http://angrydm.com/2014/09/dear-wotc-why-do-you-suck-at-selling-games/
So the Angry DM made a post/rant about why WotC is having a bad time selling D&D - to be specific, selling it to brand new potential players. Some choice quotes:
When the 5E open playtest thing started up, I got to have a short conversation with Mike Mearls, who is the co-lead designer of Dungeons and Dragons for Wizards of the Coast (along with Jeremy Crawford). The conversation was public. It was on Twitter. If you care to dig back through the feed, you can find it. It was about two years ago. But I’m going to give you the short, paraphrased version so you understand why I was really hoping not to be pissed off right now.
We were talking about the growth of D&D over the various editions. And Mearls explained to (without giving any solid numbers) that each edition of D&D had been successful. D&D had enjoyed a steady growth over all the various editions. More people were playing D&D every year and with each new edition. And that seemed like good news, so I asked the question that came naturally to me. “If that’s true, why are you scrapping 4E so soon and moving on to 5E?”
There's some credibility to the "older cousin" idea, but this guy really shows his troll card (or the fact the he doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground) when he says stuff like "no one reads the PHB."
I disagree with this "nostalgia" commentary. I think they tried to put enough nostalgia in there to please old players, but I don't see anything in the books that would require past experiences with D&D for you to have fun with them, or understand how it is supposed to be played. A new player has no need of previous experience with the game to play 5e.
However...
I do not disagree that 5e is not very new-player-friendly. It isn't, but the reason I think is another one. The book is too technical. The language is too "gamey", it tries to minimize everything that isn't fluff to a couple-lines text that relies on precise usage of in-game terminology to be understood. Change the place of a comma in the sentence and you have just changed the whole rule or ability, or maybe it just doesn't make much sense anymore.
That's usually fine for us seasoned players to handle, but a new player will more often than not be overwhelmed by that. Even us seasoned players are constantly debating how this or that rule should actually work and wondering what was the actual intention of the designer when they included it. After its release, the designers are constantly being bombarded by questions of how this or that rule in the game works too.
In my opinion, in that sense, they should have made the books more like 2e books, taking the time to actually explain how things work, what the intended effect of each rule or ability is in a descriptive/narrative paragraph which would often clarify any doubts about the rule itself by offering a description of how it works. The text in the 5e books is not good, in that sense. The fluff text is fine, but the rules text is too gamey and technical. It's harder for new players to grasp, even old players too, and the reading becomes tiresome as you have to pay major attention to each comma and each work to not interpret a rule completely wrong.
As to whether the edition will be successful or not, I have no idea. But this is a separate matter to whether a particular edition is good or bad to play. So many things factor in to dictate market success, and quality is not often one of the major factors.
Justin Bieber is extremelly successful.
In the world we live in, unfortunately quality is not a great measure for success.
"No one reads the PH" I think in the same sense "nobody reads the bible. "
Few of us do - cover to cover, start to finish. Mostly, it's used as a reference. You flip to what you need and read that.
I dont think he's suggesting everyone's buying it and then stuffing it under the couch never to be cracked open.
Apart from that. I dunno. Maybe WOTC has sucked at marketing. Maybe they suck at marketing this particular product. It seems to me they're pushing brand awareness in other fields. Movies, TV, app/games, etc.
I'm not in on the marketing. If we see huge growth, great. If not, okay.
All I can do is what I can do. Worrying about more than that causes me discomfort I don't want.
bawylie wrote:
I can't believe Wilson doesn't do a better job of marketing football to new players. Instead, they rely on dads, older brothers, coaches, youth leagues, and a multibillion-dollar professional football industry to market their product.
Okay, maybe that's a bad example.
Anyway, my opinion is more or less the opposite. I think a really effective, pen-and-paper starter product is extremely challenging. I mean, it could be brilliant, but you're not going to get many kids to take it off the shelf and look at it in the first place. And even if you can get them to try it, any experience you could package for new players and put in a box would be bewildering, dumbed-down and awkward, a pale imitation of an introductory game run by an experienced DM. So then you're trying to make your first impression and hook the new player with what will almost inevitably be a lesser experience compared to what an "older cousin" could provide. That doesn't strike me as a good marketing strategy.
