The Red Dragon's Interview is up!

[ExploderWizard]

Of course, it's also all calculated, harsh marketing, and thus totally serious business, too. They could also create some serious news coverage on their design and be laughing behind their back:
"Look, we're claiming that we have Designers and Developers. And these fans believe it! As if there was even a difference! Good that nobody knows our guys are just making it up as we go. Hey, let's lance a post that Rob and Mike changed their posts, just to keep people interested in our serious business. The fans will probably all over it, congratulating them for their choices or saying it spells doom for the future of D&D. Not that the two guys still have the same pay, and still do exactly the same stuff they did before - reading Indie games, stealing some mechanics and then re-branding them for D&D."

ROFLMAO!!! EPIC WIN!!! (..........but seriously dude, don't give away trade secrets)

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

ROFLMAO!!! EPIC WIN!!! (..........but seriously dude, don't give away trade secrets)

I should note at this point that I cannot define or confirm that I have been in, or worked at, the WotC office, or worked together with Scott Rouse on the marketing for D&D, worked as a "play-tester"

Spoiler

*

, or worked as a indie game scout for Mike Mearls or Rob Heinsoo, or that such a position would even exist at WotC.

Spoiler

*) this term still cracks me up

 

[The Little Raven]

If your going to talk about the warriors bulging thew then I think the princesses huge tracks of land also deserve mention.

...I'll be in my bunk.

 

[Hussar]

I like satire in most forms, but potty humor is not all that interesting to me and seems to come from a feeble mind. I liked Monty Python, Faulty Towers, Red Dwarf (to an extent), and Are You Being served, but those other TV programs you mention are very low brow humor bordering on just childishness from people who refuse to grow up. They are nothing like a Sit-Com, but more like the Robot Chicken form of just comedy in the form of stupidity, and are really sad programs. Simpsons does try to touch on some real issues over the top as a psuedo Sit-Com.

ROTFLMAO. Monty Python is now considered high brow humour? Dude, they blew up a fat man. They sang a song about SPAM. Sure, they had their moments, but high brow?

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

ROTFLMAO. Monty Python is now considered high brow humour? Dude, they blew up a fat man. They sang a song about SPAM. Sure, they had their moments, but high brow?

I think Monty Phyton is all over the place.

 

[Wicht]

It seems to me the value of this flash cartoon re: marketing should be debated by asking the questions: 1) Did it attract New Customers? 2) Did it drive away potential Customers?

It seems to me that all those in favor of the cartoon already play 4e.

How many people does it have to attract to offset the cost of further driving away those who are currently unhappy with WotC. Sure there are those who don't play 4e but maybe they would buy minis or MtG. Is it worthwhile to make them consider dropping support for all WotC products, which it seems to me, is the effect?

 

[Maggan]

ROTFLMAO. Monty Python is now considered high brow humour? Dude, they blew up a fat man. They sang a song about SPAM. Sure, they had their moments, but high brow?

The Creosote skit still freaks me out ... I'm physically ill whenever I catch a glimpse of it.

/M

 

[The Little Raven]

But Dork Tower does it from, primarily, outside the industry.

I wasn't aware that an artist that is in the industry is considered to be "outside the industry." Being an artist that works on games, and publishing his game-related comic strip in gaming magazines... if that's outside the industry, then the cartoon on the D&D site is just as outside the industry, since it was made by Bitey Castle - - watch things and learn stuff.

Had WotC's red dragon cartoon come from outside the company, people would be less annoyed and it would not give us an impression of WotC PR being generally insensitive.

Moral of the story: One strict set of rules applies to WotC, and an entirely different, looser, set of rules applies to everyone else, no matter who they are.

 

[Fifth Element]

<snip rant>

Ah yes, back to the BadWrongFunny spiels.

People need to accept that there is no objective definition of what is funny, much less what is "high brow" and "low brow" humour. Or that even if you could define those properly (generally "high brow" is defined as "humour that I like"), there's nothing to say that one is inherently superior to the other.

I mean, come on. As pointed out above, Monty Python has more than its fair share of gross-out and "low-brow" humour. Fawlty Towers (check your spelling, justanobody) involves a great deal of Basil yelling and jumping up and down. Are You Being Served? has a large number of not-so-subtle gay jokes (wrt Mr. Humphries), and one long-running gag about how Mrs. Slocombe refers to her cat (which I won't spell out here for Eric's grandmother's sake), which can hardly be called "high-brow". Funny, yes. But high brow? No.

British humour is not automatically intellectual humour, though I know that's a popular opinion amongst its North American fans (of which I am one). And conversely, American humour is not automatically low-brow.

The only inherently superior form of humour is, of course, Canadian humour.



That's a joke. Get it?

 

[Tewligan]

Is it worthwhile to make them consider dropping support for all WotC products, which it seems to me, is the effect?

Yes. I don't want to share a hobby with self-important crybabies who get all huffy and offended by the most gentle of jibes - they're the kind of gamers that give us a bad name. Anything that drives that sort off is fine by me.