> L. Scott Johnson wrote:
> > <set humour= "disgust">
> > <unset humour>
>
> We made the boosters the way we did because it allowed the Vampire team
> to save logistic time and funds. The new rule book had to be scrapped
> because it wouldn't fit in the new format. We had to go with a fan-fold
> outlay covering the new rules.
I can definately see where the new rulebook wouldn't be welcome in every
booster, but it still should be available - how about checking with
the marketing geniuses about including it in that MtG rag :-) you guys
publish (as well as on-line, for us connected types).
> As for why it is being still marketed as a "stand-alone"... I have no
> idea. Yes, you need the rulebook to play with Sabbat, because it isn't
> included. Yes, I agree that it isn't, but I'm not in marketing.
Well, has the point been passed along to marketing? I'd like to
hear a reason besides "not my job" (no offense, I realize it really
isn't your job - but I just see a WotC monolith out here and have
no access to the inner workings).
> Sacrifices had to be made, I guess, in order to get the product out. Ya
> know, it can be a real bitch to support this product sometimes.
Yes. I guess I'd rather see fewer but well-supported expansions rather
than a blitz of poorly done expansions (which will eventually bring the
whole thing crashing down, IMO).
> I guess I deserve all this grief as well, being a "bad boy" in respect
> to public relations. Someone on the Netrunner-L list used me as an
> example of someome who let's their "vehemence" (their word) get the best
> of him.
The grief is directed at the WotC monolith - of whom you are the
channel point. (And we all know how valuable Channels are ;-).
I'd like to see more hands-on in the newsgroup - more feedback
on the process even when the product isn't complete (like the
2-3month-old pending rulings, etc.)
(Even a notice of absence would be better than slowly discovering
the fact for ourselves and assuming another abandonment, like the
first one two years back that led to my Rulemonger title).
While I'm on my wish-list,
I'd like to see broken cards fixed (like Chainsaw and Concealed Weapon)
rather than abandoned. I'd rather see broken cards fixed (like
Archon Investigation, Tomb of RamsesIII, and Thoughts Betrayed) rather
than printing more borken cards to offset them.
(did you notice the tournament at GenCon - many players were using
Tomb - one even used it to bring out 3 Inner Circle Members and
the Prince of London (a 10-cap)). I know you guys watch the MtG
tournaments to see if certain cards are being abused - do you do
the same for VtES (granted,the tourney wasn't sanctioned, but it
used DCI rules).
> That person is lucky they aren't active on this list, or I'd flame the
> hell out of them. ;)
:-)
--
L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | Clap on! <clap> <clap>
http://www.math.sc.edu/~sjohnson | Clap off! <clap> <cla+W."
Graphics Specialist and V:tES Rulemonger. | ^Ejq#xe>4NO CARRIER
--
L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | Clap on! <clap> <clap>
http://www.math.sc.edu/~sjohnson | Clap off! <clap> <cla+W."
Graphics Specialist and V:tES Rulemonger. | ^Ejq#xe>4NO CARRIER