I think you make products for existing players and you invest your marketing dollars and energy into cultivating and supporting your "older cousins" (champions, evangelists, advocates, etc.). You need 'em. You always will. It's the nature of the game. That probably does limit the size of your potential audience, and it probably always has. The RPG game experience, its depth and possibilities, is pretty much unlike any other game or entertainment. That just makes it really hard to put in a box.
Someone who doesn't work at the company, never will, has no real-world knowledge or understanding of marketing, has several errors of logic and fact, ranting on the internet about how WotC should be run.
Meh.
I just think the market is extremely limited because WotC...and all game companies...are stuck in the "our business is selling physical books model."
Let's face it, for most of the population it's really a pain in the neck to....
1) Learn the complex rules of RPGs
2) Find a group of players who live close by, who share your gaming style, who can commit to meeting on a regular basis
3) Find a DM
I've asked a lot of older "gamers" about this, mostly my old D&D group from the 80's and my WoW guild. I hear the same things over and over again:
"I tried it once and it seemed really cool but steep learning curve."
"Just don't have the time anymore"
"None of my gaming friends live near me."
Sites like roll20 solve the geography problem, but not the time-slot & reliability problems, and they actually make both the learning curve and the workload for the DM worse.
If we want more people...vastly more people...to play RPGs, we need to dramatically lower the barriers to adoption.
I'm thinking now about rock climbing. For decades climbing was a very, very niche sport. You could show up at climbing spots anywhere in the country...Needles, Tetons, Gunks...and see people you'd met in parking lots or ledges somewhere else in the country. Then climbing saw two big changes: first sport climbing, then indoor climbing gyms. Suddenly climbing was safe. You didn't have to learn as much about complicated gear, and you probably wouldn't die. Climbing took off as a sport. Like, 100-fold.
RPGs are in the same place. There's a relatively small group of fanatics who are willing to use pretty much all their free time sitting around tables with like-minded individuals, pouring their money into gaming books, and devouring the complex rules. Those people (well, us) think this is GREAT fun, and they can't imagine why more people aren't doing it.
RPGs will be popular when:
1) They can be played asynchronously over the internet with relative strangers.
2) New DMs can get their feet wet by clicking buttons on pre-scripted adventures, then slowly turn off the auto-pilot button as they see how it works and get the confidence to take the reins.
Whichever game does this first will take over the RPG market...and expand it 100-fold...the way the iPod took over the MP3 market (despite what the people on Slashdot...analogous to the people on this forum...thought of the iPod when it was announced. "OMG no Ogg Vorbis it will FAIL!" Ha.)
EDIT: It's worth pointing out that "trad climbers" (equivalent of grognards) hated sport climbing and gyms and thought it was going to ruin their sport. Which it did in the sense that they are now vastly outnumbered by the sport/gym climbers, but of course they are free to keep climbing however they want. Full Disclosure: I'm both a grognard and (was) a trad climber.
I have a friend who is in WotC's core 5E demographic. 20's, female, works at a nationally known FLGS, huge "Euro" board gamer, but brand new to TTRPGs. A great DM I know who loves 5E introduced her to it, and the writing style of the Starter Set threw her off completely. She found it confusing, unclear, and the layout counter-intuitive.
While I think The Starter Set is written for with a "lowest common denominator" in mind, I feel like I've seen and heard what The Angry DM is talking about. Brand new players do not find 5E's materials to be written for them, and that seems to be a higher barrier to entry than any other barrier D&D has supposedly had in the past.
Chakravant wrote:
bawylie wrote:
Finieous wrote:
bawylie wrote:
Chakravant wrote:
Finieous wrote:
Chakravant wrote:
Finieous wrote:
You know what is really facepalmly about this?
Let us be very clear and concise about this. Where exactly does the real complication in the system arise, at least in the Basic book?
Is it with all the complicated stacking feats where some, particularly chains, are vastly better than others?... Huh.. nope. That's gone. At least for the appreciable part.
Is it the idea that when you make skill rolls you roll D20 and add your skill modifier to try to beat the difficulty number? No. That's pretty simple.
Is it maybe that if one has "advantage" they roll two die and take the higher and if they have "disadvantage" they roll two die and take the lower? Nope. Don't see how a comma could screw that up.
Is it rolling for gold depending on your class and then being thrust into 10 pages of a marketplace list with no clue what you should buy or could buy or would buy without any guide and hidden among the items are the things that are pretty damn critical for you to even play your class? Nope. Yes, those market place lists exist, but starting characters start off with their starting equipment based on background and class. You don't need to worry about forgetting to buy a spellbook or holy symbol because they were hidden among a list that contained 3 different sizes of bags as well as backpacks, housing furniture, tolietries and a bunch of stuff that one could hardly imagine being pertenate to the adventure and no one told you that you needed them.
