GMforPowergamers
Legend
thank you...that was my point
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
The Impasse
- Thread starter DimitriX
- Start date
thank you...that was my point
Finally, here's what I'd like to know.
Where do you distinguish the line?
How much does someone need to like the direction of D&D has went, or how much do they have to not have a problem with what WotC has decided, before they're blindly following/defending WotC?
What proportion of dislike does someone need to have?
Where do you distinguish the line?
How much does someone need to like the direction of D&D has went, or how much do they have to not have a problem with what WotC has decided, before they're blindly following/defending WotC?
What proportion of dislike does someone need to have?
I have yet to see this happen.
I would be very surprised at a "huge customer uprising" against another publisher who took action against someone reproducing large chunks of their material and making them freely available, whether online or not.
Prostitution, so long as it's legalized, is indeed, ironically, a victimless crime. It's when it's made illegal that there're problems.
Pot is not physically addictive. It's a soft drug and it's as dangerous - if not less so - then chocolate. It's illegal for stupid, illogical, and political (or perhaps I just repeat myself) reasons that have no base or touch in reality. Also, Asprin is a drug.
WotC is a big boy that grosses more money then I could ever see in my life and doesn't need defending on the internet. I truly doubt it cares what me, some random dickhead, truly thinks.
So in other words, allow me to disagree.
That doesn't mean I want WotC to fail, or that I want 4e to crash and burn. Good grief, you're allowed to disagree with something and not hate it. I dislike 4e, so I don't buy it. I don't hate Wizards because of it, and I'd be happy if they continued business. They're just going to do it sans a customer.
TSR didn't crash and burn because people said mean things about them. TSR went down because it was utterly moronic with how it handled business. That's the purpose of a market - the products that people like make money, the products people don't like do not make money. Me sitting in front of a dinky laptop thinking "Boy I don't like 4e that much" isn't going to spark some giant revolution that destroys WotC, and quite frankly, if it did, then the product in question wasn't going to survive for very long in the first place.
It would suck if WotC went out of business, yes. It sucked when Troika went out of business, but that's how capitalism works. Just because I liked Troika doesn't mean everyone else did, and while I can sit behind previously mentioned laptop in my cramped and overcharged apartment while waiting for the next meagre and inatiquite paycheck to let me LIVE THE DREAM for a bit longer and think of the rest of the world as hooting morons who wouldn't understand the concept of taste even if I could telepathically force it into their brains, it doesn't change the fact that Troika did not offer what the market wanted. And if D&D somehow vanished off the face of the earth, despite it sucking in an amazing manner, it would not change the fact that this is how the world works. White knigting on the internet doesn't do anything but stop rational conversation.
Oh, and people have had those "Mass fan uprisings" against the one company I can think of that tried to take down people who gave their stuff away for free. It was called Cthulutech, and it lost a whole lot of support and ultimately - here's the best part - it trying to stop the free stuff only made it happen more often. Meanwhile, most companies just don't care too much or, in some cases, openly accept it. MaidRPG has a whole section in the back thanking people for downloading it for free, asking them to throw in a few bucks if they enjoyed it.
Pot is not physically addictive. It's a soft drug and it's as dangerous - if not less so - then chocolate. It's illegal for stupid, illogical, and political (or perhaps I just repeat myself) reasons that have no base or touch in reality. Also, Asprin is a drug.
WotC is a big boy that grosses more money then I could ever see in my life and doesn't need defending on the internet. I truly doubt it cares what me, some random dickhead, truly thinks.
So in other words, allow me to disagree.
That doesn't mean I want WotC to fail, or that I want 4e to crash and burn. Good grief, you're allowed to disagree with something and not hate it. I dislike 4e, so I don't buy it. I don't hate Wizards because of it, and I'd be happy if they continued business. They're just going to do it sans a customer.
TSR didn't crash and burn because people said mean things about them. TSR went down because it was utterly moronic with how it handled business. That's the purpose of a market - the products that people like make money, the products people don't like do not make money. Me sitting in front of a dinky laptop thinking "Boy I don't like 4e that much" isn't going to spark some giant revolution that destroys WotC, and quite frankly, if it did, then the product in question wasn't going to survive for very long in the first place.
