MtG, D&D and Me TITLE NAME EDIT-The thread where Joe apparently offends everyone

[Darkwolf71]

I'm offended that I wasn't offended.

I also am offended that you weren't offended. Otherwise, I was unoffended.

 

[joethelawyer]

I also am offended that you weren't offended. Otherwise, I was unoffended.

give me a day or two. i'm sure i'll offend you.

 

[jmucchiello]

Awww man, I would kill for a 'real' historical wargame like that!

I'm not sure I understand. There are thousands of these kinds of games. Of course they are all chit based. So I'm guessing that you would kill for one of these games that had actual miniatures. Right?

 

[Windjammer]

Thanks, Joe. Like I said last time, it's really enjoyable to read about you. Not least because, over and above the connect, when you develop these narratives you'rs are extremely well written. I mean - damn, WotC actually pays Shelly Mazzanoble to create such fictions for part of their customer base (I let you guess which part that is - it's certainly not women, because they find her implied stereotyping of women offensive, more often than not). And Shelly's prose sucks, never mind that she's got nothing to TELL. Whereas you do.

So keep these things coming - I picked up yesterday's one from your blog (which I bookmarked last time), so you can tell, there are people here interested in you and those things. Don't let yourself be deluded by the occasional fool telling you that that's what blogs are for. They're not. Or at least not exclusively.

As to one of your main points, let me cite our stoutest defender of 4E over at TheRPGSite, who runs plenty of RPGA games.

I do agree that rules mastery is extremely important in 3rd edition and beyond. It was at that point that the rules in themselves started to present a more entertaining game than the creation of the fictional simulation, and the emphasis moved towards that. That is the real break in editions.

I'm playing 4E myself (not only) and I find it hard to deny that (say) "fiddling around with the Character Builder (say) is all about immersion and not tweaking the numbers." If it was different, you'd expect a bit more flavour text to accompany the numbers being tweaked, be these powers or magic items. My largest beef with 4E's first MM was that the powers of monsters didn't even have ONE line of descriptive text, this making it on occasion impossible to see what the power represented in-game (given the frequent disconnect from mechanics to in-game description). I'm really glad MM2 fixed that, it's an indication that WotC shares some of these concerns. I'm certainly glad they aren't listening to their fan boys. If they were, they'd never have occasion to remedy the game's shortcomings.

 

[Keefe the Thief]

Thanks, Joe. Like I said last time, it's really enjoyable to read about you. Not least because, over and above the connect, when you develop these narratives you'rs are extremely well written. I mean - damn, WotC actually pays Shelly Mazzanoble to create such fictions for part of their customer base (I let you guess which part that is - it's certainly not women, because they find her implied stereotyping of women offensive, more often than not). And Shelly's prose sucks, never mind that she's got nothing to TELL. Whereas you do.

So keep these things coming - I picked up yesterday's one from your blog (which I bookmarked last time), so you can tell, there are people here interested in you and those things. Don't let yourself be deluded by the occasional fool telling you that that's what blogs are for. They're not. Or at least not exclusively.

As to one of your main points, let me cite our stoutest defender of 4E over at TheRPGSite, who runs plenty of RPGA games.

I'm playing 4E myself (not only) and I find it hard to deny that (say) "fiddling around with the Character Builder (say) is all about immersion and not tweaking the numbers." If it was different, you'd expect a bit more flavour text to accompany the numbers being tweaked, be these powers or magic items. My largest beef with 4E's first MM was that the powers of monsters didn't even have ONE line of descriptive text, this making it on occasion impossible to see what the power represented in-game (given the frequent disconnect from mechanics to in-game description). I'm really glad MM2 fixed that, it's an indication that WotC shares some of these concerns. I'm certainly glad they aren't listening to their fan boys. If they were, they'd never have occasion to remedy the game's shortcomings.

Can you please fork the Mazzanoble-bashing and implying ("we know for whom this is because it isn´t for women, but i won´t say for whom it is because you already know it, wink wink nudge nudge") to another thread? Thanks.

And my players would be mightily offended if powers had descriptive text - its their job do describe why and how Tide of Iron works. Same for me as a DM. Different strokes, i guess.

 

[Lars Porsenna]

There's plenty of historical game figure manufacturers and rules publishers. LMK if anyone is interested and I'll supply more info.

Damon

 

[Windjammer]

Can you please fork the Mazzanoble-bashing and implying ("we know for whom this is because it isn´t for women, but i won´t say for whom it is because you already know it, wink wink nudge nudge") to another thread? Thanks.

The topic of her work doesn't really merit a thread of its own, even though you seem to think so. Mentioning her work in this thread, on the other hand, seems warranted since WotC apparently thinks that fiction of that genre , of which Joe's is an instance, has a place in DDI.

And my players would be mightily offended if powers had descriptive text - its their job do describe why and how Tide of Iron works. Same for me as a DM. Different strokes, i guess.

May I suggest playing chess to your players? Some people find it restrictive not to say "offensive" that the designation of pieces carry narrative implications, but you can toss these aside quite easily.

As I said. If WotC had listened to people like you, MM 2 would look as bland as MM 1, with powers as indecipherable as P2's Shunned. Mind you, MM 1 and P2 are my two favourite 4E products to date, but that doesn't mean I find them impeccable.

 

[Daniel D. Fox]

"You kids get off my lawn!"

 

[jmucchiello]

There's plenty of historical game figure manufacturers and rules publishers. LMK if anyone is interested and I'll supply more info.

Damon

Yes they exist. Online. How many can you find in "hobby" stores next to RPGs, CCGs, and board/card games? No, if you find those minis in a store, it is more likely a cross-over train/model shop these days. That was what I was talking about.

 

[Kez Darksun]

Yes they exist. Online. How many can you find in "hobby" stores next to RPGs, CCGs, and board/card games? No, if you find those minis in a store, it is more likely a cross-over train/model shop these days. That was what I was talking about.

While it is only a sample size of one person, I can walk in to the hobby store nearest to me and find traditional wargames alongside RPG's CCG's and traditional board games. I don't consider that store to be a cross-over shop since the store has been a general hobby shop for over twenty years and supported all sorts of hobbies from RPG's to Trains to RC Cars equally over the years I've been going there. And as far as a minis based WWII wargame goes, Flames of War has been pretty popular recently.