Is it the various status effect? Well.. maybe. There are 2 pages of various affects that can happen to your character if you fail a save beyond simple damage. I could certainly see those two pages seeing a lot more use than most in the PHB.
Is it the class feats? Oh, I suppose they might be a little tricky. But most classes have... what.. 1-3 to start with...? Are any of them really going to throw you.
Actually... we know... we know precisely where the ridiculous, over-the-top, finicky detail and complication comes in.
The ridiculous 100+ various spells with a dozen or so at the lower levels, which you need to browse over and selec from at your starting level and then you need to carefully select from after every single long rest which will vanish from your memory once you actually cast the spell forcing you to keep track of how many of which of your half dozen spells you still have in your memory for use that day.
Nothing. NOTHING could be more unfriendly to beginners, hell-- unfriendly to users in general than such a laugable mess of a magic system that doesn't remotely even match how magic is even utilized in virtually any fictional work. There is not a thing in the book that would drive away potential players faster or harder than their stupid little sacred cow that has been in every single edition D&D EXCEPT 4E.
Actually, the argument has nothing to do with complexity. Complexity has been a red herring in D&D for decades now. 5E in many ways actually puts that false claim to rest very handily. The argument has to do with writing. While I disagree that every PHB has been written exactly the same (I feel some of the very early ones were written quite differently), in general the point is that D&D books are written for an audience already familiar with D&D, and that makes it hard for new players to enter the hobby. A likely corollary would be that the problems most D&D editions have had in the past (regarding barriers to entry) was also not complexity, but writing quality, is logical but not actually written as such within the diatribe.
Rastapopoulos wrote:
Hebitsuikaza wrote:
One thing that bothers me a lot about that spell list is that the descriptions don't include which classes can use them. I don't understand how that got overlooked. It's way too easy for something to catch your eye only to lead straight to the feel-bad moment of "oh wait, I can't learn that", especially if you're a sorc or warlock.
Hebitsuikaza wrote:
jeff-heikkinen wrote:
Chakravant wrote:
Something I just heard about that I think warrants mention: the musician John Darnellle (of the band The Mountain Goats) wrote a novel called Wolf in White Van, about a man who runs a play by mail RPG service. In the interview (http://review.gawker.com/where-do-you-go-after-writing-your-ending-a-q-a-with-j-1635999867?utm_campaign=socialflow_gawker_facebook&utm_source=gawker_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow) he is asked the following question:
Had you played any of these sort of role-playing games?
No. When I was in junior high, I sort of thought that might be a thing for me, and I signed up for Dungeons & Dragons club. I was into science fiction and fantasy stuff and it seemed like an actual fit, but in classical D&D, whether you can fight a given monster or not is determined by some real basic math. If you only have so many hit points, and you run into a ghost, which is what happened to me, you should flee. You can't beat the ghost. No matter—you're not going to get a miraculous strike on him. You're an entry-level character with hardly any things. I ran into a ghost, and I said, I'm going to hit him with my sword, and the dungeon master said, you shouldn't do that, you can't, you can't. You'll die.
And I said, yeah but he's got a fighting chance, right?
Well, that wasn't really true. And so I died quickly, I said, OK, well, f--- this game.
But then when I was writing this, I mentioned it to a friend, and he mentioned that he has a weekly gaming night, that he does with friends, including the game designer Jason Morningstar, who lives in Durham, where I live, and I joined up. So now I do weekly tabletop games. We're actually doing D&D right now, but it's so different from what we normally do. The ones we normally play are much more improvisatory and often don't even involve dice. There's a story and you improv the story through. But right now we're doing D&D and rolling a lot of dice and defeating evil dragons.
Bud_the_CHUD wrote:
Finieous wrote:
Elfcrusher wrote:
With every version of the game (even 4th edition) the vast majority of players were introduced to the game, and taught how to play it by someone they knew who was already experienced with it. That's how most people learn how to play games, whether it's D&D, poker, or monopoly, and to criticize WOTC or 5th edition for that is just silly.
Considering the DMG isn't out yet; you know, the book that teaches you how to be a DM and run the game, his "article" is invalid.