It would suck if WotC went out of business, yes. It sucked when Troika went out of business, but that's how capitalism works. Just because I liked Troika doesn't mean everyone else did, and while I can sit behind previously mentioned laptop in my cramped and overcharged apartment while waiting for the next meagre and inatiquite paycheck to let me LIVE THE DREAM for a bit longer and think of the rest of the world as hooting morons who wouldn't understand the concept of taste even if I could telepathically force it into their brains, it doesn't change the fact that Troika did not offer what the market wanted. And if D&D somehow vanished off the face of the earth, despite it sucking in an amazing manner, it would not change the fact that this is how the world works. White knigting on the internet doesn't do anything but stop rational conversation.
Oh, and people have had those "Mass fan uprisings" against the one company I can think of that tried to take down people who gave their stuff away for free. It was called Cthulutech, and it lost a whole lot of support and ultimately - here's the best part - it trying to stop the free stuff only made it happen more often. Meanwhile, most companies just don't care too much or, in some cases, openly accept it. MaidRPG has a whole section in the back thanking people for downloading it for free, asking them to throw in a few bucks if they enjoyed it.
Mustrum_Ridcully
Legend
I can't speak for persons or situations that I don't know.
Sammael
Adventurer
It's quite simple, IMO. A person does not need to dislike D&D and/or WotC at all to not be a "blind defender." They can love it 100%. The problem is when they cannot emphatize AT ALL with those who do not share their love and when they feel the need to jump up against EVERY criticism raised against D&D and/or WotC.
A "blind defender" will defend the WotC decisions to raise prices, lower page counts, cut functionality from DDI, intentionally remove content as a marketing move to get people to buy future books, as well as every single decision with respect to the game's direction and rules. They will defend the original rules which are so broken that they have been errata'd three times already, and the game hasn't even been out for a year.
As an opposite, a "blind hater" is someone who cannot see (at all) why someone can have a perfectly rational love for D&D and/or WotC.
wedgeski
Adventurer
I've supported WotC on these forums but I resent any implication that I "blindly" agree with anything. When I see *what I consider to be* irrational motives and hatred lobbed in their direction, I occasionally feel strongly enough to stand up and shout about it. I do this partly because I loathe the culture of corporate demonisation that has sprung up around us all over the last few decades, and which by its very nature the internet has exploded.
The thread which spawned this fork is a good example. WotC took what I see as a totally reasonable action, and you get people comparing them to the insanity that was TSR in its darkest days. Ludicrous.
I'm a long-time WoW player and I used to do the same on their official forums, but I quickly gave up because the ratio of unadulterated (and unmoderated) immaturity which, yes, did occasionally threaten to raise a law suit because a class as described on the box had been changed in subsequent patches, was so high as to simply not be worth the effort of fighting.
The thread which spawned this fork is a good example. WotC took what I see as a totally reasonable action, and you get people comparing them to the insanity that was TSR in its darkest days. Ludicrous.
I'm a long-time WoW player and I used to do the same on their official forums, but I quickly gave up because the ratio of unadulterated (and unmoderated) immaturity which, yes, did occasionally threaten to raise a law suit because a class as described on the box had been changed in subsequent patches, was so high as to simply not be worth the effort of fighting.
wedgeski
Adventurer
Sammael can you not see that this kind of language is *exactly* the sort of thing that sets people off?
Sammael
Adventurer
No, I really cannot. Why is this the case? For instance, can you not love 4E and WotC and disagree with WotC's decision (documented in a podcast) to not include frost giants in MM1 so that more people will buy MM2? I can understand that decision perfectly well from a business point of view, but I cannot agree with it.
EDIT: For the sake of clarification, the "original rules" I'm referring to are the skill challenge rules. I am not implying that all of 4E is broken, because it's not.
EDIT: For the sake of clarification, the "original rules" I'm referring to are the skill challenge rules. I am not implying that all of 4E is broken, because it's not.
