Jonathan Tweet denounces Power Attack

[Nifft]

You think they're going to listen to reason when their only intent here is to turn a thread about a 3e's designer's ability to turn a critical eye on his own work into a "fans of 4e are stupid" thread?

They're on EN World by choice, so they're probably decent people deep down.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

You think they're going to listen to reason when their only intent here is to turn a thread about a 3e's designer's ability to turn a critical eye on his own work into a "fans of 4e are stupid" thread?

My only intent here is to correct this horrible usurpation of my intellectual property.

 

[Abraxas]

Yeah, and the F*AAT appear a lot more random chance word usage as well.

Hmm, it appears that, in my quick perusal, that the F*ATT isn't any more random than the A*ATT usage. Also, it appears that the F*ATT usage applies to using whatever the * is at maximum all the time, while the A*ATT usage applies to using whatever the * is all the time but not necessarily at maximum. Of course this is probably enough of this particular threadjack.

 

[Najo]

My only intent here is to correct this horrible usurpation of my intellectual property.

Actually, the thread is supposed to be about Tweets comments on power attack and our opinions on it. Not your IP or putting down the people posting here about power attack. You should work on that Diplomacy skill you mentioned earlier you've neglected, considering you represent your company and the products they sell.

But enough of that. On a positive note, what is Bad Axe's plans for 4th edition?

 

[Najo]

Now now... WotC does no wrong so just stop that right there.
Besides, it is clear that there are thousands of up and coming power DMs that are going to flock to 4E now that they are no longer shaking with fear. It is a good thing and you WILL like it. Unless you just think bad things about your mom. You don't think bad things about your mom now do ya? huh? huh?

WOTC does very little wrong with products they acquire from other people or products based off those said aquisitions. For example, Magic was created by Richard Garfield. D&D bought from TSR. Pokemon imported from Japan, Avalon Hill (bought and tranformed into a family board game company). Everything else has been a good game that failed (netrunner, mechwarrior, star wars TCG, jyhad, etc) or a terrible or nitchy game to begin with (dreamblade, hecatomb, duelmasters, x-23, xena, hercules, everway rpg).

Wotc is also cursed with products they cancel to soon and products they attempt to take themselves into the electronic or mass media. D&D movie and its made for TV sequel, master tools, e-tools, dragon and dungeon online, gleemax, the D&D insider, the dragonlance movie, ployhedron, star wars insider, most support for the star wars rpg, duelist magazine (which must be why they made dragon and dungeon e-mags)...ironically the magic duelist info (i.e. mtg.com) is very good, comes out weekly, and is FREE.

The ONE exception to all of this is magiconline. That is the online e-product WOTC is handling well. If D&D were handle like magic is, we be golden.

Regardless, I think the print books for D&D 4e will be spectacular.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Well, it's official: Wizards' target market for 4e is complete idiots. I guess it's a smart move, since there are an awful lot of those, but for the majority of existing players, this means that the new, dumbed-down, D&D will feel like going from university to "special class".

I guess that this is what you get when you let people who wrote a "...for Dummies" book or two design a game: They just assume that everyone's a dummy and treat them as that.

Since a large proportion of ENworld would consider themselves the target market for 4e, you think it is appropriate to call people here idiots?

You know how to make reasoned arguments, so make them. Don't fling poo like a deranged monkey.

Take a 3 day break and make a better job when you come back. Email me if you want to talk about this.

 

[BryonD]

C'mon guys. This is the one place left for reasoned discussion. Incoherent rage and pointlessly vindictive sarcasm have lots of other places to call home.

-- N

My sarcasm was neither pointless nor vindictive.

 

[BryonD]

WOTC does very little wrong with products they acquire from other people or products based off those said aquisitions. For example, Magic was created by Richard Garfield. D&D bought from TSR. Pokemon imported from Japan, Avalon Hill (bought and tranformed into a family board game company). Everything else has been a good game that failed (netrunner, mechwarrior, star wars TCG, jyhad, etc) or a terrible or nitchy game to begin with (dreamblade, hecatomb, duelmasters, x-23, xena, hercules, everway rpg).

Wotc is also cursed with products they cancel to soon and products they attempt to take themselves into the electronic or mass media. D&D movie and its made for TV sequel, master tools, e-tools, dragon and dungeon online, gleemax, the D&D insider, the dragonlance movie, ployhedron, star wars insider, most support for the star wars rpg, duelist magazine (which must be why they made dragon and dungeon e-mags)...ironically the magic duelist info (i.e. mtg.com) is very good, comes out weekly, and is FREE.

The ONE exception to all of this is magiconline. That is the online e-product WOTC is handling well. If D&D were handle like magic is, we be golden.

Regardless, I think the print books for D&D 4e will be spectacular.

I don't even know where to even start with a response.
I make a comment to the point that any critical comment on any single rule can get blasted and instantly damned as if being from a wotc-bashing axe grinder, even if the poster is pro wotc 5 times out of 7 (such as say, me). Your response is to forget the rules context and start talking about complete products and then use the assumption of your own personal opinions being fact as the whole basis of this misplaced rebuttal.

And if you think magiconline was the "ONE" thing WotC has done wrong, then I accept that and simply will consider your opinion as representing a very very small group.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

And if you think magiconline was the "ONE" thing WotC has done wrong, then I accept that and simply will consider your opinion as representing a very very small group.

I am not sure, but I think you misread him, or somehow used the false wording in your post.

The way I read his post, "Magic Online" was one of the things WotC did well (referring only to the electronic and mass media products related to their "traditional" systems)

 

[Najo]

And if you think magiconline was the "ONE" thing WotC has done wrong, then I accept that and simply will consider your opinion as representing a very very small group.

You completely misread me. take another read through please and then let me know what you think of my reply.

Most of my comments were from first hand experience in the frontlines of the game industry for the last 13 years. They were backed by experience and a strong understanding of what makes a good game sell and why a bad game fails.