The best way in this modern age is through the magic of Youtube and other online services! Watch other people play through and get excited! It helped 13th Age get out there a bit as well
... Unfortunately the team who were doing a great one of these have now stopped and just flat out ignored 5E because a certain terrible person listed as a "Thank you" claimed their friend (And GM for another campaign) was an "Enemy of the hobby" or some nonsense
So that's a great way at not selling the game?
Webster wrote:
Webster wrote:
Mecheon wrote:
TheGimper wrote:
When I first started playing D&D, I was given hand-me-down books by my brother. I put a group together and we started gaming. We had *no* clue when it came to most of the rules, but we had a heck of a lot of fun anyway. Rules != barrier to entry.
I find the current PHB more troublesome for *existing* D&D players from previous editions than new players. Many rules are quite vague and incomplete (a design goal), which means you're left with assumptions based on previous editions of D&D. Also there is some flicking back and forward between parts of the book, especially when it comes to skill checks and such.
The older editions did seem to do a better job of creating an engaging book filled with examples however. Wasn't it 3E PHB that had an entire example combat written out in the book?
The current PHB to me definitely feels like it suffered from budget/resourcing constraints, compared to the polish of earlier edition PHBs. YMMV.
Trust me, new players have more issues with the vague and incomplete rules than seasoned veterans do. New players lack the perspective needed to adjudicate such things in an informed manner.
Webster wrote:
Hebitsuikaza wrote:
Excellent post from Angry DM again. Reposting this from the comment field on his site
Frank wrote:
CCS wrote:
Angry's point that the important rules for playing are buried in the back/middle of the book and glossed over is completely valid.
His point that even race should be thought of as option is incredibly insightful.
A level 0 intro adventure would be amazing. It could walk you through the mechanics of playing, help you pick abilities scores and teach you what AC, Attacks, Saving Throws, Advantage and (maybe) spells are. Sequels to that would selectively add in rules until you're playing the full game. Complex eurogames like Space Alert do this incredibly well, and they're not backed by multinatioal corporations.
CCS wrote:
I'm fairly new to D&D. In fact, I've only played 3 games of 4e. Prior to this, I have never played a table-top / pen and paper / war game in my lifetime. My friend told me he had started playing and, as I was so interested, provided me with the 4e PHB and invited me to join them at their next session (which was this particular tables third session, I believe).
Everyone at our table is new, apart from my friend who has a couple of months experience (and truly, that's only a couple of game sessions with our available free time). My friend didn't know any of these people prior to setting up their group but posted a thread on a forum looking for local players willing to start a group.
We're just about to start our first 5e game, to test the water, this weekend.
I enjoyed reading 4e, simply because I like fantastical worlds (even if I didn't fully appreciate all the rules), and then I did the rest of my learning at the table. I was hooked straight away. I already knew I wanted to play it and because of that I was willing to be patient with it (not that I even feel I had to be patient). The same goes for 5e. I was incredibly excited to read through the 5e PHB (which I've only just finished) and I am looking forward to going back over it all to help it all sink in (and by that I simply mean that I can more easily remember things and know where to reference them).
I do not find any part of the game complicated, and I enjoy every part. Even those parts that you may considered potentially time consuming for a new player (character creation etc.).
Actually, I think that I have enjoyed the games so much because we're all new players. We all appreciate that as a table we can interpret the rules as we see fit, together. And, it is that which has made the game even better. We're not being told how to play. We're learning how to play our way. The way that we all believe seems logical, or fair. There are the occasional disagreements on a ruling but we all tackle it together.
So, to summarise, I don't see how it is difficult for new players to enjoy D&D and to get involved.
RCanine wrote:
Perhaps Angry DM should wait for the 5e version of D&D for dummies.
What I found interesting about his article was what he did not mention. One solution he proposed was a walk-thru starter adventure that helps you build your character sheet and learn the game mechanics without even needing a DM to run it. This is exactly what the 4e Redbox did with the 30 page player adventure that precedes the DM starter adventure, and is a very different approach than the DM saying here are a handful of pregens to pick from, which indeed does assume player knowledge about the game. Pregens make sense for con or store gaming where you do not have time, but taking the time to treat the character sheet creation as an adventure was a good way to go. On a podcast WOTC said they went with the pre-gens because people do not have time to learn to play that they just want to get right in and play, but that ignores that D&D is going to take a long time to play regardless of how you start. It indeed assumes the older cousin as DM because 5e is marketed to the lapsed D&D player who skipped 4e and played Pathfinder instead, it is why they treat D&D as a multi-media brand now because they know getting Millenials to play a pen and paper game is not going to happen.
