You know, after listening to the podcast, not only do I think this is such a non-issue as to make this a totally ridiculous accusation, but the fact that he prompted the players by reminding them they all had torches, and that the door could be melted by other fire-related means, this puts the accusation squarely in troll territory.
Not only is there nothing wrong with how he handled it, nobody was up in arms over it or upset by it or even noticed it beyond the half-second it took to mentally absorb the concept that the door was not a creature.
I don't need to transcend any kind 4e hate, because I've never had 4e hate. Despite its battle game micro-management rules it is entirely possible to play 4e at speed and with roleplaying.
However, the GM has to make that happen in 4e and the Youtube videos show exactly how to get a major fail and end up with a laborious and predictable 'adventure'. This is nothing to do with niggling interpretations of the rules and everything to do with skipping essentials:
- the scenario is mapped out in advance instead of revealed (OK for new players but it takes suspense out of the game)
- play is unbearably slow to the point where we're watching lingering shots of someone sucking a doughnut
- encounters happen in a hermitically sealed bubble, where you can spend half an hour talking with a door without anyone butting in
- the talking door is a fantastical early 1980's trap which takes players away from any sense of threat or gritty realism
- the player's are not challenged by the trap/ puzzle. They just roll a dice and hear the outcome
- the Darkfire 'decision' is 2 seconds of GM's disgression not a debate about the geopolitical structure of the Balkans
The WoTC guy may be a great manager/ product designer but it is not trolling to recognise that, on the occasions shown, we are watching a demonstration of mechanics not roleplaying. This is the result of skipping several roleplaying essentials involving engaging your audience and enabling roleplaying.
