No Dice <Nerd Rage>

[MrMyth]

To this day, I still miss getting Dungeon and Dragon in my mailbox

And that's entirely fair. I, for one, miss the cartoons. No idea why they haven't tried to get those back or hire some new ones for the current online issues.

You mean like putting such wonderful insights as "If you use profession skills in your game, your game probably isn't as fun as it should be." in print, saying things like you can skake you fist at the cluds (4E) bu they are still coming, portraying players of 3.0/3.5 as too incompetent to even use an index or have a basic grasp of the rules in their 2007 Gen COn youtube video, or having a dragon "poop" on detractors of 4E in a Penny Arcade cartoon?

Yeah, I still think you are reading way too much into many of those comments or cartoons, sorry. I'm sure I can't convince you otherwise, but I'm pretty sure no one at WotC set out to actively insult players of 3rd Edition - but when explaining possible issues with the edition, and reasons why they were making changes, someone was bound to be offended by it.

When I can consistantly participate in Pathfinder games that have three to four encounters in the same time frame it would take to resolve one 4E encounter, I have to conclude that the designers of 4E really messed up somewhere.

Yeah, I really don't believe this is true. If pathfinder combats are genuinely 15 minutes long on average, I'll be really impressed. (Given that in my own experience, 3.5 and 4E run about the same average combat length. 3.5 had more potential to either end really quickly, or take an entire session, while 4E has a longer timeframe per combat without as much deviation from it.) Your experience may be different, sure.

But claiming that 4E was designed "around an excruciatingly slow combat system that makes playing the game almost unfeasible" is such incredible hyperbole that it completely undermines any point you were trying to make.

The "rules updates" (both the amount and nature of them) have caused many people I know to completly stop buying WOtC's books and let their DDI subscriptions lapse. It definitely is costing them business. They should do some QA and try to get decent rules the first time around.

On the other hand, the rules updates are helping them keep me as a customer. They are, in fact, one of the things I am most impressed with them doing as a company. I'd certainly prefer they get the rules right the first time around - but given that has never happened, I'm also a fan of them fixing what they get wrong rather than leaving broken rules in place.

In any case, I'm very doubtful that they have lost serious custom from books or DDI over the presence of updates.

And again - even if so, your claims about the situation are so outrageous that I still would have to object. Some people don't like the errata - I can accept that. Claims that books instantly become obsolete and that the data is impossible to keep up with? Again, whatever genuine point you might have, the more you distort the situation, the less likely people are to accept or understand what you are trying to say.

 

[Chrono22]

Now you're calling them liars? What evidence do you have for this? Insider information of some kind? Or is this just more invective?

Did I call them liars? No. Calling my language invective is invective. Please don't put words in my mouth.

Sure it is. And it certainly isn't for you to say what a legitimate reason is or is not for a company that, apparently, you have a lot of misconceptions about ("couple dozen employees", I'm looking at you).

Once again, I can say what I want about anything. I already have the "right" to claim piracy isn't a legitimate reason, I don't need your permission.
And please, stop putting words in my mouth. I said "salaried employees". It's an important distinction.

It's funny how much people throw around words like "honesty" when they mean "I don't like it".

1. I think their excuses regarding piracy aren't truthful.
2. That means I think they're being dishonest.
It's as simple as that. If someone promised to give me exactly 5$ and instead gave me 10$ I'd be thrilled. But they'd still be dishonest.

Seriously- here's a clue: EVERYTHING a company does costs money; why would they spend that money on stuff that competes with their "core products"? Why would they divert resources from the stuff that makes them money to please a few people that spend their online time bitching about them? It's like in the 80s when TSR tried to please all the anti-D&D groups by castrating the game. They were appealing to people that weren't buying their product anyway. What is the point?

What's the competition? The people that wanted to change, changed. The people that didn't, didn't. But as a consequence of these policies WotC lost alot of respect in the gaming community and alot of goodwill. That means, people like me turning people away from WotC products or simply not endorsing them. That's bad for business, when the best form of advertising for your product is word of mouth.

Preemptive counter: Turning away new players from WotC products is bad for the hobby: Maybe, if I didn't offer or suggest alternatives. In any case, I'm going to act in my best interests (as I perceive them), not unlike a business. Unlike WotC, I am not an industry lead, I'm not setting an example for how things should function.

For not edition warring, you sure are throwing a lot of hate at WotC and 4e.

Please quote where I've taken any potshots against 4e in this thread. If you find any, I humbly apologize for hurting its feelings.