After running the 4e Redbox DM starter adventure you could then pick up 4E Essentials DM kit if you wanted to learn how to DM without having an older cousin, from there you could pick up the Essentials players handbooks and the rules compendium if your players wanted more than starting characters. Essentials was a good way of narrowing down the game to make it easier to learn, and they have essentially down that with the 5e Basic Rules but I think they should go back to the chargen adventure and eliminate the pre-gens.
bawylie wrote:
Hmm I've owned and read every edition of the players handbook in its many iterations...sometimes more than once 
Orethalion wrote:
I can't speak as a new DnD/RPG player who is also new to 5th, but as an old(ish) DnD player new to 5th. I am having MUCH more success introducing new players who never played DnD, or new-ish players (who only played 4E, but not very much and/or not very involved or immersed). This edition allows them to make low-level characters a lot easier, and the whole "W do you want to do?" is a lot easier than the "Well, what powers do you have?" that was 4E. Even making higher level characters isn't a chore for newer players (well, unless you're a spellcaster...But just imagine EVERYone was a spellcaster in 4E and also had a lot of items to buy. I loved character creation, but shew, it was a slog sometimes!)
There are some things I'll miss from 4E, sure, but I'm liking 5th so much more. Specifically, my friends who aren't super about DnD can just focus on their own characters, and leaves the rules and weird fiddly-bits to me or the DM. While this is true of any edition, 5th streamlines this better than 3.x or 4E (I feel).
But! I can understand how completely new groups can have trouble. I was introduced by a guy who had already been playing DnD for years, and I've been lucky enough to introduce it to many people. It shouldn't be 100% neccessary to "require" an old-hand to help you out, but it is reeeeeally handy. And this was true for any edition, really, as each rule-set catered to different folks. My video game or board game friends might pick up 4E easier, but some of my number-crunching or pure character-focused friends found 3.x easier to immerse in. Who will find 5th edition rules easier? Well, with a good DM hopefully everyone. Though I'm still unsure who, based on the language ad/or format, will pick these rules up "faster" if they're learning this by themselves or as a completely new group.
As for the staggered release? Meh, it's no biggie to me. Strange, yes, but veterans can DM for anyone, new people can play using modules. It's better than having to wait until Christmas for all 3 books o_O
yarnevk wrote:
Bud_the_CHUD wrote:
Bud_the_CHUD wrote:
One thing I brought up to Angry on twitter is that 4E did have a pretty nice DM conversion system: Living Forgotten Realms.
You get a short, self-contained adventure, run it for your friends and everything you need is pretty much in there. If you're used to playing, LFR was fantastic for turning players into DMs.
The new D&D AL structure absolutely kills that though.
Grifford wrote:
Karnos wrote:
Magi_theKid wrote:
I’ve removed content from this thread because trolling/baiting is a violation of the Code of Conduct.
You can review the Code of Conduct here: http://company.wizards.com/conduct
Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively.
If you wish to report a post for Code of Conduct violation, click on the “Report Post” button above the post and this will submit your report to the moderators on duty.
Finieous wrote:
I thought one of the design goals of 4e was to make it easy for new DMs, specifically those without a mentor or prior RPG experience, to be able to run the game. 4e is mechanically precise enough and published adventures/encounters are detailed (and scripted) enough that a DM could just act as a "referee" and rarely be required to make on-the-spot rulings. 5e, on the other hand, appears to frequently require DM rulings and published adventurers/encounters are so vague they are more of a "framework" than a "script." This is great for experienced, quick-thinking, creative -- and fair -- DMs but I cannot imagine how a first-time GM (using the generic term) could run a smooth game without several experienced players guiding them.
Pangur wrote:
Magi_theKid wrote:
Rastapopoulos wrote:
I just read this thread and admit I am a little confused by something. Isn’t the whole point of the Starter Set? I mean it is marketed as “… your gateway to action-packed stories of the imagination. This box contains the essential rules of the game plus everything you need to play heroic characters on perilous adventures in worlds of fantasy.” It comes with slimmed down rules, a sample adventure, pre-made characters, etc.
