WotC: Save CSRs time and effort by posting FAQs on forums yourselves - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

WotC: Save CSRs time and effort by posting FAQs on forums yourselves

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
Ziana
Jun 19, 2008 15:47:34 Numerous conscientious and interested players have been attempting to resolve disputes over the correct interpretation of ambiguous rules by contacting CSRs for clarification as to the designer's intent.

Players have even begun collating FAQ answers based on CSR responses and collections of proposed errata themselves here on the Gleemax forums as well as on the ENWorld boards.

It might save effort (time and money) on the part of your CSRs if they or another representative were to actively engage on the forums and post responses to common concerns or areas of confusion. Issues like Skill Challenges and Stealth in Combat come to mind as prime examples.

While there exists a online FAQ for the Player's Handbook, the answers there are brief, and the site itself is malfunctioning with numerous broken images. Simply posting the "official" answers to rule disputes or ambiguities here on the boards would likely save your CSRs a great deal of work.

Thanks.
#2
etarnon
Jun 19, 2008 18:27:34 One wonders why the original text was not written in a clear fashion.
#3
Ziana
Jun 19, 2008 19:59:15 There could have been better playtesting and editorial feedback, certainly. But much of what is coming up from players is the result of thousands of complete newcomers to 4E encountering hurdles that more experienced players or WotC insiders might never have considered.

But now that they're getting feedback, lots of it, I believe they should respond quickly by interacting with their fanbase, clearing up confusion, and using an iterative FAQ process to inform their errata development.

Getting all of this stuff fixed could mean a 2nd printing run with all of the errata incorporated into the text.
#4
etarnon
Jun 19, 2008 20:01:33 I agree. Pretty much the same thing happened with SAGA edition.
#5
RogerWilco
Jun 22, 2008 0:16:41 I know a year ago there were some posts by Greg Bilsland on updated Errata or an Errata wiki or something of that sort. I think nothing ever came of it.

I think it is indeed a pity that the wealth of information that Customer Service has collected over the past years is not available in some generally accessible archive.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Ziana Jun 19, 2008 15:47:34	Numerous conscientious and interested players have been attempting to resolve disputes over the correct interpretation of ambiguous rules by contacting CSRs for clarification as to the designer's intent. Players have even begun collating FAQ answers based on CSR responses and collections of proposed errata themselves here on the Gleemax forums as well as on the ENWorld boards. It might save effort (time and money) on the part of your CSRs if they or another representative were to actively engage on the forums and post responses to common concerns or areas of confusion. Issues like Skill Challenges and Stealth in Combat come to mind as prime examples. While there exists a online FAQ for the Player's Handbook, the answers there are brief, and the site itself is malfunctioning with numerous broken images. Simply posting the "official" answers to rule disputes or ambiguities here on the boards would likely save your CSRs a great deal of work. Thanks.
#2 etarnon Jun 19, 2008 18:27:34	One wonders why the original text was not written in a clear fashion.
#3 Ziana Jun 19, 2008 19:59:15	There could have been better playtesting and editorial feedback, certainly. But much of what is coming up from players is the result of thousands of complete newcomers to 4E encountering hurdles that more experienced players or WotC insiders might never have considered. But now that they're getting feedback, lots of it, I believe they should respond quickly by interacting with their fanbase, clearing up confusion, and using an iterative FAQ process to inform their errata development. Getting all of this stuff fixed could mean a 2nd printing run with all of the errata incorporated into the text.
#4 etarnon Jun 19, 2008 20:01:33	I agree. Pretty much the same thing happened with SAGA edition.
#5 RogerWilco Jun 22, 2008 0:16:41	I know a year ago there were some posts by Greg Bilsland on updated Errata or an Errata wiki or something of that sort. I think nothing ever came of it. I think it is indeed a pity that the wealth of information that Customer Service has collected over the past years is not available in some generally accessible archive.