WotC drops more 3E support :(

[Mouseferatu]

BTW, Teflon Billy, since you're here...

Why are you in my DMG? (Page 193.)

 

[blargney the second]

If WotC's not going to issue errata for the Tome of Battle, maybe we should do it here on ENWorld?

 

[Darrin Drader]

Considering some of the answers I have read from customer service I don't think that this is that big a deal. You are more likely to get the correct answer to your questionby asking in the EN World Rules Forum.

[rant]You know, I really love this attitude, having done the job for two years. Frankly, I couldn't get out fast enough, and that's because the truth of the matter is that more often than not, there is no correct answer.

For example, there were numerous times poor unsuspecting WotC rules support was called in to settle a messageboard dispute. CS guy looks up the question, provides and answer, and depending on who submitted the question, the emailer is either satisfied or insulted by the answer. The response then gets posted, prompting a flood of new emails from others who either want clarification, or to argue with the ruling.

Now, on several occasions, said CS person would take these emails and differing interpretations of the rules, run them over to a couple of R&D guys and ask for their opinions. Guess how often our poor overworked and underpaid email guru would get conflicting answers out of R&D. It was more than 50%.

So, if the people who make the rules don't agree on how to interpret them half the time, how exactly do you expect perfect accuracy from a guy who has to answer between 50 and 100 of these per day? How about when the guy providing the answers is also a published game designer? Would that make a difference? Of course not.

How about all the times a player would get bent out of shape with his DM, submit a rules question, framed in such a way that the balance breaking aspect of some feat/class ability combination is not immediately apparent, the CS person agrees with the player's interpretation, then the player uses the email to overrule his DM? Happens all the time, and sadly some DMs actually allow them to do it. Guess who gets a disappointed email that it would be OK to allow such game creaking combinations to work together.

The bottom line is that the CS department is there to help people figure out the rules. When issues like this come up, the CS department is there to act in the same manner as an RPGA judge. They provide advice, not absolutes, and the DM is always the final arbiter of what to allow and what not to allow.

In terms of messageboard debates, why bring CS into it? If its something that is causing contention here, what makes you think that any sort of "official" ruling is going to settle the debate? It won't. It will just make some people feel vindicated while others call CS incompetent. The best way to handle these things is to either settle the issue online amongst yourselves, or let the sage make the final call (keeping in mind, of course, that some of us think that some of the answers that the sage gives are broken).
[/rant]

Now, that said, support for 3.0 ended the day 3.5 was released. It has always been WotC CS's policy to support only one edition of any given game. This is for two reasons. The first is because the department has several people answering these questions and not all of them are well enough versed in all the games to be able to give retroactive answers on all the games. The second reason is the obvious one - drop support for the older game to drive the co-dependent rules lawyers to the current edition.

Finally, I'd rather gnaw my own arm off at the shoulder than get involved in another Magic: The Gathering rules debate.

 

[thorian]

I remember a lot of the members of the WotC boards compiling errata in order to assist WotC in getting it released. I'm not sure where the threads are now, but I'll dig a bit and see if I can find it.

Edit: Here it is: errata metathread

That thread has links to numerous other errata threads.

 

[Treebore]

I'll have to give you that one. I didn't know Rolemaster still existed, much less that it has gone thru several editions people still play.

I stand by my (somewhat weakened) argument, however. It's certainly not "standard" practice in the rpg industry to support older editions. And IMHO it's a waste of time. (Now watch people post dozens of examples proving otherwise . . .)

SJG, the GURPS company, still answers my questions about Traveller material from their 2E version. They are also a HUGE help with updating anything from earlier editions to their newest edition.

Face it, WOTC does not go very far in providing customer satisfaction in comparison to a number of other companies.

I am also saddened at how many people jump up a provide excuses for poor customer service. We, the consumer, have every right to expect EXCEPTIONAL customer service. A business NEVER has any excuse to provide less.

Saying that it would kill WOTC and be a waste to continue giving "official" answers is nothing but putting corporate wealth before the general consumer. Putting the "customer first" worked for over 50 years. This "corporation comes first" attitude is very, very saddening.

"The CUSTOMER comes first!" Get it?

 

[Crothian]

SJG, the GURPS company, still answers my questions about Traveller material from their 2E version. They are also a HUGE help with updating anything from earlier editions to their newest edition.

I have to imagine Wizards gets ten or 20 or perhaps hundreds more questions then sjg

"The CUSTOMER comes first!" Get it?

They do, the 4e ones

 

[Mister Doug]

Posted on the WotC knowledge base:
Once again, a great customer service move by WotC. :/

A company that continues to support legacy products helps inspire confidence in customers purchasing their products, which I will not do anymore due to a variety of reasons.

/sour grapes

There's a WotC customer support service for D&D?

 

[Darrin Drader]

Putting the "customer first" worked for over 50 years. This "corporation comes first" attitude is very, very saddening.

"The CUSTOMER comes first!" Get it?

Corporation comes first is the new American way. I hate it just as much as anybody.

 

[Treebore]

Corporation comes first is the new American way. I hate it just as much as anybody.

The problem is "anybody" is far from being "everybody". Far too many people excuse and accept and even promote the "Corporation and profits come first" attitude. Just look in this thread.

 

[Rhianni32]

Not answering questions about rules is far different then software support.

If you opened your 3.5 PHB and got a "Error page 43 failure code 800x.." then yes they still need to support it.

However when its someone wanting to know what happens if Feat X is used against monster Y that casts spell Z they just might have to make a decision on their own. Its someones opinion on how a rule works in an imaginary game. As others have posted message forums can do that and a lot more accurately.

What exactly is wotc needing to support 3.x via customer service for?