Stand-Alone (?)
L. Scott Johnson
How can the Sabbat expansion be "Stand-Alone" when you
cannot play it unless you have the rulebook from the base
game?
"Stand-Alone" implies that you need nothing but what comes
with the supposedly "stand-alone" product.
---
<set humour= "disgust">
What's up, WotC? Figure the lot of us weren't buying enough
starters? Gonna prevent the old Jyhad'ers from ever getting
a printed rulebook unless we cave in and buy a V:tES starter
that we don't need? Or just gonna force the collectors to
get more commons than ever by not offering the concentrated
mix usually found in a booster? (I for one do not need any
more Bewitching Orations, even one with a cute Sabbat symbol
in the corner.)
<unset humour>
---
Ian, no rulebook, too many commons, no expansion skills.
I hope there's something good enough in the Sabbat to
redeem it - it looks pretty shaky (from the limited info I
have at this early date).
--
L. Scott Johnson (sjoh...@math.sc.edu) | Beatings will continue
http://www.math.sc.edu/~sjohnson | until morale improves.
Graphics Specialist and V:tES Rulemonger. |
Shawn F. Carnes
L. Scott Johnson wrote:
> <set humour= "disgust">
>
> What's up, WotC? Figure the lot of us weren't buying enough
> starters? Gonna prevent the old Jyhad'ers from ever getting
> a printed rulebook unless we cave in and buy a V:tES starter
> that we don't need? Or just gonna force the collectors to
> get more commons than ever by not offering the concentrated
> mix usually found in a booster? (I for one do not need any
> more Bewitching Orations, even one with a cute Sabbat symbol
> in the corner.)
>
> <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.
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.
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.
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.
That person is lucky they aren't active on this list, or I'd flame the
hell out of them. ;)
--
>>> Shawn F. Carnes
Game Designer and Developer, Wizards of the Coast, Inc
WotC NetRep for rec.games.trading-cards.jyhad
*************************************************************
"Which one of you claims to be the craziest? Which one the
biggest loony? Who runs these card games? Who's the bull
goose loony here?"
--McMurphy, "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest"
L. Scott Johnson
> L. Scott Johnson wrote:
> > <set humour= "disgust">
>
> 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
Charles T. Schwope
"Shawn F. Carnes" <sw...@castle.wizards.com> wrote:
>L. Scott Johnson wrote:
>> <set humour= "disgust">
>>
>> What's up, WotC? Figure the lot of us weren't buying enough
>> starters? Gonna prevent the old Jyhad'ers from ever getting
>> a printed rulebook unless we cave in and buy a V:tES starter
>> that we don't need? Or just gonna force the collectors to
>> get more commons than ever by not offering the concentrated
>> mix usually found in a booster? (I for one do not need any
>> more Bewitching Orations, even one with a cute Sabbat symbol
>> in the corner.)
>>
>> <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.
>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 at least someone at WotC realizes its false advertizing. :)
I can see some kid in a game store picking up a booster or this "stand
alone" game, much like he picked up a Mirage starter and thinking he's
going to be able to play it. :) The poor game store owners need to
warn them that it isn't really stand alone, even though the box says
it is. :) "So what else do I have to buy? A starter of Vampire...
yuck. Is that what this game is about.. Yuck... I don't want it... my
mommy will get made at me. Just give me a booster of XXXenophile...
of course I'm older then 18" :)
>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.
Seems like it. However you could always be supporting something
else... like Star Wars. Or even MtG. (Not quite sure which is worse.
:) )
>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.
Well... I suppose thats all a point of view thing. I haven't seen you
as too bad myself. And I long ago realized that even though if I was
posting from a company's email site to a list about said company's
products (whether or not I was the official rep) I would be damn
considerate to the others on the list, because it reflects on the
company. But that is obviously not an opinion shared by everyone, but
different strokes for different folks I suppose. Plus, I'm probably
less emotional about stuff like that then others.. :)
Charles
--
Charles T. Schwope | Every man is a spark in the darkness. By the
aka CT | time he is noticed, he is gone forever, a
sch...@infrared.csc.ti.com | retinal afterimage that fades, and is obscured
c-sc...@ti.com | by newer, brighter lights.