I'll be brief, because I'm aware that I'm at risk of appearing rather bitter on this subject, but I can't let this pass without comment.
The normally well-informed and always readable Alex Ziebart of wow.com has just published his review of the priest Q&A shadow section. His review is articulate, reasonable and balanced, as always. But he makes the mistake of taking the Q&A at face value.
People who work in public-facing roles are often asked questions that they don't want to answer. It is their job to resolve this dilemma, and they have evolved a barrage of decoys and evasive manoeuvres to aid them.
We all like to think we're savvy to such manipulations, but the truth is we fall for them all the time. This is simply human nature, and testament to the skill and ingenuity of the people we are dealing with. Our only defence, which is an imperfect one, is to be aware of the techniques and be on guard for them. Ask yourself: is this the question I asked? Does this answer address my subject? Is this what I want to know or is this simply what they want me to hear?
I like World of Warcraft, I value what community relations we have with Blizzard and I think Ghostcrawler is an extremely talented and likable person in a challenging job. But Blizzard is not in the business of pandering to every emo appeal they receive and sometimes they are asked questions they do not want to answer.
So you can choose to take the priest Q&A at face value. Or you can see for yourself the range of questions put to Blizzard by the community before you judge the output.
D&D 5E House Rules: Randomness
1 day ago