuses" to run off and do their own thing without corporate restraints and that any mention of an employee doing this would be considered "unfair competition" or whatever they like to call it in lawyerspeak, and a great way to get on the fast track to being fired. "Oh, so George thinks he doesn't need us bean counters here at Spacely Sprockets anymore, does he? Getting too big for his britches, is he? Get in here, Jetson! You're fired!"

Sorry if I sound cynical; it's my nature to question the motives of everything and everyone around me.

 

[jasamcarl]

Okay, but a salary cap can be a good thing from a corporate perspective: "Anybody who wants more than we're willing to pay can go take a flying leap." It's needed in most businesses to keep salaries from escalating out of control (sports, movies, TV, etc.). It's a way to control the bottom line.

I think the OGL suddenly made it possible for these "boy geniuses" to run off and do their own thing without corporate restraints and that any mention of an employee doing this would be considered "unfair competition" or whatever they like to call it in lawyerspeak, and a great way to get on the fast track to being fired. "Oh, so George thinks he doesn't need us bean counters here at Spacely Sprockets anymore, does he? Getting too big for his britches, is he? Get in here, Jetson! You're fired!"

Sorry if I sound cynical; it's my nature to question the motives of everything and everyone around me.

I don't think you are being cynical, just irrational. Its unlikely that Monte or any other designer was let because the OGL market outbid Wotc for their work, given how primitive and small that market is. I think its more likely that those who were laid off were those who were most likely to leave eventually anyway, or would demand more than they are ultimatly worth. This isn't bad, its just expedient. It ultimatly did not damage any product that would come out.

 

[yangnome]

Back to the topic at hand... I too received the book as a father's day present (a cool suprise since I really wanted the book, but didn't think I'd be able to get it because of too many purchases lined up over the next couple months.) readin through it, I've really been enjoying it and really think it's worth the money just for the ideas it spawns, even if you decide not to use the setting as is. Another side note, from the looks of the book itself, it seems that WotC has fixed the book binding problems. This cover is not warped and it (the cover) seems to be of better quality than other books I've bought from them in the last year or so. Hopefully the same will be true of the new core books.

 

[SneakyB]

Seems strange to me that WoTC should choose to ****can the bulk of its most creative, talented designers instead of some of the questionable "talents" they chose to retain <SNIP>

Feel free to flame on if I'm incorrect, people, but I believe that both Monte and Sean left of their own volition. It's my understanding that Monte voluntarily left well before the first pass of layoffs and that Sean left immediately preceding them as he was heading on to other ventures anyhow. However, I could be wrong...

While I'll wholeheartedly agree that WotC let a lot of their core talent go in the layoffs, let's be accurate in our portrayals of the Sean and Monte stories

As to earlier comments you've made, Iron_Chef, can we agree that this book is NOT for everyone, and, as with all other products, consumers should vote with their wallets? I mean, the original poster was merely eliciting feedback on whether or not he should purchase the book; not a discourse on management practices and ethics (or the lack thereof).

Dan

 

[Iron_Chef]

Oh, you mean you wanted the short answer? Then, no, I don't recommend Ghostwalk unless you really like ghosts and/or are looking for an offbeat "ghostly" setting.

I didn't originally want to get into a lengthy debate about tangential issues, but was drawn into it by questions raised by other posters, which made this a far more fascinating discussion for me than this thread should have been. For my contribution in dragging this thread way, way off topic, I must apologize. Let your normally scheduled Ghostwalk discussion resume, though I fear this thread's had it, and a new one should be started, which I will hopefully manage to keep out of, as I really have nothing more to say on the subject other than "I didn't like it; it was too weird for me." Which is all I should have said in the first place, but... you know how it is, you mean to just say one thing, and suddenly you've blabbed on forever, and not even on topic. My bad, gang.

 

[Olive]

Feel free to flame on if I'm incorrect, people, but I believe that both Monte and Sean left of their own volition. It's my understanding that Monte voluntarily left well before the first pass of layoffs and that Sean left immediately preceding them as he was heading on to other ventures anyhow. However, I could be wrong...

No flame, but I think you might be...

Pramas and Reynolds laid off story: http://www.gamingreport.com/article.php?sid=3025

I can't find one for Monte, but I'm pretty sure he got laid off as well. I also think that Monte and Sean wanted to go, and that getting laid off was probably good from their point of view (as they'd get paid out as well...)

 

[yangnome]

MOnte left on his own, Sean got laid off.

 

[SneakyB]

No flame, but I think you might be...

Pramas and Reynolds laid off story: http://www.gamingreport.com/article.php?sid=3025

I can't find one for Monte, but I'm pretty sure he got laid off as well. I also think that Monte and Sean wanted to go, and that getting laid off was probably good from their point of view (as they'd get paid out as well...)

None taken!

While the above referenced article (from Sean himself, no less) indicates that he was laid off, it was my understanding that Sean effectively fell upon his own sword and offered himself up for being laid off. Once again, I could be completely off base, won't be the first time.

Dan