Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 2747290" data-attributes="member: 2067">Why is Wizards being attacked? Because they made an unimaginative, unoriginal, derivative product.I don't think the compendium had to be original. I think they could've spent time and effort doing something that WAS, however. And still given us the compendium.I do think that WotC, as the people who published the flawed spells in the first place and who invalidated some of their own work by releasing a .5 edition, DO have a moral, if not actual, obligation to make good on their previous mistakes without asking for any compensation. It's demanding. It's unrealistic. But so what? Shall I let them slouch their way to another couple of thousand dollars, or should I make them defend every choice they make as a business and as a provider of my entertainment? Should I pay for mediocrity and not say "Hey, this isn't up to snuff"? What do you want me to do, shut my trap and tow the line and praise the design gods of Wizards when they have the common sense to update their own material and charge me for it? I'm under no delusions that my message board gripes will change anything at any higher level. I don't really care. I call it as I see it, and there's no way that you can honestly tell me that Spell Compendium *is* a rich wellspring of brand new and imaginative material, is there? It ain't, unless you want to argue THAT point. I was running under the assumption that these boards were for the discussion of d20/D&D gaming, and part of that discussion is, yes, offering my opinion that this product is lazy, simple, and basic.This doesn't invalidate what it does. I never once said it was a horrible product, or that it isn't useful, or that it is an affront to all that is decent, or that it is an embarassment to gaming (all of which I've either leveled at other products or have seen in other product reviews). I'm not being unfairly biased against everything Wizards does. I'm usually in their camp, defending a product I think is quite solid. That doesn't make this product imaginative, though. I'm not even questioning it's usefulness, so saying "But it is very useful!" isn't really much of a defense, is it? Yes, it collects and updates all the spells, a very USEFUL thing. I'm just not impressed at something useful. Chimps make useful things. I'll very proudly hold Wizards to a higher standard than I hold Pan Troglodytes, especially when they're going to charge me and others for this neat little termite stick.You're welcome to think it's an excellent product. You're welcome to like crap. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> It really isn't going to bug me at all. That doesn't mean that I can't voice my opinion, right? To ask me why I took Wizards to task ("attacked" them?) for making an unimaginative product somehow seems to assume that they shouldn't be attacked for making an unimaginative product.So, tell me, then: Why *shouldn't* I attack Wizards on an internet message board for making a product which completely lacks fresh and imaginative new material, and thus is inferior in that respect to every other book they've ever done (with the possible exception of the 3.5 core books)?</blockquote>

Verification