To me, this feels like the original Blue Box Set. That is what I started with. I would never expect someone to just buy the PHB and try to “get it” without help.
It feels like the OP just glossed past the Starter Box when that seems to be the product aimed at new players who have never played D&D before. Or did I miss something?
dafrca wrote:
Grifford wrote:
RCanine wrote:
Hebitsuikaza wrote:
AH_schulerta wrote:
Wuzzard wrote:
yarnevk wrote:
SteveMND wrote:
4E sold successfully because most folks who played the prior editions bought 4e sight unseen. Good marketing backed with existing "take my money" enthusiasm at the prospect of a new edition. If you'd like some barely used 4E books in pristine condition I'm happy to sell mine. 
I don't know a single player I gamed with or knew in the D&D community (scores of players) that made the jump to 4E. Most moved to Pathfinder and a small minority like myself just kept playing 3.5.
The challenge isn't going to be getting new players...4E did that already to the alienation of its existing base. The challenge will be to woo the old hats back to the game. I'm finally retiring my 3.5 books, but for whatever reason...it has proven difficult for Wizards to "get the old band back together." At least that has been my observation since all the Pathfinder guys I've asked as to whether they plan to switch to 5E..the answer has almost entirely been "no." I don't know if it's "fool me once" thinking, but I wish they'd just take the "fool me twice...watch it!" attitude. Maybe they just need a pet hamster.
yarnevk wrote:
Huntsman57 wrote:
MechaPilot wrote:
"Nobody is reading the PHB" is a crazy statement to make. How does one learn to play the game? By NOT reading the rules? Really?
Yes, the PHB DOES in fact tell you how to play D&D. Turn to page 171 of the new PHB. See what it says at the top? "Part 2: Playing the Game".
It seems like Angry DM has good points but, since when is it WotC's job to create new DMs? Ever been to a game where everyone prefered to play? Running a game is a lot of work, and many people choose not to be DM. Saying WotC has to do something to make more DMs is like saying WotC has to make people want ot play clerics.
I loved 4th, still do, and after a while (more stuff comes out) I am hoping to love 5th.
One doesn't have to read every word of the PHB, but you want to learn how to play a game, what do you do? Read the instructions. The PHB is the instructions on how to play.
I did read the whole article. And not at a fourth grade reading level unless you're suggesting it was written at a fourth grade writing level. It is a refrence book, but it also takes the game step by step, exactly what was desired in the article. Look at the building a character section. Not only does it explain game concepts, but uses a player "Bob" to build his character. It's already hand holding, but it seems the author wants even more hand holding to the point where people will once again, (if they haven't already" accuse D&D of being "dumbed down".
"It seems like Angry DM has good points but, since when is it WotC's job to create new DMs? Ever been to a game where everyone prefered to play? Running a game is a lot of work, and many people choose not to be DM. Saying WotC has to do something to make more DMs is like saying WotC has to make people want ot play clerics."
See? I read it. ;)
"The problem is, WotC doesn’t expect the PHB to teach people how to play the game. The PHB is a reference. No one reads it, except crazy people like me who actually read every word even though I can practically sing along. It isn’t a handbook anymore. It’s a Rules Compendium. WotC has me and the legions of older cousins to teach their .... game."
And yet, it has examples of bulding characters. It explains the three pillars of RPGS- Exploration, Social Interaction and Combat. Twice. It's more than just a dry glossary of terms. D&D DOES explain the rules of the game. To learn to play the game, you can learn from other people (the Older Cousin example) or actually read the rules. The rules that teach players how to play, and DMs how to DM.
Since when is it WotCs job to create new DMs?
Since WotC brought a Roleplaying Game company back in 1997.
Shasarak wrote:
yarnevk wrote:
Pangur wrote:
Pangur wrote:
yarnevk wrote:
Neonflux wrote:
Really? Maybe he should have mentioned that in the title of his rant or something...
But OK... change '...not really sure what his point is' to '...don't think his argument really holds much water'
Neonflux wrote:
Neonflux wrote:
Pangur wrote:
Mind_Flayer_Monk wrote:
We’ve removed content from this thread because of a violation of the Code of Conduct.
You can review the Code here: http://company.wizards.com/conduct
Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks. You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively.
Remember, a community is a joint effort of all those involved, and while we want intelligent meaningful and productive banter to ensue we also need it to be polite and considerate of others.
Thank you for your time and support as we continue to try and make a great community for everyone.