By all means, boycott WotC and complain bitterly all you like about ow THEY ARE ALLL LAIRS AND THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT THE OLDE SCHOOL GAMERSZ!!1! But really, don't be surprised to find that they aren't catering to you.

Wheee!!! You're spinning so fast I'm getting dizzy just reading this. But now I feel like puking.

To everyone else that had the patience to not mischaracterize me: thank you for that, and thank you for not trying to pull this thread into a debate about the rules of 4e.
I've said my piece, and while the rage is still there, at least I've gotten the opportunity to get it off my chest.

 

[Mark CMG]

If what you see is an attempt to stifle, you have not grokked in fullness.

I think you aren't grokking the fullness of what you are saying in that by qualifying one position over the other (and also qualfying them as "dumb") you aren't "merely" admitting anything but rather making a judgment based on not having the information that you also claim prevents making the inverse judgment. Further, if you wish to generate discussion you don't simply dismiss what some members see as a problem based on choosing one side or another, you suggest solutions that are more inclusive.

We know only a handful of things regarding the WotC PDF situation: WotC ceased selling PDFs, more than a few people were previously purchasing them (RPGNow top seller placement prooved that), WotC claimed the reason they were stopping PDF sales was due to piracy (and they cited piracy of 4E materials specifically as the problem), a fair number of fans expressed disapproval of the stoppage of PDF sales (and in regard to pre-4E materials there is no direct print support from WotC).

The discussion in this thread regarding the pre-WotC PDF products seems to take two forms, the first is interested in pre-4E PDF products from WotC and would like to see pre-4E PDF sales reinstituted, while the second is apparently not interested in pre-4E PDF products from WotC and is suggesting reasons never proffered by WotC as to why this cannot happen. I don't follow the logic that supports the negative reasoning of the latter. It doesn't seem to be an inclusive, positive position to take and seems to be casting about for reasons (again, not reasons ever put forth by WotC) that suggest ways to prevent moving forward in a manner that makes a greater number of gamers happy.

I, on the other hand, have been suggesting alternatives that hopefully bring the PDFs back to the public. One more way might be to release a certain number of them (let's say 20 of their hundreds) through the DDI to subscribers each month and only for that month. They could announce the schedule in advance so that those who want to cherry pick could potentially sign up for a month here and there, but I'd imagine many would simply subscribe fully and grab their downloads as they appear. They might even have subscriber polls to allow for people to suggest a certain number of them by request.

So, any positive suggests on how to make this work or other ways to suggest how PDFs might be made available again? And, of course, feel free to simply explain why WotC won't do this either, if that's the best you can muster.

 

[Shazman]

And that's entirely fair. I, for one, miss the cartoons. No idea why they haven't tried to get those back or hire some new ones for the current online issues.



Yeah, I still think you are reading way too much into many of those comments or cartoons, sorry. I'm sure I can't convince you otherwise, but I'm pretty sure no one at WotC set out to actively insult players of 3rd Edition - but when explaining possible issues with the edition, and reasons why they were making changes, someone was bound to be offended by it.



Yeah, I really don't believe this is true. If pathfinder combats are genuinely 15 minutes long on average, I'll be really impressed. (Given that in my own experience, 3.5 and 4E run about the same average combat length. 3.5 had more potential to either end really quickly, or take an entire session, while 4E has a longer timeframe per combat without as much deviation from it.) Your experience may be different, sure.

But claiming that 4E was designed "around an excruciatingly slow combat system that makes playing the game almost unfeasible" is such incredible hyperbole that it completely undermines any point you were trying to make.



On the other hand, the rules updates are helping them keep me as a customer. They are, in fact, one of the things I am most impressed with them doing as a company. I'd certainly prefer they get the rules right the first time around - but given that has never happened, I'm also a fan of them fixing what they get wrong rather than leaving broken rules in place.

In any case, I'm very doubtful that they have lost serious custom from books or DDI over the presence of updates.

And again - even if so, your claims about the situation are so outrageous that I still would have to object. Some people don't like the errata - I can accept that. Claims that books instantly become obsolete and that the data is impossible to keep up with? Again, whatever genuine point you might have, the more you distort the situation, the less likely people are to accept or understand what you are trying to say.

