Letter to WotC

N

Notepad

Guest
Below is the rough draft of the letter I would like to send to Mark Rosewater. I think this meets with the sights of the CPA when it was founded, and I would like to get involved in this sort of thing. Even though it isn't earth-shattering, it at least lets us try to open a dialogue with WotC, which I am sure was one of the founding purposes of the CPA.

Any suggestions or changes? If there isn't anything fundamentally wrong with it, I'll have it sent off to Maro pretty soon.

======

Dear Mark,

I'm writing you on behalf of the Casual Players Alliance. Our group was started with the intent of giving casual players of Magic: The Gathering a voice. A voice that might not be listened to, but could at least be heard by Wizards of the Coast.

Keeping with the group's mission, I'd like to let you know about a vote that was conducted at the website recently. We posted a vote thread that was made public by a front page link. (The thread can be found here for reference: http://www.casualplayers.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=13284). The vote concerned the question: "How likely are you to play the new Arcbound mechanic?"

Here are the results of the vote:
I'm building a whole deck dedicated to it! = 4
I'll put a lot in an artifact-heavy deck. = 0
I'll use a few in various decks. = 2
Maybe I'll play one or two. = 2
Get this trash away from me! = 2

As of this writing, 48 replies have been posted in the thread. Though only ten votes were cast, the choice with the largest votes was the one most in support of the new Arcbound mechanic. This is probably not surprising at all, as the mechanic has a very casual feel to it.

Thank you for your time,
-Sean "Sefro" Roney
Proud member of the Casual Players Alliance
http://www.casualplayers.org
 
R

Reverend Love

Guest
Keep the tone positive. We don't want the impression to be of self rightouess casual whinners.

A voice that might not be listened to, but could at least be heard by Wizards of the Coast.
Click to expand...
makes no sense.

Also tell him why he might be interested in the results and how both the votes and posts are windows into casual player thinking and card judging.
 
T

train

Guest
I think it's good to point out that they hit on a mechaninc that would be played(as voted) by casual players... 8 out of 10 actually...

That's impressive - and we weren't talking about ravager when voting it...

Maybe hint that that "kind" of mechanic went over well with casual players, and that we'd like to see more of something like that in the future...

Also point out that we do tons of various discussing here - tourney compared to casual play, and we do look at mechanics as WoTC R&D/playtesting should/does - through all formats, not just the Pro Tour formats... Who knows - we may help them find something in an older format just by discussing topics in our threads...

And last but not least - mention to them our thoughts on the lucky charms and see if we may be given a tidbit, as to what will definitely be printed in future base sets - though it seems very evident - we'd have verification from the company itself... (before other sites..) and it isn't something that breaks or spoils the game in any way...
 
O

orgg

Guest
Any WOTC member won't be allowed to adknowledge the letter, Sef.

It's against polocy, just to let y'know. I found that out from a (alt+q, i) on MOL.
 
S

Spiderman

Administrator
Staff member
I like it, but honestly, if I was in Mark's shoes, I would be thinking "Okay, I'm looking at results of a poll with ten votes and forty-replies (which breaks down to perhaps around 10 unique members if he actually looks at the thread). Meanwhile, there are probably thousands of casual players. How are they a "voice" or representatives of casual players?"

I don't mean to discourage you, I'm just trying to think in terms of the overall picture.
 
T

train

Guest
It's the whole sample bit - we are just casual players who actually voice their thoughts on it...

"Those never speaking, can never be heard..."

Common sense to most - but a big cause for failure in the classrooms most of the time...

Unless the non-speaker is an Einstein...
 
N

Notepad

Guest
Thanks for the input. Here is the revised letter:

================
Dear Mark,

I'm writing you on behalf of the Casual Players Alliance. Our group was started with the intent of giving casual players of Magic: The Gathering a place to gather and to let you at Wizards of the Coast know our thoughts.

Keeping with the group's mission, I'd like to let you know about a vote that was conducted at the website recently. We posted a vote thread that was made public by a front page link. (The thread can be found here for reference: http://www.casualplayers.org/forums...&threadid=13284). The vote concerned the question: "How likely are you to play the new Arcbound mechanic?"