I have participated in enough Pathfinder and 4E combats to honestly say that the 4E combats, regardless of group and player composition do take about 3 times as long as Pathfinder combats (at least those I have experienced). You can easily resolve a combat in 30 minutes in Pathfinder, whereas even low level 4E combats can be 1 and half hours long (sometimes longer). Every time I play Pathfinder, I am amazed at how much faster it is to resolve combat than in 4E. I'm sure it has a lot to do with not every monster having an absurd amount of hit points. I also personally know people that can no longer participate in LFR because of the huge time investment playing a mod requires. Once again, it is because of the excessivley long time it takes to resolve combat in 4E. The last few rounds of updates have upset the group of people I occasionaly play LFR with (which is practically never now thanks to excessive combat length and outrage at rules updates) enough to swear off buying any more books and letting their DDI subscriptions lapse. I can't say that I blame them either. I personally find the amount of rules updates, which generally equate to extreme nerfing of formally useful feats, powers, class abilities, and paragon paths, to be seriously offputting. You can believe me or not, but these are in fact my personal experiences with 4E.

 

[Mistwell]

To this day, I still miss getting Dungeon and Dragon in my mailbox

This is something that happened during the 3.x era, though your post seemed focused on 4e. So, not sure how the two relate.

You mean like putting such wonderful insights as "If you use profession skills in your game, your game probably isn't as fun as it should be."

You state that like it's an exact quote, but that is not the quote I recall. Is it a paraphrase?

in print, saying things like you can skake you fist at the cluds (4E) bu they are still coming,

I do not understand this sentense.

portraying players of 3.0/3.5 as too incompetent to even use an index or have a basic grasp of the rules in their 2007 Gen COn youtube video,

I don't recall anything like that implication. Do you have a link?

or having a dragon "poop" on detractors of 4E in a Penny Arcade cartoon?

Umm...Penny Arcade is not owned, in any way, by WOTC.

I may be wrong, but the 4E layoffs seem to be more regular and drastic.

You are wrong. Just as frequent, but actually LESS drastic in my opinion than some of the stuff that went on during the 3.X era.

When I can consistantly participate in Pathfinder games that have three to four encounters in the same time frame it would take to resolve one 4E encounter, I have to conclude that the designers of 4E really messed up somewhere.

You should consider the possibility that your group knows the Pathfinder rules and characters better than the 4e ones, and that it was the group, not the game, that caused those kinds of delays. If you look at people who have discussed this topic in the past, a great many people (a majority in fact) do not have this kind of problem with 4e, and explain in detail why they think that is. So, you didn't "have" to conclude it was the designers of 4e that messed up...you chose to draw that conclusion.

The "rules updates" (both the amount and nature of them) have caused many people I know to completly stop buying WOtC's books and let their DDI subscriptions lapse. It definitely is costing them business. They should do some QA and try to get decent rules the first time around.

That is not my experience, and in threads here I have not seen any trend at all that rules updates are causing people to end their business with WOTC. You say it did this to "many people you know". How many, and give details, since it sure seems like a novel argument to me.

 

[Chrono22]

Free previous editions PDFs aren't likely, but that would be snazzy.

Releasing access to PDFs through DDI would probably be the most attractive option for releasing them, for WotC. A pay-per-product scheme or monthly releases maybe.

 

[Mistwell]

Did I call them liars? No....


1. I think their excuses regarding piracy aren't truthful.
2. That means I think they're being dishonest.

Whatever distinction you see between the word "liar", "not truthful" and "dishonest", I am not seeing it.

What is the distinction you are seeing between those words? Sure looks to me like you are calling them liars.

 

[Maggan]

And please, stop putting words in my mouth. I said "salaried employees". It's an important distinction.

It goes way over my head, that distinction. Care to explain in a bit more detail?

/M

 

[Mistwell]

I have participated in enough Pathfinder and 4E combats to honestly say that the 4E combats, regardless of group and player composition do take about 3 times as long as Pathfinder combats (at least those I have experienced). You can easily resolve a combat in 30 minutes in Pathfinder, whereas even low level 4E combats can be 1 and half hours long (sometimes longer).

I play 4e, a lot. We play it by the rules, using no house rules concerning combat. Our combats usually take 20 minutes to 30 minutes, just like the did during our years of playing 3.0 and 3.5.

A lot of people on these boards relate similar time frames.

So, consider the possibility it IS your group, and not the game.

 

[Chrono22]

A commission artist/writer, while technically part of their payroll isn't a permanent fixture of the business.

Whatever distinction you see between the word "liar", "not truthful" and "dishonest", I am not seeing it.

What is the distinction you are seeing between those words? Sure looks to me like you are calling them liars.

Sure. A liar is one who lies consistently. A dishonest person is someone that has not told the truth- either by lying or by omission.