Here are the results of the vote:
I'm building a whole deck dedicated to it! = 4
I'll put a lot in an artifact-heavy deck. = 0
I'll use a few in various decks. = 2
Maybe I'll play one or two. = 2
Get this trash away from me! = 2

As of this writing, 48 replies have been posted in the thread. Though only ten votes were cast, the choice with the largest votes was the one most in support of the new Arcbound mechanic. This is probably not surprising at all, as the mechanic has a very casual feel to it. Also of note is the fact that only two votes were cast in total rejection of the mechanic. You folks at WotC really hit on a great casual mechanic.

While it was a small vote conducted in one week's time, I thought you might be interested in seeing the vote results as they reflect the views of a casual website with a different reader demographic than Magicthegathering.com.

Thank you for your time,
-Sean "Sefro" Roney
Proud member of the Casual Players Alliance
http://www.casualplayers.org
================

Spidey: I tried to take your comment into consideration with the last paragraph. I'm not certain there is a way to make a ten-ballot vote look like anything to really be concerned about, but I think it does work as a way to open doors (if not a dialogue) with WotC. If we can establish some sort of connection with them, it will be easier to actually discuss big issues in the future.

Train: You have some good points there. Maybe some future topics of discussion and even votes are in order. I was thinking of having a MTGO-related vote next week, but I like your idea of the lucky charms more. Maybe the week after can be the MTGO vote.

Orgg: I know an all-out issue discussion would be impossible with any official at WotC, but something along the lines of a short dialogue can be accomplished. In the past I have written to Rosewater and Buehler and they have replied (and I'm not talking about those stupid joke letters from Thanksgiving).
 
N

Notepad

Guest
Okay, if anybody else wants to comment, I check back this afternoon before sending it in to them. One line I noticed I had to change real fast:

"Our group was started with the intent of giving casual players of Magic: The Gathering a place to gather and to let you at Wizards of the Coast know our thoughts."

I always forget minor little things that change the look of the whole sentence.
 
T

train

Guest
looks good - I know it's already sent out - but I think it may get a decent reply...

;)
 
N

Notepad

Guest
Yup, sent it already.

I'm not expecting anything earth-shattering in the way of opening contact here, but it's a start, nonetheless.

Now, for the second letter, which is based on the Best Card in Darksteel vote.
 
N

Notepad

Guest
There are some issues you mentioned to add to the first letter that I did not, as the letter mainly concerned the vote. The second letter will likely be the same.

I like the ideas you're coming up with. I share the same ideas, but I don't want to write a "this is our general concensus" in a letter if I'm uncertain if that is the case. Things like lucky charms and indestructible seem like good things to comment on, nonetheless (with pressing things like lucky charms taking priority).

Should there be two votes per week? Three? I don't want to make multiple because it would bog down things with so many votes. It would make people apathetic, I think. Then again, more polls means more involvement, and folks do really like being involved. I'm confused. *mumbles*

Anybody else have any ideas on these things?
 
S

Spiderman

Administrator
Staff member
Well, I think one poll a week is fine. It gives the (few) people here time to respond and post their thoughts, but since there's so few, once people are done, there won;'t be much wait for the next one.
 
T

train

Guest
I'm up for 50...

well... maybe 75...

but the traffic and time doesn't really warrant it for everyone.:rolleyes:
 
S

Spiderman

Administrator
Staff member
I was reading Mark's article for today and he gets tons of feedback, as in the thousands. He also has a 100 questionaire up, so although I think this is a good idea to send letters to him, answering his polls and questions also might help.
 
T

train

Guest
Well - the questionnaire is over - those were the questions responded with feedback upon...;) but the right idea there o webbed one...;)
 
N

Notepad

Guest
Oh, I'm sure he gets tons of email all the time. Though I'll bet the floods only come when he gives the little homework assignments.

I click on those votes when I think they're relevant. Sometimes they're just stupid. Like one time Mark posted:

Which would you rather fondle:
-Roseanne Bar's butt
-John Goodman's breast

Without need to say so, I immediately though of my trusty Mountain Goat cards.
 
S

Spiderman

Administrator
Staff member
I'm sure he has spikes in his email, but my point was those are the prime opportunities to get in your opinion since that's when he's asking as the WOTC rep officially. Sure it's thousands and your entry is one, but thousands of opinions count a lot more than 10 or so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top